Atheists delusional?

[pocaracas]

No need to make rational sense of that either according to you.

I’m starting to wonder what you mean by “rational sense”… Care to educate me?

Your explanation is that you don’t want to die.

Did I stop when I explained it?

For the Christian, a teleological view of reality is the only view that makes sense of the fact that we want to live.

Well… the part I bolded need not be correct.
But I understand your (as in, most Christians’) desire for it to be so.

these qualities are essentially goal directed

Again, I understand why you’d like it to be so.
It is comforting to have a goal imposed upon you, isn’t it?

metaphysical naturalism with no intentionality in the universe does not make sense of the human condition.

To me, it makes a lot of sense.
But perhaps what you understand as “human condition” isn’t the same I do…

It seems obvious to me that you wanted to imply that my behavior is like someone that is autistic.

Yes… keyword “like”.

Why someone would point that out in a debate i don’t know, but i have my suspicions. Perhaps you meant no harm.

7 replies when one (maybe 2 due to the character limit) would suffice?
It’s just annoying to me. And bad netiquette in general.

 

[IWantGod]

Again, I understand why you’d like it to be so.

It’s not a matter of like. Emotions and desires are goal directed.

 

[IWantGod]

It’s just annoying to me

Here’s the thing. You don’t have to reply to anything that i say. That’s the magic of the internet, but your emotions compel you too. Your feelings say to you if you leave one stone unturned that will be the end of the debate.

But here is the thing. This debate ended a very long time ago. We won. It’s just for fun now. loool

 

[pocaracas]

But here is the thing. This debate ended a very long time ago. We won. It’s just for fun now. loool

Dammit… I missed the finals and the trophy delivery ceremony!!
Can you recap how that was won, for me?

 

[Bradskii]

pocaracas:

Some of them will not be rational… we know that.

Some of them will be rational… we know that too.

Given metaphysical naturalism. None of them are rational. They have the illusion of being rational because you are compelled to survive for some unknown reason (there is no objective rational answer) which is itself a product of blind physical processes that have no intentionality for your existence.

I dunno. Maybe you never learned something new that excited you. Maybe you never watched your son win a grand final or get married or heard him simply say ‘Thanks, mate’. Maybe your daughter never walked down the stairs in her wedding dress. Maybe she never made you cry when you heard her tell someone how much she loved you. Maybe you don’t have grandkids who love to hug you. Maybe you never read a great book. Maybe you never grew older with your wife and never saw those sights you’d always planned to visit. Maybe you’ve never just had a cold beer on a hot day with close friends. Maybe you never had a dog. Maybe you never learnt a language or travelled. Maybe you don’t appreciate Bach or Stevie Ray Vaughan. Maybe your team never scored the winner in extra time.

Maybe you don’t appreciate a life full of love and emotion and family and friends and travel and good food and health and music. Maybe you think that without God all these things have no value.

That you are wrong, well…there’s no maybe about that.

 

[IWantGod]

Maybe you think that without God all these things have no value.

Given metaphysical naturalism, their lives are objectively meaningless and have no true value for sure, and if you think that the list of things that give you pleasure is suppose to make me think that you are reasonable; you have failed. That you endow a fetus with value and place significance on it is just a consequence of your natural impulses (which you blindly follow) and the imaginary importance you place on that thing. That you love the concept of having children, and being a dad, and watching them grow up, has no relevance to the objective fact they are merely an amalgamation of physical processes. You choose to think of them as being more than that because of the pleasure it gives you. That your brain is wired to find pleasure in life and other beings, the fact that the processes in your brain causes you to value other biological organisms is of little concern to me. The pleasure of being alive is enough for you. But that doesn’t mean that your existential motivations are rational. It doesn’t mean that bringing other people into existence is rational. It does not mean that your behavior is rational or that your thought processes are rational… All it means is that you do things that give you pleasure.

Making rational sense of being a personal being with emotions and having a rational motivation for my existing, a rational motivation for acting on my impulses, and a rational motivation for bringing other people into existence other than just because my genes are telling me to do it, is my concern. It’s clear that none of that matters to you.

Perhaps you approach life as just a user-experience, a just-so story that you just-so happen to be content with. I have no argument with you in that regard since its clear to me that such a life is an object of contentment for some people. But if you’re interested in making rational sense of this life, instead of blindly following your impulses, that’s a different matter entirely.

 

[Bradskii]

I’m pretty certain that you would get meaning from all the things that I mentioned. Whether they were objectively real or not.

And we could try a simple thought experiment. If, for example, every child had objective value in herself and not as subjective value to certain people, then you should treat all children the same. But you don’t. You value your child over all others.

If, for example, every person had an equal objective value, then you should, appreciating that, treat every person equally. But you don’t. You treat yourself and your immediate family better. And treat those in ever increasing social circles away from you with less and less value.

You talk the talk but do not walk the walk. You do the same as everyone else and treat the world subjectively in every way. You say that God’s existence gives objective value to life but you live it subjectively for all to see and give lip service to what you profess.

