(March 2, 2014 at 1:06 pm)StatCrux Wrote:(March 2, 2014 at 12:58 pm)Mr. Moncrieff Wrote: His views on supervenience are rather flawed.
He has considerations that social hierarchy is predicated upon the simplest forms of natural existence. This position largely excuses us as responsible moral beings and thus encourages a nihilistic outlook on life.
It's rather bleak to hold that regard yes. But he doesn't define all atheists, just as the Westboro Baptists don't represent all of Christianity.
The problem for atheists is that his position is logically consistent with atheism, its the atheists that try to maintain that intentionality, meaning, purpose in life etc are consistent with atheism that have the problem. I agree with Rosenberg, I just wish other atheists would face the problem and admit that's logically where you end up, empty, meaningless and pointless existence
You have obviously confused us with people who give a flying fuck what you think.