It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

On the basis of Morality.

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Problem being is most likely the facts will never be completely "in". We are terriably limited creatures after all. And just because we think we "know" anything and what we think we "know" makes sense to us, it doesn't mean it is. You believe as you do, let them believe as they will. Minus the judgemental bullcrap, because you do is lower yourself.




posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


We complain, yes complain as derogatory a term is appropriate.

About the atrocity, of religion or supernaturalists, which tell people absolutes, which are unproovable. Whilst claiming to back their arguements of there validity because one can not completely prove it unprovable.

I ask logic to be implemented. And Get attacked.


WITS: I haven't looked at your profile actually!
!

What does describe you then?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Republican08
 


Problem being is most likely the facts will never be completely "in". We are terriably limited creatures after all. And just because we think we "know" anything and what we think we "know" makes sense to us, it doesn't mean it is. You believe as you do, let them believe as they will. Minus the judgemental bullcrap, because you do is lower yourself.


I don't feel all I do is lower myself.

I suppose I bring about a sense of (enlightment mabye) questions, interrogations.

We are incredibly limited that we agree upon!

I believe the facts eventually, *million years or so! lol* will be in.

Although for now, we must deny everything.

Not a innocent until proven guilty scenario.

In this, we should believe everything is wrong till it's proven right.

If it can't be proven right, it MUST be assumed wrong.

I believe as I do, and quite a few numbers believe as well, I am not the only one, I just prepose a arguement for the silent majority!



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
If you find morality is not your main reason for believing in a divine being, what is?


1. Simple mathematics. (All that has been)+(All that is in Existence) =/= (The Potential of All That Could Be). (All that has been)+(All that is in Existence)+(The Potential of All That Could Be) =/= The Infinite. Clearly there is more than just what we acknowledge as Existence.

2. The Law of Causation. Every Cause Has Its Effect; Every Effect Has Its Cause. If Existence is the Effect, then what was the Primal Cause?

3. The universal belief of deity, in some form or another, in every civilization and culture that ever has been. Name one civilization or culture that did not have a belief in a deity? You simply cannot. Deity is an innate Archetype in the human Psyche, even to those that deny the possibility of deity in some form (usually taking the form of a dark or antagonistic Archetype in the later case, but present nevertheless). The details of that deity may change from person to person, but it's presence is there.

4. Cogito, Ergo Sum, Ergo Cogito Deus, Deus Sum. If I think, therefore I am, thus if I think of God then God is.

5. Gnosis. It is neither feeling without the reason, nor is it reason without feeling, but a transcendent knowledge that both defies and encompasses them both.

I'm sure I could come up with more arguments pro-deity, but alas the hour is late and my pillow is calling my name.


And besides, in my book if an Atheist has a discerning mind, governed by intellect and reason, and places their faith in the tried and true demonstrative proofs of Science, then contrary to what they may profess, they believe in a deity by another name although they refuse to consider it such. Science can be another name for the Infinite, Undefinable Divine Monad that is beyond human comprehension.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


This thread isn't about me and I don't want to write an essay about myself just at this hour.
And what attrocity?? Considering the fact you yourself spew absolutes yourself with absolutely no ability to factually back it up. Also, do you not claim you are correct because they cannot prove their beliefs to be true? And logic enters in at no point on either side, although your side likes to claim otherwise.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by TornMind
 


Respect???? Really??



I feel the average christian is no different than a murderer on death row


A truer statement has never been spoken..
The average Christian (in God's eyes) was on death row.. We all sin... Some decide to turn their life around.. Others do not..
The Bible says... telling a lie.. or killing your brother is the same thing..




To me the real key to survival is RESPECT

The murderer.. at one pont.. had the utmost respect.. for his wife.. then found her sleeping with another man.. and killed them both on the spot....
Respect can be erased in a moment.. the realization that you have screwed up (morality) will stick with you forever....



The only difference is the average christian cowers into false cover of 'morality', and the murderer knows what they did


Why does the murderer know what they did??
I'm going to go with the "conscious'. the sense of right and wrong.. which, in my mind, is called morality... not respect...

People change.. morality does not..
We conform to the society and culture.. and accept the things that everyone defines as ok as OK... but when a couple goes through with an abortion.. they still feel guilty..
When the first TV producer allowed a curse word on TV.. he went home and rationalized to his family and friends why he did it.. but still felt guilty.. now it's just nothing.. most people don't care..

I do agree though.. morality and respect go hand in hand.. most people do not respect a crack head.. or murderer... People always respect "a good person"

That just means that morality induces respect...



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Republican08
 


This thread isn't about me and I don't want to write an essay about myself just at this hour.
And what attrocity?? Considering the fact you yourself spew absolutes yourself with absolutely no ability to factually back it up. Also, do you not claim you are correct because they cannot prove their beliefs to be true? And logic enters in at no point on either side, although your side likes to claim otherwise.


I claim simply that any religious organization claims, indoctrinates, and controls, the people for things, or in the name of somethin they cannot prove.

I proclaim that nothing can be proven as of yet, and gods are least likely, and that evolution or I don't know aliens implanting us here, are more logical then that.

I do not neccesarily claim I am "correct"

Just i'm more logical savvy?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Of course, not even Hitler thought he was doing wrong. And also, just because you believe the "facts will be in" doesn't mean it ever will. No mention the fact you must be kidding yourself because thus far all I have seen is attack along the same lines I have seen so many times before from those that wear the same label you allow to define you.....


