Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:37 pm**

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:30 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:24 pm
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:20 pm

Many atheists say they are not religious but are spiritual.

Define god. It looks like you are defining it as everything and nothing at the same time.

Try my definition of just the best rules and laws to live by. Those definitely exist.

Regards
DL
I'm neither religious nor spiritual.
Atheism is not a religion.
By my definition it is.

You are completely wrong.
In fact you could not be more wrong.

KIS or we end in just discussing the meaning of words and as stated, I have no time for such B S. Why? Just read what I quote below.

Since following an ideology is a prerequisite of religion, atheism can be considered a religion, since atheists draws on philosophical ideologies to guide ideas, behaviors, and actions, like that of any religion. That is why atheist churches are called atheist churches.

Atheism is not an ideology.
Even if it were you would have to include all ideologies by your argument. That would just make you look more ridiculous.

---------
Atheists Are Sometimes More Religious Than Christians
A new study shows how poorly we understand the beliefs of people who identify as atheist, agnostic, or nothing in particular.

What moron made that "study"? Please cite!
Atheism is a state of non-belief, even disbelief not does not include any belief as necessary.

Americans are deeply religious people—and atheists are no exception. Western Europeans are deeply secular people—and Christians are no exception.

BS

These twin statements are generalizations, but they capture the essence of a fascinating finding in a new study about Christian identity in Western Europe. By surveying almost 25,000 people in 15 countries in the region, and comparing the results with data previously gathered in the U.S., the Pew Research Center discovered three things.

First, researchers confirmed the widely known fact that, overall, Americans are much more religious than Western Europeans. They gauged religious commitment using standard questions, including “Do you believe in God with absolute certainty?” and “Do you pray daily?”

Second, the researchers found that American “nones”—those who identify as atheist, agnostic, or nothing in particular—are more religious than European nones. The notion that religiously unaffiliated people can be religious at all may seem contradictory, but if you disaffiliate from organized religion it does not necessarily mean you’ve sworn off belief in God, say, or prayer.

The third finding reported in the study is by far the most striking. As it turns out, “American ‘nones’ are as religious as—or even more religious than—Christians in several European countries, including France, Germany, and the U.K.”

“That was a surprise,” Neha Sahgal, the lead researcher on the study, told me. “That’s the comparison that’s fascinating to me.” She highlighted the fact that whereas only 23 percent of European Christians say they believe in God with absolute certainty, 27 percent of American nones say this.

America is a country so suffused with faith that religious attributes abound even among the secular. Consider the rise of “atheist churches,” which cater to Americans who have lost faith in supernatural deities but still crave community, enjoy singing with others, and want to think deeply about morality. It’s religion, minus all the God stuff. This is a phenomenon spreading across the country, from the Seattle Atheist Church to the North Texas Church of Freethought. The Oasis Network, which brings together non-believers to sing and learn every Sunday morning, has affiliates in nine U.S. cities.

Last month, almost 1,000 people streamed into a [Atheist] church in San Francisco for an unprecedented event billed as “Beyoncé Mass.” Most were people of color and members of the LGBTQ community. Many were secular. They used Queen Bey’s songs, which are replete with religious symbolism, as the basis for a communal celebration—one that had all the trappings of a religious service. That seemed completely fitting to some, including one reverend who said, “Beyoncé is a better theologian than many of the pastors and priests in our church today.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...t ... ns/560936/

Regards
DL

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 3:10 pm**

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:26 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 1:45 pm
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:18 pm

Most moral people will call discrimination without a just cause evil and fight the bastards who do it. Right?
Well, "discrimination" is not necessarily a dirty word, if you check the dictionary.

There, you'll find positive cases. A "discriminating" wine-taster knows the difference between Chateau Lafite and plonk. A "discriminating" stamp collector recognizes when a mere dilettante has a "two-penny blue" in his collection. Their "undiscriminating" counterparts don't. That's not a good thing for the indiscriminate.

So whether or not one is "discriminating" in a good or bad sense is not merely established by invoking the word "discriminating." It's not a good thing not to know the difference between things, and to be so dull as to be incapable of seeing important distinctions.

Consequently, the vexed question there is, "what is the moral status of a given group?" And it isn't settled by someone arbitrarily ruling on one side or the other, and calling everybody who thinks differently "evil bastards." That's merely an attempt to bully the field into agreeing with her opinion. Really, it's quite simple-minded, childish and foolish -- as well as irrelevant to the question in hand -- and a philosopher of any rational discrimination at all sees right through such a transparent strategy every time, and remains unimpressed.

Those who have a difference of opinion should trade reasons, not trade pejoratives. Pejoratives are merely a way of ginning up gratuitous hatred.
So now we have lowered ourselves to the definition of words.

