Atheism plays a large role (perhaps one of the biggest) in the destruction of western civilization. It is one of the root causes for the degeneracy and overall moral decline we see today.
It all stems from the fact that atheism is incompatible with moral universalism, which makes it possible to morally rationalize any action (i.e. moral relativism), as can be seen with the LGBTQ movement. This acronym is constantly evolving (currently at LGBTQQIP2SAA if I'm not mistaken), and I believe it's just a matter of time before pedophilia and bestiality are integrated as well (in-before muh slippery slope).
I expect some people to challenge the notion that atheism is incompatible with moral universalism. I've had this debate before, and they usually resort to: "Empathy is in our biology. It's a product of evolution that is innate in all humans." The problem with this argument is that it begets the question: Whose "biology" are we talking about? Not everyone are empathetic about the same things. People seem to have different concepts of what is wrong and what isn't. Who is right? What society? Not to mention that it's irrational and quite frankly intellectually dishonest to assume that there is an ultimate standard of right and wrong that supersedes mere fanciful "ideas" about what is right and wrong at a given time in our ethical evolution (from an atheistic perspective).
I'm not saying that all atheists are amoral, but that has more to do with the intellectual cowardice, hypocrisy and inconsistent logic of atheists than it does with the moral strength of atheism. Morality is impossible without a foundation of transcendental truth. Atheism denies that such a concept is even possible. Logically then there is no reason for an individual to respect the concept of collective morality.
Atheists proclaim to be intellectually superior and have an aptitude for logical and critical thinking, yet they fail to understand something so simple. It just boggles my mind.
obnoxious bible belt evangelicals (i.e. reformed alcoholics/drug addicts) and catholic pedophiles killed christianity, and why the fuck would anyone who they chased away want to try another abrahamic religion?
whatever, you're going to post your bullshit, allahuackbar, you probably are unemployed and bored and thats why you post this retarded shit
>Not believing in a magic sky wizard is degenerate
Nice try Mohammad.
>>78037989
Atheism killed the west
>>78037989
SWEDEN NO!
But really this is a very well summary of problem with our post-modern societies. Nihilism, hedonism are the only things that matter.
This is why i really want to go back to religion.
>>78037989
>Thinks Atheism is Nihilism
Top kek
>>78038164
>>78038182
>>78039497
Feel free to refute the OP.
>>78038238
>>78038534
>>78039092
Good lads.
>>78037989
https://youtu.be/ca2pMYsU0Ac?t=84
![serb2[1].png_itok=KJOw54p9.png](https://i.imgur.com/H3KjBaR.png "serb2[1].png_itok=KJOw54p9.png")
>>78037989
a religious person has no right to talk about logical inconsistency
and what the lgbwhatever faggots are doing is no worse then what the church would do if they were in charge
I do not trust a person who is 100% dependent on their faith to make logical choices because they will put whatever their beliefs are over any sort of physical evidence
for example, not allowing the usage of contraceptives in aids ridden countries because they think that some of the most disposable cells in the human body are sacred
I agree, praise be to allah right?
>>78037989
>matter of time before pedophilia and bestiality
>>78037989
Uh canada ?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bestiality-legal-canada-supreme-court-a7073196.html
the slippery slope is real
>>78040525
>a religious person has no right to talk about logical inconsistency
How so?
>and what the lgbwhatever faggots are doing is no worse then what the church would do if they were in charge
Protestantism and catholicism are degenerate as well (seeing as they are jewish variations of christianity), but that's beside the point. The topic at hand is that atheism is degenerate (and way more degenerate than protestantism and catholicism). Follow the Bible and you're golden.
>I do not trust a person who is 100% dependent on their faith to make logical choices because they will put whatever their beliefs are over any sort of physical evidence
Evidence is not proof. Just because something is supported by evidence it doesn't necessarily make it true.
>>78040458
>>78040590
So being opposed to atheism means that you're a muslim?
>>78040960
It is, if you have a swedish flag.
>>78041200
Not statistically speaking, seeing as there are more christians than muslims in Sweden.
>>78040960
>Protestantism and catholicism are degenerate as well (seeing as they are jewish variations of christianity), but that's beside the point. The topic at hand is that atheism is degenerate (and way more degenerate than protestantism and catholicism). Follow the Bible and you're golden
yeah no, the bible changes every few decades to coincide with the ruling class
back in the day the bible said that niggers were descendants from Cain, that intelligent women were witches, that priests should be given more political rights etc. because that was the norm back then
I fully expect that in 20 years homosex will no longer be a sin while something against racism will be added in the 10 comandments, because thats how this shit works, it is not the holy word it is the word of the ones who rule you made to appear as the voice of god
>Just because something is supported by evidence it doesn't necessarily make it true
just because something is supported by a book or an old man in warcraft cosplay doesn't necessarily make it true
>>78041502
>yeah no, the bible changes every few decades to coincide with the ruling class
That's why modern versions are often rejected, hence why people tend to follow the KJV.
>back in the day the bible said that niggers were descendants from Cain, that intelligent women were witches, that priests should be given more political rights etc. because that was the norm back then
That has more to do with faulty interpretation than it does with the consistency of the biblical message. This is what I was referring to earlier when I mentioned protestantism and catholicism. Both have have deluded, distorted and perverted Christianity to the point where it no longer bears any resemblance to the word of God. They have turned it into a doctrine of racial equality, integration, and mongrelization which they call “Christian”. However, like I said. This is beside the point. The topic at hand is atheism, not christianity. Try to not derail the thread.
>I fully expect that in 20 years homosex will no longer be a sin while something against racism will be added in the 10 comandments, because thats how this shit works, it is not the holy word it is the word of the ones who rule you made to appear as the voice of god
Except it doesn't work like that and you know it. You are mistaking "wannabe-purists" with actual christians. The Bible is clear on it's stance about homosexuality, and that will never change.
>just because something is supported by a book or an old man in warcraft cosplay doesn't necessarily make it true
That's why religious people have faith. You atheists can't even admit that science is a system based on faith as well (e.g. the presuppositions that science is built on). Arrogance.
Do you still find this funny, svennyboi?
>It all stems from the fact that atheism is incompatible with moral universalism
What are ideologies?
