It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Rising conservative star Jordan Peterson in debate: "Athiesm leads to murder"

page: 21
<< 18  19  20    22  23 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 11:07 AM
a reply to: username74

Sorry need a bit more information than that, just not sure

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 11:11 AM
a reply to: Raggedyman

lol, yeah i know!
but there she is in her glory.
the universe is our creator, way too complex for an earth bound species.
people shouldnt be so hard on each other.

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 11:16 AM
a reply to: username74

when you say they act in their own interest, is it really their own interest or that of the ego?

most humans just float through life without ever actually being aware or present in reality
living through their plans for the future instead of being present.
Listening to their ego because its easier than having to be conscious of your reality !

What death controls are you referring to ? corporal punishment ?

So chaos will reign eternal , if you assign to the second law of thermal dynamics, at what stage does the chaos manifest if not already on the solar scale , the local galactic, the galactic
have we observed these systems in chaos already ?
the universe is apparently 13.6 billion years old , where is the disorder ?

apologies if I missed the mark !

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 11:17 AM
a reply to: username74

Im in the same boat as GBS haldane!

nothing we humans come up with will ever be sufficient enough to explain the complexity and mysteriousness of the universe!

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:11 PM
In an atheist society who decides what is moral?

When you answer that question understand that you are partaking in religion.

Point is, atheism is as much a religion as any other religion when it starts to stake claim to defining morality; even those claiming there's a God.

At least to me, that's what religion is: establishing a moral code.

That said, I think an important tenant in any truly free society is that people are free to define their morality as they see fit; so long as it neither picks another's pocket or breaks another's bones.

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:15 PM
a reply to: sapien82

"What death controls are you referring to ? corporal punishment ? "
look at it in a system sense. things live and multiply. so a thing must die.
so its offspring can live. at this level individual action is not a factor.
your ego is following the demands of the system or the systems inherent in the system.
we are already within the paradox.
try this-
Ideally, we should develop radically different death control systems, in order to integrate human, industrial and natural ecologies. However, all of the currently established sociopolitical systems are based upon the intense paradoxes, or sets of consistent contradictions, which are due to the biggest and best organized gangs of criminals being able to most get away with lying about themselves NOT actually doing that. Presuming that the exponential growth in the strip-mining of the planet continues to be pushed to go as far as it can go, so that the resulting overshooting will be as extreme as it possibly could have gotten, before there finally are the "corrections" of civilization collapsing into chaos, that future is too extreme to be fully imagined. The potential, and indeed probable, psychotic breakdowns of globalized systems of electronic monkey money frauds, backed by the threat of force from apes with atomic bombs, go completely off the scale of any previous human experiences, since those technologies are literally trillions of times more capable and powerful than anything that ever existed before in human history!

People who still think of the world in terms of paper frauds, backed by gunpowder weapons, or still think in terms of common sense chemical energy and chemical processes, are NOT in the right ball park, order of magnitude of the existence of electronics and atomic energy, nor even in the same order of magnitude as advanced molecular biology, nanotechnology, or whatever similar sorts of awesome technologies, based on series of profound paradigm shifts in physical science.

"So chaos will reign eternal , if you assign to the second law of thermal dynamics, at what stage does the chaos manifest"

this started for us in the neolithic. thats why its so hard to see it from the outside.
replace chaos with process. thats truer to the second law.
nature abhors a vacuum.
processes requires form like the vortex in the bath. the air must come up and the water down.
every molecule of water knows what to do.

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:22 PM
a reply to: sapien82

the guy who said queerer than we suppose?
i resectfully disagree.
we are getting there as subjective conciousnesses, just not as a group.
but we did not develop to be one big group.
homogenimity is statis.
or death.
all is process.
i think the fact he was a marxist is quite telling.

