[Serious] Absolutes and Atheism

[Silver]

Okay, I'll dangle a carrot.

As a hard antitheist, my single absolute in this atheistic system to which I attribute my conscience is god doesn't exist.*.

*not to be confused with other atheists who may not have the same perspective as me.

[Angrboda]

Let's say that is true...still hoping to hear some candidates for absolutes.

.........................?  Like logical absolutes or moral absolutes or reality or feeling the sense of the numinous?

Despite the serious tag, I don't believe Neo is sincere and rather is making a bad-faith attempt at some point.

[The Grand Nudger]

In which case, why not go straight for the moneyshot?

[Anomalocaris]

.........................?  Like logical absolutes or moral absolutes or reality or feeling the sense of the numinous?

Despite the serious tag, I don't believe Neo is sincere and rather is making a bad-faith attempt at some point.

When Christian’s exhibit concern for your soul when you hold a political opinion perceived to be detrimental to the influence of their kind, they are almost never sincere, but they usually are serious.

[Mister Agenda]

When Nietzsche wrote "God is dead," his point was clearly not simply that Christianity was unsalvagable but that its demise took with it any pretense of transcendant certitudes or absolutes. Was he right? Or are there absolutes that must be true in all possible worlds and true even if there were no physical universe at all?

Absolutes in the absence of any physical universe? Please define this term. And maybe tell us what you think about existence with no physical universe at all?

That's where the loading is, @BrianSoddingBoru4. He's trying to sneak in the numinous without having it questioned.

I guess a nonexisting universe would absolutely not exist and not contain anything that does exist. All other universes would exist and contain at least one thing that does exist.

[Mister Agenda]

I only want to know what absolutes could an atheist believe in or does atheism entail a lack of belief in absolutes. If the former give me an example of an absolute. If not the god of classical theism, what fundamental principles are available to the atheist? How can one can be an atheist and justify not being a nihilist?

I don't see what atheism has to do with anything besides whether someone believes there is really a God (or god) or not. It's one opinion on one topic, it seems to me that asking whether it entails absolutes or nonabsolutes is like asking the same thing of people who think left-handers should have more representation in public office.

But the idea that there are no absolutes sounds like a non-starter to me. The statement 'there are no absolutes' strikes me as self-contradictory, so it can't be true. However, noticing that has nothing to do with me being an atheist.

[The Architect Of Fate]

His question starts with the assumption that I should believe god is the source of absolutes. Why on earth should someone assume this?

[brewer]

I only want to know what absolutes could an atheist believe in or does atheism entail a lack of belief in absolutes. If the former give me an example of an absolute. If not the god of classical theism, what fundamental principles are available to the atheist? How can one can be an atheist and justify not being a nihilist?

Mostly the ones in physics, math, chemistry, astronomy, cosmonogy, biology ..........................

Nihlist is your personal position on atheists and is unsupportable. I think my short time on earth has meaning, just not the meaning that you seem to so desperately need.

[The Grand Nudger]

If the question is whether atheists can believe in god meaning..or god value...rather than intrinsic meaning or absolute value - then the answer seems like it would be obvious?

[Neo-Scholastic]

I only want to know what absolutes could an atheist believe in or does atheism entail a lack of belief in absolutes. If the former give me an example of an absolute. If not the god of classical theism, what fundamental principles are available to the atheist? How can one can be an atheist and justify not being a nihilist?

I don't see what atheism has to do with anything besides whether someone believes there is really a God (or god) or not. It's one opinion on one topic, it seems to me that asking whether it entails absolutes or nonabsolutes is like asking the same thing of people who think left-handers should have more representation in public office.

But the idea that there are no absolutes sounds like a non-starter to me. The statement 'there are no absolutes' strikes me as self-contradictory, so it can't be true. However, noticing that has nothing to do with me being an atheist.

First let me say for the sake of discussion I am accepting the premise that there is no god. And I am putting aside any attempt at apologetics. I also want to challenge my own opinion that Nietzsche was right about this. IMHO he was right that the theolgical collapse of Christianity took with it the foundations of Western metaphysics. No more grand ontological naratives. No more appeals to anything beyond a Promethian will where artifice tragicly defies absurdity.

Anyways.

So we are all atheists now. Well. Now what? Where will we go and who will be our guide? Revelation is not an option. Fine, we're clear about that. We can say Reason and Reality, but as noted by the trolls, those can quickly take on numinous overtones. So we have can we be sure that by evoking reason and reality we are not tacitly drawing on theistic assumptions which go back at least as far as Plato. That doesn't leave much that was not coopted by Christianty. So what intellectual tools remain that for an atheistic philosophy. Perhaps the lack of ontology is itself hallmark of an atheistic philosophy. I do not know so I am asking the question, and it really is not a very hard one. If we are going to build a productive atheistic philosophy what are the starting points? I am pompting and listening, that's all.

That said.

Your response tacit assumes that making a self-contradictory statements is an epistemic error. It suggests a necessary assumption yet why should we suppose that strongly felt intuitions of illogicalness actually correspond meaningfully with reality. IOW why must reality be logical?