Atheism, Marxism, and all that other stuff

[mack341]

I know some are fans of Jordan petersen, so here is a video of a debate between jordan, douglas murray and sam harris, about atheism and religion etc.., at 36.06 onwards murray makes the point I was trying to make in my posts, about the atheist marxists in russia, cambodia, china who did the killing and meted out barbaric punishments to others, had no concern of moral repercussions from a religious standpoint.

It is a long video, but there doesn't seem to be a highlights version I like the deeper philosophical ideas put forward here by Jordan, stimulating for the old brain cells, the atheism from sam harris I find stark and mechanistic. Others may find the opposite...

 

[goatwack]

^ Which slot is this?

Looks like something MG would make

 

[trancemonkey]

Atheism will never appeal to everybody, I think you have to accept this.

I would like to think that long after we are all worm food, the world has realised that the notion of a God, or Gods, is pointless. And that everyone throws religion in the bin and just gets on with everyone else by treating them with respect, morality, and happiness. You don't need a God to be a good person.

And whilst you're right, I can't conclusively prove there is no God, there is a mass of evidence that religion is man- made and almost none that proves the existence of God, or a creator.

The whole idea that their must have been a creator because stuff cannot just begin to exist and the big bang is impossible... well that falls apart instantly once you point out that the very same must be true of a creator. Where did they come from? They would also need to have been "made".

 

[Mouche12]

Yeah, the mind-boggling paradox of a God who created himself/herself/itself also applies to one small dot that suddenly arose out of nowhere and created the Big Bang. Where did the energy within the dot come from?

 

[dionysus]

for me, whether a naturally occurring creation or a creator, the fact is, we're still just simply a rather smarter type of monkey, and we're still growing learning and evolving, and as clever as we are, there's still simply things are minds arent yet there enough to comprehend.

I err on the side, of a universe coming come into being rather than a creator - though I'm not anti-creator sentiment; who knows.
I'm anti-'God' and modern religion as I see most as simply early man-made stories in an attempt to try to understand the universe, and contemporary religion simply doesnt hold up to scrutiny

 

[trancemonkey]

Yeah, the mind-boggling paradox of a God who created himself/herself/itself also applies to one small dot that suddenly arose out of nowhere and created the Big Bang. Where did the energy within the dot come from?

Exactly, both ideas suffer from the same problem.

 

[mack341]

The whole idea that their must have been a creator because stuff cannot just begin to exist and the big bang is impossible... well that falls apart instantly once you point out that the very same must be true of a creator. Where did they come from? They would also need to have been "made".

yes this flummoxed me whenever I started to think about a 'god', who created god but apparently in philosophical terms it's not a big deal, I was reading or watching something on that very question the other week, I'll try and fish it out if I have time.

you understand odds and statistics etc... what are the odds [roughly] for a creature to start out hiding in caves and hunting with flints and sticks etc... to end up building space ships and all the technological achievements reached so far?
None of the other creatures/animals that evolved have managed anything like man's achieved.

Also I think the odds for a planet like ours to exist in the first instance, with all the right conditions to sustain so much life etc.. are long, or must be considering the number of planets that don't?

I tend to agree that the religions are man made but that doesn't mean religious or a spiritual thought/impulses are man made and only a result of conditioning, it's been there in us from day one really, what are we doing here etc..

Edit: sorry bloatgoat for the derail

 

[mack341]

Did I actually start this debate oh dear... sorry If it was me who derailed the original toxic slots thread, I think I replied on the determinism vs fatalism /free will topic and then it went on from there to marxism and atheism.

It feels much better now though to have it's own thread Meaning/ spiritual beliefs/ atheism is a fascinating subject, basically the biggest and most important subject ...'and all that other stuff' sums it up nicely, anything 'big' that someone wants to delve into can be discussed here I think ... descartes, sufism, nihilism, etc...they all relate back to the same issues in the end.

 

[DavidShush]

This a twenty day old post of mine David you've left it a bit long, I can't remember the gist of everything that far back and I'm not going to reread it, as it involved a lot of brain ache at the time..it was something to do with free will that's how the discussion started.

The communists were atheists, they had no qualms or worries about any consequences from a god for their actions. They killed a lot of orthodox christian believers and priests etc.. and what I was saying was they wouldn't have done this if they'd been orthodox christians themselves, so 'their' version of atheism [not yours] played a part in the whole tragedy.
As I understand it atheism is a core part of marxism but marxism is not a core part of atheism, that's the nub of it.

The michael sherlock fella you quoted is on record of proclaiming himself proud to be a militant atheist and wanting to promote atheist thinking using militant methods etc..correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Neither militant religion nor atheism appeal to me; and you can't demonstrate god's existence or non existence, it's a mystery. I prefer 'creator' rather than god which conjures up the image of a man with a white beard etc...

In your post you've shoe horned in 2 claims of me using straw men, imagery of trying to fly by jumping out of a window, saying that would be a stupid belief and abuse and the catholic church. All this to make a round about attack on religion through word placement etc..., atheism will never appeal to everybody, I think you have to accept this.

Sorry, been busy. So...people kill people because they have active beliefs in other things/ideals. Atheism as a belief that there are no gods doesn't lead to people killing or more atheistic countries would be vastly different to what we actually see.

People who are atheists can kill and murder, sure, but their atheism plays no part in that. Your claim that because they lack the belief in god they wouldn't kill also doesn't hold up because we see lots of similar examples of people who kill in the name of gods specifically. We can say nobody would have done anything if they'd been "insert active belief in non violence here" but so what? Like I said, you need another step from atheism to get to an active belief for what they did.

"I don't believe in god" doesn't mean I want to kill anyone. There would have to be a reason why I thought killing someone would be acceptable. Would certain religious doctrines be against murder? Of course, but so are secular rational values. Not all atheists are rational. Not all theists are rational. So we could just as easily say "they wouldn't have done this if they'd been rational themselves".

I'm not really fussed with labels like "militant" etc. I'm more interested in what they're saying.

This isn't an attack, this is a challenge. If I say something incorrect then I'd hope someone would have the decency to challenge me so I can learn where I'm going wrong and improve. And if I make a post/claim in a public forum then I think by default I'm opening myself up to being challenged. The other option is to not post it.

Atheism, or at least the "nones" are one of the fastest increasing minorities in USA right now. Which is quite a feat for such a religious country. Obviously in Europe it's less of an issue but numbers are growing, and whilst it may take a while or never reach a majority, I think it's the only honest rational position to take when faced with these questions.

 

[dionysus]

I don't understand why people keep getting this wrong.
Atheism isn't a belief that there are no gods - atheism isn't a belief system at all.

 

[mack341]

No worries, am busy myself atm so likely can't have a big all day discussion

Your claim that because they lack the belief in god they wouldn't kill also doesn't hold up because we see lots of similar examples of people who kill in the name of gods specifically.

No, I was quite careful to say if they russian marxists had been believers in the russian orthodox church they wouldn't have started killing lots of the population who also believed in orthodox christianity, obviously if you have different religions they do at times attack each other in the 'name' of their religion. Most folk accept that is when religion is distorted, the organized religions etc...there's no doubt religion has been abused by kings and leaders to wage wars and killing. [still is happening to this day ]

You can't really unpick the marxist revolutions from their atheism, we could just agree they distorted atheism and wanted to impose it, as part of their marxist beliefs/dogma, and decided they'd have to dismantle any opposing systems of belief. Which is what the militant atheists are attempting to do, belittle and reduce the influence of religion [especially the large organised movements] step by step, the militant atheists in marxist russia went one step further and used violence, in their twisted minds they thought the means justified the ends.

So we could just as easily say "they wouldn't have done this if they'd been rational themselves".

I'm not sure about this, obviously I think they were wicked and evil in their actions but were they acting rationally in accordance to marxism?? Did Marx say you mustn't kill anybody to bring in his system [I tried to read das kapital once and gave up soon after ]
Is marxism rational or illogical?

It's not really a matter of being fussed about militant atheism, it is a reality, I would probably have to reread michael sherlock's articles as to how he envisages it. I think I did read that some atheist scientists had actually attacked richard dawkins [m. sherlock is affliated to him] for his approach re militant atheism. Dawkins is a very disagreeable man so his atheism has had no beneficial affect on his manners.

Church of england believers are pretty harmless, okay so they might not approve of some aspects of modern life, the gay agenda etc.. but that's not enough in my book to warrant destroying the religion.

I tend to think man without god or a spiritual dimension to his life will be more barbaric and selfish, if you think of all the sociopaths/psychopaths and greedy billionaires I doubt they have much belief in a god, contrast that with somebody like mother teresa, all the good things she did etc..

Atheism, or at least the "nones" are one of the fastest increasing minorities in USA right now.

And would you say the morality levels of behaviour are high in the USA, including the politicians and business people?

I do see that atheism could be attractive because some of the obnoxious practices and beliefs that religious believers follow, people kind of want a live and let live approach to life but without religion holding back some of the excesses of human behaviour I think the overall moral behaviour in countries would get worse.

This looks like an interesting video below, in HD too, I might watch it when I've got a chance, I must admit I'm not fully up to speed with the atheist debate as I 've just stuck with my own belief in some sort of creator.

Is the universe a fair place, is there such a thing as universal justice, an atheist I guess would say no, there's ony man made justice...and just thinking on my feet that is another interesting side topic, 'Law' as that was influenced from the religious teachings etc...

 

[mack341]

took this from the american atheist website

"Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods."

eh?? I'm not too hot on philosophical logic but isn't this nitpicking/weasel words, I thought this bold part sounds more like an agnostic

 

[paul7388]

I do see that atheism could be attractive because some of the obnoxious practices and beliefs that religious believers follow, people kind of want a live and let live approach to life but without religion holding back some of the excesses of human behaviour I think the overall moral behaviour in countries would get worse.

Why do you think that. Look at nearly every country in the world. There is so much morally wrong with them all one way or the other and every one has some sort of religion.

Atheism is not really a choice. Everyone is actually born Atheist God and Religion is something taught to you.

More people are becoming Atheist as you put it for one simple reason. These days with people and the world becoming more advanced people are more inclined to question whether " Gods" are real and less people are now believing in there existence.

Besides depending on Religion there could be loads of gods. What ones are real. Who knows.

But one thing is for sure. I never have and never will believe in a god. But morally i know what is right and wrong i do not need a believe in a god to know that.

 

[paul7388]

I once believed in Santa. Guess what. Once i stopped believing in him i still got presents on christmas day

 

[mack341]

Why do you think that. Look at nearly every country in the world. There is so much morally wrong with them all one way or the other and every one has some sort of religion.

Atheism is not really a choice. Everyone is actually born Atheist God and Religion is something taught to you.

More people are becoming Atheist as you put it for one simple reason. These days with people and the world becoming more advanced people are more inclined to question whether " Gods" are real and less people are now believing in there existence.

Besides depending on Religion there could be loads of gods. What ones are real. Who knows.

But one thing is for sure. I never have and never will believe in a god. But morally i know what is right and wrong i do not need a believe in a god to know that.

Paul being in scotland I expect your experience of the problems religion causes is much greater than mine, the warring sides fighting over whose god is the real one is tiresome, silly and dangerous. But I think there is a spiritual dimension to man and the organised religions have fed on that and distorted it into systems. sectarianism is dreadful, both are supposed to be christian, it's crazy but it goes back to the power of rome and the pope I think, that's where politics mixed with religion. I suppose catholicism is a much more strict approach than C of E.

There could be a creator and no spiritual afterlife or anything, he doesn't want anything to do with us, we're just an entertainment perhaps, the planet a living creation which will unfold. Randomness is another aspect to life, mathematics and chance...It's all a bit too big and complex for my old brain

 

[mack341]

I once believed in Santa. Guess what. Once i stopped believing in him i still got presents on christmas day

I don't know if you have children but would you let them believe in Santa or tell them it's all made up nonsense?

 

[dionysus]

took this from the american atheist website

"Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods."

eh?? I'm not too hot on philosophical logic but isn't this nitpicking/weasel words, I thought this bold part sounds more like an agnostic

it isn't believing there isnt a god
there's no belief there is a god - it isnt about belief at all

one is a theist trying to apply a belief in something or a belief there isnt something on someone, when belief doesnt factor in any way whatsoever

agnotists, generally speaking, feel they don't know, or can't know, one way or the other

it might sounds like semantics but it's a huge difference

 

[paul7388]

I don't know if you have children but would you let them believe in Santa or tell them it's all made up nonsense?

I let them believe in Santa. I would let them believe in God if they so wished as well.

 

[mack341]

Why do you think that. Look at nearly every country in the world. There is so much morally wrong with them all one way or the other and every one has some sort of religion.

But are the ones behaving most immorally, Religious [in the day to day sense not talking about preachers, bishops, immans, rabbis etc..] to give an example wouldn't a rich person who believed in God give more away than one that doesn't?

 

[dionysus]

I don't know if you have children but would you let them believe in Santa or tell them it's all made up nonsense?

id let my kids believe in Santa; there's nothing wrong with developing a creative mind and a questioning mind

i wouldnt care if my kids believed in a god or gods either; id likely explain what others believe and let them determine what they choose, or choose not to, believe

 

[dionysus]

But are the ones behaving most immorally Religious [in the day to day sense not talking about preachers, bishops, immans, rabbis etc..] to give an example wouldn't a rich person who believed in God give more away than one that doesn't?

id say charity, by and large is about making the person giving the money, feel good about themselves (even if theyre as well, trying to do good)
there's very few, id imagine, altruistic people

 

[paul7388]

Paul being in scotland I expect your experience of the problems religion causes is much greater than mine, the warring sides fighting over whose god is the real one is tiresome, silly and dangerous. But I think there is a spiritual dimension to man and the organised religions have fed on that and distorted it into systems. sectarianism is dreadful, both are supposed to be christian, it's crazy but it goes back to the power of rome and the pope I think, that's where politics mixed with religion. I suppose catholicism is a much more strict approach than C of E.

There could be a creator and no spiritual afterlife or anything, he doesn't want anything to do with us, we're just an entertainment perhaps, the planet a living creation which will unfold. Randomness is another aspect to life, mathematics and chance...It's all a bit too big and complex for my old brain

Yes religion and sectarianism is bad in Scotland. But both Catholic and Protestant believe in the same god. Just not the way it is taught.

Although i believe in no God i brought my children up as protestant and let them make their own choices whether they went to church etc.

But don't let anyone kid you. The religious problems in Glasgow have nothing at all to do with belief in God lol.

 

[mack341]

it isn't believing there isnt a god
there's no belief there is a god - it isnt about belief at all

one is a theist trying to apply a belief in something or a belief there isnt something on someone, when belief doesnt factor in any way whatsoever

agnotists, generally speaking, feel they don't know, or can't know, one way or the other

it might sounds like semantics but it's a huge difference

No I still don't get the difference I think you need a more intelligent brain than I've been given to understand it, how can the atheists [esp the militant ones] spread it to others if it isn't a belief/thought system. An atheist surely has an opinion on whether there is a god? If he thinks there is no god then that becomes an affirmative belief [referring back to that bold part of the text]

Are they saying it isn't a belief that there is no god because to them it's a fact instead?

 

[mack341]

Yes religion and sectarianism is bad in Scotland. But both Catholic and Protestant believe in the same god. Just not the way it is taught.

Although i believe in no God i brought my children up as protestant and let them make their own choices whether they went to church etc.

But don't let anyone kid you. The religious problems in Glasgow have nothing at all to do with belief in God lol.

so is it a form of nationalism, identity differences, morality, lifestyle etc..or just a tradition of emnity and hatred which has just gone on and obtained it's own momentum beyond the original causes??

 

[dionysus]

No I still don't get the difference I think you need a more intelligent brain than I've been given to understand it, how can the atheists [esp the militant ones] spread it to others if it isn't a belief/thought system. An atheist surely has an opinion on whether there is a god? If he thinks there is no god then that becomes an affirmative belief [referring back to that bold part of the text]

Are they saying it isn't a belief that there is no god because to them it's a fact instead?

well, take gambling, or sewing, or, i dunno, creative writing
you can share an interest in a topic, discuss it and chill with like-minded people; it doesnt mean you ascribe some sort of belief in those things

i know it's a fine point but there's
A - a person who does not believe in a god or gods vs
B - a person who believes there is no god or gods

atheism is A. It isn't about belief. If made to think about it or question it an atheist would say A, because it isnt any sort of active belief; it isnt an issue in their world at all.
Some however, may find it an interesting point of discussion