No. We have raised ourselves from the folly of not really understanding what we were saying.

But if one doesn't wish to be raised from the mental mud-puddle of pejoratives, nobody can force her to raise her head.

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 3:42 pm**

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:18 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 4:51 pm
Impenitent wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 4:07 pm

non lethal (and lethal as well) inquisitions against the other have occurred ever since the "righteous" form groups... some are more lethal than others
A "non-lethal" inquisition? What a weird phrase.

Is that like "non-wet water," or "non-toxic poison"?

Normal people just call that a "difference of opinion."
Most moral people will call discrimination without a just cause evil and fight the bastards who do it. Right?

Regards
DL

Is it possible to discriminate and it be 'just'?

If yes, then please explain, and with examples please.

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 3:46 pm**

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:49 pm
Dubious wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 10:49 pm Atheism is the counterpoint to theism. The question then becomes would atheism even exist as an idea or concept if theism itself never existed invoking its opposite. If atheism were not forced forward as a negation would it have any meaning at all, would the word even need to exist? If it weren't for the perverse psychological needs of humans there would have been no need to imagine any kind of theistic entity since nothing of the kind ever presented itself. Both Imagination and subterfuge are indispensable to theism in creating something out of nothing but like Yeats wrote the center cannot hold because there is no center. Since theism obviously exists having ruled the world for so long, it by its own illogic is forced to create a monster child proclaiming its parent is a fiction.
Point taken.

IOW, Yin/religion, cannot exist without Yang/atheism.

Take 'beliefs' out of all human beings, then there is NO religion, and also nothing to fight for nor fight against.

Very simple AND very easy really.

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:49 pm Belief in the notion that there is more to life than what we see is natural and instinctive. We are built to create gods. We just forgot that we created all of them and stupidly let ourselves be subsumed by them.

But only some do this. Not all of us do this.

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:49 pm Knowing this truth is why Gnostic Christians put man above god, while the stupid religions put god above man.

Regards
DL

EVERY religion is STUPID, by definition. The so called "gnostic christian" religion being NO different.

Being religious, by definition, is 'being stupid'.

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 3:54 pm**

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 1:31 pm Atheists are people who believe that god or gods are man-made constructs.
Religions are belief systems that relate humanity to spirituality.

In reality. Nothingness exists. Now everythingness also exists. And this is what you encounter, everythingness.
Here we're getting into definitions in this CONception.

You experience that you are God. But before you experience that, you know that you are nothing; you have to go through the experience of Nothingness.

Nothing exists but God.

.

So, from your perspective, nothingness exists. But, at the exact same time, God exists.

Some would take this to imply or infer that, from your perspective, God is nothing, or just nothingness, itself, which is absurd and extremely contradictory if you are also to say that "Nothing exists but God".

But I do FULLY understand 'you', "dontaskme". Because you BELIEVE that words and language are NEVER going to make sense NOR are they ever able explain this 'thing' (which you so desperately are 'trying to' explain), then you could not write any thing in a Truly sensible, reasonable, and understandable way because this would then go against and be in complete opposition of your strongly held onto and maintained BELIEF of yours.

Oh, and by the way, what you are so desperately 'trying to' explain CAN BE explained very simply AND BE understood very easily.

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 4:03 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 1:45 pm
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:18 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 4:51 pm

A "non-lethal" inquisition? What a weird phrase.

Is that like "non-wet water," or "non-toxic poison"?

Normal people just call that a "difference of opinion."
Most moral people will call discrimination without a just cause evil and fight the bastards who do it. Right?
Well, "discrimination" is not necessarily a dirty word, if you check the dictionary.

There, you'll find positive cases. A "discriminating" wine-taster knows the difference between Chateau Lafite and plonk. A "discriminating" stamp collector recognizes when a mere dilettante has a "two-penny blue" in his collection. Their "undiscriminating" counterparts don't. That's not a good thing for the indiscriminate.

So whether or not one is "discriminating" in a good or bad sense is not merely established by invoking the word "discriminating." It's not a good thing not to know the difference between things, and to be so dull as to be incapable of seeing important distinctions.

Okay this answers the clarifying question I asked before about, 'Is it possible to discriminate and it be 'just'?'

If one is discriminating 'things' other than the human things, then that can be very 'just', or justified.

But now, 'Is it possible to discriminate against human beings and this be 'just'?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 1:45 pm Consequently, the vexed question there is, "what is the moral status of a given group?"

There is NO 'moral status' of a given group. Unless of course that group is thee group of Everything. And the status of that group is obviously the HIGHEST.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 1:45 pm And it isn't settled by someone arbitrarily ruling on one side or the other, and calling everybody who thinks differently "evil bastards." That's merely an attempt to bully the field into agreeing with her opinion. Really, it's quite simple-minded, childish and foolish -- as well as irrelevant to the question in hand -- and a philosopher of any rational discrimination at all sees right through such a transparent strategy every time, and remains unimpressed.

