Philosophy Now Forum

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 5:43 pm Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I'll meet you there.''

You're asking, "What's the difference between being "beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing," on the one hand, and being "beyond good and evil," on the other?

The answer is, "Not much." Both laud amorality.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:05 am As a Christian myself, I rate you...

Hmmm...what happened to "Judge not, lest ye be judged"?

Duh. As you keep insisting, we are ALL getting judged anyway!! What a stupid statement.


btw. To the congregation you probably project your thread atheist bashing errands up on a screen to, please note...I rate your PASTOR (ROT_SAP) as a SHIT Christian.

God just kicked me out of bed at 3am to deal with you AND now I gotta do the hard yards of getting all my words that you chopped out back, you just won't self analyse and be a half decent - a fair, ethical Christian will you. (too busy preaching it seems)

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:06 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:05 am As a Christian myself, I rate you...

Hmmm...what happened to "Judge not, lest ye be judged"?

...we are ALL getting judged anyway!

Yes, we are...but you are not the Judge. Not am I.

"Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand." (Romans 14:4)

"But as for you, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or you as well, why do you regard your brother or sister with contempt? For we will all appear before the judgment seat of God." (Romans 14:10)

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pm Most Atheists are inconsistent in that way. They cling to conventional morality, even though they deny its premises.

In contrast, do tell us about the consistency of theists. And tell us about where their wide-ranging morality comes from.

If you want to narrow it down... we can just focus on the morality and horrific deeds of theist men: their sexual abuse of children, and the death and wars they wage on others. They may ask their god's forgiveness, or claim it was their god's will. What kind of morality is that: which lies and deceives, and does so much damage throughout humankind for thousands of years, all in the name (or forgiveness) of one god or another?

If you really care about moral thinking and behavior, why not examine the obvious horrific thinking and behavior committed exactly by those who claim to be morally better than that? Where, then, does morality actually come from? If being a theist does not prevent such widespread and pervasive evil acts, might theism actually provide a cover for them?

You banging on endlessly about atheists having no greater reason to be moral is such a childish load of shit alongside the horrific deeds done under banners of god.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pmBut [atheists] they're inconsistent. If consistency is a virtue, they manifestly don't have it.

That describes HUMANS... NOT uniquely atheists! Your argument is a thin film of glitter that you wrap yourself in, as if no one can see through it or guess what the purpose is.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pmAtheism rationalizes only amorality

How has theism rationalized or excused behavior?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pmany moral precept taken beyond that is merely arbitrary and personal.

And you think it's different across all the varieties of theism?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pmThey [atheists] can't insist it's really "right."

That might be to their credit, as they can be responsible for continually assessing themselves and the world around them -- whereas theists might stagnate in their rut of righteousness they've burrowed into, 'leaving it to their god' and denying all else. You can insist anything you want (as you continually do), but it's meaningless when you ignore everything to the contrary. The contrary can show you how blind you are. You could learn a lot from atheists if you weren't so righteously self-involved. Any wise god would be an atheist!

CASE IN POINT - What happened to MY other statements being addressed? Please kindly address them in FULL without cutting words out to SUIT YOU.

As Vitruvius wrote:
I hate how you leave your argument in full, reduce mine to one line - often missing the salient point, and then bang on afterward, again at great length. Further, you stick a label on my argument then attack the label.

You are a cunning Evangelist fox.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:14 pm But you admit that you would likely take full advantage (of others) no matter what the cost (had you believe there was no God watching over your actions) - as per your above statement?

Any thinking Atheist would. (But I'm no Atheist, of course.)

As a Christian myself, I rate you pretty shit as a Christian. I would go as far as to say unethical and showing a degree of cowardice by the way you debate with Atheists, most of whom appear to have mastered "thinking".

Certainly, most of my friends are "thinking" atheists and they would not stoop to take full advantage (of others) no matter what the cost, as you have clearly shown, you would.

