Angels & Demons
discussion
Would you rather live in a world without science...or in a world without religion?
cs wrote: "But it is religion, and the belief of an afterlife that set the standards for people to be christian (small c) to each other."This is just plain wrong.
Maria wrote: "i think the world would be better without science and other people think without religion"Time to stop using your computer to post on here then, and modern medicine is out too.....living in a modern house also. You can thank science for all of those things.....not religion.
Mary Rose wrote: "Afterall, science is a kind of religion"No it isn't. Please reread the earlier posts in this discussion, it may take a while, but we're patient.
Michael wrote: "Would you rather live without your legs or without your arms. Oh gee, having both sure improves your quality of life. Or another one ... Do you still beat your wife/husband/children/grandmother ...."
No. There is no equivalence. I live my life without religion, and my quality of life is just fine thank you.
Dina wrote: "So much we don't know about science and religion. They tend to fill in each other's gaps"This is the God of the Gaps concept, and it is a one way street. Religion claims god for anything that science says "we don't know" to, and as science progresses it fills in those gaps, so there is less need to refer to god, but there is no traffic the other way, where science says "now we know, and it's god!".
cs wrote: "It would be every one for thenselves 'the fittest win'."
No it wouldn't, you're applying the biological concept in a societal context. Which is wrong.
cs wrote: "Imagine a world with no morals, only laws; that’s what you would have if religion was taken out of the equation."Your opinion. AN incorrect one at that.
cs wrote: "It's a loaded question to give atheists a platform to have a poke at religion."
Wrongity wrong wrong wrong.
cs wrote: "Morals (whats right and wrong) have derived from religion, in a world without religion it's hard to see where they would have come from."
It might be hard for you, but that does not mean it is true.
Morals predate your religion, and will survive it.
cs wrote: "I said Morals (whats right and wrong) have derived from religion. There are more religious people in the world than non religious so i guess yous statement "religion has a monopoly on morals" is correct."So how did you decide which religon's morals to take on?
cs wrote: "If you think morals most likely preceded the invention of religion, then maybe the word 'morals' was given to what was already built into humans when god made us and is what sets them apart from animals. "God of the Gaps. "I don't understand how morality could have evolved, so it must have been god!"
Shannon wrote: "Interestingly, making overgeneralizations and being judgmental are common to both. Neither are set apart when it comes to that."I agree, it's human nature.
Right, think I'm up to date again :)
Wow! Cerebus, you have been busy.I'm tired just reading all that.
Let's see, there's been god of the gaps
No religion, no morals
false equivialency
I think we are missing 'Evolution is only a theory', some reference to creationism, 'science doesn't have all the answers' and did I miss anyone the classic 'if we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?'
Then the bingo card is full.
Travis wrote: "Wow! Cerebus, you have been busy.I'm tired just reading all that."
Didn't take as much as it might seem, after all it's mostly rebutting the same old stuff that comes up time and again :)
I like the idea of playing bingo with some of these repeated themes :)
In my not so humble oppinion, I would not want to live in a world without "religion" or science both are neccessary.
Morals definitely out date religion and you don't have to have a belief system to have good morals, a lot of religions make excuses for the lack of moral fibre in their followers( to many examples to name), so if they believe in god and murder, rape, bash another being do they just get forgiven by god, or has whatever religion failed them?? But then some religions sacrifice! Then we have blind faith were followers "interpret" readings and put them into practice no matter what the ramifications or against better judgment, no matter what questions you ask them they believe the answer they give is ALWAYs correct even when it is impossible. How is it moral to be so bias about the one religion and everyone else is a lesser person or wrong?? With science you can't explain everything but we don't need to. Factions will interpret their religion as what suits them at whatever time!!!
in a world of science
Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on you.If you think morals most likely preceded the invention of religion..."
Not from a European perspective, from a christian one.
"crossing the boundary"? I guess the term is not as well known across the pond.
