Why are atheists so unhappy?

[Charles_Darwin]

josie_L:
That’s because you’re illogical (you run around in circles when you speak).

No its because you don’t seem to have even the most basic understanding of sceince. As a result you raise objections based on YOUR lack of knowledge. This is called an argument from ignorance.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

CD is starting to remind me of “Dan the Illogical Scientist” from the Dilbert comic strip. Whenever we say something that CD doesn’t agree with, he simply says “you say that because you’re ignorant.”

No whenever i am presented with an agrument based on a lack of knowledge and understanding, i explain it is nothing more than an argument from ignorance.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Hey I’m back. I hope everyone here is doing well. Remember to get sunshine every so often for that daily dose of vitamin D

Anyways, here are wiki definitions of atheism and deism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist
“Atheism can be either the rejection of theism,[1] or the position that deities do not exist.[2] In the broadest sense, it is the absence of belief in the existence of deities”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
“Deism is a religious and philosophical belief that a supreme being created the universe, and that this (and religious truth in general) can be determined using reason and observation of the natural world alone, without a need for either faith or organized religion.”

From the encyclopedic definition of atheism, it seems that you are not really an atheist. Instead “a rejection of your claim god does exist” would be an anti-Catholic since I am Catholic an that is a response to me. (Also we are on a forum called Catholic Answers ^^.)

So if you are atheist, you might want to edit your own thoughts. If your not, you might want to edit your profile.

Actually if you look at my profile it says religion = none. If you look at the definition you provided you will see exactly what an atheist is.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist
"Atheism can be either the rejection of theism,[1] or the position that deities do not exist.[2] In the broadest sense, it is the absence of belief in the existence of deities"

I reject all humans claims regarding a god. Therefore i dont believe there is NO god, i lack the belief in a god.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Hey hey, I hope you guys are doing well. Yeah, I have experience in modeling atomic particles and interactions with matter. I did it in college among other things.

Fair enough, i get the feeling we may be talking about different things. Its not really key to the topic anyway.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Again, (this is getting old :banghead: ) what does it matter whether a society thrives or fails? We’re all gonna die when the sun runs out of fuel in 5 million years, so why is it important to having a thriving society?

When did i ever once say it was?

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Morals could not have evolved because there are certain requirements that are needed to stabilize a community. A certain amount of cooperation, sharing, trust, hard work, courage . . .etc. was needed in order for a society of hominids to survive. Do you get what I’m saying now? Our ancestors could not have been without some understanding of morality (whether they realized it was moral or not). There was always a universal moral code.

Simple morals and cooperation existed a LONG time before homo sapien sapien. We can see morals and cooperation evolve in society. LIke i have asked you, name me one society that has the same more code as 100 years ago let along 1000, or 10000, or 100000???

If morals are absolute then why did it take up until 50 years ago for “moral” christians to stop opressing coloured people?

 

[RNRobert]

S

If morals are absolute then why did it take up until 50 years ago for “moral” christians to stop opressing coloured people?

And I’ve asked you before (and I am continuing to ask you) why you consider oppressing colored people or stoning homosexuals, or condoning rape) to be wrong? Yet you simply evade the question and retreat into insults.

The universe has been around for billions of years. The length of time that humans have been around is a microscopic fraction of that period. Odds are we’ll be extinct long before the universe comes to an end, so what does it matter whether we treated our fellow man with respect, or that we had “stable societies?”

 

[Charles_Darwin]

And I’ve asked you before (and I am continuing to ask you) why you consider oppressing colored people or stoning homosexuals, or condoning rape) to be wrong? Yet you simply evade the question and retreat into insults.

The universe has been around for billions of years. The length of time that humans have been around is a microscopic fraction of that period. Odds are we’ll be extinct long before the universe comes to an end, so what does it matter whether we treated our fellow man with respect, or that we had “stable societies?”

I have told you why i consider it wrong…

Emapthy.

Now can you answer my question?

 

[RNRobert]

When did i ever once say it was?

You didn’t, which is why I’m asking. YOU said:

Bacause empathy stabilizes a society. It is a very good thing.

You apparently put some kind of value on a stable society. I wish to know **WHY **it is a good thing. In the overall scheme of things, man’s existence isn’t even a pimple on the arse of eternity, and we’ll probably end up like the dinosaurs before its all over. So, what will it have mattered whether we treated our fellow homo sapiens with respect or not.

I’m not asking a complex science question. I simply want to know why you think these things matter.

