Atheists Overreach ... Why do they do that?

[Tone]

No....I'm saying atheism is the same.

Atheism is the belief that there is no god. Nothing more. Photosynthesis is an answer to a question about reality that asks "How does sunlight affect plants?" Atheism is an answer to the question "Does god exist?"

That's all it is.

So, there are no moral/ethical frameworks in atheism...yeah, that's kind of the whole point of this thread. I agree.

 

[Ana the Ist]

So...in other words...it's a framework...?

It's a process. Process does not equal framework. An electrochemical process is definitely not a moral framework or worldview.

There may or may not be.

How would you find out?

 

[Ana the Ist]

So, there are no moral/ethical frameworks in atheism...yeah, that's kind of the whole point of this thread. I agree.

Ok....then what's your point?

There's no moral or ethical framework in photosynthesis but it's still 100% true lol.

 

[Tone]

It's a process. Process does not equal framework. An electrochemical process is definitely not a moral framework or worldview.




How would you find out?

"Photosynthesis" is a framework that attempts to describe a process...

 

[Ana the Ist]

Shermer quotes Smith's book at 6:55, "I am not arguing that atheism is wrong. I am not arguing that theism is right. I am not saying that atheists have no reason to behave ethically. I am not suggesting that atheism leads to moral nihilism. I am not saying that science is incompatible with atheism. I am not suggesting that all people are somehow covertly religious. And I am not saying that secular people and cultures cannot live happy, meaningful lives."

What use is a long quote telling me what someone isn't saying???

I could spend the rest of my afternoon filling this thread with posts about what I'm not saying lol.

 

[Ana the Ist]

"Photosynthesis" is a framework that attempts to describe a process...

Nope. It's just a process.

 

[Tone]

Ok....then what's your point?

There's no moral or ethical framework in photosynthesis but it's still 100% true lol.

The point is as I stated way back in my post #45

Atheists Overreach ... Why do they do that?

Your conclusion doesn't follow from the premises.

 

[zippy2006]

What use is a long quote telling me what someone isn't saying???

You seem utterly confused about what the thread is about and what Christian Smith is saying. I'm leading you to water.

 

[Tone]

Nope. It's just a process.

In your mind perhaps, since you have accepted it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Because you seem utterly confused about what the thread is about and what Christian Smith is saying.

Then why don't you explain it instead of telling me what it's not about?

That seems infinitely more useful....

 

[Ana the Ist]

In your mind perhaps, since you have accepted it.

There's evidence for it .

 

[zippy2006]

Then why don't you explain it instead of telling me what it's not about?

That seems infinitely more useful....

Why don't you watch the first 15 minutes of the video, as the OP recommended? It doesn't make much sense to try to criticize an argument that you haven't even listened to, though you clearly did that in this post.

Wolves and coyotes will chew up food and regurgitate it so that their young cubs don't have to do much work chewing and digesting it. Unfortunately for you, I'm not a wolf and you're not my cub.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The point is as I stated way back in my post #45

Atheists Overreach ... Why do they do that?

Your point there isn't very clear.

Your conclusion doesn't follow from the premises.

Of course it does....statements of fact need no inherent moral frameworks to be true.

If I tell you it's raining outside....it doesn't matter that there's no moral or ethical framework inherent in that statement. All that matters is that water is falling from the sky.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Why don't you watch the first 15 minutes of the video, as the OP recommended?

I did.

Wolves and coyotes will chew up food and regurgitate it so that their young cubs don't have to do much work chewing and digesting it. Unfortunately for you, I'm not a wolf and you're not my cub.

Maybe you got something different from the video than I did....

But if you can't explain the point being made....then perhaps the problem is that there's really no point being made.

 

[Tone]

Then why don't you explain it instead of telling me what it's not about?

That seems infinitely more useful....

Let me help you with this:

Scenario:

200 years from now,the world is united in one happy and bubbly global village. All those imposing religions have been done away with...or maybe they've just been relegated to the texts of higher learning for explanatory purposes...or whatever. Now, the news has just announced that the majority of the population has just approved and is pushing for the minority of the populace to be systematically eradicated. In this post religious world, where belief in God has sunk to maybe 5% of the population, you find yourself in the minority. What will you appeal to in an attempt to preserve your life...or perhaps the lives of any others you may care for?

 

[Tone]

Of course it does....statements of fact need no inherent moral frameworks to be true.

Your conclusion is that atheism is true, which does not follow from the above^.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Let me help you with this:

Ok....

Scenario:

200 years from now,the world is united in one happy and bubbly global village. All those imposing religions have been done away with...or maybe they've just been relegated to the texts of higher learning for explanatory purposes...or whatever. Now, the news has just announced that the majority of the population has just approved and is pushing for the minority of the populace to be systematically eradicated. In this post religious world, where belief in God has sunk to maybe 5% of the population, you find yourself in the minority. What will you appeal to in an attempt to preserve your life...or perhaps the lives of any others you may care for?

Atheism = lack of a belief in god.

You're asking me about morality? I can give you an answer if you want, but it won't have anything to do with atheism.

 

[zippy2006]

I did.

Was the sound on?

The quote at 6:55 clearly answers your charge here. If you had listened to and understood the very early part of the video you would not have tried to argue that Smith's arguments don't disprove atheism. He explicitly tells us that they don't disprove atheism at the very beginning. That's not what the book is about. If you are interested in a conversation about the truth of atheism you are probably looking for another thread. Not every thread is about the truth of atheism.

 

[Tone]

There's evidence for it .

There is evidence for anything you set your mind to.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Your conclusion is that atheism is true, which does not follow from the above^.

My conclusion that atheism is true isn't based on the above lol.