A child needs to know, metaphorically speaking, what their boundaries are and if they cross them there will be consequences (punishment). From what time they should be home....... to not carrying a knife or gun.
Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "You may have missed my reply to Hazel........The phrase is today commonly used in contexts that are incompatible with the original meaning as intended by its first two proponents: Brit..."
Again I repete......
The phrase is today commonly used in contexts that are incompatible with the original meaning as intended by its first two proponents: British polymath philosopher Herbert Spencer (who coined the term) and Charles Darwin."
........ the word commonly (generally - usually - ordinarily - normally).
cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on you.If you think morals most likely preceded the inventio..."
The last time I checked those "PC" ppl you don't like very much are often also those favor stronger gun control. And I don't know any atheist/skeptics group, or any political/religious group for that matter, who advocates that teens should stay out at night or hurt other ppl with a gun or a knife. I agree that there are plenty of problems in our world, but if one want to blame a specific one on Christians/atheists/Muslims/liberals/conservatives etc. one should at least give some solid evidence:)
Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on you.If you think morals most likely preceded the invention of religion, ..."
........... I don't agree.
I don't know the figures but I bet more atheists converted to, than were born atheist. So the positive effects of religion are in-bread.
Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "It keeps the moral behaviour of society in check"Yet again, you are saying that without religion to keep you in check you would be out there stealing, killing etc.
If you get your moral..."
Atheists when talking religion tend to drift between past the present, using whatever analogy fits best into their reasoning. I am talking about the world we live in now.
cs wrote: "Cerebus wrote: "cs wrote: "It keeps the moral behaviour of society in check"Yet again, you are saying that without religion to keep you in check you would be out there stealing, killing etc.
If ..."
If you are basing your argument on the world now, then you are on even shakier ground.
As even religion doesn't seem to be keeping you people in check and on your good behavior.
and if you don't approve of atheists drifting into the past to make arguments, don't base yours on a 2,000 year old book that people are still using to make laws now that are to be forced on all of us.
talk about your clinging to the past.
Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on you.If you think morals most likely preceded t..."
I think we are at cross purposes.
Boundries. Unwritten laws. Discipline. What a child is allowed to do and what lines they should not cross.
Without these you have an out of control child.
cs wrote: "I don't know the figures but I bet more atheists converted to, than were born atheist. So the positive effects of religion are in-bread. "Ironically enough, a lot of atheists do grow up being indoctrinated into a religion, and a lot abandon religion for ethical reasons based on the dated morality of the leading religions. This is why atheists tend to be on average more knowledgeable about religions than the actual practitioners.
However, experiments have shown that primates have a primitive sense of morality, enforcing rules in their societies and even costing themselves to punish perceived unfairness or cheating. Since none of them have started kneeling to a carved effigy we can assume they are probably not religious.
Also around the world there is no link between the religiosity of the society and how 'moral' it is (unless you have some strange priorities).
cs wrote: "I don't know the figures but I bet more atheists converted to, than were born atheist. So the positive effects of religion are in-bread. "
Am I meant to infer from that statement that you believe babies are born already believing in a deity? Surely everyone is born atheist. Faith in anything is learnt from experiences as you develop.
cs wrote: "Boundries. Unwritten laws. Discipline. What a child is allowed to do and what lines they should not cross. Without these you have an out of control child."
Teaching children rules and boundaries is very laudable, but what is better is [i]educating[/i] them. Explain why we all benefit if people follow the rules, explain why killing someone else is wrong because they don't go to heaven, they cease to exist.
Civilising children is about education and knowledge.
The nominal religious "morality" is not morality however, it is the rule of fear. Do this and you will get rewarded, do this and you will get punished. That is not morality that is oppression.
An ethical person chooses to act in an ethical manner because they understand why its the right thing to do, a person who bases morality solely on religion submits through fear of consequence. That is not morality. Change the rules and the religious person obeys, whether it's turning the other cheek, or murdering rape victims because they did not scream loud enough.
cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on you.If you think morals most like..."
