List of reasons to believe God exists?

[The Grand Nudger]

Let's go back to the times of ancient civilizations where a powerful Empire enslaved an entire group of people. Let's use the Egyptians enslaving the Jews as the example. Obviously having slaves is good for the Egyptian community. They rely on it for everything, and without the forced labor of these "lesser people" they wouldn't live the comfortable, high quality life they have.

Bible God didnt seem to think this was immoral. Why then is it immoral in your views? Maybe because it has something to do with reasoning that doesnt invoke God.

Exodus is a myth.  The jews didn't build the fucking pyramids, lol. The egyptians -didn't- "rely on slaves for everything". They'd have been fucked if they did.

[henryp]

WallyM, I have a question for you about morality. As I understand it, you believe morality to be a purely societal construct based around what is best for the community in general, and empathy was evolved to reflect that. Is that correct?

Let's go back to the times of ancient civilizations where a powerful Empire enslaved an entire group of people. Let's use the Egyptians enslaving the Jews as the example. Obviously having slaves is good for the Egyptian community. They rely on it for everything, and without the forced labor of these "lesser people" they wouldn't live the comfortable, high quality life they have. Let's say one of these Egyptians is a sociopath... lacks empathy of any sort and to make matters worse has a particular fetish for violence and forced sex. He's super horny one night and so decides to take care of these urges by going out and raping a Jewish slave girl. He's not going to get in trouble for it because no one who matters will believe her instead of him, and even if they did, they wouldn't care... it's just a slave girl anyway. He feels zero remorse, and in his mind, it's not big deal at all. Also, it won't have a single negative effect at all in his community.  

Is what he did still immoral? If so, why?

Yeah, I don't see a problem that.  I don't have a moral problem with any behaviors, because I think morality is just something people made up as a tool to get more people in line, or exert power over groups, or various other things of that nature.  

One of the perks of having slaves is raping them.  I think humans have established that as a rule of thumb over the years, no?

[The Grand Nudger]

LOL, you've always been my favorite POE.

[GrandizerII]

WallyM, I have a question for you about morality. As I understand it, you believe morality to be a purely societal construct based around what is best for the community in general, and empathy was evolved to reflect that. Is that correct?

Let's go back to the times of ancient civilizations where a powerful Empire enslaved an entire group of people. Let's use the Egyptians enslaving the Jews as the example. Obviously having slaves is good for the Egyptian community. They rely on it for everything, and without the forced labor of these "lesser people" they wouldn't live the comfortable, high quality life they have. Let's say one of these Egyptians is a sociopath... lacks empathy of any sort and to make matters worse has a particular fetish for violence and forced sex. He's super horny one night and so decides to take care of these urges by going out and raping a Jewish slave girl. He's not going to get in trouble for it because no one who matters will believe her instead of him, and even if they did, they wouldn't care... it's just a slave girl anyway. He feels zero remorse, and in his mind, it's not big deal at all. Also, it won't have a single negative effect at all in his community.  

Is what he did still immoral? If so, why?

Yeah, I don't see a problem that.  I don't have a moral problem with any behaviors, because I think morality is just something people made up as a tool to get more people in line, or exert power over groups, or various other things of that nature.  

One of the perks of having slaves is raping them.  I think humans have established that as a rule of thumb over the years, no?

I wouldnt say "made up".

[The Grand Nudger]

Yeah, I don't see a problem that.  I don't have a moral problem with any behaviors, because I think morality is just something people made up as a tool to get more people in line, or exert power over groups, or various other things of that nature.  

One of the perks of having slaves is raping them.  I think humans have established that as a rule of thumb over the years, no?

I wouldnt say "made up".

-and that's how any conversation about -anything- that starts with fairies or as a response to the fairy proposition begins at the drain and circles irrelevance from the outset.

[henryp]

I kind of ran out of time on the previous reply...

A question, for you (or others).

In a hypothetical (from your perspective) world with no deity, do you suspect we'd still see religion and morality playing a big role in human history?

It's really hard to answer that since I don't think any of us would be here at all if it weren't for a sort of higher force.

Honestly, I dont think so. As far as morality goes, while I believe in evolution and evolutionary behavior and all that, I still do think it was planned/foreseen to be this way. As you can recall, i believe in natural law. So I think nature and the way the world works is specifically designed with these moral laws in place, which is why we can discover them through logic and observation of our world. In other words, everything just seems "a little too perfect." If a God didn't exist and we really were just purely material accidents, i don't think things would be quite as ordered in terms of morality, knowing goodness from evil, etc. I can't really say how I think they would be like instead... perhaps more animalistic without an existance of good and evil? Just that I think things are the way they are as a result of an intelligent designer.

As for religion, I think the same principles apply. I can see how religion was a part of the evolutionary process and survival of the fittest, but I think it was designed to be that way, if you will.

So when the Norse are praying to Thor during a storm, do you think that's probably only possible because of a Christian God?  I didn't consider you'd say no to the previous answer, so I'm working out the implications on the fly.  In the face of unexplained frightening power, what would keep a mind capable of rational thought from considering the concept of something more?  You find it intuitive, do you not think intuitivity could exist?  Or is it that extra little jump in evolution in our brains, that you consider a little too perfect, that you blame for that, and you don't think we could get to these brains without a designer?

