Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

70 (27.6%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

113 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (24%)

Total Members Voted: 249

[Rolan7]

What about the most basic of Christian rules: "You shall have no other gods before me"? Animals can't follow that because they have no concept of gods and spirituality. You don't follow that because you chose to reject it.

...Technically, atheists and animals do follow that
Not really the intent behind it though.  Though even then, technically, we don't choose to reject it.

[wierd]

The fossil record gives several distinct, but closely related species to humans, who appear to have had spirituality

Namely, the Denisova and the Neanderthal.

[Orange Wizard]

My point is that God is involved in Christian morality, and is therefore inherently superior. I hope.

The fossil record gives several distinct, but closely related species to humans, who appear to have had spirituality

Namely, the Denisova and the Neanderthal.

Yeah, I find that stuff really interesting. No idea how it works, but vov.

[Frumple]

Scientifically, we're all animals. But you were also born human, and as such are superior to beasts and fish and so on, even if you don't acknowledge it.

That... depends a hell of a lot on what you consider "superior" to mean. We're definitely better than most at a few things, mostly boiling down to communication and building from that, and a bit of (specific sorts of) endurance and hand/eye coordination, but we're categorically worse in most other ways and even in many of the fields outside of communication, we're fairly regularly outperformed by a number of other species. We're also not even remotely the dominate form of life on the planet, that particular mantle falling mostly on various sorts of bacteria, with a side of insects and fish.

Superior's not really the word I'd use, m'self. We've got a helluva' hat trick that we've used to arguably good effect, but as an animal qua animal we're easily identifiable as not terribly impressive. We're less good than we are least bad with a solid degree of coordination. Being fair, aggressively mediocre counts for a lot, but I'm damn sure not going to walk up to the hungry shark and say I'm the better swimmer, y'know?

... though it's probably worth noting regarding the morality aspect, that command-based ethics (which is what christian morality is) is generally, uh. Not considered superior ones. The problems involved with it(s simplistic nature) are well traveled, really...

[TD1]

My point is that God is involved in Christian morality, and is therefore inherently superior. I hope.

No offence, but there are many instances in which I would not follow the morality of God. That approach...isn't the best.

Also, some form of deity is involved in most/possibly all religions' morality. Doesn't make them inherently better. What religious morality seems to is take a load of common sense morals - don't kill, don't fight for no reason - it hurts you and others, that's why silly - and then adds a backstory and some form of eschatological or physical reward.

[origamiscienceguy]

"Common sense" is a vey vague morality.

[TD1]

And yet it's what I follow.

I'm not a bad person, believe it or not, simply because I don't believe in some transcendent Father who turned up to make me and then disappeared.

You may read a book that gives you morals, but in the end you simply do what you feel is right. There are an awful lot of adulterers out there who wear a cross about their necks.

[wierd]

I think he means more "Socially minded" pragmatism.

EG, "Dont poop near where you prepare food", "Don't take other people's things", etc.

Basically, the basic underpinnings necessary for social groups larger than just a few people.  Since these underpinnings are so important to larger group cohesion, it makes sense that they would be enshrined in some way.

Traditionally, human culture favored authoritarian rule by a small subclass within the society. These were typlically "Elders" who were given special excemptions for having lived a long time, seen a lot of things, and thus presumably have some wise insight into managing problems within a society.  This typically also coincides with belief systems. The connection between village elders and village priests is pretty strong as a correlation.

Naturally, it does not take much to explain how religious undertones to simple civic ordinances can come into vogue, and how those religious undertones can help to enshrine and perpetuate adherence to those norms better than threat of violence can.

Religion first and foremost is an attempt by the early humans to understand the world around them. Supernatural agencies like gods help explain previously inexplicable occurrences of phenomena. (Such as the rising and setting of the sun, or the varying lengths of the day with the changing of the seasons.)

For those two alone, there are countless gods in numerous pantheons, with myths expounding upon them.

[Bohandas]

My point is that God is involved in Christian morality, and is therefore inherently superior. I hope.

No offence, but there are many instances in which I would not follow the morality of God. That approach...isn't the best.

Also, some form of deity is involved in most/possibly all religions' morality. Doesn't make them inherently better.

Great wall of prophecy, reveal to us God's will that we might blindly obey

[Orange Wizard]

My point is that God is involved in Christian morality, and is therefore inherently superior. I hope.

No offence, but there are many instances in which I would not follow the morality of God. That approach...isn't the best.

Also, some form of deity is involved in most/possibly all religions' morality. Doesn't make them inherently better. What religious morality seems to is take a load of common sense morals - don't kill, don't fight for no reason - it hurts you and others, that's why silly - and then adds a backstory and some form of eschatological or physical reward.

The crux of the issue here seems to be that you don't seem to realise that Christians believe Christian morality is special, whether really it is or really isn't notwithstanding.

[wierd]

That is not exclusive to christianity, and their moral code.

The same is true of Judaeism, Islam, and quite a few others that are not of Abrahamic origin.

Any religion that proclaims itself to be the absolute truth, and also contains a moral code, will suffer from this problem. The problem is inherent in the invocation of a-priori axom: "This is the absolute truth."

[Rolepgeek]

Sometimes it's important to have an a-priori code of morals which you believe must be objectively true, period. If you go purely off empirical evidence, you end up with wireheading or morality being meaningless, as far as I've seen. Believe it what isn't real in order to make it real.

Or something. I dunno...

[Frumple]

Don't believe OW is saying it's a unique phenomena. Just noting it's a common thing for christians, which is... pretty true. One of the more notable points of contention its various sects have with other ideologies, really. Christian inability to recognize other moral codes as valid is rather frustrating, at times, heh. Fortunately a fair number that don't think like that, but... a lot, do. Quite a lot.

[TD1]

The crux of the issue here seems to be that you don't seem to realise that Christians believe Christian morality is special, whether really it is or really isn't notwithstanding.

I know they do. I just think that it's wrong to do so.

Edit: Oh, and has no reason to claim to be so. That's important too.

[Rolan7]

I really, really don't understand faith at all.  I'm not proud of that or phrasing it as an attack, in fact I'm kinda ashamed?  Considering how much time I've spent in arguments with Christians both online and in person.  I just... don't... understand.

In high school I spent a week at a Christian (Baptist) camp and tried talking to God.  Begging to become a Christian.  At the time I desperately wanted something divine to believe in and...  Well, to believe that there was some grand cosmic plan where everything was okay.  I sat outside under the stars and just begged.  I wasn't angry afterwards, just disappointed and numb.

That was a pretty dark time for me.  I had been reading the Bible a lot, and knew what Jehovah is said to have done.  I was essentially willing to pledge to a Mythos beast.

Nowadays I say I believe in fairies, or "little people".  I actually do mean that.  I want them to exist, I think it's possible, and it would explain things more than it raised questions (since they have superpowers and hide from scrutiny).  Is that belief?  Do I have faith?  I don't know if that's what the words mean.

What IS faith?
Is it "Acting like a thing is true without solid evidence"?  Because that's how I feel about the fey, sure.  But I can't imagine being *evangelical* about something if I can't provide evidence.  It's one thing to act like something is true, it's another to *tell* people it's true with any certainty.

I guess probably most religious people feel some personal, unshareable evidence.  Not literally "talking to God" necessarily, but a feeling that a divine spirit is confirming their belief as true.

If that's true, I definitely believe in the Fey.  (Not that I would serve them, but they don't demand service.  And most of them are fucking terrifying aliens, nearly as bad as Jehovah)