I do agree with you in that children need some boundary or so-called "discipline", just don't see what this have to do w/ our discussion on atheism or your dislike of "PC world". I'm not a fan of extreme PC-ness but blaming the bad behavior of kids on PC or on atheism seems to me just like saying global warming is caused by the decline of piracy. And I'm raised by atheist parents, whose parents are also atheists, and they almost never allowed me to stay out after school until I went to college.
cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on you.If you think morals most like..."
Again, you keep going back to children and boundaries, and then ignore when I use the very same type of argument discussing primitive cultures and people that came before the invention of religion.
Heck, you can see the same type of behavior in groups of primates.
and since you see so few monkeys in church, there might be something to what I say about 'morals/boundaries' being a societal construct, rather than coming from a magic being.
Unless you what to go with the argument that Adam and Eve were chimps...
I also have to say that ' the effects of religion being in-bread' is my new favorite typo.
religion being in-bread?
though, this one speaks to me more, even if its not in bread, or in fact any form of baked goods at all:
Paul wrote: "cs wrote: "I don't know the figures but I bet more atheists converted to, than were born atheist. So the positive effects of religion are in-bread. "
Am I meant to infer from that statement that y..."
Maybe that is splitting hairs. If the parents are Christian there is a good chance they will raise the child the same way. Likewise an atheist couple are unlikely to raise their child as a catholic.
Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on you.If you think moral..."
An example of PC'ness, teachers could do very little if there were unruly pupils in a class. Now that the damage has been done the government is trying to reverse the pc damage.......
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic...
Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on you.If you think morals ..."
Post 3109 has been taken out of context by some other posts. You must be reading the out of context ones.
"Heck, you can see the same type of behavior in groups of primates". I don't think so but I'm sure you can give me an example.
Not so much a typo, more a spilling mistick.
Gary wrote: "cs wrote: "I don't know the figures but I bet more atheists converted to, than were born atheist. So the positive effects of religion are in-bread. "Ironically enough, a lot of atheists do grow ..."
Oh, I have been told by atheists here not to assume things...... you need proof.
cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on you.If ..."
Primate groups ( packs, gaggles..what's the word for a bunch of monkeys?) do work together, through both social interaction and working to defend the herd/pod from outside dangers and will work together at child rearing and food gathering.
Heck, penguins show the same kind of behavior and you see even fewer of them in church than you do monkeys.
as to atheist converting: if religion is all prevailing, like you keep claiming, then obviously the atheists must have converted from them...we don't just show up, rocketed from a doomed planet or through a portal from an alternate earth.
If you need proof...Hi, I'm an atheist and my mom was a church goer and the daughter of two serious church going parents.
Travis wrote: "what's the word for a bunch of monkeys?"
I believe it's tribe. Or, is it troop?
At any rate, if you guys don't stop, I'm certain to have horrible nightmares of Charlton Heston in an ape costume.
I believe it's tribe. Or, is it troop?
At any rate, if you guys don't stop, I'm certain to have horrible nightmares of Charlton Heston in an ape costume.
Shannon wrote: "Travis wrote: "what's the word for a bunch of monkeys?"I believe it's tribe. Or, is it troop?
At any rate, if you guys don't stop, I'm certain to have horrible nightmares of Charlton Heston in ..."
Thanks for the info. That was bugging me.
I'm quite proud that I've gone this long without a single 'Damn, dirty apes!' joke.
Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Travis wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Xdyj wrote: "cs wrote: "Most atheists seem to have the same type of morals as anyone else so I guess a bit of religion has rubbed of on ..."I think you have proved my point.
I finding I'm thinking, with great fondness and longing, of our discussion regarding Bond, James Bond ... and which Bond was best ...
Shannon wrote: "I finding I'm thinking, with great fondness and longing, of our discussion regarding Bond, James Bond ... and which Bond was best ..."Nooooo! not another page of the girls drooling over Daniel Craig!