And when animals behave in a way that mimics morality, do you think it has anything to do with morality, or it's just instinctive?

[GrandizerII]

Bible God didnt seem to think this was immoral. Why then is it immoral in your views? Maybe because it has something to do with reasoning that doesnt invoke God.

Exodus is a myth.  The jews didn't build the fucking pyramids, lol. The egyptians -didn't- "rely on slaves for everything". They'd have been fucked if they did.

Sorry, not sure what your point here is? Yeah, Exodus is a myth, I agree.

[The Grand Nudger]

You're being led down the rabbit hole, lol. CL asked you to explain some shit that never happened. Any explanation is entertaining her fantasy.

The actual story of what it took for the two cultures to have -any- significant contact at all is impressive. It involved successively dead dropped provisions in the sand over 400 miles and a one of a kind military campaign that would never be repeated.

[Catholic_Lady]

WallyM, I have a question for you about morality. As I understand it, you believe morality to be a purely societal construct based around what is best for the community in general, and empathy was evolved to reflect that. Is that correct?

Let's go back to the times of ancient civilizations where a powerful Empire enslaved an entire group of people. Let's use the Egyptians enslaving the Jews as the example. Obviously having slaves is good for the Egyptian community. They rely on it for everything, and without the forced labor of these "lesser people" they wouldn't live the comfortable, high quality life they have. Let's say one of these Egyptians is a sociopath... lacks empathy of any sort and to make matters worse has a particular fetish for violence and forced sex. He's super horny one night and so decides to take care of these urges by going out and raping a Jewish slave girl. He's not going to get in trouble for it because no one who matters will believe her instead of him, and even if they did, they wouldn't care... it's just a slave girl anyway. He feels zero remorse, and in his mind, it's not big deal at all. Also, it won't have a single negative effect at all in his community.  

Is what he did still immoral? If so, why?

Yeah, I don't see a problem that.  I don't have a moral problem with any behaviors, because I think morality is just something people made up as a tool to get more people in line, or exert power over groups, or various other things of that nature.  

One of the perks of having slaves is raping them.  I think humans have established that as a rule of thumb over the years, no?

I appreciate your honesty.

With that beimg said, this is why I don't think morality is subjective to empathy, as many people here claim. Because some folks, such as yourself as an admitted sociopath, don't have it. If morality is built on empathy, how can we really tell a sociopath to not rape (for example) because it is immoral? He can just as easily say "Well, I don't feel sorry for that girl, she means nothing to me, raping her will have 0 negative impact on myself or my community, and im horny... so why should it still be immoral for me to do so?" Its seems logical then that I can't really tell this person that rape is wrong, if my arguments against it is purely subjective empathy. Yet even folks who claim that morality is subjective would still not be ok with that answer from the rapist. Which brings me back to my point #2 - most people still act as though morality is objective even though they claim not to think it is.

---

It's really hard to answer that since I don't think any of us would be here at all if it weren't for a sort of higher force.

Honestly, I dont think so. As far as morality goes, while I believe in evolution and evolutionary behavior and all that, I still do think it was planned/foreseen to be this way. As you can recall, i believe in natural law. So I think nature and the way the world works is specifically designed with these moral laws in place, which is why we can discover them through logic and observation of our world. In other words, everything just seems "a little too perfect." If a God didn't exist and we really were just purely material accidents, i don't think things would be quite as ordered in terms of morality, knowing goodness from evil, etc. I can't really say how I think they would be like instead... perhaps more animalistic without an existance of good and evil? Just that I think things are the way they are as a result of an intelligent designer.

As for religion, I think the same principles apply. I can see how religion was a part of the evolutionary process and survival of the fittest, but I think it was designed to be that way, if you will.

So when the Norse are praying to Thor during a storm, do you think that's probably only possible because of a Christian God?  I didn't consider you'd say no to the previous answer, so I'm working out the implications on the fly.  In the face of unexplained frightening power, what would keep a mind capable of rational thought from considering the concept of something more?  You find it intuitive, do you not think intuitivity could exist?  Or is it that extra little jump in evolution in our brains, that you consider a little too perfect, that you blame for that, and you don't think we could get to these brains without a designer?

And when animals behave in a way that mimics morality, do you think it has anything to do with morality, or it's just instinctive?

I have to do some chores around the house. But I like this question. Let me get back to you later.

[henryp]

How in the world could anyone find atheism a coherent and satisfying intellectual stance?

Existence is.  It doesn't need any explanation.  I don't have to jump through any hoops.  There are no apologetics.  I don't have to make stuff up.  I just observe as best I can, and that's that.  It's really not even Atheism.  It's just acceptance that what is is.  If a God showed up tomorrow, and said "Hey guys, you know the 3rd Episcopal Church of downtown St. Louis is actually the real church."  That'd be that.  I'd act accordingly.  It wouldn't change anything about my fundamental notions of just observing, and behaving accordingly.

I think, for me, it's about starting with as few assumptions as possible, and seeing where that takes me.