Answers needed

[Louis Chérubin]

Sorry, maybe I was drawing false conclusions. You say that you don't need god so you don't care about his existence.

It's like this:

I don't know if a god actually exists.  There's no credible evidence for one, and I can't believe in the existence of something if there's nothing pointing to its existence.  Because I operate just fine without believing in a god, I obviously don't need a god to guide my thoughts or actions.  And since I'm perfectly independent and capable without a god, I don't spend much time thinking about it.  Indeed the only time I think about subject at all is when I debate theists here, or when theists act in harmful ways against society.  Beyond that, god(s) don't occupy my time.

I'm almost a full apathist.

OK. That makes good sense.

[ignoramus]

Simply using logical fallacy labels is not the most scholarly process.

Louis, now I'm confused.  This statement is "truer" for you than it is for Robvalue.

[Louis Chérubin]

Simply using logical fallacy labels is not the most scholarly process.

Louis, now I'm confused.  This statement is "truer" for you than it is for Robvalue.

Have I called out anyone for using logical fallacies? I guess I did point out one tautology. But that was based on a simple statement, not on assumptions. Robvalue assumed I was giving a definition of God while I was in fact simply clarifying my question. Maybe you mean something else though? Thankfully no blood was shed.

lol. I just noticed your signature line!

[emjay]

Hi everyone!

I'm not sure whether this is the right place to post this, but I'd really appreciate some answers to some/all of the following questions. I'm interested in how an average atheist thinks about these topics. It would be great if you could give some explanation for your answers. I'm coming from a protestant worldview.

1. Does God exist?
2. Where did the universe come from?
3. Does my life have a purpose?
4. Why do people suffer?
5. Is there life after death?
6. Can I distinguish right from wrong?
7. Can people know truth?

Sorry for being point form. 

Hello

1. Probably not.
2. The Big Bang, but if the question is why there is something rather than nothing my answer is I don't know, don't think we as a species will ever know, and to be honest, don't really care; I don't need to have an answer to every question, and I think there are many questions we will never be able to answer with certainty.
3. Your life does not have a purpose but it is still amazing how it came to be - all that had to come before for you or me to be here today... millions of years of evolution preceded by our planet and solar system forming and everything all the way back to the Big Bang.
4. There is suffering in the world because you can't please everyone; every battle has a winner and a loser and every time something is given to one person there is another who cannot have it.
5. Probably not.
6. My view is that some of morality is conditioned and some of it is innate, and the part that is innate is geared towards not harming our own species. For instance the Nazi's achieved their evil by dehumanising the Jews, likening them to rats and lice. The converse of that is that we treat animals better when we ascribe to them human feelings and motivations. It makes perfect sense to me because there are other biological rather than mental effects that achieve the same results: for instance I saw a programme about Cannibal tribes who got a strange disease that caused them to shake whenever they ate human flesh; nature's way of saying 'don't eat your own kind'.
7. I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. What is truth in this context?

[Louis Chérubin]

Hello

1. Probably not.
2. The Big Bang, but if the question is why there is something rather than nothing my answer is I don't know, don't think we as a species will ever know, and to be honest, don't really care; I don't need to have an answer to every question, and I think there are many questions we will never be able to answer with certainty.
3. Your life does not have a purpose but it is still amazing how it came to be - all that had to come before for you or me to be here today... millions of years of evolution preceded by our planet and solar system forming and everything all the way back to the Big Bang.
4. There is suffering in the world because you can't please everyone; every battle has a winner and a loser and every time something is given to one person there is another who cannot have it.
5. Probably not.
6. My view is that some of morality is conditioned and some of it is innate, and the part that is innate is geared towards not harming our own species. For instance the Nazi's achieved their evil by dehumanising the Jews, likening them to rats and lice. The converse of that is that we treat animals better when we ascribe to them human feelings and motivations. It makes perfect sense to me because there are other biological rather than mental effects that achieve the same results: for instance I saw a programme about Cannibal tribes who got a strange disease that caused them to shake whenever they ate human flesh; nature's way of saying 'don't eat your own kind'.
7. I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. What is truth in this context?

