Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-11-2012, 05:36 AM
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
(12-11-2012 02:12 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(12-11-2012 01:48 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  What did you hope to accomplish with this thread exactly?
We must be organized apparently. Without organization and bureaucrats and people to tell us what to do *atheism will die*. And if it did become a thing of bureaucrats, a deserved death too IMO.
You are used to thinking of leadership from the top down whereas we both know that no atheist would join something where he does not have a vote on policy. Any atheist organization would be the most democratic entity on the planet IMO.
Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 06:16 AM
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
(13-11-2012 04:03 AM)Humakt Wrote:  
(12-11-2012 03:01 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Actually, you do. So maybe I should correct that impression.

I'm not even close to the OP's position. But I do understand it.

Of the morality principles, highlighted by Jonathan Haidt, as discussed earlier in this thread (care/passion; liberty; reciprocity/fairness; in-group loyalty; authority; purity/sanctity), I do not hold with the last three. Which according to Haidt's research makes me a liberal (although I don't like that label. I prefer Libertine!).

I have a twisted sense of loyalty, so that's a tricky one... I'm loyal in a relationship and I am loyal to friends (often misplaced) but I am so out-group that I'm not even a member of my own family (dissociative behaviour).

If I was ok with the last three moralities, I could easily see the benefits of an atheist 'church' / union / party / club.

It would offer protection to the weak and disenfranchised. It could do the bonding-thing that tbh, churches are pretty good at.

While I'm on a roll, here are the chapter headings from Alain de Botton's 'Religion for Atheists':
Wisdom without Doctrine
Community
Kindness
Tenderness
Pessimism
Perspective
Art
Architecture
Institutions.

I think the churches are good at these things. Some (e.g. C of E) don't even push their doctrine anymore (much).

So I get what this is about. I do.

If I thought there was no other way, well maybe I would give in to the idea of an atheist church but it would completely go against what I said earlier in post #67 (which seems like a long time ago).


Also, DLT? Really? What am I, a hairy, ex Radio1 DJ? I'm hurt Weeping
First off sorry for the hairy cornflake mistype/brain fart on my part. Secondly, I'm happy you weighed into clarify, I did say I didnt want to put words in your mouth and the phrase closest to, was pretty much laziness on my part.

As to the DeBotton, Ive seen the podcast, never occurred to me that it was also a book, I'll have to look it out. I'm a big fan of his, although Ive never read him. So thanks for that.

I guess maybe in america, and possibly france if I is any judge, there might be some need for an active orginisation of atheism, here in Britain at least in my experience its just not needed, religion or your lack of it is a private matter and the vast majority of people could not care less. In fact, if a "church" of atheism did get going I have no doubt it would be treated with derision and scorn
That may be the sacrifice that gives sanctity. It is said that all causes need martyrs.
Step up to the same that you likely give to the religious as you will know that reciprocity is fair play.
I had not heard or read anything of Mr. Alain de Botton but found him quite good.
Of course, he would agree with me. Angel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Oe6HUgrRlQ




Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 06:18 AM
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
(14-11-2012 05:36 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  
(12-11-2012 02:12 PM)morondog Wrote:  We must be organized apparently. Without organization and bureaucrats and people to tell us what to do *atheism will die*. And if it did become a thing of bureaucrats, a deserved death too IMO.
You are used to thinking of leadership from the top down whereas we both know that no atheist would join something where he does not have a vote on policy. Any atheist organization would be the most democratic entity on the planet IMO.
Regards
DL
i.e. an Anarchy. Which we have already Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 06:57 AM
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
(14-11-2012 05:32 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  
(12-11-2012 01:48 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  What did you hope to accomplish with this thread exactly?
To both inform and strengthen atheism.
I am not one of you but it serves me and mankind to have you strong. At present,, without an organization/church, you are weak. One toothpick is easy to break but put many together and no man can break it.
Regards
DL
You seem to have no tao, snake. Tongue

Certainty creates its own uncertainty. That is tao.

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 07:39 AM (This post was last modified: 14-11-2012 07:43 AM by Humakt.)
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
(14-11-2012 05:26 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  
(12-11-2012 11:56 AM)Humakt Wrote:  Well as your suggestions include we start book burning to protect the children, I'm glad you think I'm wrong if you thought I was in way right I'd need to have a word with myself. If there is a point to atheism, which there isnt, its to offer an alternative to the church, its institutions and practices. Your suggestion that we form up and behave like them would just fracture what consensus there is, with me and I suspect others having to become aatheists.
I said nothing of book burning as that would be counterproductive and I think that fighting fire with fire is better.
If you see no point in being an ateist then why are you not looking for a point to your life?
Regards
DL
You did in fact mention book burning here http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid201527 perhaps your not advocating it, but your all for starting a church and your description is of how a church establishes itself, but ok your not for book burning, good show.

