You believe good and evil are not merely human concepts? If so, how do you know?
Try reading my posts. Which you obviously didnt because you wouldnt have posted that. Unless you like appearing foolish which I suppose is possible.
You believe good and evil are not merely human concepts? If so, how do you know?
I don't believe there is any such thing as 'evil' beyond humanity and human deeds. There is no free-floating, nefarious force in the universe, no evil spirits, no evil in nature, no 'objective evil'. That's a childish perspective, a duality driven by splitting, which is itself driven from a lack of clear perspective.
There wasnt any ad hominems.
Better way to define good and evil? Good and evil are the definitions and can not be "bettered", I know that a lot of hipster Nietzsche readers arent too hot on the idea but in time either experience or discovering some other author, like Chesterton for instance, makes Nietzsche seem less novel.
Plus I guess growing up just makes it easier to make judgements.
Well, if you're not going to make any comments that actually contribute to the discussion, and instead want to use ad hominems while claiming you're not using ad hominems, then we're probably not going to get any further in this conversation. Ah well.
I would like a fresh start so that you can give clear answers to clear questions and I know exactly what we are talking about.Try reading my posts. Which you obviously didnt because you wouldnt have posted that. Unless you like appearing foolish which I suppose is possible.
I'm sorry, there's things you just said that are ridiculous, even by your own lights.
Why is it useful to approach things from an atheist perspective and why is it automatically speaking of God and morality which is insensitive?
Lets look at what atheism and amorality gave us, slavery, communism, nazism, fascism, that's not a great record, so it becomes impossible by your own standard to consider things things from the conceptual stand point you consider objectively correct to do so.
The reality that concepts are abused aswell as used does not invalidate the same concepts altogether, its like applying the worst rationalisations from debates about gun control to language and theory.
Now I know what you wrote was ENTIRELY well meant, though THINK, THINK HARD, go on try it!!
Have you seen The Fifth Element?
Greatest film since Star Wars. Until Promethius came out that is. Although still a lot like Star Wars.
Hmm. Speaking of god is not wrong, I'm just saying it is easy for both sides to stereotype one another and not listen to each other. Atheists have contributed many good things to society. I think the correlations you draw between atheism and various horrors sound very similar to christianity aand the crusades type talk. Also, many atheists would state that horrible atrocities were done because some guy stood up and said he was the son of god (the Pharaohs of egypt for example). I only addressed your comment because I guess I view you as more aware of/conscious of the moral/emotional impacts of belief/ideation than others on this forum.
"...And that's what your holy men discuss, is it?" [asked Granny Weatherwax.]
"Not usually. There is a very interesting debate raging at the moment on the nature of sin. for example." [answered Mightily Oats.]
"And what do they think? Against it, are they?"
"It's not as simple as that. It's not a black and white issue. There are so many shades of gray."
"Nope."
"Pardon?"
"There's no grays, only white that's got grubby. I'm surprised you don't know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is."
"It's a lot more complicated than that--"
"No. It ain't. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they're getting worried that they won't like the truth. People as things, that's where it starts."
"Oh, I'm sure there are worse crimes--"
"But they starts with thinking about people as things..."
And it seems so, so hackneyed and cliched to state such things, the crimes and horror associated with the crusades or other aspects of the era in which religion had hegemony are exaggerated.
Exaggerated by generations of opposition frequently requiring a menace in which to rally their own support or supporters or animate their movements, I'm not talking about communist atheism but all sorts of atheism from the time of the enlightenment and predating it with the humanism of the rennaisance which was Godless (the was an alternative to the Godless humanism, if you ever get a chance to read the books from that time prefaced by intros by Russell Kirk you'll get an idea).
I would suggest that the pharoahs issue is the same as dictatorship and economic planning, its the conflating to two ideas which dont necessarily go together and the obvious abuse of a concept, in one instance religious beliefs and the other planning, by elites to exploit it.
Intergenerational conflict has inhibited the transmission of truth or memory of what the reality of the crusades or other events treated critically by the irreligious or anti-religious too.
I would agree with you. To me, both sides have bitter animosity toward the other. To me, it is more useful to focus on integration in the present than the pain of the past. Spirituality has many great gifts including altruism, generosity, kindness, love, etc. Believe it or not, there are many atheists who have similar gifts. Perhaps you've yet to encounter them.
I'm not antagonistic towards atheism, although we're a very, very long way from it being treated as it deserves or even as religion and religosity has been treated.
I agree. I think people are so antagonistic to religion because it is largely seen as anti-science and also because atheists tend to be in the minority in general. People who are members of a communitt in which they are the minority tend to exaggerate the differences between themselves and the group. Like thegteatone and his sex threads, elfboy and his over the top ideas, speed gavroche and his libertarianism, etc etc. This happens a lot irl too.
The difference is that while atheism may imagine its a minority it isnt, its pervasive, pulling all the levers of government and pretty normative into the bargain.
I think that the vociferous and vocal evangelists and theocons which atheists believe are the majority they are resisting are a sign of religion and religiosity's weakness and waning status.
Being the unacknowledged or unconscious cultural rudder is a bad thing.