[/quote][/quote]



6. Interesting. Though, using kuru (the disease) as evidence of the evolution of morality sounds dubious.
7. I mean objective reality. (Please don't read into that too much.) This question comes from the fact that our thoughts may be driven by purely chemical processes and therefore may perhaps be unverifiable.

[Cephus]

Hi everyone!

I'm not sure whether this is the right place to post this, but I'd really appreciate some answers to some/all of the following questions. I'm interested in how an average atheist thinks about these topics. It would be great if you could give some explanation for your answers. I'm coming from a protestant worldview.

1. Does God exist?
2. Where did the universe come from?
3. Does my life have a purpose?
4. Why do people suffer?
5. Is there life after death?
6. Can I distinguish right from wrong?
7. Can people know truth?

Sorry for being point form. 

1.  Not so far as we can tell, there is absolutely no evidence that suggests that a god, any god, exists in reality.  Rational people do not believe things for which no evidence exists.

2.  It began with the Big Bang, what came before that, we don't know.  Not knowing something is not license to just make something up.

3.  Not inherently but you're free to assign it some purpose if it makes you feel better.

4.  Because that's reality.  Everything suffers to some extent, from the smallest insect to the largest animal.  Welcome to life.

5.  Not so far as we can tell.  Just being uncomfortable with dying doesn't mean you get to make up an arbitrary afterlife.

6.  Right and wrong and morality are subjective things that exist on the societal level.  People decide collectively what's right and wrong within their social group.

7.  Define 'truth'.  Do you mean fact?  Certainly then, we can look at objective evidence and determine what is actually true about the world around us.  If you mean something different, you'll have to be more clear.

[Iroscato]

Interesting. Though, using kuru (the disease) as evidence of the evolution of morality sounds dubious.

Think of it as an incidental evolutionary pressure, and when applied and its effects become apparent, there is a natural trend away from indulging in it. Much as killing someone's child will result in you having the shit murdered out of you by the parent, thereby removing you from the gene pool. Natural mechanisms that, when played out, result in a pattern forming.
I'm not a biologist so I can't really explain it better than that, but I think the gist of the point is solid enough.

[Louis Chérubin]

Hello

1. Probably not.
2. The Big Bang, but if the question is why there is something rather than nothing my answer is I don't know, don't think we as a species will ever know, and to be honest, don't really care; I don't need to have an answer to every question, and I think there are many questions we will never be able to answer with certainty.
3. Your life does not have a purpose but it is still amazing how it came to be - all that had to come before for you or me to be here today... millions of years of evolution preceded by our planet and solar system forming and everything all the way back to the Big Bang.
4. There is suffering in the world because you can't please everyone; every battle has a winner and a loser and every time something is given to one person there is another who cannot have it.
5. Probably not.
6. My view is that some of morality is conditioned and some of it is innate, and the part that is innate is geared towards not harming our own species. For instance the Nazi's achieved their evil by dehumanising the Jews, likening them to rats and lice. The converse of that is that we treat animals better when we ascribe to them human feelings and motivations. It makes perfect sense to me because there are other biological rather than mental effects that achieve the same results: for instance I saw a programme about Cannibal tribes who got a strange disease that caused them to shake whenever they ate human flesh; nature's way of saying 'don't eat your own kind'.
7. I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. What is truth in this context?

[/quote]



6. Interesting. Though, using kuru (the disease) as evidence of the evolution of morality sounds dubious.
7. I mean objective reality. (Please don't read into that too much.) This question comes from the fact that our thoughts may be driven by purely chemical processes and therefore may perhaps be unverifiable.
[/quote]

Hi everyone!

I'm not sure whether this is the right place to post this, but I'd really appreciate some answers to some/all of the following questions. I'm interested in how an average atheist thinks about these topics. It would be great if you could give some explanation for your answers. I'm coming from a protestant worldview.

1. Does God exist?
2. Where did the universe come from?
3. Does my life have a purpose?
4. Why do people suffer?
5. Is there life after death?
6. Can I distinguish right from wrong?
7. Can people know truth?

Sorry for being point form. 

1.  Not so far as we can tell, there is absolutely no evidence that suggests that a god, any god, exists in reality.  Rational people do not believe things for which no evidence exists.

2.  It began with the Big Bang, what came before that, we don't know.  Not knowing something is not license to just make something up.

