First Principles

January 23rd, 2020 at 12:59:11 AM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
Quote: petroglyph

"“Religion can be a crutch, it can be something that people have to have to make themselves feel better,” Rodgers continued. “Because it’s set up binary, it’s us and them, saved and unsaved, heaven and hell, it’s enlightened and heathen, it’s holy and righteous … that makes a lot of people feel better about themselves.”


When I was trying to be a Christian many years ago,
the group I was in was constantly talking about the
spiritual war they were involved in with the Devil.
They loved every minute of it, they were the center
of attention in the spiritual world. God wanted them,
the devil wanted them, it was a battle every day and
they cherished it. Made them feel important, and
that's the whole point of religion. To make you feel
like you're stupid, meaningless life not only means
something, but mean something glorious. This is why
there are so many Christians, it's an easy sell.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
January 23rd, 2020 at 4:31:30 AM permalink
Mosca
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 22
Posts: 730
Quote: FrGamble
Yes we did discuss it and yet you still maintain that there is not objectively evil acts? I thought you surely realized by now that morality is not subjective? I mean kids get the fact that certain things are wrong.


One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.
January 23rd, 2020 at 7:57:23 AM permalink
toomuch
Member since: Dec 30, 2019
Threads: 0
Posts: 22
Quote: Evenbob
When I was trying to be a Christian many years ago,
the group I was in was constantly talking about the
spiritual war they were involved in with the Devil.
They loved every minute of it, they were the center
of attention in the spiritual world.
Could say the same of the group of kids, around the same time, who thought that computers were going to tell us everything. One of my roommates told us, the next morning, about a nightmare in which he thought he was trapped in a computer. Religion to science is apples to oranges. Being "cool" with whatever, while reality remains reality.

If reality could laugh, whom would it be laughing at?
Were there a God, per se, then there wouldn't be any atheists, to begin with.
January 23rd, 2020 at 10:34:11 AM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
Quote: Mosca
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.


Great analogy, wish I would have
of it. Both sides think they're good
and the other side is evil. And they
are, because good and evil are just
ideas, they don't exist in the objective
world. FrG will never see this because
his whole religion is based on myth
and superstition being real.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
January 23rd, 2020 at 2:50:40 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Quote: Mosca
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.


One of them is right and the other is wrong, sometimes you need better facts, a different perspective, or history to show us who is who. The fact remains there is evil and good. They are not truly the same and no amount of subjective opinion can change that.
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
January 23rd, 2020 at 2:52:51 PM permalink
toomuch
Member since: Dec 30, 2019
Threads: 0
Posts: 22
Quote: Evenbob
Good and evil are just
ideas.
That we all must create our own realities, ie, use the same, one(-is-other) reality to try to consistently explain ourselves, means that no one such "reality" is above any other.

A few more guesses. Science, too, even in terms of mathematics, is just a bunch of ideas because none of it means that we actually own anything in the universe. But another illusion that we are gaining on something. There are no guarantees for any of us, so, all our lives will come to a screeching halt no matter what we cling to. We weren't here before we were born, so, nor will we be after. And, there's no coming back because the same person can't be in two places at once, with his/her past alongside his/her new future, which becomes another past. (Can't have a past defined so that it's not the, a past.)

Most surprisingly, and niggling, what we have, and who we are in this life are lost to the next where all the people on one side of an argument become those on the other side with whom they argued with in the life before. Yin and yang at its finest.

Here's a quote I grabbed off the internet, just now. Less extreme than my guesses, but, I think, supportive:

Quote:
Science is not inherently a religion, but it is often turned into a religion known as scientism. People who adopt this religious view are usually atheists that actually believe that their beliefs are all derived from science, and that the only kind of true knowledge humans can have is scientific knowledge.

But it is not difficult to see why this religious view is self-refuting:

How could a statement such as, “The only kind of knowledge that we can have is scientific knowledge,” be verified scientifically? With a chemistry experiment utilizing a bunsen burner and test tubes? With a physics experiment utilizing a particle accelerator? Because the belief that, “The only kind of knowledge that we can have is scientific knowledge” can itself never be scientific knowledge, it is a self-refuting belief.

Or take the premise, “No belief can be accepted as true and rational unless it can be known by science or quantified and tested empirically.” How can that premise be known by science or quantified and tested empirically? With a biology experiment involving a microscope and a petri dish?! It can’t be quantified and tested empirically, and therefore such a premise is self-refuting.
Nor will science, itself, ever be complete.
Were there a God, per se, then there wouldn't be any atheists, to begin with.
January 23rd, 2020 at 2:55:42 PM permalink
toomuch
Member since: Dec 30, 2019
Threads: 0
Posts: 22
Quote: FrGamble
One of them is right and the other is wrong, sometimes you need better facts, a different perspective, or history to show us who is who. The fact remains there is evil and good. They are not truly the same and no amount of subjective opinion can change that.
Too often, all sides in a dispute are wrong. And, then, the judges seek a way for all sides to be right, to quickly dismiss legal cases, to further also their own corrupt interests.
Were there a God, per se, then there wouldn't be any atheists, to begin with.
January 23rd, 2020 at 8:15:57 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
Quote: FrGamble
One of them is right and the other is wrong,


Just not true at all. Hemingway was
deeply involved in the Spanish
Civil War in the 1930's. He was
on the side of the freedom fighter,
even fought with them. He gradually
came to realize he didn't know
which side was right and got out.

Quote:
The fact remains there is evil and good.


The only fact is we label things
good and evil, and it doesn't
exist outside our labeling.
You can't prove they exist either,
you've tried. You always have
your go to example, The Holocaust.
Pure evil, you say. Which part of
The Holocaust, it wasn't all evil.

You have to narrow it down and
narrow it down until you get the
one person violating the human
rights of another person. If that's
the case, then the inquisition's held
by the Catholic Church are just as
evil as the Holocaust. But the church
didn't see it that way. They truly
thought they were doing good, they
thought they were doing God's will.
To the people they were doing it to,
it was pure evil. To the church they
were helping these people to see the light.
Two sides of the same coin, that's good
and evil.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
January 23rd, 2020 at 9:24:03 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
You are sadly mistaken and right at the same time. You implicitly admit that "violating a human rights", a strange euphemism for killing innocent people, is evil. Then you posit that because someone thinks they are doing good it makes it not evil. That is baloney and you know it. I don't care who thinks killing the innocent is a good thing, it is not! Public opinion, the majority, you, me, or even the Pope can't make something evil a good. Surely you understand this, please.
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
January 24th, 2020 at 12:39:31 AM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
Quote: FrGamble
You are sadly mistaken and right at the same time. You implicitly admit that "violating a human rights", a strange euphemism for killing innocent people, is evil. .


It comes down to that thing you like to pretend
that you don't understand, subjective reality. The
priests in the Catholic Church we're doing a good
thing during the Inquisition. In their subjective
reality this is what God was telling them to do.
In their minds they were fighting against evil,
not doing evil. The people on the receiving end
of all this goodness felt a little differently about it.
Good and evil are just words we use to describe
where you're standing at the time. They are
reference points, they help us make sense of a
world in a universe that doesn't give one whit
about what we do.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.