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 12:24 PM
a reply to: GenerationGap

show me an atheist society
ok i'll edit that. could say communism. and thats what triggered the progressive young man in the video for this thread.
and thats where peterson was going.
and you can see his point if you know your chinese or russian history.
untold murder.
its an ism.
if you find a true athiest is'nt that just a materialist?
edit on 3-7-2018 by username74 because: (no reason given)

Sovereignty was based on the power to rob,
the ultimate power to rob is power to kill.
so why would anyone suppose the sovereign atheist society would be any different to any other ism.
the opposite ideology to facism isnt communism, its absence of ideology.

edit on 3-7-2018 by username74 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-7-2018 by username74 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-7-2018 by username74 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:56 PM

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: FyreByrd

You keep saying Atheists this and Atheists that. Well who are you talking about specifically? We don't have a formal hierarchy. Each Atheist is autonomous. We are all Agnostics - you can never prove the existence of your God rationally only subjectively.
Then you tell me I cant prove the existence of my God but that I can .
Oh btw It was God that proved His existence to me . That is why I am so convinced that He is real .

But you can't prove it to me. You can only prove it to yourself. Therefore you cannot provide verifiable proof of the existence of your God.

Objective Proof requires that another person(s) can, following your methods and materials, come to the same result. You can't objectively prove the existence of God. Therefore you are an agnostic that subjectively believes in the existence of God.

This is one of my biggest complaints about people running around saying they know God exists. They can only prove it to themselves.

I've no problem with your beliefs, how they serve you and you them, but "God gave us Brains to Use" and when it comes to issues of faith a lot of people lose all semblance of rationality.

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 01:57 PM

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: Annee

an atheist is an individual. Each individual can believe whatever they want (except belief in a god/deity). That is called the Atheist's Philosophy (personal belief).
So they are allowed to lie to each other . Steal from each other . Actually sounds like they could break any and all conceivable moral codes and laws and their Atheistic Philosophy is maintained . But if they contemplate or decide to believe in a god/deity then they are out of the club . Wow pretty tight ship you run there . must be wonderful .

WTF???? Where is this come from? Where do you find that athiests are allowed to lie, steal and cheat? Come on - where?
edit on 3-7-2018 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 02:04 PM

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Puppylove

So your sayin a believer once forgiven doesn't have to deal with their conscience and failures but non believers do
So how does that work, I am very interested

My actions are forgiven not excused, my conscience doesn't become any less real. Point in fact, I take on the burden of my failures, accept they are wrong and have to deal,with it

I know non believers who have no fear of eternal consequence and happily Robin Hood to feed of others, no guilt

I know non believers who don't suffer much guilt at all, show no remorse and don't change their lifestyles
A tenant of Christianity is repentance, accepting and changing
Do atheists have to repent, have to change, is it a commandment
Atheists can if they choose continue in any act they want, and they never ever have to confront or accept responsibility for their actions if they choose not to

Yes Christianity is an awesome gift for criminals, it demands repentance, offers forgiveness but Christianity doesn't dull the conscience
It doesn't excuse your actions, helps finding forgiveness, helps with becoming a better peeson

But regardless, a believer or not, has to pay the consequences of their actions, here and hereafter.

Some Christians think that believing is a "Get Out of Jail Free" card.

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 02:16 PM

originally posted by: username74
a reply to: Puppylove

why must i be letting anyone off any thing. least of all ill considered rebukes suchas the one you just made.

heres some background and context. see if you can find fault.

The funding of the political/religious process was always the essential aspect of the established systems, which provided the maximum leverage to accumulate more social power over time. Following the money leads us through the dark places where the murder system backs up the money system. The money system operates the heart of darkness, whereby the murder systems are paid for, to maintain the money systems in return. People were conditioned to be adverse to understanding and participating in the money and taxation systems because those actually depend on murder systems.

It is extremely difficult for most people to even begin to consider the ways that money is measurement backed by murder, and even more difficult for them to consider that it must necessarily be. Thousands of years of the history of successful warfare based upon backing up deceits with destruction has created conditions which are profoundly paradoxical. There must necessarily be some death control systems, however, the actually existing systems were developed to become the most socially successful through the triumphs of those who were the most successfully deceitful and treacherous. Those paradoxical kinds of social success reverberated down through generation after generation to result in social pyramid systems being almost totally dominated by the best available professional liars and immaculate hypocrites, and that included both the core of organized crime, as well as the layers of controlled opposition around that core. All of the established sociopolitical institutions have ended up being dominated by the best available professional hypocrites (sociopathy).