>>78042328
>What are ideologies?
What's your point?
>Do you still find this funny, svennyboi?
Do I find what funny?
>>78041502
>back in the day the bible said that niggers were descendants from Cain, that intelligent women were witches
Neither of this were offical teaching of any major christian church.
>not being braindead
>degenerate
huh, really makes you think...
>>78042432
>What's your point?
Atheism and moral universalism are not mutually exclusive as you suggest. All you need for moral universalism is just the believe that your principles are good and others should follow the, you don't need any supernatural beings. Ideologies are example of that.
>Do I find what funny?
using the same copypasta every week
>>78037989
>It all stems from the fact that atheism is incompatible with moral universalism, which makes it possible to morally rationalize any action (i.e. moral relativism),
>implying religion is not moral relativism)
Why can't i buy slaves anymore? Church was ok with that back then why Church is not ok with slavery anymore? i thought they supposed to be unmovable foundation of morals instead they jump left and right with current agendas (at least Islam is based i can buy slaves as Muslim)
>>78037989
>Not everyone are empathetic about the same things.
Yes they are, human empathy is very basic. Helping anything your brain considers part of your group makes you feel good while watching them suffer or die makes you feel miserable. Modern society is much too complex for such basic instincts so different cultures found different ways to manipulate it and use it to their advantage.
Religions are an easy example of this, most fit in and followers consider the rest of society part of their group. Others devote a lot of effort to training followers to only consider other believers part of their group, they display little to no empathy for outsiders.
>>78042187
>You atheists can't even admit that science is a system based on faith as well (e.g. the presuppositions that science is built on). Arrogance.
Because it isn't
For a scientist to use the old knowledge as a basis he has to first understand it, to know how it works and why it is true (or most likely the truth like in atomic theory)
Everything that is disproved is cast aside
Are there exceptions within the scientific community that are blinded by their arrogance, well i don't know, are there pedophile rings in the religious community?
>>78043132
>Atheism and moral universalism are not mutually exclusive as you suggest.
Except they are. Refute this:
>I've had this debate before, and they usually resort to: "Empathy is in our biology. It's a product of evolution that is innate in all humans." The problem with this argument is that it begets the question: Whose "biology" are we talking about? Not everyone are empathetic about the same things. People seem to have different concepts of what is wrong and what isn't. Who is right? What society? Not to mention that it's irrational and quite frankly intellectually dishonest to assume that there is an ultimate standard of right and wrong that supersedes mere fanciful "ideas" about what is right and wrong at a given time in our ethical evolution (from an atheistic perspective).
>using the same copypasta every week
Using it as a red-pill.
>>78037989
>Morality is impossible without a foundation of transcendental truth. Atheism denies that such a concept is even possible. Logically then there is no reason for an individual to respect the concept of collective morality.
Read about game theory and morals.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/game-ethics/
>>78043137
>Why can't i buy slaves anymore? Church was ok with that back then why Church is not ok with slavery anymore? i thought they supposed to be unmovable foundation of morals instead they jump left and right with current agendas (at least Islam is based i can buy slaves as Muslim)
See >>78042187
>>78043152
Except humans really aren't empathetic about the same things. There are always exceptions. What then? Should we resort to argumentum ad populum and just assume the majority is correct?
>>78043314
the world isn't empathic by design
humans are since it was useful in our evolution
>>78043350
how do we know that the "true" bible you are selling is not just another fake one
what if god does love fags?
>>78037989
You're describing Nihilism not Atheism you dumbass.
>>78037989
The worst part of atheism is that it's true.
>>78043639
>the world isn't empathic by design
>humans are since it was useful in our evolution
Is that your rebuttal?
>how do we know that the "true" bible you are selling is not just another fake one
You don't. But theism can support moral universalism (due to the absolute moral authority), and atheism can't.
>>78043314
>Refute this:
They ain't nuffin to refute, because there is no argument why should the concept of universal morality require belief in supernatural beings.
>>78043696
>You're describing Nihilism not Atheism you dumbass.
Atheists can still believe in moral relativism, but that's really an inconsistent and illogical way to look at things. Some countries believe the death sentence is immoral, others don't. Who is right? Both? That's a contradiction (hence illogical). Who's the absolute moral authority?
>>78043819
>Is that your rebuttal?
what more do you want, i didn't say anything wrong
>But theism can support moral universalism (due to the absolute moral authority)
it can't because they are unable to prove the existance of that moral authority (bible doesn't count, unless you want to tell me that Eru iluvitar and Sauron real)
>>78043987
>They ain't nuffin to refute, because there is no argument
If you're just going to behave like that (since there's an obvious argument in the OP) then I'm done replying to you.
>>78043314
Religion disagrees about same things all the time.
>>78037989
>Atheism plays a large role (perhaps one of the biggest) in the destruction of western civilization.
Religion has by far played the largest role in the destruction of western and Eastern civilization.
Zealots kill each other to please their gods. Rational people need a good reason to kill.
Checkmate!
>>78044026
>Who's the absolute moral authority?
no one
not everything has a yes or no answer
>>78044077
>what more do you want, i didn't say anything wrong
You didn't even refute it. Whose biology should we adhere to? Not everyone agree when it comes to right and wrong, so the biology is obviously different.
>it can't because they are unable to prove the existance of that moral authority
You don't have to prove the existence of this absolute moral authority for it to be theoretically plausible.
>>78043551
>Except humans really aren't empathetic about the same things. There are always exceptions. What then? Should we resort to argumentum ad populum and just assume the majority is correct?
They're all empathetic about the same thing, you can just easily subvert it via conditioning. It's like food, different cultures like different food, your brain is conditioned to like whatever is eaten locally as you grow up. But the base instinct is the same, humans like eating when hungry.
>>78037989
>morality
>>78044141
>Religion disagrees about same things all the time.
There's still an absolute moral authority. The confusion is just about WHAT his laws are.
>>78044201
>Religion has by far played the largest role in the destruction of western and Eastern civilization.
Western civilization was built upon a christian foundation, so don't even try.
>>78044297
>You don't have to prove the existence of this absolute moral authority for it to be theoretically plausible.
there doesn't always have to be one correct answer (biology or otherwise) for people to follow it
if it is proven that there is one that is superior to all then it is logical to cast away others, tradition be damned
>>78044226
>no one
Great, so moral universalism is not possible, only relativism.
>>78043137
If by church you mean catholic church, know that slavery was never fully justified by catholic theology. Notice that morality can change becouse economy or society can change. Slave were treated often better than nowadays low-paid workers.
>>78043311
But it is thought.
When you hear in interesting scientific fact about the universe or something that you cannot measure yourself, You believe it to be a fact because you believe the people who discovered, tested and verified are correct in their assumptions and take it at face value.
Sure, there are somethings which you can prove for yourself, but other then that faith is required when accepting such information at value, unless you can confirm for yourself that this is the case.
OP is 100% correct
atheism promotes degeneracy.
>>78044321
Well done my property, my job here is done. I will no longer have to attain power over you.
>>78044320
>They're all empathetic about the same thing, you can just easily subvert it via conditioning. It's like food, different cultures like different food, your brain is conditioned to like whatever is eaten locally as you grow up.
Alright, let's get back to your initial statement then. One country (group of people) think it's moral to genocide the population of another country (since this will benefit them). The other country think that's immoral. Who is right?
>>78044456
so what
>>78044499
you can check everyting for yourself, if you put enough effort in
but no matter how hard i try i will never be able to prove that god exists
thats why science should always have a higher authority
>Sharing the same ideas and philosophy as most high-IQ members of society
>"degenerate"
Atheism is a faith that many have turned into a religion.
>>78044452
>there doesn't always have to be one correct answer (biology or otherwise) for people to follow it
There is nothing to suggest that atheism is compatible with moral universalism. Nothing. It all points to the opposite.
>if it is proven that there is one that is superior to all then it is logical to cast away others, tradition be damned
The most logical approach for western civilization is to genocide all the slavs and other non-whites. Since that's the most logical option I guess it's the most moral one. Do you agree?
> atheism is incompatible with moral universalism
That is retarded.
Moral relativism is a question of morality, not theism.
The source of your universal tenets is irrelevant and just because yours came from a particular book doesn't mean that it can special treatment.
>Morality is impossible without a foundation of transcendental truth. Atheism denies that such a concept is even possible.
Oh I see, you just don't see the difference between epistemology and theology.
What you are basically saying is
>Mathematics is impossible without a foundation of transcendental truth
>Atheism denies that a concept of a priori knowledge
Kill yourself.
>>78044099
Put that head in sand if you want, but you didnt wrote and argument why would universal morals require god, you just wrote a ""rebbutal"" against one specific argument. Communism for example is a set of universal morals and yet they have no need for supernatural.
>>78043350
See what?
>my interpretation of Bible is right yours is not?
You would go to burn at the stake trying to tell this to old Catholics that where not
>doctrine of racial equality, integration, and mongrelization which they call “Christian”
And them you reject. Did you see that you have liberally now place in religion? Your reject one yourself and you are heretic for others.
>>78043311
>Because it isn't
It is. Hence epistemological solipsism. Our entire perception of reality (primarily science) could be nothing but mere illusion that is being perpetuated by an invisible force. Scientists assume that materialism is an actual thing. This is a presupposition. A leap of faith.
>>78037989
>literaly a CULT of Feminism
>literaly a SJW CULT
blaming atheism.... not Atheism+
>>78044784
>There is nothing to suggest that atheism is compatible with moral universalism
don't know about universalism
but is still has a higher moral ground then any religion
>>78044669
>so what
What do you mean? That was the entire point of this thread.
>>78044499
Faith is believing something with no evidence.
Believing a person who spends their life trying to prove things with logic is not. Its simply accepting that other people know more than you.
>>78037989
Implying religious people make decisions based on logic
My spaghetti monster your fucking dumb
Atheism now equals Islam.
They denounce faith and then sought out a new one.
>>78044969
irrelevant to the current discussion
>>78045022
weren't you mouthing off about atheism beign more degenerate then religion
that religion has a moral high grou
because that ain't true
>>78044919
There was an argument but I'm not surprised you didn't see it because you probably stuck your head in the sand yourself. Make a rebuttal.
>>78044321
I wonder how many of you guys who post stirner memes all the time actually read him. He keeps babbling about "me" but he never explained what "me" means. How can I say is there any action made really by myself, not by spooks.
>>78044201
Really? Because it's socialist and atheistic regimes like Maoist China and the USSR which devolved the church from society in a large degree was much more destructive then their capitalist/christian counterparts, China utterly destroyed their ancient culture and killed millions of its own citizens in rejecting Chinese traditionalism, religion and culture. China only really recovered and rallied back after Mao's death and Xiaoping's reforms in China, including cultural and religious.
>>78045204
ground*
fug
>>78044948
>See what?
The post obviously.
>You would go to burn at the stake trying to tell this to old Catholics that where not
Then so be it. What's your point?
>Your reject one yourself and you are heretic for others.
Yes.
>>78045030
>Faith is believing something with no evidence.
There's a difference between evidence and proof. There is plenty of evidence that supports theism. I guess theism isn't faith-based then? According to your own reasoning?
>>78045116
>irrelevant to the current discussion
Not really, since you said atheism wasn't faith-based.
>>78045260
because it tried to completely remove instead of seperate
people should be allowed to believe all the bullshit they want but they shouldn't try to impose that bullshit on others
the system that you put in place to run the goverment should try to be as objective as possible with absolute objectivity beign unreachable
>>78045319
>Then so be it. What's your point?
that that system objectively sucks and is degenerate
>>78045204
>weren't you mouthing off about atheism beign more degenerate then religion
Because it is, since it can't support moral universalism,which consequently leads to the SJW movement you see today.
>>78045440
>There is plenty of evidence that supports theism
such as
>inb4 bible
>>78037989
>Atheism plays a large role (perhaps one of the biggest) in the destruction of western civilization
I am an atheist and I agree with this. The masses need to be kept in check with religion. The failure of Christianity has lead to the Failure of Western Society. I would much rather live in a Christian country than an atheistic country.
>>78045586
>that that system objectively sucks and is degenerate
You're not him so how can you give an answer to what his point was?
>>78045660
>inb4 bible
What's wrong with the Bible? It's evidence.