I do indeed see no point in being an atheist, nor am I one, I'm agnostic. I don't believe there's anything like a strong enough case to support the kind of confidence to maintain atheism, if you do thats fine.

I've also no idea that if there was a point to my life that advancement of the atheist agenda would be it, in fact I'm sure it would not be. As Ive said before here in Britain, its not an issue it is a curiosity at best.

But, anyway just as morality isnt predicated by religion, it isnt predicated by being or wanting to form groups. Your continued assertion that everyone get on board with your brand of morality/subjugation of the self for the collective well being is not immoral, but its certainly simplistic, arrogant and well rude.

Also the idea, that you can define a set of simple rules and say thats morality, is ludicrous. Moral systems are widely divergent and in many cases contradictory. Someone can act morally and still behave in a way you dont agree with, all that is required to act morally is a moral system and to act within it. At the end of the day, if a moral system doesnt have some form of live and let live in it, its to my mind a part of the problem regardless of how benign or malign it is.

On the whole, the "church" you suggest is set up by definition to be in opposition to the more traditional churches, to my mind thats not in anyway helping its just compounding the problem.

Lastly, on fighting fire with fire. I was a combat medic and served with specialist burns unit, I can assure you that burns are not not best treated, by further burning. Nor are fire engines fitted with flame throwers.

You wanna set up your church of atheism, I say bon chance, but its not for me, or from the looks of this thread its not really for anyone else who has posted here. As your idea of morality seems to hinge around the collective, seems to me if anyone is at odds with there personal morality its you.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Humakt's post
14-11-2012, 08:04 AM (This post was last modified: 14-11-2012 08:08 AM by Greatest I am.)
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
(14-11-2012 07:39 AM)Humakt Wrote:  
(14-11-2012 05:26 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  I said nothing of book burning as that would be counterproductive and I think that fighting fire with fire is better.
If you see no point in being an ateist then why are you not looking for a point to your life?
Regards
DL
You did in fact mention book burning here http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid201527 perhaps your not advocating it, but your all for starting a church and your description is of how a church establishes itself, but ok your not for book burning, good show.

I do indeed see no point in being an atheist, nor am I one, I'm agnostic. I don't believe there's anything like a strong enough case to support the kind of confidence to maintain atheism, if you do thats fine.

I've also no idea that if there was a point to my life that advancement of the atheist agenda would be it, in fact I'm sure it would not be. As Ive said before here in Britain, its not an issue it is a curiosity at best.

But, anyway just as morality isnt predicated by religion, it isnt predicated by being or wanting to form groups. Your continued assertion that everyone get on board with your brand of morality/subjugation of the self for the collective well being is not immoral, but its certainly simplistic, arrogant and well rude.

Also the idea, that you can define a set of simple rules and say thats morality, is ludicrous. Moral systems are widely divergent and in many cases contradictory. Someone can act morally and still behave in a way you dont agree with, all that is required to act morally is a moral system and to act within it. At the end of the day, if a moral system doesnt have some form of live and let live in it, its to my mind a part of the problem regardless of how benign or malign it is.

On the whole, the "church" you suggest is set up by definition to be in opposition to the more traditional churches, to my mind thats not in anyway helping its just compounding the problem.

Lastly, on fighting fire with fire. I was a combat medic and served with specialist burns unit, I can assure you that burns are not not best treated, by further burning. Nor are fire engines fitted with flame throwers.

You wanna set up your church of atheism, I say bon chance, but its not for me, or from the looks of this thread its not really for anyone else who has posted here. As your idea of morality seems to hinge around the collective, seems to me if anyone is at odds with there personal morality its you.
Two things.
To your live and let live.
Do you apply that to what you see below?

African witches and Jesus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlRG9gXriVI&feature=related

Jesus Camp 1of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBv8tv62yGM

Promoting death to Gays.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMw2Zg_BVzw&feature=related

To your last. Yes my morality is based on the collective because any that are not in a collective do not need or develop them. Morals are for dealing with others. If there are no others around, then they are not required.

BTW, is fence sitter a good synonym for agnostic?


Regards
DL

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 11:21 AM (This post was last modified: 14-11-2012 07:20 PM by Humakt.)
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
(14-11-2012 08:04 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  
(14-11-2012 07:39 AM)Humakt Wrote:  You did in fact mention book burning here http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid201527 perhaps your not advocating it, but your all for starting a church and your description is of how a church establishes itself, but ok your not for book burning, good show.

