Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?

[genkaus]

However, I see that many here are being instructed, for they seem to be somewhat ignorant of the implications of an atheistic view of reality and all that it entails.

You are the best possible example of that ignorance.

---

As I see it, when one is told that they determine for themselves what is meaningful, what is good, what is bad, what is right, what is wrong, with no one to judge them for their thoughts or actions, then you are essentially telling them they are God.

The only thing you are allowed to decide here is what you find meaningful. You cannot determine your own arbitrary and subjective standards of right and wrong or good and bad and even without a god, there are plenty of intelligent beings around to make a judgment.

When measuring time or distance in this world, we utilize standards and we can tell if a clock is keeping correct time by comparing it to the one time keeping device that is the standard by which all others are measured. If my watch deviates from the standard time keeping instrument, my watch is wrong in virtue of it not displaying the time that the standard displays.

Likewise, if I say a mile is 5,279 feet, then I am wrong in virtue of the standard telling me that a mile is not 5,279 feet, but rather, 5,280 feet.

We utilize standards, laws, rules, and those objective rules exist regardless of what our individual opinion is. You may not like the fact that it is 2:30 according to International Atomic Time and may rather wish it to be 5:30, but if the International Atomic Time is 2:30, then your opinion counts for nothing regarding the matter. It is 2:30 even if you say it is 5:30.

Try to remember this part - it'll be useful later on.

Remove the standard of morality and each individual is left to determine for themselves what is moral. We are adrift in a sea of individual opinion. None of these opinions are "better" or "worse" than any other because each individual is the determiner of what is moral. Each individual's preferences are their own standard!

How is it that this oft-refuted strawman is still floating around? Why do you think that removing your imaginary god as a standard of morality would leave morality up to individual determination?

Unless you maintain that their is some type of standard or law or rule that exists above and over the various opinions of the six billion or so that exist that you look to and compare the opinions to and say this opinion (O) is closer to meeting the standard (S) than opinion (O2).

But if you remove God, what basis do you have for saying that there exists this "objective standard" that we should judge our individual opinions by?

How, in the absence of God, can we legitimately say that action (A) is "wrong"?

The simplest and most obvious answer here is that we do it the same way we decide on the standard time-keeping device or the standard number of feet in a mile. A certain group of people - much smarter than you, by the way - should get together and come up with a set of rational moral instructions and those instructions would then be objective in the same way all the other forms of measurement are objective. And if you disagree - it'd be just your individual opinion.

But being gracious, I can grant for the sake of making my point, that there are objective moral values and duties that exist without God as the explanation. I will grant that that is true for the moment and ask:

What follows?

Some people choose to live according to these values and duties and some do not.

If each person determines what they want out of life with neither anyone above them like God to judge them, nor anyone beneath them, for we are all sons and daughters of an indifferent cosmos, then what follows??

Some people will find meaning in living in such a way as to fulfill every moral duty and obligation to their fellow man. Some people will find meaning in living in such a way as to break every moral duty and obligation to their fellow man.

Ultimately, they both......

Do you realize that the same argument is equally applicable to your International standards for time and distance?

So what if I choose to believe that there are 30 hours in a day?
So what if I determine that 1024 meters in a kilometer instead of a 1000?

What follows then? What follows if I choose to live by my individual, subjective standards of measurement instead of the universally accepted ones? What follows if more and more people start doing it?

What follows is that there is confusion and chaos that realistically affects my life. What follows is that there are consequences for not following accepted standards which I'd have to bear right here and right now.

And if you think that it doesn't matter since it "ultimately" wouldn't matter, then remember, ultimately, its not going to matter if I choose my own standards of measurement either.