That then proves to me that you are only into the Christian thing in an attempt to benefit from it. You are not a Christian for the right reason; altruism and show little to no bravery, and fairness as demonstrated by the way you debate on this forum, hence you are unethical. (thus a hypocrite)

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pmHe would know that no moral constraints hang over his head, and he could not possibly miss the simple logic of, "I want it, I can get it, and when my life is over there is no more -- so what is there to prevent me from getting it, save my own cowardice?"

..oh, that is so you (deep down it's who you are, not your fault, blame God, he made you) , except you think you are going to get some great reward and these mere atheists are going to be punished, oh the irony if you actually knew.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pmYes, we are...but you are not the Judge. Not am I.

Did I "judge" you? or rate you? ..as a SHIT Christian.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:07 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 5:43 pm Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I'll meet you there.''

You're asking, "What's the difference between being "beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing," on the one hand, and being "beyond good and evil," on the other?

The answer is, "Not much." Both laud amorality.

Where is the concept '' amorality'' in deep dreamless sleep? Oh that's right, there is none, like there is no ''field''.

The concept ''amorality'' is a mental construct. Have you ever seen a mind? No...have you ever seen a God? No...these are all mental constructs. But hey ho, if the story feels convincingly true and real enough, believe what you want, you are the only knower of concept as far as you can know....and yet you pipe on about how fiction is not real. Boy are you confused. Concepts are known by the only knowing there is which is consciousness, and consciousness is this immediate unknowable known, this unseen seen. Life is a dream dreamt by noone. My god, even Einstein knew that.

You cannot say to others that they are right or wrong. To do so is just plain arrogance. There's just what's happening. No claim, no blame, no fame, you do not need to show up to your own show.


I'm actually embarrassed to be living among people who still believe there is such a person called a Christian. And yet mock the idea of a ''Field''

I'm especially embarrassed for those who like to believe they are intellectually intelligent, when in reality, they are in total denial that they have been brainwashed by simple narratives. It's breathtakingly unbelievable that these people still exist today.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:12 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pm Most Atheists are inconsistent in that way. They cling to conventional morality, even though they deny its premises.

In contrast, do tell us about the consistency of theists. And tell us about where their morality comes from.

Give me a particular kind of Theist. They don't all have the same answers.

But either way, they don't fix up the deficiencies of Atheism. Atheism has to stand or fall on its own feet, not merely by casting stones at everybody else. If Atheism wants to complain that Theists are "immoral," it needs to begin by showing that "moral" is a word with some meaning an Atheist knows about.

What is the meaning of "morality" under Atheism?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pmBut they're inconsistent. If consistency is a virtue, they manifestly don't have it.

That describes HUMANS... NOT uniquely atheists!

To some degree, yes...we all fall short of the ideal. The natural human condition is to fall short of any goal we set for ourselves. We should all recognize that, I think.

But what has Atheism got to offer? Even followed to it's "ideal" (which it doesn't really even propose or have), where would it leave us? That's the important question.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pmAtheism rationalizes only amorality

How has theism rationalized or excused it?

I think perhaps you've misunderstood what amorality means. It's not "immorality." Atheism provides no basis to judge anything as "immoral" or as "moral." That's what's meant by "amorality."

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pmany moral precept taken beyond that is merely arbitrary and personal.

And you think it's different across all the varieties of theism?

Of course. Go look.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 4:22 pmThey [atheists] can't insist it's really "right."

That might be to their credit, as they can be responsible for continually assessing themselves and the world around them

By their own account, it cannot be. Nothing's "to" anybody's "credit," because "credit" implies moral categories. Atheism has none. And according to Atheism, nobody's "responsible" for anything, because there's nobody to whom one can actually be morally "responsible."

According to Atheism, you're not inherently "responsible" to anyone, or objectively "responsible" to anything. If there's somebody or somethign that can force you to comply, they may; but "right" and "wrong" don't even exist, and can't be invoked. There is only the fact of force. That's the beginning and end of Atheist "responsiibility." It's amoral...devoid of moral categories, both good and bad.