I do indeed see no point in being an atheist, nor am I one, I'm agnostic. I don't believe there's anything like a strong enough case to support the kind of confidence to maintain atheism, if you do thats fine.

I've also no idea that if there was a point to my life that advancement of the atheist agenda would be it, in fact I'm sure it would not be. As Ive said before here in Britain, its not an issue it is a curiosity at best.

But, anyway just as morality isnt predicated by religion, it isnt predicated by being or wanting to form groups. Your continued assertion that everyone get on board with your brand of morality/subjugation of the self for the collective well being is not immoral, but its certainly simplistic, arrogant and well rude.

Also the idea, that you can define a set of simple rules and say thats morality, is ludicrous. Moral systems are widely divergent and in many cases contradictory. Someone can act morally and still behave in a way you dont agree with, all that is required to act morally is a moral system and to act within it. At the end of the day, if a moral system doesnt have some form of live and let live in it, its to my mind a part of the problem regardless of how benign or malign it is.

On the whole, the "church" you suggest is set up by definition to be in opposition to the more traditional churches, to my mind thats not in anyway helping its just compounding the problem.

Lastly, on fighting fire with fire. I was a combat medic and served with specialist burns unit, I can assure you that burns are not not best treated, by further burning. Nor are fire engines fitted with flame throwers.

You wanna set up your church of atheism, I say bon chance, but its not for me, or from the looks of this thread its not really for anyone else who has posted here. As your idea of morality seems to hinge around the collective, seems to me if anyone is at odds with there personal morality its you.
Two things.
To your live and let live.
Do you apply that to what you see below?

African witches and Jesus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlRG9gXriVI&feature=related

Jesus Camp 1of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBv8tv62yGM

Promoting death to Gays.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMw2Zg_BVzw&feature=related

To your last. Yes my morality is based on the collective because any that are not in a collective do not need or develop them. Morals are for dealing with others. If there are no others around, then they are not required.

BTW, is fence sitter a good synonym for agnostic?


Regards
DL

All of these things, do not themselves demonstrate this and as I said are part of the problem, what I said is that your solution is no solution and just compounds the problem. Not as your trying to suggest, in a rather dishonest way is that I am saying no problem exists. Dont play the fucking idiot with me sonny Jim, I have taken the time on several occasions to address your specific points and state disagreement with them and cited why I have a difference. If your just gonna try and score cheap points like this then Im gonna dismiss you as an ignorant fool, not worth the effort of debating.

But lets try one more time:

African witches and jesus - not as you suggest a comparison between jesus and african witches, but the practices of christian ministers empowered by there collective to enact attrocities upon the defenceless. The behaviour is abhorrant, but I am in no position to tolerate or not. Do I condone no, do I condemn yes. Will either make any difference no. This is a matter for the goverments and legal systems of the countries in which they happen.

Jesus camp - Do I tolerate this yes, sure. Do I like it, not paticularly, would I send my children to it, no. Is it really any of my business, no.

Promoting the death of gays - In the arena of free speech, then yes say what you will no matter how disgusting and retarded. As for the killing of gays, no.

I would disagree also that morals are for exclusivly how we with deal others, in my view morals are much more a matter of how we deal with ourselves. Perhaps, if you do not see this, then you need a church or a group to define yourself, I do not, I have a morality that applies far more stringently to me, than it does to any outside agency. In fact, I would say it is when we are alone or unobserved that morality is just as and in some cases more applicable.

And no, I would not say that agnostism and fence sitting are the same thing. No I would'nt, agnostism is purely saying that you have no knowledge of the nature of God or Gods, and thus havin no knowledge make no assertions on that nature positive or negative. If you want to say your an atheist and you "know" god does not exist, then I can tolerate that even if I find that statement as unsupported in fact as any religio who claims a personal relationship with the lord.

Notice how I practice what I preach there, I have not forwarded the drivel you sent back my way. Even though I can play the retard to, watch.

So you wanna set up a church, but catholic priests are pedophiles, so you just wanna play with little boys and get away with it. BTW, do you see organising as fascism you nazi peedo. How fucking stupid do I look to you making that point?

I invite you, to do better next time, if you dont buck up your game to the point were you pay at least a fraction of the respect Ive payed you thus far you can expect and will receive a much shorter and less tolerant response if any.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Humakt's post
14-11-2012, 12:29 PM
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
(14-11-2012 05:32 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  ... it serves me and mankind to have you strong.
How?

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 12:31 PM
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
(14-11-2012 05:36 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  Any atheist organization would be the most democratic entity on the planet IMO.
And thus not a church.

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2012, 12:54 PM
RE: Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.
I'm thinking of creating a group for people who don't believe in Big Foot. That is apparently the next logical step in the evolution of the lack of a belief in such a creature.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: