RE: The difference between ethical atheism and nihlism is that ethical atheists have more faith
March 1, 2013 at 5:20 pm
This is a fairly simple problem to solve.
1. Deny the existence of the reality of any morality at all - a human being is no more valuable than an amoeba
I accept the existence of the only kind of morality which has ever existed: arbitrary, subjective morality. To argue from a position of objective morality is meaningless: no such thing has ever existed. Even if we assumed that God existed, morals attributed to God are no less subjective and arbitrary than secular morals, and there is no justifiable basis to assert that God's morals are of any greater value than secular.
Morals are, to put it most simply, guidelines by which society can best function and people can most amicably co-exist, and as such, arbitrary secular morals are demonstrably far superior to arbitrary God morals (which, as we all know, are loaded with all kinds of terrible, destructive and divisive tenets). Secular morals are also superior in that they are flexible, and subject to improvement and refinement, whereas God's morals are rigid and unbending. Society, economics and politics never saw any substantial improvement until Godly morals began to give way to secular morals. Theists love to take credit for such developments as the abolition of slavery, the Enlightenment and the fostering of science, but the reality of it is that slavery, ignorance, and opposition to science were (and in many ways continue to be) the result of applying Biblical morality.
The value we place on life has pretty much everything to do with how deeply we can empathize with it. Most people value cats and dogs, because it is possible to form relationships with them. Few people value amoeba because that's not possible. We have a hard time empathizing with creatures which we perceive to be threats, and this is not always justified. What sets us apart from you is that an honest secularist can admit this. You're just lying to yourself.
2. Ascribe some sort of arbitrary value to human beings
As above, it is impossible to apply an objective value to human beings. Religions claim otherwise, yet one needs only to open to any random page in a history book to find some sinister example of religion, or religious-driven people, arbitrarily deciding that some humans are less valuable than others, examples being the African slave trade, the subjugation of women as second-class citizens, and the brutal oppression of the Jews. Secularists are, of course, guilty of this as well, but again, we can be honest about our shortcomings. You're pretending that yours don't exist (or, popularly, that those among your number who are guilty of it are not True Scotsmen).
The morality of Christianity is brutal, selfish, sycophantic and hateful. On all levels. Even many of the 'good' parts are sinister if you examine them closely. There are many decent Christian people, but the reason they are decent is because they pay lip service to their faith. They cherrypick the Bible and discard all of the horrifying commandments which are not acceptable in an enlightened society (or just discard it altogether and stick to a highly-sanitized Hippie Jesus ideal). A Christian who sincerely tries to live by biblical morality is a bad person because they glorify and endorse the worst kinds of evil.
Nothing makes me laugh harder than a Christian who assumes he occupies the moral high ground. Your morality is based on lies and is primitive and savage. It is just barely above that of animals. I'm not impressed by your presumptions.
1. Deny the existence of the reality of any morality at all - a human being is no more valuable than an amoeba
I accept the existence of the only kind of morality which has ever existed: arbitrary, subjective morality. To argue from a position of objective morality is meaningless: no such thing has ever existed. Even if we assumed that God existed, morals attributed to God are no less subjective and arbitrary than secular morals, and there is no justifiable basis to assert that God's morals are of any greater value than secular.
Morals are, to put it most simply, guidelines by which society can best function and people can most amicably co-exist, and as such, arbitrary secular morals are demonstrably far superior to arbitrary God morals (which, as we all know, are loaded with all kinds of terrible, destructive and divisive tenets). Secular morals are also superior in that they are flexible, and subject to improvement and refinement, whereas God's morals are rigid and unbending. Society, economics and politics never saw any substantial improvement until Godly morals began to give way to secular morals. Theists love to take credit for such developments as the abolition of slavery, the Enlightenment and the fostering of science, but the reality of it is that slavery, ignorance, and opposition to science were (and in many ways continue to be) the result of applying Biblical morality.
The value we place on life has pretty much everything to do with how deeply we can empathize with it. Most people value cats and dogs, because it is possible to form relationships with them. Few people value amoeba because that's not possible. We have a hard time empathizing with creatures which we perceive to be threats, and this is not always justified. What sets us apart from you is that an honest secularist can admit this. You're just lying to yourself.
2. Ascribe some sort of arbitrary value to human beings
As above, it is impossible to apply an objective value to human beings. Religions claim otherwise, yet one needs only to open to any random page in a history book to find some sinister example of religion, or religious-driven people, arbitrarily deciding that some humans are less valuable than others, examples being the African slave trade, the subjugation of women as second-class citizens, and the brutal oppression of the Jews. Secularists are, of course, guilty of this as well, but again, we can be honest about our shortcomings. You're pretending that yours don't exist (or, popularly, that those among your number who are guilty of it are not True Scotsmen).
The morality of Christianity is brutal, selfish, sycophantic and hateful. On all levels. Even many of the 'good' parts are sinister if you examine them closely. There are many decent Christian people, but the reason they are decent is because they pay lip service to their faith. They cherrypick the Bible and discard all of the horrifying commandments which are not acceptable in an enlightened society (or just discard it altogether and stick to a highly-sanitized Hippie Jesus ideal). A Christian who sincerely tries to live by biblical morality is a bad person because they glorify and endorse the worst kinds of evil.
Nothing makes me laugh harder than a Christian who assumes he occupies the moral high ground. Your morality is based on lies and is primitive and savage. It is just barely above that of animals. I'm not impressed by your presumptions.