Those who have a difference of opinion should trade reasons, not trade pejoratives. Pejoratives are merely a way of ginning up gratuitous hatred.

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 4:17 pm**

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:20 pm
Define god. It looks like you are defining it as everything and nothing at the same time.

God is just another word for Consciousness or Awareness in which all concepts arise and fall and are known instantly as and when they arise one with the knowing.

When Nothing is known Everything is known.

What is not-known will eventually become known, but what is UNKNOWABLE can NEVER be known.

It is best to know the tides before building sand castles.

.

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 4:36 pm**

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:20 pm
Try my definition of just the best rules and laws to live by. Those definitely exist.

What Is, is not, as far as you are concerned.
If all is one, that doesn't leave much room for you.

No best or worst way to live by. Your thoughts are as empty as an atom.

No one ever lived or died in the making of this movie.

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 5:14 pm**

Age wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 4:03 pm But now, 'Is it possible to discriminate against human beings and this be 'just'?

Not "against;" but "among," yes.

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:09 pm**

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:37 pm
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:30 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:24 pm

I'm neither religious nor spiritual.
Atheism is not a religion.
By my definition it is.
You are completely wrong.
In fact you could not be more wrong.

KIS or we end in just discussing the meaning of words and as stated, I have no time for such B S. Why? Just read what I quote below.

Since following an ideology is a prerequisite of religion, atheism can be considered a religion, since atheists draws on philosophical ideologies to guide ideas, behaviors, and actions, like that of any religion. That is why atheist churches are called atheist churches.
Atheism is not an ideology.
Even if it were you would have to include all ideologies by your argument. That would just make you look more ridiculous.

---------
Atheists Are Sometimes More Religious Than Christians
A new study shows how poorly we understand the beliefs of people who identify as atheist, agnostic, or nothing in particular.
What moron made that "study"? Please cite!
Atheism is a state of non-belief, even disbelief not does not include any belief as necessary.

Americans are deeply religious people—and atheists are no exception. Western Europeans are deeply secular people—and Christians are no exception.
BS

These twin statements are generalizations, but they capture the essence of a fascinating finding in a new study about Christian identity in Western Europe. By surveying almost 25,000 people in 15 countries in the region, and comparing the results with data previously gathered in the U.S., the Pew Research Center discovered three things.

First, researchers confirmed the widely known fact that, overall, Americans are much more religious than Western Europeans. They gauged religious commitment using standard questions, including “Do you believe in God with absolute certainty?” and “Do you pray daily?”

Second, the researchers found that American “nones”—those who identify as atheist, agnostic, or nothing in particular—are more religious than European nones. The notion that religiously unaffiliated people can be religious at all may seem contradictory, but if you disaffiliate from organized religion it does not necessarily mean you’ve sworn off belief in God, say, or prayer.

The third finding reported in the study is by far the most striking. As it turns out, “American ‘nones’ are as religious as—or even more religious than—Christians in several European countries, including France, Germany, and the U.K.”

“That was a surprise,” Neha Sahgal, the lead researcher on the study, told me. “That’s the comparison that’s fascinating to me.” She highlighted the fact that whereas only 23 percent of European Christians say they believe in God with absolute certainty, 27 percent of American nones say this.

America is a country so suffused with faith that religious attributes abound even among the secular. Consider the rise of “atheist churches,” which cater to Americans who have lost faith in supernatural deities but still crave community, enjoy singing with others, and want to think deeply about morality. It’s religion, minus all the God stuff. This is a phenomenon spreading across the country, from the Seattle Atheist Church to the North Texas Church of Freethought. The Oasis Network, which brings together non-believers to sing and learn every Sunday morning, has affiliates in nine U.S. cities.

Last month, almost 1,000 people streamed into a [Atheist] church in San Francisco for an unprecedented event billed as “Beyoncé Mass.” Most were people of color and members of the LGBTQ community. Many were secular. They used Queen Bey’s songs, which are replete with religious symbolism, as the basis for a communal celebration—one that had all the trappings of a religious service. That seemed completely fitting to some, including one reverend who said, “Beyoncé is a better theologian than many of the pastors and priests in our church today.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...t ... ns/560936/

Regards
DL

Those who are leading the thinking and promotion of atheist priests and churches disagree with you.

You want more facts and survey info, do it yourself as you do not like my sources.

"Even if it were you would have to include all ideologies by your argument."

I basically did.

"Atheism is a state of non-belief, even disbelief not does not include any belief as necessary."

Except for a state of non-belief, even disbelief a n includes any belief as necessary.

See what I did there. Think before speaking.