 

[RNRobert]

I have told you why i consider it wrong…

Emapthy.

Now can you answer my question?

You’re talking in circles. I asked you why certain actions are wrong, you said empathy. When I asked you why empathy is good, you said because it stabilizes society. When I asked you why it matters whether society is stable, you say empathy.

But, I will answer your question. Just because human beings fail to live up to moral absolutes, (what Christianity calls sin) does not mean they don’t exist. Like in Olympic gymnastics, very few score a perfect 10, but that doesn’t mean a perfect 10 doesn’t exist. Most people know it is wrong to lie, steal, kill, etc, yet, we’ve all done those things at one time or another (not everyone has killed, but you get the point).
Just because someone is a Christian does not make them automatically perfect. Besides, there are those who may have a distorted understanding of the faith. They may be blinded by their upbringing or culture. And there are those who are Christians in name only. They may call themselves Christian and go to church every Sunday, but they’re simply exploiting the name for their own purposes- Jesus warned us there would be people like that.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

You’re talking in circles. I asked you why certain actions are wrong, you said empathy. When I asked you why empathy is good, you said because it stabilizes society. When I asked you why it matters whether society is stable, you say empathy.

But, I will answer your question. Just because human beings fail to live up to moral absolutes, (what Christianity calls sin) does not mean they don’t exist. Like in Olympic gymnastics, very few score a perfect 10, but that doesn’t mean a perfect 10 doesn’t exist. Most people know it is wrong to lie, steal, kill, etc, yet, we’ve all done those things at one time or another (not everyone has killed, but you get the point).
Just because someone is a Christian does not make them automatically perfect. Besides, there are those who may have a distorted understanding of the faith. They may be blinded by their upbringing or culture. And there are those who are Christians in name only. They may call themselves Christian and go to church every Sunday, but they’re simply exploiting the name for their own purposes- Jesus warned us there would be people like that.

Empathy is a good thing because it reduces suffering. Suffing is bad because it destabilizes society. Stable societies are good because they increase procreation.

Procreation is good in the sense the it increases a societies chance of survival. That is why we see what we consider morals within a cooperative society. Simply (and im not refereing to just homo sapiens) the societies that were not stable disappeared. By our very nature we reproduce. I think we are talking about two different meanings of the word “good”. I mean good in the sense of maximizing reproduction. After all that is all were are… Very complex self replicating systems.

What you said doesn’t address the question. In every aspect of modern society we see an evolution of morals. If your hypothesis was correct we would not expect to see a overall improvement in almost every aspect.

If you beleive morals are absolute then present me with these aboslutes. Is stoning chlidren immoral?

 

[RNRobert]

Empathy is a good thing because it reduces suffering. Suffing is bad because it destabilizes society. Stable societies are good because they increase procreation.

Procreation is good in the sense the it increases a societies chance of survival. That is why we see what we consider morals within a cooperative society. Simply (and im not refereing to just homo sapiens) the societies that were not stable disappeared.

But why is survival important? Animals procreate without wondering why their species should survive. The human race will eventually become extinct one Why should I, as an individual, care whether society or mankind continues after I’m dust?

 

[RNRobert]

If morals are absolute then why did it take up until 50 years ago for “moral” christians to stop opressing coloured people?

You feel that oppressing coloured people is wrong, that we should feel empathy. Why? If I consider them genetically inferior, if I consider them a threat to the survival of my race, why shouldn’t I oppress them.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

But why is survival important? Animals procreate without wondering why their species should survive. The human race will eventually become extinct one Why should I, as an individual, care whether society or mankind continues after I’m dust?

I didn’t say i was important. I’m not saying you should care. I don’t think your getting my point. I might not be explaning myself clearly enough.

RNA is a self replicating molecule. Since it’s synthesis it it has made copies of itself by its very nature. By it’s make up it couldn’t not copy itself.

These copies were not perfect, this is refered to reproduction with variation and it still happens today. The copies that could reproduce better, again by their very nature became more abundant. These moleclues incremetally became more complex, until 4 billion years later you have us. You could in theory trace your unbroken lineage all the way back to a strand of RNA.

We are the exact same as RNA, we self replicate. The evolution of morals and societies increased our chances (as a whole) of reproducing. The animals that did not have these advantages died out.

So if you don’t want to reproduce, of you want to kill etc then you will just end up like one of the less we adapted stands of RNA did and your lineage will be no more.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

You feel that oppressing coloured people is wrong, that we should feel empathy. Why? If I consider them genetically inferior, if I consider them a threat to the survival of my race, why shouldn’t I oppress them.