3.  Not inherently but you're free to assign it some purpose if it makes you feel better.

4.  Because that's reality.  Everything suffers to some extent, from the smallest insect to the largest animal.  Welcome to life.

5.  Not so far as we can tell.  Just being uncomfortable with dying doesn't mean you get to make up an arbitrary afterlife.

6.  Right and wrong and morality are subjective things that exist on the societal level.  People decide collectively what's right and wrong within their social group.

7.  Define 'truth'.  Do you mean fact?  Certainly then, we can look at objective evidence and determine what is actually true about the world around us.  If you mean something different, you'll have to be more clear.

7. See above

[emjay]

Hello

1. Probably not.
2. The Big Bang, but if the question is why there is something rather than nothing my answer is I don't know, don't think we as a species will ever know, and to be honest, don't really care; I don't need to have an answer to every question, and I think there are many questions we will never be able to answer with certainty.
3. Your life does not have a purpose but it is still amazing how it came to be - all that had to come before for you or me to be here today... millions of years of evolution preceded by our planet and solar system forming and everything all the way back to the Big Bang.
4. There is suffering in the world because you can't please everyone; every battle has a winner and a loser and every time something is given to one person there is another who cannot have it.
5. Probably not.
6. My view is that some of morality is conditioned and some of it is innate, and the part that is innate is geared towards not harming our own species. For instance the Nazi's achieved their evil by dehumanising the Jews, likening them to rats and lice. The converse of that is that we treat animals better when we ascribe to them human feelings and motivations. It makes perfect sense to me because there are other biological rather than mental effects that achieve the same results: for instance I saw a programme about Cannibal tribes who got a strange disease that caused them to shake whenever they ate human flesh; nature's way of saying 'don't eat your own kind'.
7. I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. What is truth in this context?

6. Interesting. Though, using kuru (the disease) as evidence of the evolution of morality sounds dubious.
7. I mean objective reality. (Please don't read into that too much.) This question comes from the fact that our thoughts may be driven by purely chemical processes and therefore may perhaps be unverifiable.

6. No, I don't think there's necessarily a connection between the mental and the biological but the coincidence is enough for me. Plus, what Iroscato said. Also, I don't claim to be an expert in logic or to make all my decisions based on logic. That's just an emotional boost to my existing theory.
7. I'm sorry, that's over my head, and it's late. Can you give me an example of what you mean?

[Louis Chérubin]

Interesting. Though, using kuru (the disease) as evidence of the evolution of morality sounds dubious.

Think of it as an incidental evolutionary pressure, and when applied and its effects become apparent, there is a natural trend away from indulging in it. Much as killing someone's child will result in you having the shit murdered out of you by the parent, thereby removing you from the gene pool. Natural mechanisms that, when played out, result in a pattern forming.
I'm not a biologist so I can't really explain it better than that, but I think the gist of the point is solid enough.

Even more interesting :-). Do you think it matters that kudo usually came as a result of mortuary cannibalism (they weren't actually murdering anyone)? This reminds me of the discussion my anthropology class had last semester of the morality of mortuary cannibalism. Stimulating stuff! Lol the discussion not the cannibalism!

---

6. Interesting. Though, using kuru (the disease) as evidence of the evolution of morality sounds dubious.
7. I mean objective reality. (Please don't read into that too much.) This question comes from the fact that our thoughts may be driven by purely chemical processes and therefore may perhaps be unverifiable.

6. No, I don't think there's necessarily a connection between the mental and the biological but the coincidence is enough for me. Plus, what Iroscato said. Also, I don't claim to be an expert in logic or to make all my decisions based on logic. That's just an emotional boost to my existing theory.
7. I'm sorry, that's over my head, and it's late. Can you give me an example of what you mean?

Here's what I posted before.

"I recently heard a researcher state that naturalism leads him to understand that consciousness is simply a product of chemical reactions. This is the obvious conclusion of naturalism. If you believe this, how do you know that your logic is true? How can you be so dogmatic about the conclusions you draw? Isn't there a good chance they are false? We have a strong conception of free will, but, according to naturalism, that is simply an illusion. Couldn't our minds be playing other similar tricks?"

This is what spurred my thoughts:

http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/cogsci-2011/interview-with-judea-pearl