>>78045605
>since it can't support moral universalism
well neither can religion
but atheism can offer replacements that strive for moral universalism but simply cannot reach it
which is why it is superior IMO
it isn't perfect, but then what is
>>78039497
Nihilism is the natural conclusion of atheism. He doesn't think nihilism is atheism. I think you knew that and you're just lying though
![meet[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/xYXRtYg.jpg "meet[1].jpg")
>>78045791
in a 1000 years this will be evidence that spiderman is real
occams razor is a beautiful thing
>>78045835
>well neither can religion
Religion can, because of the absolute moral authority (i.e. God).
>but atheism can offer replacements that strive for moral universalism but simply cannot reach it
Because it's logically inconsistent. Why should I follow your arbitrary laws? If I'm an atheist I'm on this Earth for me. Social darwinism.
>>78037989
You posted this exact same thread like a week ago. Fuck off
>>78046050
Seems that you don't know the difference between evidence and proof. Not even science has any proof, just an abundance of evidence.
>>78046152
>You posted this exact same thread like a week ago.
Yes, what's your point? Some people might have missed it (and there are always new people coming to /pol/).
>>78045440
>There is plenty of evidence that supports theism
Kek
>>78045319
Your moral universalism doesn't seem all that universal when even people believing in the same god as you would burn you at a stake for being a heretic.
>>78045791
i wrote a book about niggers being kingz and shizz
ISSE EVIDANCE NOW
>>78046279
>Your moral universalism doesn't seem all that universal when even people believing in the same god as you would burn you at a stake for being a heretic.
Theism is theoretically plausible with moral universalism. Atheism isn't.
>>78046057
>because of the absolute moral authority
which it cannot prove and is itself often arbitrary
as for the typical "if I won't burn in hell then why shouldn't i go around murdering people" argument
well we have laws in place to punish such behavior
>>78046157
it has more evidence then religion, occams razor suggests it is more likely to be correct then religion
making it superior
>>78037989
Athiesm means no religion, it isn't a group or anything like that.
Learn about something before you go spewing off about it.
religion keeps killing people today
>>78041502
None of what you said about the bible is true. People interpret it to mean these different weird things, they don't change the bible to say those things. If you actually think people will change the bible to accept homosexuality then you're absolutely delusional. Even fake, moderate, liberal Christians would see the blasphemy and true Christians would lose their mind
>>78037989
My fedora is going to make an appearance..if you'd please.
I simply don't have that part of the brain - if you can call it that. I look up in the sky and see clouds, stars and on rare occasions other planets. Secondly, original sin? I'm guilty of murder by being born or whatever the fuck it is? Go fuck yourself. I take the same stance on white privelege. By being born I'm guilty of oppressing others. Again, fuck off.
I'm of good moral character through my parentals' teachings. And **I** don't need religion.
However, do I think religion is desperately needed in a time like this? Absolutely. White women especially are becoming out of control with their attitudes and anti-western perspectives. They're gullible and susceptible to programming more than any other group in my opinion. Academia is on the way to becoming a joke. Instead of adhering to a behavior code administered through the church and community they are absorbing propaganda and popular media that plainly just normalizes vulgar and degenerate behavior. Do I enjoy watching, for example, some hoes shaking their asses around on screen? Sure. But I don't go to clubs and I don't engage in hook up culture.
There IS a standard of what is right and wrong. Not killing other people is a pretty easy concept to digest. Basically the 10 commandments are easily conferred upon young minds. Other than that, if you don't like gays or abortion or whatever - don't look, don't read about it, etc.
I don't know what else to write.. but I really think that women are the biggest outliers in this whole equation. To give you credence to your side, Islam is doing fine and dandy with its society (in their fucked up sense of morality).
>Mfw I respond to bait instead of letting it go
Morals are a social construct. While yes, we seem to have some innate knowledge of empathy, how we respond is purely learned.
Like religion.
No one is born instinctively knowing of religion. We are born seeking meaning between events. It helps us understand our world so we may survive.
Religion is not degenerate, however the reasoning OP put behind stating Atheism is are false.
Lets discuss this, as it's the main argument from what I gather.
>
I'm not saying that all atheists are amoral, but that has more to do with the intellectual cowardice, hypocrisy and inconsistent logic of atheists than it does with the moral strength of atheism. Morality is impossible without a foundation of transcendental truth. Atheism denies that such a concept is even possible. Logically then there is no reason for an individual to respect the concept of collective morality.
I raise you society. Society is the reason individuals who are atheist are able to find collective morality. These views will constantly be challenged, as society itself changes.
>but anon, mah religion is more steadfast
No it isn't. Over the course of every religion, views change. Religion, while a faith system, operates just as a society does. Take marriage. Originally there was nothing wrong with marrying a 14 year old. However our society evolved to believe that this is morally incorrect, and religion reflects that as well.
Society is actually the cause of group morality, not religion, however religion is a society, or at least functions in such a way for many people. I can see where everyone is coming from, because it's a lot easier to find common ground inside of a smaller group. May I offer that globalism is what you're truly having a problem with?
>>78046432
>religion keeps killing people today
But I'm a Christian and I don't kill. We're told not to
>Religion is the status quo
>4chan hates it and chases out all the chsristifags
>Atheism becomes popular as the less intelligent die off.
>4chan proudly defends religion and chases off anyone who isn't a cultist with fedora memes
Could you guys stop trying so hard to be different?
>>78046397
>Theism is theoretically plausible with moral universalism
it can never be proven making its plausability next to none
>>78046448
>true Christians
you mean the catholics? orthodox? protestant? the mid east cults?
>>78040525
I agree.
It takes some cognitive dissonance to convince yourself and accept that there's a man in the sky and a man* at the earth's core.
>>78046416
>which it cannot prove and is itself often arbitrary
Nope, still theoretically plausible.
>Well we have laws in place to punish such behavior
Arbitrary. If I can get away with murder or rape, shouldn't I them murder or rape (if it's beneficial for my own prosperity or survival)?
>it has more evidence then religion, occams razor suggests it is more likely to be correct then religion
White people are more likely to be smart compared to slavs. Therefore white people are superior to slavs. Therefore the logical approach is to genocide all slavs because they threaten the prosperity of the white people.