I’ll take reality as it is thanks. With all the wonders and all the ugliness. We strut our stuff as best we can until the final curtain. And it might make you sleep better believing that there’s a director out there sitting in the stalls watching over us. And maybe there is. But we are left to our own devices to make of the play what we can. We make it up as we go and there’s no second act. So do your best…

 

[IWantGod]

I’m pretty certain that you would get meaning from all the things that I mentioned.

Given metaphysical naturalism you are just talking about what just so happens to trigger a pleasure response in your brain, and any significance you imagine is in those experiences are imaginary since only physical processes exist. But as long as it makes you happy right?

 

[IWantGod]

But we are left to our own devices to make of the play what we can

Good luck with your fantasy.

 

[Bradskii]

So your love for your child is real in your case but is just a meaningless chemical reaction in mine. OK. Got that.

So why is it that you treat those close to you subjectively better? When you shoukd treat all objectively? I missed the answer to that bit.

 

[IWantGod]

So why is it that you treat those close to you subjectively better? When you shoukd treat all objectively? I missed the answer to that bit.

Are you asking why i do things that you have no knowledge of? Or are you asking me if we should treat others equal to our family members? If metaphysical naturalism is true, the qeustion is irrelevant. How we ought to treat other people is a qeustion that concerns only theists.

 

[Bradskii]

So as a theist…

How should you treat all people? Objectively equal so that you treat a guy in a Mumbai slum the same as your wife? Or subjectively different so you give greater value to your wife.

And please, there’s no point in saying that they SHOULD be treated the same (I know you think that God treats them equally). I want to know if you practice what you preach.

Because just between you and I (and the rest of the forum), we know that you value your wife more. Something to do with those durn chemical reactions I think. Leads to subjectivism and I don’t know what else.

 

[Paddy1989]

I’m not able to keep up with all the posts as i am in New Zealand’s time zone and usually in bed or at work when most of you guys are active so i’ll try and reply when i can. I think you make a grave error by claiming that we demonstrate human value is subjective as this is certainly not the values of the west from the Judeo Christian world-view. We are bound by the truth of our world-view that all human beings have an intrinsic value and a dignity that is sacred in the image and likeness of God. Your confusing one’s loving bond with their family member or friend etc and their lack of emotional bond with a stranger as being how one see’s one human being as having superior value than another. A man who loves his son so much that he would sacrifice his life for him i would expect would not and should not see the son of another man as having less value, this is also why when strangers sacrifice their lives for another we see such virtue in this as giving our lives up to those we have no emotional bond with out of complete love is one of the greatest acts one can give. There is no act in love greater than this… Continued below

 

[Paddy1989]

Another analogy would be a political leader will value the interests of his people politically economically and socially more so than of the people of other nations yet would you think a political leader would be right to think of other nations peoples as having inferior value? I may prefer the presence and have an emotional bond with one person over another yet i would never be as so cold to say that value of this person is superior to that of another. What you describe opens up whole ideologies that have done extreme damage in history to say the least, ideologies that are extremely nationalistic to the point of believing their own people is superior to others and that they would even be justified in subduing other peoples for the benefit of their own people. With this view the united states could reinstate slavery by subduing peoples from other nations as a means to end ALL poverty in their own nation as their own people would then matter more to them than lets say a man or woman from Somalia. I would be emotionally traumatized if something happened to my loved ones much more than i am about a stranger whose death will rarely affect me, this is nothing to do with the human value that person has, this is merely the effect of my emotional and loving bond with certain peoples i experience in this life. I would think myself however to be in grave error if i thought that these other people have less value than my loved ones. This is why as Christians we are called to show love and charity to everyone especially those who are need in most and our enemies so that they no longer become our enemies but brothers and sisters united in God’s love. The Christian message is not just about propagating love to our close loved ones but also to strangers as to live consistently with this truth that we are all brothers and sisters, we can not meet every person in the world and develop a emotional loving bond with them personally but we can live in such a state of complete recognition of the intrinsic value that encompasses all of humanity so we will be willing to help and sacrifice ourselves in love for all peoples of this world. It is this recognition of the intrinsic value of all people that we have progressed in the west in terms of human rights which aims to protect the value and dignity of all peoples equally.

Surely you recognize this do you not?

 

[Paddy1989]

Do people see human value as subjective? Some people clearly do and many people have in history. The atheist if they are honest will say objectively we know humanity has no value but some will then say subjectively i’ll make up my own value because a subjective reality on how they perceive their very being is more comfortable than the objective true reality. If value is seen as subjective and one truly does see some people as having less value over others then we should not be surprised that we are living in a society of euthanasia and abortion. The ancient Greeks and other peoples would abandon their disabled infants due to seeing them as inferior in value. Certain people may believe and have believed that a certain class of people are better of being slaves for the benefit of the higher classes. What we can know for certain is that God and truth will prevail, in the face of this society which is moving ever closer towards the eugenics society it will provide no spiritual sustenance and when people are in their most despair they will hear the Christian message more clearly and it shall appear as radical and beautiful in relation to truth to them as it did to the Romans, Greeks and pagans in the first millennium ad, it will be like they have heard it for the first time as society today is drunk on it’s own ego

 

[Bradskii]

But you treat people subjectively. This is what I do nt get. You say it’s objective but you live subjectively. Let’s be honest here.