Anything but that!
we could start talking about Sean Bean if you like, instead, Travis... I especially like him as Sharpe.
Travis wrote: "Shannon wrote: "I finding I'm thinking, with great fondness and longing, of our discussion regarding Bond, James Bond ... and which Bond was best ..."
Nooooo! not another page of the girls droolin..."
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!
Nooooo! not another page of the girls droolin..."
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!
cs wrote: "I don't know the figures but I bet more atheists converted to, than were born atheist. So the positive effects of religion are in-bread. "Everyone is born an atheist, and then converts to a religion, usually as a result of their parents.
cs wrote: "Atheists when talking religion tend to drift between past the present, using whatever analogy fits best into their reasoning. I am talking about the world we live in now. "It would really help if you quoted correctly, so we could know what it is you are replying to. It's not difficult.
What is it about the world we live in now that you are referring to?
Hazel wrote: "we could start talking about Sean Bean if you like, instead, Travis... I especially like him as Sharpe."
Speaking of SEAN BEAN, Hazel ....
He's in a new television show over here in America. I think it's called Missing. He stars with Ashley Judd and plays a spy, double agent or some such thing. He's also attempting, I think, an America accent, which is somewhat disturbing. But, when I saw it last week, I tried to simply watch and not listen.
Ahhahahahahahahahah!!
Sorry, Travis. I couldn't resist going down this path.
Speaking of SEAN BEAN, Hazel ....
He's in a new television show over here in America. I think it's called Missing. He stars with Ashley Judd and plays a spy, double agent or some such thing. He's also attempting, I think, an America accent, which is somewhat disturbing. But, when I saw it last week, I tried to simply watch and not listen.
Ahhahahahahahahahah!!
Sorry, Travis. I couldn't resist going down this path.
cs wrote: "Again I repete......The phrase is today commonly used in contexts that are incompatible with the original meaning as intended by its first two proponents: British polymath philosopher Herbert Spencer (who coined the term) and Charles Darwin.""
And again, I repeat.....
Since there was confusion over the phrase, I clarified the meaning which I intend when I use it, and when evolutionary biologists use it. It doesn't mean that there is not now another meaning which has come into use, nor does it mean that new use has replaced the old, not does it mean that when I use it in the evolutionary sense that I also mean it in the societal sense.
I don't care that you use the phrase to mean something different to me. I understand how you are using it, you (should) now understand how I use it, and that should enable the discussion to continue....
...which is what I will do now....
Accepting evolution as a result of the overwhelming scientific evidence has no bearing on areas outside of evolutionary biology. It does not mean that I think that societies should be based on the same concept, not does it mean that I think societies *are* based on the same concept. I disagree totally with your baseless assumption that without religion society would operate on a 'survival of the fittest' model, and I know of no atheists or biologists who hold that view, or who would want that view to be true.
cs wrote: "So the positive effects of religion are in-bread. "Rye or wholegrain?
cs wrote: "Maybe that is splitting hairs. If the parents are Christian there is a good chance they will raise the child the same way. Likewise an atheist couple are unlikely to raise their child as a catholic. "So in other words, if you had been born into a hindu family (you may well have been, I don't know) you would now be a hindu arguing vociferously in favour of Matsya, Kurma, Varaha, Narasimha, Vamana and so on? So the only reason you are christian (again, making an assumption, but the point still holds) is an accident of birth?
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
Vector Calculus (other topics)The Devil's Collection: A Cynic's Dictionary (other topics)
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (other topics)
God Hates You, Hate Him Back: Making Sense of the Bible (other topics)
The New Money System: When Your Money Fails (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Ray Kurzweil (other topics)Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
Wendy Joyce (other topics)
More...
Yet again, you are saying that without religion to keep you in check you would be out there stealing, killing etc.
If you get your morals from religion, particularly the christian religion, specifically the bible, why do you not own slaves? Do you agree with stoning disobedient children? Or do you pick and choose?