>>78037989
Kantianism can be atheistic and is still a non-relativistic form of moral absolutism.
>>78046432
>Athiesm means no religion, it isn't a group or anything like that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Militant_Atheists
>>78046636
>/pol/ is 4chan
Fuck off.
>>78046636
What hentai is that in your pic I forgot the name
>>78046711
>still theoretically plausible.
so is the spaghetti monster
but we don't give legislative rights to pastafarians
>shouldn't I them murder or rape (if it's beneficial for my own prosperity or survival)?
then we must improve those laws and punishment to minimize such behaviour
>>78046657
>it can never be proven making its plausability next to none
What did you just say?
>>78037989
if you need to believe in a fairy in the sky that will let you into his club when you die, for you to behave like a civilized human, you have a fucking problem. religion is cancer, pathetic, and embarrassing
>>78046657
There are true Christians within all denominations. This wasn't the point of my post
>>78046927
is that your rebbutal lmao
>>78047007
prove it,objectively define a true christian
you can't, no one can, that's the nature of religion
Figures, I post a thoughtful response and get ignored, guess I should have ad hom'ed someone.
>>78047156
>is that your rebbutal lmao
Should I make a rebuttal for nonsensical drivel?
>>78037989
I don't need to be Christian to understand that not being a giant cunt towards other people generally results in better relationship and thus, at a greater level, in a healthier society. Anything else is just useless babble.
>>78046581
Following the changing laws of the land doesn't mean the religion changed. Following the law of the land is a part of Christianity (not so sure about Islam though)
>>78047266
You called my thread bait which is why I instantly stopped reading.
>>78037989
Why do I need empathy to have self-consistent ideological system ?
Frankly I prefer absolute egoism. It's effective at least if you are not a complete retard.
>>78047316
If an atheist can get away with murder, and the murder is beneficial to his own prosperity, shouldn't he then commit the murder?
>>78045319
>Then so be it. What's your point?
The point is. What religion are you going to preach? Because there is no one that you can. You despise modern Catholicism? Like they care. You can cry as much as you want but your tiny voice would not be heard. Instead bishops would assemble and decide in a sort of egalitarian democracy way what is wrong what is right what is sin what is not. Oh wait moral relativism. Not the word of God but votes of man on Earth decide what is religion. Those votes changed Catholicism into what do we see now. And no sky didn't rip apart and Gods voice didn't stop them . How do you feel about that? "Fuck them i would make my own true religion?" Good luck, mr Martin Luther 2.0, with such moral relativism.
>>78047527
What is so difficult to understand about the concept of "don't do to other people what you wouldn't want to be done to you?"
![1305523587250[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/yY5Oezb.png "1305523587250[1].png")
Okay guys, this was fun but I gotta go study I got a chemistry exam tomorrow and I'm sure some other autist will pick up the discussion
>>78047266
you made a good point anon, just don't drag yourself to their level, no insults, name calling, etc. cause thats when you've lost
>>78047302
i guess that makes the 2 equal
>>78047156
>do something
>I won't listen or engage in conversation though because you can't prove it haha lmao
Lol, okay. If we had to objectively prove everything we talk about we wouldn't be able to discuss anything. Also, this wasn't the point of original post, like I said. You're either lying or extremely ignorant if you think Christians would be okay with changing their book to condone homosexuality
>>78047671
But what reasoning is there for acting that way? Why do that? What's the point?
>>78046581
>No one is born instinctively knowing of religion. We are born seeking meaning between events. It helps us understand our world so we may survive.
Yes that's true. But people are raising in the sociey, and all societies had religions, there was literally no country without majority of religious people till 20th century.
>Take marriage. Originally there was nothing wrong with marrying a 14 year old.
Ehh another great historian ITT. Just please realise that morality can change becouse world changed. In medival times lifetime of common person was ~40-50 years. There was no teeneger in medival times. There were only adults and childs.
>>78047702
just give it time anon
just give it time
>>78047527
kill yourself
>>78047527
Morality is but a by-product of evolution. Stop linking it with your fairy tales.
>>78047527
Yes.
>If an religious man can get away with murder, including indulgence of his sins and the murder is beneficial to his own prosperity, shouldn't he then commit the murder?
Yes again.
>>78047816
It is an unspoken social contract. You assume other people operate under this mindset as well and that's how we function as a society. Ultimately, we are pack animals, we cooperate to survive.
>>78047527
Which atheist?
How large is benefit?
What ideology or rules he normally follows in his life?
Can his psyche take the stress from the act?
Is there some possible secondary or tertiary effects that can affect him in case of murder even not directly?
>>78047266
Lol, I responded. You're a smug little shit though so why would anybody want to talk to you? I just addressed a small part of your post though, most of it wasn't worth addressing
>Hurr nobody responded, guess I win again!! XD
Morality assumes Free Will, a fact not in evidence.
I admire Christianity for it's moral code although I don't think it has a monopoly on that. You can be moral without Christianity. I was raised Christian (school / church) but I can't force myself to believe no matter how much I envy those who do. Should I just start going back to church and see what happens?
>>78046581
>Morality is impossible without a foundation of transcendental truth
Mandatory reading >>78043337
The true degeneracy (and I mean that literally, not just as a meme) is the death of the Classics. The death of ALL institutions of thought. The death of fundamentals, pride, and ethos. How many college students do you think have ever even read Aristotle, Augustine, or Kant? I don't care if you major in computer science, a Bachelors is a general education degree. Not where you go to learn a trade, but where you go to get educated. 30 years ago that meant something. No longer.
The degeneration of thought is not limited by atheists. Reflection, confession, contemplation: these were once what the preacher gave to his herd and what he asked of them in return. No longer. Today Religion is a team that you are on and that you root for against all other teams. It is a set of rules you are supposed to obey- I implore you to understand: this has rarely been the case throughout history and whenever it has it has resulted in the death of that religion. Religion is a path to understanding. Religion does not ask that you set reason aside at the door, no it gives you a starting point and asks you, begs you to use all of your capacities to seek the truth.