Under Atheism, you're truly "on your own" for whatever you want to do. If you can get away with it, there's no reason you "shouldn't." For "shouldn't" doesn't even exist.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:24 pm The concept ''amorality'' is a mental construct.

Actually, it's a negation...a denial. It doesn't "construct" anything.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:21 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pmYes, we are...but you are not the Judge. Not am I.

Did I "judge" you? or rate you? ..as a SHIT Christian.

If you're a Christian, ask the Lord. It's not my job to tell you. I don't look on people's hearts. But God does.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:07 pm...........

There is no such entity as a Christian.

The label ''christian'' is a belief, it is a known concept, it is not a factual thing in and of itself that can be seen. The fact is, you have no idea who or what you are except that you are.

You reject Nonduality simply because you do not fully understand it yet. Just admit it, and stop trying to be a big shot, thinking you can fool people, it's actually not working in your favor, it just makes you the absolute fool...no one else.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:48 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:21 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:48 pmYes, we are...but you are not the Judge. Not am I.

Did I "judge" you? or rate you? ..as a SHIT Christian.

If you're a Christian, ask the Lord. It's not my job to tell you. I don't look on people's hearts. But God does.

But you are heartless. You would be ruthless if you didn't believe someone was watching over you. Whereas, ALL the atheists I know are decent people, thus are of a FAR better ethical standard and more worthy of Christ than you.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:33 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:24 pm The concept ''amorality'' is a mental construct.

Actually, it's a negation...a denial. It doesn't "construct" anything.

It's a word.

Words cannot negate themselves.

Can a tree, negate from being a tree. There is no tree there, there's just the idea of tree, which in reality, is a no tree. Same applies to every known concept...who knows every concept? and can that ''known knower'' be negated, I think not...try again.

I’ve been reading the posts here and they do not appear philosophical to me. To have arrived at philosophy; a love of wisdom and at philosophical thinking; wisdom in action, requires a basic understanding of reality and acceptance of it, as we did not create it and there is nothing we can do about it.

Firstly, we live in a system of duality: opposites. Duality exists at the physical, psychic, and spiritual levels. At the psychic and spiritual levels it can be oppositional. Being oppositional is a matter of choice. The reality is that there are two sides to the equation. In the topic under discussion; to believe in a deity or not to believe in a deity. Like all opposites these two cannot be reconciled. So get used to it. Choose which side you want to relate to follow it and respect the other side.

Enough of these harangues. They are getting tedious.

owl of Minerva wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 7:07 pm I’ve been reading the posts here and they do not appear philosophical to me. To have arrived at philosophy; a love of wisdom and at philosophical thinking; wisdom in action, requires a basic understanding of reality and acceptance of it, as we did not create it and there is nothing we can do about it.

Firstly, we live in a system of duality: opposites. Duality exists at the physical, psychic, and spiritual levels. At the psychic and spiritual levels it can be oppositional. Being oppositional is a matter of choice. The reality is that there are two sides to the equation. In the topic under discussion; to believe in a deity or not to believe in a deity. Like all opposites these two cannot be reconciled. So get used to it. Choose which side you want to relate to follow it and respect the other side.

Enough of these harangues. They are getting tedious.

For me, this is not a debate about whether Christ existed or not, it is about the ethics of someone insisting they are a Christian (Immanuel Can)

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:48 pm
If you're a Christian, ask the Lord. It's not my job to tell you.

Which brings us back to the issue who told you you are a christian? - who told you you have a christian name? oh that's right your mommy and daddy told you...and yet you say something stupid like ... It's not my job to tell you. So tell us, who is the ''my'' who's job is it not to tell ''you's'' ?

Ok, I suppose what you are saying all makes sense to you, whatever, but no one is fooled.