Aside from the fact we are basically genetically indentical…

Because empathy dictates that you should not do so for you can imagine how you would feel in someones position.

 

[kristine105]

Im sorry but if someone is going to tell me what a believe, then totally misrepresent to a lack of knowledge, established universally accepted scienctific theories then i am going to point out they are ignorant. That is not ment as an inslut, its a fact.

Ignorant –adjective

1. lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man.
2. lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact: ignorant of quantum physics.
3. uninformed; unaware.
4. due to or showing lack of knowledge or training: an ignorant statement.

Oh well, teaching an ignorant is one of the corporal works of mercy…

 

[kristine105]

Oh well, teaching an ignorant is one of the corporal works of mercy…

I mistook to what side i should be…

 

[Tomster]

Empathy is a good thing because it reduces suffering. Suffing is bad because it destabilizes society. Stable societies are good because they increase procreation.

Procreation is good in the sense the it increases a societies chance of survival. That is why we see what we consider morals within a cooperative society. Simply (and im not refereing to just homo sapiens) the societies that were not stable disappeared. By our very nature we reproduce. I think we are talking about two different meanings of the word “good”. I mean good in the sense of maximizing reproduction. After all that is all were are… Very complex self replicating systems.

What you said doesn’t address the question. In every aspect of modern society we see an evolution of morals. If your hypothesis was correct we would not expect to see a overall improvement in almost every aspect.

If you beleive morals are absolute then present me with these aboslutes. Is stoning chlidren immoral?

 

[Tomster]

Empathy is a good thing because it reduces suffering. Suffing is bad because it destabilizes society. Stable societies are good because they increase procreation.

Procreation is good in the sense the it increases a societies chance of survival. That is why we see what we consider morals within a cooperative society. Simply (and im not refereing to just homo sapiens) the societies that were not stable disappeared. By our very nature we reproduce. I think we are talking about two different meanings of the word “good”. I mean good in the sense of maximizing reproduction. After all that is all were are… Very complex self replicating systems.

What you said doesn’t address the question. In every aspect of modern society we see an evolution of morals. If your hypothesis was correct we would not expect to see a overall improvement in almost every aspect.

If you beleive morals are absolute then present me with these aboslutes. Is stoning chlidren immoral?

WOW! Talk about destabilizing societies! The “first cause” of socialism’s mistaken concept of the person and society is atheism. The denial of God deprives the person of his foundation and consequently leads to a reorganization of the social order without reference to the person’s dignity and responsibility. The collapse of the Communist regimes in central and eastern Europe was due to the violation of the rights of workers, the inefficiency of the economic system and atheism. The true cause of the new developements was the spiritual void brought about by atheism. Marxism had promised to uproot the need for God from the human heart, but the results have shown that it is not possible to succeed in this without throwing the heart into turmoil.

The class struggle, in which what is pursued is not the general good of society, but a partisan interest which replaces the common good and sets out to destroy whatever stands in its way. The class struggle transfers to internal conflict between social groups the doctrine of total war, which militarism and imperialism use in international relations. Both class struggles in the Marxist sense and militarism have the same root, namely, atheism and contempt for the human person, which place the principle of force above reason and law.

You are truly in the dark my friend!

 

[Charles_Darwin]

WOW! Talk about destabilizing societies! The “first cause” of socialism’s mistaken concept of the person and society is atheism. The denial of God deprives the person of his foundation and consequently leads to a reorganization of the social order without reference to the person’s dignity and responsibility. The collapse of the Communist regimes in central and eastern Europe was due to the violation of the rights of workers, the inefficiency of the economic system and atheism. The true cause of the new developements was the spiritual void brought about by atheism. Marxism had promised to uproot the need for God from the human heart, but the results have shown that it is not possible to succeed in this without throwing the heart into turmoil.

The class struggle, in which what is pursued is not the general good of society, but a partisan interest which replaces the common good and sets out to destroy whatever stands in its way. The class struggle transfers to internal conflict between social groups the doctrine of total war, which militarism and imperialism use in international relations. Both class struggles in the Marxist sense and militarism have the same root, namely, atheism and contempt for the human person, which place the principle of force above reason and law.

You are truly in the dark my friend!

You don’t even know what atheism is.

It’s a shame for your whacky hypothesis that the societies with the lowest crime rates on earth are all atheist.