Religion was once a common language- a common organism that the entire Western world of thought shared in order to help digest truths about the world. But God is dead. And we have been thrown into chaos. The wisdom of the ancients and the shoulders of giants have been carelessly cast aside and now every seeks to construct Truth entirely on their own, as if they were the first divine being ever to be born onto this Earth. And so everyone is an island, speaking their own language, reconciling nothing and understanding little, thinking that it is impossible to understand very much at just as a man with a wooden shovel thinks that breaking rock is impossible.
>>78037989
Atheism revolves around being skeptic.
if you cant ask questions or follow anything like a sheep then you are no good from those you belittle.
If an atheist ignores science , he is an idiot.
Do not forget that there are 3 kinds of atheists
>actual atheists
>wannabe atheists
>not-so atheist atheists
>>78037989
Amen.
>>78047970
So if I can survive just fine treating people like shit then there's no reason for me to act any differently right?
What reasoning do you have for thinking all people think this way anyways?
>>78048287
>Aristotle
the guy who thought that objects fall down because they get tired?
im all for preserving the good of the past but some things should just be left behind
>But God is dead. And we have been thrown into chaos
you are not the first to say it, nor will you be the last
but time goes on, and tomorrow will bring a new generation saying the same
in 2080 /pol/fags will be saying how superior todays culture was
>>78045244
>There was an argument
Nope, there was and assumption (MU require belief in god) and then some sort of counter-argument against the fact that our understanding of ethics came from our adaptations to social life. Then there were some insults, one empty statement and one wrong statement.
>Morality is impossible without a foundation of transcendental truth.
Empty statement, I don't even understand what did you tried to say with "Morality requires truth". Did you meant that in order to believe in something you need to believe your beliefs are true?
But even moral relativism would be compatible with such beliefs: "I am just a humble man and I believe other's have right for their opinions"
btw Truth is truth, it is only one and objective, adding "transcendental" is just masturbating to words you've just read on wiki.
>Atheism denies that such a concept is even possible.
Atheism is just absence of religion. It is not related to whatever we are capable of finding the Truth. You can believe something is true even without sacrificing cows to Jupiter.
>>78048690
If you want mathematics read Archimedes, Aristotle is a philosopher and you dismissing him because of his pre-modern understanding of physics is sheer hubris. I don't really want to converse about philosophy with someone who reads as an adversarial, you are the very island I refer to. You isolate yourself and pride yourself on isolation
>but time goes on, and tomorrow will bring a new generation saying the same
Tomorrows bring ever more secular societies. This wasn't the case before God was killed, but it has been the case ever after. This is the analogy of Nietzsche spoke, people who were sufficiently versed in understanding the world began to question the need for religion and from that question, questions propagated. There's no going back, Pandora has opened her box.
>>78037989
Jamal is absolutely correct. Atheism is the BASIS of lefist degenracy. YOU NEED atheism to turn objective moral values into subjective "what I feel is right" moral values. After that moral values just become flexible as fuck. You can be a complete degenrate and have your own set of moral values decide that fucking your dog is completely fucking fine. Why do you think the basis for Communism was atheistic? The point of communism was to losen the objectivity of moral values so fucking much that they could end the lives of 120 gorrillian civilians and nobody would bat an eye.
Socialism, Social Justice Warriorism, communism cannot exist without atheism. Atheism is the BASIS of the downfall of the western civilisation.
>>78048684
Not all people thinks this way. Watch the news if you are a masochist and you'll see it.
And there is no outside reason for you to act differently if you can get away with it and support your preferred lifestyle. Serial killers show it best.
>>78049302
Exactly
>>78048684
>What reasoning do you have for thinking all people think this way anyways?
Because it's pretty clear-cut that most people (not all because not all people are well-adjusted) want to live their lives without significant trouble. It's the path of least resistance. (Now I'm talking about a homogenous group, so I'm not taking into account stuff like tribe rivalry etc.)
And yes, it does make sense for you to treat people like shit if you feel you don't need anyone. It would be rather short-sighted, though, because you never know when such a need might arise.
>>78037989
I have to agree.
A lot of atheists are so arrogant, they think there is this idea of universal morality. That's why the Atheists of Europe have invited the Muslims in and expect the Muslims to have the same concepts of morality that they do. Muslims certainly don't believe in universal morality. They believe that its OK to rape, kill, steal, and lie to the kuffir, the non-Muslims.
Atheists take living in a Christian society for granted. They are influenced by Christian laws and ethics because they are surrounded by other Christians. Its very easy to take Christian ethics for granted if you've been surrounded by them your entire life.
The mostly atheistic Chinese have very different views on what is good morality than the Christian US does. The Chinese don't value environmentalism, they don't value the "good Samaritan," they don't value intellectual property. Their laws and ethics reflect this. They have destroyed their environment. They have a very different good Samaritan law than the West does, where the Samaritan may be liable for damages, so people don't help one another.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law
>>78047671
I like getting spanked by daddy therefore I'll spank everyone at work today because I'm a strong independent atheist who doesn't need no logic.
>>78049678
Nice false equivalence.
>>78044431
>Western civilization was built upon a christian foundation, so don't even try.
Western civilization was built despite Christians putting atheist to death.
When the founding fathers no longer feared the divine rule and religious tyranny of King George III, they established the United States of America
Right Wing politics are concerned with the long-term survival of Civilization
Christianity is only concerned with personal salvation to become part of a nebulous afterlife for which no evidence exists, and for which this world needs to be sacrificed, which is best expressed in the way early christians like Martin of Tours refused to fight enemies of their nations, insofar killing in this world could cost them heaven
When Jesus says "if they take your coat, let them have your shirt as well", "do not resist evil", "I have come to turn a man against his own household", "if you don't hate your self and your own family you can't follow me", "love your enemies, pray for your persecutors", "the meek will inherit the Earth", "those that wanna die will live", "blessed are those the persecuted, for they will be my Kingdom", "do not save treasures for tomorrow", "carry your cross so that you can receive eternal reward", "Sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you'll have treasure in heaven", "it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye than for the rich to enter Heaven", "Woe to you who are well fed, Woe to you who laugh, for you will mourn and weep" he is not kidding, or meaning the opposite, but actually setting down a morality where the world is a lie and only the afterlife is the real deal, so destroying your life in this world, "carrying your cross" as he says, is completely logical
/pol/ "christians" seem to believe Jesus actually meant the OPPOSITE of all that, and that Jesus wants you to defend your family, that Jesus wants you to kill your enemies, to become prosperous, well-fed and rich in this world, and to avoid persecution and death!
