RE: Emotional resilience and Philistinery
January 2, 2014 at 4:14 pm
(This post was last modified: January 2, 2014 at 4:50 pm by Simon Moon.)
(January 2, 2014 at 1:49 pm)Get me Rex Kramer! Wrote: Atheism has at least the personal consequence of having not accepting something socially acceptable, socially enabling and in many places enforceable.
80% of the population of Sweden, almost 80% of the population of Denmark, 70% of Norway, 60% of Finland, 54% of France are atheists.
What, exactly, is the 'socially acceptable' thing are they not accepting?
Seems not having any beliefs in gods is perfectly socially acceptable to them.
Being a tad ethnocentric possibly?
Quote:Atheism is a philosophy because it has philosophical antecedence and consequences that are very important both for us and for others. The reason we use a description, after all, is to describe something worth talking about.
Atheism can be part of someones philosophy (objectivism, humanism) , but on it's own, it is not a philosophy.
Calling atheism a philosophy is no different than calling the disbelief in bigfoot a philosophy.
Quote:There is also the internal method for deciding that atheism is a philosophy - the fact that its principles aren't established through math, or anything else, but in and through philosophy.
My atheism is based on the theist's assertion that gods exist not having met its burden of proof. If you want to call that a philosophy, sure.....
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