I believe as I do, and quite a few numbers believe as well, I am not the only one, I just prepose a arguement for the silent majority!


No, you attempt to bludgeon those whom you deem your adversaries. With illogical arguments given the illusion of logic.... And the whole world could believe the center of the Earth is cookie dough and that would not necessarily make it so. For one who claims to champion logic you sure use your fair share of Logical Fallacy.


If it can't be proven right, it MUST be assumed wrong.


Sure if you ignore the obvious limitations that you claim you agree with me on.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:44 AM
link   
reply to post by tgerb8
 


When *if I may refer to an earlier post of mine* an ape was put in one cage, and another ape into another cage, about 5 feet apart, one ape had a bowel of corn (grapes or something) into the bowel, and it was close the their cage, they could easily grab and eat it, but when an ape was introduced into the opposing cage, which had a string attached to the bowel, so he could bring the bowel to him, he instinctively brought the bowel to himself. And began eating.

The first ape to of had the bowel screamed shouted and banged against the glass, in outrage.

The researches first startled, decided to place the same angry ape in the opposing situation where a new ape was with the grapes and by himself with no string just with a close bowel, the first ape was silent, and okay with it.

It showed ultimately that apes process wrongdoings, he felt robbed, stolen from and injusticed, it was amazing, i'll find the video sooner or later!



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Actually no your not. You attack belief systems based on the actions of a few and call that logical? I would really have to ask what color is the sun in your world if that is true. And why do you attack? Because your seek to advance your own.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
It showed ultimately that apes process wrongdoings, he felt robbed, stolen from and injusticed, it was amazing, i'll find the video sooner or later!


Or does it demonstrate how quickly institutionalised behaviour sets in?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout

Originally posted by Republican08
It showed ultimately that apes process wrongdoings, he felt robbed, stolen from and injusticed, it was amazing, i'll find the video sooner or later!


Or does it demonstrate how quickly institutionalised behaviour sets in?


Explain further please?

Institutionalised? How so?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:49 AM
link   
I think religious people are very selfish – they think their existence is so important that they must do all they can to live forever. Their whole existence is based on trying to please some god, killing hating, complaining about what other people get up to in their own bedrooms or getting upset when others believe differently.

If you actually think you are immortal, then you would have time to be timid and do all you could to make sure you get to experience that immortality, it would be so important to you that even if it meant hurting/killing others you would do what was necessary.

But what if you believed you where mortal and that any activity you engaged in might well be your last and possibly your most important legacy – I wonder what a world would be like then, if everyone in it believed like this I wonder if there would be time for hate/war and all the other petty rubbish immortal people squander their time on.

The only thing there would be time for if you where mortal is making your and everyone else’s life as happy and fulfilling as possible now.


So is there a difference between morality for an immortal and morality for a mortal?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by fraterormus
 


i would rebut you, but this is the wrong topic and i feel we are all digressing.

so back onto morals!
if god came down and was like..."yeah guys...uh sorry i didnt show up earlier because (pick a reason. i prefer "i was napping", but you pick).
here are all these new morals i want you to follow", and all the new morals are what we now consider to be atrocious, would you follow those new rules?
there would now be proof of divinity and still the same punishments for not following. would commands from the (something that is irrefutably) divine be enough to make you do horrific things?

why or why not. (just a fun exercise)



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Republican08
 


Actually no your not. You attack belief systems based on the actions of a few and call that logical? I would really have to ask what color is the sun in your world if that is true. And why do you attack? Because your seek to advance your own.


At a personal level, I don't attack just those of a few.

I attack the pacifist, who support a organization, which ultimately leads the extremists of a few, which cause an extreme amount of damage/ physical and psychologically.

I attack, because seeking one answer is not good enough nor logical at an early state in humanity.

We must not rely upon the abrahamic religion, or hinduism confucism or whatever you 'like'.

We must rely on what we know, and as far as we know, we know doubt the most, I prepose doubt, I spread it.

Seeds of doubt grow only reason.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:56 AM
link   
So newcomers to the thread see.

"What moral action, can you do as a religious person, that I as an Atheist, would be unable to do?"

(it's my own quote back off the copyright crap)

That's the main topic to keep clean there.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Yet you stand at the "there aint no way" of atheism. You admit you cannot definitively prove your case yet you feel the right to attack them for not being able to definitively prove theirs. And blood has been shed for the advance of atheistic principles, Stalin being a good example of that and his persecution of the Russian Orthodoxy. Yet you assume that label and defend it.

[edit on 19-7-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 04:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


well...i would assume that loving god is the most important moral in christianity since not loving god is the only unforgivable sin.
so my answer is "love god."

do i win money?




posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 04:04 AM
link   
reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest
 


Nope. Such things can be faked. Especially in this day and age and I do not believe in a being that will mettle too much in our affairs. For a rather long list of reasons.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Republican08
 


Yet you stand at the "there aint no way" of atheism. You admit you cannot definitively prove your case yet you feel the right to attack them for not being able to definitively prove theirs. And blood has been shed for the advance of atheistic principles, Stalin being a good example of that and his persecution of the Russian Orthodoxy.


The one of stalin, can be proclaimed of those of religious. Please don't make me go there.



This guy says it quite well and quitely.

What blood has been shed.

What man has proclaimed 'I kill you in the name of NO GOD".

Who wasn't a psychopath. While those who kill in the name of god are martyrs, and saints.

Kind of getting late and getting off, but nonetheless.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join