Only a person that does not actually believe in the Heaven bullshit and in eternal rewards for dying a martyr would actually re-interpret Christianity as a cult of earthly power which declares "the strong shall inherit the Earth" and "you must destroy the enemies of your nation"
>>78037989
(((Christians))) I've met were 10x the degenerates Atheists were. Western civilization's collapse is due to fake Christians, not real Atheists.
>>78037989
The main argument to me is that there is no obligation nor inclination for the state to ensure the continuity of our moral, intellectual and cultural legacy. What could actually help is philosophy. It has the same purpose in a smarter way in fact, but philosophy is hard. You basically need to read almost all authors before you since the pre-socratics to understand what is our civilizations, what we have achieved, what proved important, which theories are more relevant and what exist, ... But this is too hard so having a common moral framework such as a religion is the only actual way to achieve the same purpose. This will allow to pass on simple yet efficient mottos to your kids, their kids, and so forth so that you can be certain that they won't blindly follow what their empathy tells them and be able to rationalize, in simple matters, about what the ancients did or would have done for this same problem and why it's actually important.
This is the difference between people who were brought up together within the same moral framework, such as e.g. Japan who is able to have their kids roam freely at the age of 5 in the metro and be certain that people will help them and they'll be fine against societies, such as ours, where you cower all the time, are ensure of what may happen to yourself (not even your kids) if you take the metro and some aggresses you, etc. Because we are morally weak, allowed barbaric trends to spread and let our whole civilizations reach destruction.
Now, I'll add that I don't believe in meme skydaddy. I think any religion could do the trick and in fact I'm in favor of a better laid out one, with more scientific facts put into it, additions of the western philosophical legacy, ...
>>78045260
>Really? Because it's socialist and atheistic regimes like Maoist China and the USSR which devolved the church from society
Well, you're not bright enough to know you're wrong nor bright enough to be embarrassed by this irrational revisionism.
First, They were both religious. Mao attended Confucious college and practiced a rough form of Taoism. Stalin was a priest-in-training who attended seminary when he was 16. In the binary orthodox tradition, an "atheist" is someone who does not accept ALL the tenets of Eastern Orthodoxy in the same manner that
The Orthodox church that coronated Czar Nicholas II and hated the Bolsheviks could easily undermine Stalin's authority by turning the people against him. So he rounded up all the dissenting priest under the pretense of sedition and had them killed as a lesson to the rest (Cмepть шпиoнaм!)
The Orthodox White Russians fought the Marxist Red Russians for years, That's why, just like Peter the Great, he disconnected the Church from political power by declaring an atheist state.
Stalin and Mao did not commit atrocities because they were non-believers. They committed atrocities that threatened their control.
>>78047920
honestly this should be /thread.
>>78050233
>protestants
>christian
yea no
>>78037989
OP: When governments don't interfere in people's thoughts, things such as belief in god arise naturally
If you truly want a natural society, you need to fight against the people who want a government that seeks to mold humans to its image
There's right, left, centre, and esoteric versions of it, but what they all have in common is that: "power has to tell people what to think and how to feel about stuff"
Power's role is to force people to ACT in certain way that benefits the group, regardless of if the person thinks its ok or not. It isn't supposed to force you to "realize acting like this is good", only to force you to do it.
>>78052618
He wasn't talking about Protesants. Obviously there are some Protestants that aren't really Christians but a lot are. Stop this autism of classifying all Protestants of being the same when they vary widely in their beliefs. At least they worship Jesus and not Mary
NO U: The Thread.
>>78049902
>Right Wing politics are concerned with the long-term survival of Civilization
Right-wing conservatives have become nothing more than dimwitted cheerleaders for legal fictions and their political corporatism.
When Exxon instructs them to call climate change a hoax, despite the solid body of science, they fall for it.
When Verizon instructs them to eliminate net neutrality, they fall for it.
When Koch Industries instructs them to call for term limits, creating a perpetual cycle of veteran lobbyists and freshmen congressmen, they fall for it.
Now right-wing politics is all about bigotry and race hate, something we haven't seen sine the KKK days.
I was a hard core libertarian and mildly socially conservative, but the Supremacist right-wing abandoned me. I switched from Republican to Democrat once they ramped up the minority bashing in 2009. Now it's worse than ever.
>>78042187
funny thread, you a funny man
>>78037989
Atheism is the bane of intelligent thought.
It destroys any notion of objectivity and what follows from that is the acceptance that there is no "right way" thus the search for one is entirely futile and truth itself might as well not be pursued.
Atheism's conclusion is, nihilism, hedonism, anti-intellectualism, its intellectually infantile, and meaninglessness.
No one has ever given a good argument for atheism
>inb4 no argument for religion
Christian thought has always been the most intelligent thought, the history of Christianity is largely the history of The West.
The defense of atheism is generally puerile in nature while the ideals that atheists claim to hold are generally wafer thin.
Why should an atheist be rational?
no, really, some grand logician holding you accountable? Why be good either?
Not that we don't know good, but why do good when we can just as easily do evil?
how can an atheist even justify logic or rationality?
Without an absolute reference point one might as well disregard logic entirely as it can not be trusted absolutely and thus can not be trusted at all.
It melts away, slowly but surely, we descend into madness.
>>78054706
Good argument...
>>78055294
>all this bullshit
>mfw
>>78055294
>how can an atheist even justify logic or rationality?
I still haven't gotten an answer from them about this
>>78055722
What about it is bullshit?
>>78037989
Stop and think, is belief truly necessary? If something is real, then why do we need to believe it? You have eyes,arms,legs,job,gf,friends,car,house,internet.. or whatever, you don't have to believe you do have these things, right?
Only when you find out who or what YOU really are, will you understand the nature of belief and the illusion of it.
Free tip: [spoiler]You're an idea[/spoiler]
>>78055294
>>78055294
this heap of bullshit hahahaHAHAHAHAH
How does it make you guys feel knowing Christianity's influence is going to lessen with each generation?