 

[Paddy1989]

Can you give me an example where you think i would treat someone that would place more value in one persons life over the other? In order words what way do you think i treat people that place someone’s human value and dignity as inferior to another?

And the King will answer, “In truth I tell you, in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it to me.” Matthew 25:40:

We cannot deny the truth that all humans have an intrinsic value and dignity given to us by our creator, if some reject this and view peoples human value subjectively we must recognize this it is only done for selfish gain, nothing more. Do people treat others as having less value than their own life and family members lives, absolutely we see these injustices everyday from how the rich use the poor as a means to an end or how we use each other for mere pleasure. We all have done this at some point aswell and perhaps will consciously or sub consciously in the future yet we are driven away from this mindset by virtue and believe practicing virtue as a habit will lead us towards living in consistency with the law in which we were made to live, we see little good in subjective human value and recognize it is done as a result of our sinful nature, it is done either for convenience, power and/or pleasure. As a Christian we are called away from this mindset as not only does it alienate us from loving one another as equal in value and dignity but it causes conflict within our very souls that demand we live by the truth. One of the reasons so many turned from their paganism towards Christianity was of the historical fact of the Resurrection of Jesus and the redemption for man’s sinful state which he could already recognize and felt that enslaved him, it broke them free from the bonds of a world that at best only had some grasp of the Natural Law which sustains the goodness of the soul

 

[Paddy1989]

Lets say two people are drowning and you can only save one person knowing the other will die, you are moral in saving this person. Now lets say one of these persons is your daughter and the other is your neighbors daughter who will you save? As hard of a thing leaving the other person behind would be i’m going to assume you would save your own daughter. Does this action mean that your daughters human value is more than that of your neighbors? No, your duty as a father and the loving bond you have will naturally take hold and the loving bond we have is so strong we wouldn’t think twice about sacrificing our lives for each other. Does the fact you love your daughter more take away the value and dignity of another human being? Of course not and as i said before we as Christians are called to show complete devoted love to one another in recognition of this. If someone holds less value than your daughter then they would never be deserving of the amount of love you give to her, you would withhold it with a half measure and keep the full measure to her but this is not what we believe we should do even at times when we fail to live up to it. We do not invoke the belief that the human value of our own national people is superior over another as then perhaps we would be justified in our enslavement of others for the economic flourishment of our own people. Human value has intrinsic value and dignity, this is a objective truth most people believe in but one which we do not always live up to. We value certain people more in our lives because of our loving experience with them, but it would be foolish to say that some humans have more value and dignity than others based on our own subjective experiences with them. We would not have progressed in our society by removing slavery and advancing in social justice if we did not accept this truth that ALL people have equal value. If human value is subjective then one nation could enslave and subdue another for their own gain as they would believe that the people they would be enslaving would have less value and dignity than their own people whom they are enriching. I’m sure you agree that such a view is absurd and i think it’s more out of confusion in our ability to define human value that we are arguing this, i feel you see human value as being subjective due to seeing it measured by how much love one has and gives to another and not as an objective truth independent of our subjective experiences but think deeper on this and i’m sure you see where a subjective view on human value will lead us

 

[Paddy1989]

Surely you understand that while your subjective experiences make you feel more attachment to some people more than others this hardly makes the people you don’t experience love with as inferior, you simply have no attachment to them, you would never see them as an inferior i’m sure of it. We are called however to love God and one another as ourselves and although it’s hard, we have the Saints as our role models to see that such a thing is possible, our loving acts of caring for one another, the poor, the sick, the persecuted, our forgiveness of each other all prove this objective fact. We see it as virtuous when we live up to this belief and feel compelled to recognize it even when society turns away from God. To put all this simply which i sincerely hope i have done by now how much i love someone which is subjective does not correlate to the objective truth of their intrinsic value and dignity

 

[pocaracas]

As hard of a thing leaving the other person behind would be i’m going to assume you would save your own daughter. Does this action mean that your daughters human value is more than that of your neighbors? No, your duty as a father and the loving bond you have will naturally take hold and the loving bond we have is so strong we wouldn’t think twice about sacrificing our lives for each other.

And that is why the value of each person is subjective.
Humanity beyond our family and friends still has value, but nowhere near as much as those closest to us. Why are those others valuable? In a nut shell, because they are a pool of genetic variety, needed for sexual species to survive, or minimize unhealthy defects.
Of course, this reason is not readily available to most people’s awarenesses, including ancient philosophers and present-day clergy, so a more readily available value for humanity was devised. One that seems, at face value, correct, but is based on a potentially incorrect assumption.

We do not invoke the belief that the human value of our own national people is superior over another as then perhaps we would be justified in our enslavement of others for the economic flourishment of our own people.

You mean as it is kinda endorsed in the legislation in the OT? A whole scripture, inspired by the divine, and yet… that basic notion that all humans have the same value missed the writers (and justice enforcers) completely??