My first problem with this is that I wouldn't call atheism a worldview. It is merely a view on a certain subject regarding a belief, the belief in God.
On that note, there would be no way to tell them that they are wrong using a moral standard derived from atheism itself, but rather from a belief you hold regarding morality. In this sense, you are more than able to be both an atheist and have anti-pragmatic views which contrast the man in the hypothetical.
It is common for theists to think that, because most atheists don't accept the silly absolute morality credence that is so often spouted by apologists, that we couldn't have a moral standard due to some set criteria.
To get the hypothetical pragmatist to abandon his views on this subject you would have to reason out the negatives to his view and explain why your view accomplishes similar things but has fewer downsides. For example:
By harming other people in your society, you will have less to fall back on when you falter, as your pragmatic/objectivist views don't include altruistic behavior. This means, of course, that because he was a jerk to attain his wellbeing, he will have less comrades to fall back on when his funds collapse or a disaster strikes.
On that note, there would be no way to tell them that they are wrong using a moral standard derived from atheism itself, but rather from a belief you hold regarding morality. In this sense, you are more than able to be both an atheist and have anti-pragmatic views which contrast the man in the hypothetical.
It is common for theists to think that, because most atheists don't accept the silly absolute morality credence that is so often spouted by apologists, that we couldn't have a moral standard due to some set criteria.
To get the hypothetical pragmatist to abandon his views on this subject you would have to reason out the negatives to his view and explain why your view accomplishes similar things but has fewer downsides. For example:
By harming other people in your society, you will have less to fall back on when you falter, as your pragmatic/objectivist views don't include altruistic behavior. This means, of course, that because he was a jerk to attain his wellbeing, he will have less comrades to fall back on when his funds collapse or a disaster strikes.
My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe any of the dogmas of traditional theology and, further, that there is no reason to wish that they were true.
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
