(November 10, 2017 at 10:09 am)Mathilda Wrote: I haven't read any atheist blogs but this is not what you were asking. You were saying "All people partially outsource their decision making process by seeking advice." and now when I have answered that you have moved the goal posts.

I think that I'm referring to moral decisions is apparent from the context of the discussion, but whatever - do you think all atheists come to their moral positions independently, or do you think many of them go to other atheist sources for input?

Quote:Generally yes.

Yes to which - they switch to the left (if that's what you mean do you have evidence), or they stay right but with a change in that particular position?

Quote:Yes but not because organised religion pushed for acceptance of homosexuality but because others did. New churches, like any good business, are created to satisfy a niche in the market place.

Regardless of your speculation as to motive, you acknowledge that such theists are mature enough to analyze the world and change their positions, which goes againt your OP.

(November 10, 2017 at 10:13 am)Khemikal Wrote: Institutions, religious or political, resist change by their very nature and by necessity of survival, and so too do the people who serve them.  They're explicitly organized so as to be normative.

This is why I say our species morality is evolutionary.

There were no political parties or written religions 200,000 years ago. But our primate cousins, just like today DID evolve to be social. Creating groups and giving them labels DOES create order and increase potential to the survival of the group. It does not mean, EVEN WITH atheists, that they are correct 100% of the time. It would only mean, correct or incorrect that for good or bad, we'd only say that our ideas of morality are still ultimately natural.

Unfortunately evolution, regardless of species, isn't a moral claim, but a process and it doesn't care if one ant colony defeats another. If Hitler had won the war instead, again, evolution would not care.

HAVING SAID THAT, that is not a justification for what that monster did. Evolution ALSO produces empathy and compassion and that can win too. But our justifications as a species to do harm to others or to be kind to others is not magical. It is still up to us what we choose to do.

I do not see the morality of an atheist saying Che was good so lets replicate Cuba as good. I do not agree with atheists who love guns and ignore our flooded market as being moral. I do not see Ayn Rand's economics as moral either.  But for those who do, we'd only agree that our positions are not magically handed down to us, or that humans have magic  powers to communicate with another world to give us our respective conclusions. 

The only core thing "atheists" have in common is a lack of belief in a God or Gods or deities.

"Off" is not a political party or economic view. If a theist wants to know what the individual atheist's position on any given topic is, they have to ask the individual atheist.

(November 10, 2017 at 10:18 am)SaStrike Wrote: Why is this in the christian section?

Why is everyone using the word literally so much these days? Almost all of the time it's redundant too. This is literally off topic. I apologize.

I quite agree. I expected a section for theism and was going to post it there instead but couldn't find one.

(November 10, 2017 at 10:18 am)SaStrike Wrote: Back on topic. I'm going to have to agree with OP on this one. Theism (not just christianity) is childish but it doest slow the mental maturity rate that much. Deep down everyone knows they're just bullshitting themselves with the faith they have. But fear and stubbornness keeps it from surfacing that often.

Quite possibly, which would explain why some theists have found this thread so insulting yet few have actually tried countering what I have said and largely just dismissed it as strawman arguments and wild generalisations. But I contend that it definitely can slow the mental maturity rate depending on the person. Either way it doesn't help. The brain is like a muscle in that you need to use it or lose it.

(November 10, 2017 at 10:27 am)Mathilda Wrote: Quite possibly, which would explain why some theists have found this thread so insulting yet few have actually tried countering what I have said and largely just dismissed it as strawman arguments and wild generalisations.

There's not much you can say about unsubstantiated conjecture. That's why I've approached by using counterexamples to the implied corollary.

(November 10, 2017 at 10:24 am)alpha male Wrote: do you think all atheists come to their moral positions independently, or do you think many of them go to other atheist sources for input?

I don't think many of them go to atheist sources for the moral  positions. Unlike what theists would love for everyone to believe, atheism isn't a religion.