BY DEFINITION, the central issues in human ecology are the death control systems. However, since the actual systems developed to be best done by being deceitful, the generally established and accepted public attitudes towards the death controls have developed to become operated through the maximum possible deceits about themselves. Not only are the actual systems operating according to the principles of methods of organized crime, but also, the opposition to those systems has become almost completely controlled, so that the apparent, publicly significant, opposition also stays within the same, almost totally deceitful, frame of reference regarding the death control issues.

Who are you quoting? Without attribution.

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 05:08 PM
a reply to: username74

I will come back to your first reply when I get to digest it better!

as for this comment , arent humans meant to share information , the universe appears to be about symbiosis a cycle of life and death and the sharing and accumulation of energy and information , humans are sociable hence the reason we have communication. We obviously did develop to be one big group thats at least what DNA appears to be doing finding the best genes and sharing them passing on information through communication. The individual may perish but the information persists immortal within the species , provided the species survives by sharing the DNA ensuring strength in the gene pool!

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 06:12 PM
a reply to: FyreByrd

thats delicate. i am using quotes but its someone who has a much better expression of my conclusions and i have this conclusion from a diverse number of influences such as jungs chapter on the archaic mind, some conclusions from polish psychologists learning in the transition from nazism to communism, survivability study on the basis of neuropsychology ancient history primary and secondary sources, goes on.
but the guy i tend to quote never wrote a paper or book but did have political platform in canada for a while.
he pops up here and there so i didnt want to publicise him cos hes not a spring chicken and i am sure if he wanted to push his position i am sure he could. also his nom du plume (pen name) could violate the t/c conditions on this site.
the point being he was able to unpack these concepts into language which i cannot do nearly as well.
you should find him with those clues

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 06:17 PM
a reply to: sapien82

lots of little groups interacting.
old fashioned diversity. some make good choices some bad. some die, some know why
its why humans are good at gossip.
lump em all together , noone knows #'

# maybe you can imagine a class of people who would want to control your dna, that would be awful, what would you call that sort of person?
edit on 3-7-2018 by username74 because: eugenics

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 06:31 PM
a reply to: sapien82

energy is imformation decipherable by its format.
its not about me or you as individuals.
thats just our individual selves can find this ...unpleasant at times
hence the birth of religion
perception gives birth to the dream, the logos (reason, purpose)
hope lives within the dream (the idea things can get better)
perception is reality
what is reality?
what do you perceive?

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 06:34 PM

In an atheist society who decides what is moral?

The majority.

In a religious society rulers and priests decide what is moral, for their own benefit.

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 06:40 PM
a reply to: CB328

no. the ism decides.
new boss same as old boss.
the sociopaths go to the loot.
it perpetuates.
better sociopaths may take control and tweak the ism to increase loot pile.
edit on 3-7-2018 by username74 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 06:47 PM
a reply to: username74

What is this 'ism' thing you keep saying like its a point?

Do you know the definition of 'ism'?


posted on Jul, 3 2018 @ 06:54 PM
a reply to: coomba98

Natural selection was internalized as human intelligence, which was then applied to the most important selection pressures, which were other groups of people. Hence, the history of warfare, as what made and maintained Globalized Neolithic Civilization.
After life exists, then the death controls direct the evolution of that life. In the case of human beings and civilization, those natural selection pressures have driven the death control systems to become most socially successful by becoming as deceitful and treacherous as possible. Hence, it has been rather routine for wars to be started and escalated by staging various false flag attacks.

so thats where "ism's" come in.
the hierarchy-
>the ism/the myth/the fantasy
>the sociopathic leaders
>the sociopathic hierarchy
>the true believers
>the dumbasses (enlightened or not)

result= bull# flows downwards, power flows upwards. this is religion.
and it s all psychology!
edit on 3-7-2018 by username74 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 18  19  20    22  23 >>

log in