Why are there so many atheism-related post?

[WisdomTree]

I came to the "philosophy" section of this forum cause I'm really into philosophy (I even minored in it after failing to major it ).

Instead of getting a wide-range of topics in the areas of; ethics, epistemology, logic, and metaphysics, aesthetics? (who does this anyway?), the section was bombarded with "atheism" topics.

As interesting as atheism and the philosophy of religion is, that's not what philosophy is exclusively about! Even if it's Christian philosophy!!!

 

[Eudaimonist]

Then start topics on ethics, epistemology, logic, metaphysics, and aesthetics.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[WisdomTree]

Then start topics on ethics, epistemology, logic, metaphysics, and aesthetics.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Seriously though, who the hell does aesthetics?

 

[Eudaimonist]

Seriously though, who the hell does aesthetics?

One example is Ayn Rand, in her book The Romantic Manifesto. I'm sure that there are others.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Tinker Grey]

We've done some of those topics before. I'm rather fond of epistemology though I must confess that I've haven't read any formal works on it.

Start some topics. I'll look forward to reading them.

 

[Buy Bologna]

It does seem to be a real hot topic here in philosophy.

And you're right.

I think the main reason is becuz there is no where else on this forum where all theologies and theist/atheist can discuss the subject and philosophy is the best place for that.

Thats my 2 cents anyway.

Best option is just not to click on the thread i guess

 

[Danyc]

It's because it can't happen in Christian Apologetics, it can't happen in Exploring Christianity, there's no 'exploring atheism' subforum, and there's no board devoted to atheism. It's pretty much here or Ethics and Morality.

 

[WisdomTree]

In that case, I propose that we all join forces here and make the "Philosophy" section more interesting, having it made more true to its definition: Love of Wisdom!

 

[Gracchus]

In that case, I propose that we all join forces here and make the "Philosophy" section more interesting, having it made more true to its definition: Love of Wisdom!

Well, we have to bear in mind that some of the questions of classical philosophy, such as morality and epistemology are being addressed by neuroscience. We are even gaining insight into why some people believe in magic sky daddies.

 

[WisdomTree]

Well, we have to bear in mind that some of the questions of classical philosophy, such as morality and epistemology are being addressed by neuroscience. We are even gaining insight into why some people believe in magic sky daddies.

We are philosophers! Everything is in our domain and as such we should stick our noses in everything!!! Philosophy is the predecessor to everything academic and as such we decide on the fundamentals. We are; KINGS!!!!!

On the other hand, we don't have to do just analytic philosophy, we could always do experimental and/or continental...

 

[Amber Bird]

Seriously though, who the hell does aesthetics?

I'd adventure the guess and say, artists?

And I agree with the other poster. Rather than ask, why so many atheism posts appearing where they rightly belong in a philosophy forum? Why not post your own interest in those categories you're looking for?

 

[Eudaimonist]

Well, we have to bear in mind that some of the questions of classical philosophy, such as morality and epistemology are being addressed by neuroscience.

Only to an extent. Science cannot replace philosophy entirely in those areas.

For example, neuroscience cannot tell us what we ought to do. It can only report on the origin of moral capacities and how they function in the brain.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[WisdomTree]

Only to an extent. Science cannot replace philosophy entirely in those areas.

For example, neuroscience cannot tell us what we ought to do. It can merely report on the origin of moral capacities.


eudaimonia,

Mark

That's because Philosophers are Kings!

 

[Tinker Grey]

Only to an extent. Science cannot replace philosophy entirely in those areas.

For example, neuroscience cannot tell us what we ought to do. It can only report on the origin of moral capacities and how they function in the brain.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Sam Harris avers in "The Moral Landscape" that inasmuch as science can tell us what is harmful and what is helpful, we can use science to say we ought or ought not.

 

[TScott]

I do find it curious, though, that atheists are drawn to a Christian website.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Do you find it curious that Christians are drawn to Atheist websites?

(N.B. I was a Christian for my first 6 years here.)

I find it curious that as many times as "why atheists come to christian websites" has been addressed, you haven't seen any of the answers.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Sam Harris avers in "The Moral Landscape" that inasmuch as science can tell us what is harmful and what is helpful, we can use science to say we ought or ought not.

Yes, I know that he says that. I think it is great that he is taking an interest in ethics, but he remains overly scientistic.

Science can't tell us what is helpful or harmful without a philosophical understanding of "help" and "harm". What precisely does it mean to say that someone has been helped? Helped to do what? Even though we may have a common sensical intuitions of such matters, it still requires philosophy to sort it all out. He seems to resort at least in part to his familiarity with Buddhist philosophy to arrive at these understandings.

Also, knowing what is helpful and harmful doesn't get one the whole way there. There are still important deep ethical issues that have to be addressed, such as identifying the relationship between "helpful" and "ought", and figuring out if one's ultimate ethical purpose is located in oneself, or others, or some combination of the two. Such issues are not easy for science to answer all by itself.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

I do find it curious, though, that atheists are drawn to a Christian website.

Do you now? I've always found it curious that Christians are drawn to atheist websites. I've seen plenty over the years.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Tinker Grey]

Yes, I know that he says that. I think it is great that he is taking an interest in ethics, but he remains overly scientistic.

Science can't tell us what is helpful or harmful without a philosophical understanding of "help" and "harm". What precisely does it mean to say that someone has been helped? Helped to do what? Even though we may have a common sensical intuitions of such matters, it still requires philosophy to sort it all out. He seems to resort at least in part to his familiarity with Buddhist philosophy to arrive at these understandings.

Also, knowing what is helpful and harmful doesn't get one the whole way there. There are still important deep ethical issues that have to be addressed, such as identifying the relationship between "helpful" and "ought", and figuring out if one's ultimate ethical purpose is located in oneself, or others, or some combination of the two. Such issues are not easy for science to answer all by itself.


eudaimonia,

Mark

It's been a little while since I read it. I should note that "help" is my word. Also, I did say "inasmuch". However, that is my caveat. I don't know that he would be that careful.

Part of what appeals to me is that much of what we can see is obvious. Throwing acid in a little girl's face is bad. Anybody to which this has happened screams. We don't need brain scans to tell us this harmful, nor do we need philosophy for it.

OTOH, I don't think he suggests throwing philosophy out entirely, nor am I.

But for me, a lot of the "philosophical" discussion is reasoning. "If X and Y must be selected between, and X hurts more than Y (and all else is equal) then choose Y."

Other questions might be more philosophical such as "X causes physical harm and Y causes emotional harm, how do we choose?"

 

[abysmul]

Do you find it curious that Christians are drawn to Atheist websites?

(N.B. I was a Christian for my first 6 years here.)

I find it curious that as many times as "why atheists come to christian websites" has been addressed, you haven't seen any of the answers.

I personally don't frequent atheists websites, but it's likely that they might relate it to "the Great Commission" (as it is commonly called).

Perhaps similar reasons for Atheists coming here, they want to spread their "religion" ?

I'd also be curious to know if other large religious forums (of non-Christian varieties) have a similar number of Atheist posters.