(November 10, 2017 at 10:24 am)alpha male Wrote:

Quote:Generally yes.

Yes to which - they switch to the left (if that's what you mean do you have evidence), or they stay right but with a change in that particular position?

Sorry, I meant to say generally yes to 'they stay mostly right, but with a more nuanced position'

(November 10, 2017 at 10:24 am)alpha male Wrote:

Quote:Yes but not because organised religion pushed for acceptance of homosexuality but because others did. New churches, like any good business, are created to satisfy a niche in the market place.

Regardless of your speculation as to motive, you acknowledge that such theists are mature enough to analyze the world and change their positions, which goes againt your OP.

But it was not because of the infantilising influence of religious indoctrination that they acknowledged that homosexuality was not evil but because they were forced to confront the issue and their prejudices by other segments of society. Progress would have been a lot quicker without organised religion.

(November 10, 2017 at 9:12 am)alpha male Wrote:

(November 10, 2017 at 9:02 am)Aegon Wrote: I got to say I'm cringing/laughing at everybody describing their personal lives trying to prove themselves to a complete stranger.

What would you think about someone engaging in voyeurism on such discussion?

Sounds hot.

(November 10, 2017 at 8:57 am)alpha male Wrote:

(November 9, 2017 at 6:11 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: So, you're trying to somehow turn actual mental illness

And other things like bad relationships and divorce, alcohol and drug abuse, porn and masturbation instead of real relationships, etc.

Also, I don't subscribe to the notion that mental illness is always random. I've suffered from depression, and it was likely caused by poor life choices I made.

Quote:into a tu quoque towards people who are insulting towards your religion?

Into a counter example to someone who says that religion stunts mental growth.

Mental illness has nothing to do with mental growth.
Porn and masturbation aren't bad, especially if there are legitimate reasons as to why a person cannot pursue a relationship
Bad relationships and divorce have nothing to do with mental growth. Sometimes shit happens.
Addiction is more complicated, but most of the addicts I know were subconsciously attempting to self-medicate a mental illness.

You really suck at this counter example stuff. Then again, I've noticed that most of the theists here cannot make accurate analogies, either, so I'm not really surprised.

(November 9, 2017 at 12:55 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(November 9, 2017 at 10:56 am)Kernel Sohcahtoa Wrote: Unfortunately, it seems that for every civil, open-minded individual who is willing to engage in serious, thoughtful discussion on these forums and IRL, there is also an impolite, uncivil person who argues for the sake of arguing and is tuned out to learning anything new/different.  I'm sorry if you've encountered too many of these types of people on AF and IRL.  However, I would hope that this statement is not a generalization of all atheist members on this site.

All? No. Most? Yes. If you think that's not fair, just look at Minimalist's tag line and thread titles, then look at his rep points.

It's gotten bad enough that I don't even play games (mafia, fantasy football) here anymore.

Just out of interest, why should any disagreements here make any difference to you playing mafia? Remember how you first invited me into the game in the shoutbox: 'it's a chance to lynch alpha male folks'  In other words, mafia has always been 'ecumenical'; there, faith or lack of makes no difference... everyone has equal opportunities in getting brutally lynched

(November 9, 2017 at 10:31 am)alpha male Wrote: If the atheists on this site are what you consider mature adults, I'll take being a child, thanks.

So you still believe in Santa, right?

(November 10, 2017 at 9:51 am)alpha male Wrote:

(November 10, 2017 at 9:43 am)Brian37 Wrote: Um wrong. 

I do not have the same thing in common with an atheist who would claim abortion is immoral. I do not have the same thing in common with an atheist who things "sell more and do nothing" on issues of firearms. I do not have the same thing in common with claiming Ayn Rand's "fuck you I got mine" is moral. WE DO NOT agree on those things 100%.

And neither do Christians agree 100%, which was never my point. Do you seriously not get it, or are you just in denial?

But christians claim a perfect deity is the source for their morality, as well as claiming a relationship with god. Why DON'T christians agree 100%?