Regards
DL

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:15 pm**

Age wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 3:42 pm
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:18 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 4:51 pm

A "non-lethal" inquisition? What a weird phrase.

Is that like "non-wet water," or "non-toxic poison"?

Normal people just call that a "difference of opinion."
Most moral people will call discrimination without a just cause evil and fight the bastards who do it. Right?

Regards
DL
Is it possible to discriminate and it be 'just'?

If yes, then please explain, and with examples please.

That is rather obvious, but ----

Every law has a compulsion to discriminate negatively against a certain sub-group of our society.

That could be the murderer demographic of rapist for two examples.

If you do not discriminate negatively against them, should you know of one and the law learns of it, you will likely end in jail.

Do you get the idea of what just discrimination looks like?

Regards
DL

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:18 pm**

Age wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 3:46 pm
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:49 pm
Dubious wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 10:49 pm Atheism is the counterpoint to theism. The question then becomes would atheism even exist as an idea or concept if theism itself never existed invoking its opposite. If atheism were not forced forward as a negation would it have any meaning at all, would the word even need to exist? If it weren't for the perverse psychological needs of humans there would have been no need to imagine any kind of theistic entity since nothing of the kind ever presented itself. Both Imagination and subterfuge are indispensable to theism in creating something out of nothing but like Yeats wrote the center cannot hold because there is no center. Since theism obviously exists having ruled the world for so long, it by its own illogic is forced to create a monster child proclaiming its parent is a fiction.
Point taken.

IOW, Yin/religion, cannot exist without Yang/atheism.
Take 'beliefs' out of all human beings, then there is NO religion, and also nothing to fight for nor fight against.

Very simple AND very easy really.

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:49 pm Belief in the notion that there is more to life than what we see is natural and instinctive. We are built to create gods. We just forgot that we created all of them and stupidly let ourselves be subsumed by them.
But only some do this. Not all of us do this.

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:49 pm Knowing this truth is why Gnostic Christians put man above god, while the stupid religions put god above man.

Regards
DL
EVERY religion is STUPID, by definition. The so called "gnostic christian" religion being NO different.

Being religious, by definition, is 'being stupid'.

Wrong on all counts.

Regards
DL

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:29 pm**

Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Apr 16, 2020 3:41 pm religious inquisitions are small compared to secular purges...

-Imp

granted history, this is so 60/40.

but there were enough of the 40-percent of Beieives to make the agurment - beliver not beleiver is viod per the death count.

lets count shall we?

1. China - Moe - 15-20 million (biggest count per the Athiests)
2. USSR- Stalin (who was going to be a priest before he became a leader and killer - so was Stalin an Athiest? or Christian when he killed 5 million? - who knows - so should we call it wash and give 1/2 of his dead to each side?
3. Cambodia - Pol Pot 2 million, Pot was a Buddist
4. Hitler - an archiac German polythiestic? or athiest? - not clear - like Stalin - so lets divide his 7 million one half to each side.
5. Balkins - 1/4 million dead - killed by Serbians - eastern othrodox christians
6. Ruwanda - 1/6th million dead - killed by Roman Catholics.

so its a wash - killing is a equal opportunity and not related to Faith/athiesm of any sort

2-cents.

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:30 pm**

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 4:17 pm
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:20 pm
Define god. It looks like you are defining it as everything and nothing at the same time.

God is just another word for Consciousness or Awareness in which all concepts arise and fall and are known instantly as and when they arise one with the knowing.

When Nothing is known Everything is known.

What is not-known will eventually become known, but what is UNKNOWABLE can NEVER be known.

It is best to know the tides before building sand castles.

.

I will agree that god is our consciousness and awareness.

This is worthless and a poor use of language and just begs the type of question you were asked above by another. "When Nothing is known Everything is known."

"What is not-known will eventually become known, but what is UNKNOWABLE can NEVER be known."

I would use knowable instead not known but I think I get your meaning.

Some things not known may never be known, like what was before the Big Bang. God of the Gap stuff.

As to your last, the fun is in the building. Not the preservation.

One liners can be near perfect but sometimes, not so much.

You have been thinking a lot but like me, sometimes the expression needs work in trying to see from the listeners POV.

Regards
DL

Posted: **Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:34 pm**

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 4:36 pm
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:20 pm
Try my definition of just the best rules and laws to live by. Those definitely exist.

What Is, is not, as far as you are concerned.
If all is one, that doesn't leave much room for you.

No best or worst way to live by. Your thoughts are as empty as an atom.

No one ever lived or died in the making of this movie.

You are trying to impress yourself instead of me.

You are great to you but as I put in my last., your delivery needs work.

We are in the all together, alone.

See, even I can pull your shit. I refrain as most noses do not smell the sweetness.

Regards
DL

Philosophy Now Forum

Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

Re: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.