(January 1, 2014 at 8:02 am)Get me Rex Kramer! Wrote: I have a BA and MA in Philosophy. I also did a years' research with published work in a journal. I am acknowledged in a recent book on Kant. I am a teacher and lecturer. Let's not compare dicks mate.
I don't find atheists' ethics 'quite well developed', I find them cherry picked from various sources that don't necessarily fit together well. In fact, I don't find there to be a credible atheist 'way of thinking' and that's the reason for the discussion: because I feel there should be if what atheists say always already has socialised consequences (and nobody has contradicted me on this so far). This is the main reason I find atheists to be philosophically lacking. As I have mentioned, the symptom of this is the belief that we can build our lives around simple descriptive truths about the physical universe and forget the complexity of human need. I'm glad you would stop at telling someone about to die that there is nothing waiting for them, but I wonder where you do draw the line.
For someone who claims an advanced degree in philosophy, your argument is quite unsophisticated.
You lump atheists together and refer to "atheists' ethics" as though atheism was a philosophy. It is not - it is simply a skeptical stance on the existence of gods.
I suggest you do more reading than writing here until you understand that.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.