>>78055896
>how can an atheist even justify logic or rationality? Without an absolute reference point one might as well disregard logic entirely as it can not be trusted absolutely and thus can not be trusted at all. It melts away, slowly but surely, we descend into madness.
Well have you ever thought to consider that perhaps logic and rationality might be null concepts in an absurd world?
>but why do good when we can just as easily do evil?
There are evolutionary reasons for cooperation amongst our species, lots of evidence, and lots of evidence to support similar behavior in other primates and mammals.
>>78055294
>It destroys any notion of objectivity and what follows from that is the acceptance that there is no "right way" thus the search for one is entirely futile and truth itself might as well not be pursued.
Just because you don't like the answer doesn't make it wrong. Accept that there is rarely/never objectivity in this world
>Atheism's conclusion is, nihilism, hedonism, anti-intellectualism, its intellectually infantile, and meaninglessness.
[citation needed]
>No one has ever given a good argument for atheism
Subjective. Knowing your type, you will never consider an argument for atheism good.
>Christian thought has always been the most intelligent thought
Subjective. Following a book blindly isn't "intellectual".
>the history of Christianity is largely the history of The West.
Therefore its true? Nonsense.
>The defense of atheism is generally puerile in nature while the ideals that atheists claim to hold are generally wafer thin
Opinion-as-fact and subjective.
>Why should an atheist be rational?
Why should he be otherwise? Burden of proof.
>Not that we don't know good, but why do good when we can just as easily do evil?
Morality? Most people don't enjoy doing evil things. Those who do are stopped by the law, prison, the police etc.
>how can an atheist even justify logic or rationality?
Explain
>Without an absolute reference point one might as well disregard logic entirely as it can not be trusted absolutely and thus can not be trusted at all
Bullshit
>It melts away, slowly but surely, we descend into madness
Slippery slope
>>78037989
the core idea of your argument is the absence of transcendance and the ability to mobilize people around core shared values. atheism correlates with this but didn't cause it. the fundamental causes that led to this absence of transcendence, moral relativism, in short the entire postmodern "liquid" society we are heading towards, are hyperindividualism and the narcissic culture (read christopher lasch)
even if relative individualism was always an anthropological feature of northwestern european societies, it has dramaticqlly increased with the rise of literacy, decline of birth rates, urbanization and capitalism.
fascist thinkers knew that, and proposed a regenerescence of modern society, in contrast to reactionary movements that just wanted to bring back monarchy and organized state religion, fascist thinkers proposed to praise ethnical/national/racial affiliation with an organic view of society: it's the ethnic group culture, future and welfare that is the transcendental atheistic truth, the return to corporatism as an alternative to capitalism, the return to rural world against modern urban life that atomized people into individuals
so the point is to find an alternative transcendance without god and organized religion, but with the good part of shared moral values, decency, collectivism-brotherhood, some bond keeping rituals and shared culture. so far, only eastern european patriotic communism and fascism were able to find this alternative.
>>78037989
>Implying you need religion to have moral universalism or protectionism
Kill yourself swedecuck
>>78037989
It's impossible to be religious and truly red-pilled. Religion has always been a tool of the elite to control its populations. Notice how so many kings were "of deity", or "of God"? That means if you rebel against them, you're rebelling against GODDD!!! You don't want to do that!
So yeah, basically all religion is mind-control, but I believe everyone should have the right to practice it.
Nothing like watching an ideology in its death throes.
Just like a cornered animal, they bite and scratch at anything that comes near them.
They'll even gnaw their own leg off to escape the trap.
Truly sad.
>>78055896
It's quite literally nothing but mindless generalizations, misrepresentation and namecalling that are based on absolutely nothing.
Also, no one outside of philosophy cares about 'justifying logic and rationality', people in the grown up world care solely about results and consequences, they couldn't give a flying fuck about your rationalizing and theorizing
>>78056485
Bullshit, just about any ideology can if it is so crafted.
A western-centric moral protectionism brotherhood should be the ideology that preserves said transcendance.
Blindly following any religion has been the cause of many problems with humanity for thousands of years. Human sacrifice, killing people of other religions, rape, child wives, stoning, hangings, forced marriage, wars, etc etc etc. All because muh book or muh god(s) said so. All religions are cults and have no basis in reality. They're completely faith based, which might as well be the delusional symptoms of schizophrenia. Your neighbor thinks people are trying to poison him and you think he's crazy, but you pray to an imaginary man when it will have 0 impact whatsoever. Just ask the people who died from "praying the cancer away." Seriously, stop being fucking idiots. I never bash religion and let my religious friends preach whatever to me, but as soon as someone attacks me for not believing in God or allah or zeus or whoever the fuck it annoys me. Why is your religion right and every single other one wrong? Do you have any proof? In the scientific world something that lacks evidence is rejected. Didn't even read your post either, just the title.
OP is a christ cuck. Religion served as a great stepping stone for cultural development, but it's lived it's potential. Wanting to revert back into a theocracy would be stupid. It's kind of like full blown liberalism, it had it's moments of glory and there's parts of it that are still good and applicable to society, but throwing yourself completely at it is just going to wreck you.
Religion would need to be reformed radically for it to have appeal in a larger scale. Currently it's just a backwards and degenerate way of thinking.
What is "morality"? Who defines what is moral and what isn't? God? God tells you to hate others for things that have nothing to do with you, is that moral?
You can argue about the way you WANT things to be, but the universe doesn't care, things are as they are.
>>78037989
>Atheism is degenerate
I know, but I can't stop. The mythology of religions is so fucking dumb. I would be Christian if I could, believe me.
>>78045945
>the conclusion of nihilism is atheism
kill yourself
the conclusion of nihilism is apathy or absurdism
>>78056479
>>78057177
atheists actually believe this
>>78037989
Right, atheism is the problem. Did your hosts let you use the computer Achmed?
>>78062943
Great refutation bro
I liked the part where you said "atheists actually believe this"
>>78057868
Western society is inherently collectivist and thus morality is defined by what is best for the collective. For instance murder is bad for the survival of the group and thus the group decided it was morally wrong. What reason would someone not part of the collective have to believe murder is morally wrong? No matter how butthurt /pol/ gets about it morality is relative. What /pol/ is too retarded to understand is that objectivity is not required to oppose a different morality.
