(September 25, 2016 at 5:02 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: If materialism is an atheist thing, why do believers indulge in it so much?

(September 25, 2016 at 12:21 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:

(September 25, 2016 at 12:16 pm)purplepurpose Wrote: If population is extemly poor, you can easily justify war by offering nazi, jihad, extremist christianity ideas. Africans, right now are joining jihad efforts for a promised heaven in chaliphate.

There are crazy people in christianity, but I have met only good people among them so far.

Then you don't read or get out much. Are you being intentionally ignorant or is that your way of maintaining your delusional bliss?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

Sorry, I didnt know about this stuff. Im from EU, its much more peaceful here in this regard. Still, its not like I will be sorting out global problems by saying to normal christians that their religion is corrupt.

(September 23, 2016 at 5:32 am)robvalue Wrote: If a true psycopath suddenly becomes "moral" (some form of religious subjective morality) it seems to me they're either pretending to do so pragmatically, or else an intangible threat/promise is enough to make them conform. Either way, it's not too impressive. Dealing with psycopaths in society is hard, but manipulating and scaring them isn't the best way IMO.

Are you familiar with the story of Beth Thomas? She was physically, mentally, and sexually abused at a very young age and basically had no emotions and no morals. She constantly abused her brother and wanted to murder her parents. But after years of treatment, she is by all accounts a perfectly normal, functional member of society now. Do you think she's still a psycho? Is this a nature/nurture thing?

(September 23, 2016 at 5:29 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(September 23, 2016 at 5:27 am)mcolafson Wrote: In other words, in equal circumstances Christians/Catholics are better than atheists, because Christians/Catholics have moral compass.

So sayeth the people that just so happen to be on the side they've decided is morally upstanding.

To borrow from PZ Myers, the RCC has a perfect moral compass. Just do the exact opposite of what they consider moral and you're heading in the right direction.

(September 25, 2016 at 12:21 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(September 25, 2016 at 5:02 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: If materialism is an atheist thing, why do believers indulge in it so much?

(September 23, 2016 at 4:56 am)robvalue Wrote: Morality is subjective. I'd say almost everyone has a compass, it's just some are unpopular/unusual.

People who don't have one at all would presumably be psycopaths, who don't consider any action to be bad or good, even subjectively. Their compass has no opinion, just "do whatever".

So basically psychopaths are the only people with correct views of morality? LOL

I actually believe that's true, that nothing is inherently right or wrong. But I think that I also have my own idea of what right and wrong is that I believe in and stand for. I do think that ultimately all morals are just subjective to whoever is coming up with them. Do you think something is right? What even measures that, and what is everyone's different type of measurement? It's arbitrary as fuck, which is why there's no actual morality.

I like Sam Harris's view though, that you can develop morality through science. I think he's right too, you can observe empirically what is best for others through science.

I disagree.  I think that we all inherently believe that some things are wrong.  That this requires no god, no divine law....that many of us would recognize injustice -as- injustice, and that sociopaths are simply, and punish-ably...... wrong.

(October 10, 2016 at 6:15 pm)EruptedCarcassBloat Wrote:

(September 23, 2016 at 4:56 am)robvalue Wrote: Morality is subjective. I'd say almost everyone has a compass, it's just some are unpopular/unusual.

People who don't have one at all would presumably be psycopaths, who don't consider any action to be bad or good, even subjectively. Their compass has no opinion, just "do whatever".

So basically psychopaths are the only people with correct views of morality? LOL

I actually believe that's true, that nothing is inherently right or wrong. But I think that I also have my own idea of what right and wrong is that I believe in and stand for. I do think that ultimately all morals are just subjective to whoever is coming up with them. Do you think something is right? What even measures that, and what is everyone's different type of measurement? It's arbitrary as fuck, which is why there's no actual morality.

I like Sam Harris's view though, that you can develop morality through science. I think he's right too, you can observe empirically what is best for others through science.

I suppose you could use science to fine tune a justice system, measuring the results with each new tweak.  You'd still have to decide which results would matter to you and I don't see how science will give you that.  Morality very much is a subjective experience and by that I don't mean 'it's just something you make up'.  I think for most of us it is something you come to experience on a visceral level where it matters.  I do think obsessive preoccupation with morality isn't a good thing.  Those who want to 'excel' at it would probably be better served to get a life instead.

(October 10, 2016 at 6:19 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I disagree.  I think that we all inherently believe that some things are wrong.  That this requires no god, no divine law....that many of us would recognize injustice -as- injustice, and that sociopaths are simply, and punish-ably...... wrong.

Punishably wrong? I'm probably one of the few people that don't actually condemn psychopathic people. Because I see psychopathy as basically a medical condition, that's the way their brains work and I wouldn't condemn a psychopathic person for not having empathy any more than I wouldn't condemn a severely mentally handycapped person for pooping their pants or something. I believe in order for society to work there has to be some sort of control of people, that much is obvious. I am all for law enforcement. 

What I see as a problem though, is the sort of dogmatic nature of morality, that seems rather religious. Why not just say that we shouldn't do some things because they aren't right, and then try to understand why some people wouldn't follow those rules? I never really understood the point of punishment. Is it about vengeance? That's not productive. Is it about keeping society safe? Well okay, but why do you have to do that at the expense of vulnerable people? I mean, this may seem really backwards, but trust me I actually am trying to present a more humanistic side to all of this here.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to give psychopaths more fuel to say that they're a victim and get away with crimes. However I would also argue that not all psychopaths are criminals. I'm just saying we should try to create a society where some people aren't condemned to misery and failure just because of the unfortunate nature of the brain they were born with, like the criminally psychopathic. I'm not saying I have an answer to the problem, I'm just saying I wish that there was a way that we could help so we could save their lives too, instead of just punishing them to save the lives of others.

I'm trying to think of everyone here.

Oh well, murder someone because you're sick...... and I'm still gong to take action against you...by locking you in a room I will never let you out of.  

/ shrugs