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.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Claiming that "anything goes" is not logically sound. A claim that a human being could grow to the height of 14 miles is an "anything goes" proposition, yet not logically sound.
Originally posted by Conspiracy Chicks fan !
I don't understand the logic behind forming a certitude of something's non-existence.
Originally posted by Conspiracy Chicks fan !
How is that not logically sound ? What laws of science would a 14-mile high human fall foul of ?
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
There is no suspension of logic in deciding to behave morally, nor do atheists use a faith based system of morals. Morals and ethics are not derived from faith or religious texts. They are derived from social contract.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
There appears to be a major disconnect in your logic in assuming that atheism begets nihilism, yet atheists are "as moral as the rest of us". That alone renders your logic fallacious.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Being that there are no such atheists as the ones you describe I imagine you're falling on deaf ears. The problem here is your faulty misconceptions about atheism and morality. It really would be ideal to discover where you're going wrong in your argument so that we can stop wasting bandwidth trying to explain it to you.
Originally posted by BlankSlate
Does agnosticism lead to a different result morally, if we follow through with your logic?
Originally posted by Conspiracy Chicks fan !
What, no logical atheists ?!
I'm not going wrong anywhere in this debate, so there's nothing for me to discover.
The only replies I've had are from atheists attempting to explain their own personal ethos, which is faith and emotionally driven, rather than logically.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
They are intertwined for believers in personal deities, they are not intertwined for followers of religions with no deities, and are not intertwined for agnostics or atheists. Since moral behavior operates independent of religious belief it should be clear that they are not derived from religion.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Moral codes also exist in societies of the earth's animals and they have no religion.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Incorrect. While some atheists may choose to be nihilists there is no "default position" on morality for atheists. Many, in fact, apply the moral universalism of humanism instead.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Recommended reading: try the wikipedia page on atheism for a start...
Originally posted by Conspiracy Chicks fan !
As I said earlier, I think we'll have to agree to disagree about the logical relationship between atheism and nihilism.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
You would a form a certitude that there exists no 14 mile high human beings in Washington, D.C. Follow the understanding of how you reached that certitude and the logic will become more clear.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Gravity, for one.
If you wish to believe in it, so be it.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Few will share your "logic".
Originally posted by Conspiracy Chicks fan !
Yes, because you would be able to see a 14 mile high human being in Washington DC. They would be clearly visible for miles as they would have to be standing or sitting up, and is confined to a small, searchable place.
It's an erroneous analogy. Again, comparing a finite scenario with an infinite one.
Clearly, we don't understand how the universe works, so we cannot say with any level of logical certainty, whether something does or does not exist in slightly broader parameters than Washington DC !
To form a certitude on that is the argument from ignorance logical fallacy.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Incorrect again. Most atheist's morals are driven by reason and empathy using a logical process. No atheist derives their moral set from faith. With all due respect that is patently absurd.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
At some point you'll need to back up your claims regarding the morality of agnostics and atheists because they seem to evade all facts on the matter.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
I don't. I believe you have made a claim and an assertion of which you need to back up with some facts.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Only if we expand your parameters indefinitely as you seem to wish to do can we employ the argument you present.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
However, the universe operates within some finite parameters, therefore the indefinite expansion of parameters is illogical.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
"Anything goes" is not a reasonable stance if it includes things beyond the realm of possibility, such as 14 mile high human beings. You asked for the logic in forming certitudes and I have presented fair descriptions of such.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Until and unless irrefutable evidence of deities is presented, neither I nor the universe has any problem existing without them nor do I have a reason or need to consider the eventual discovery of one within the realms of possibility.
Originally posted by Conspiracy Chicks fan !
Now extrapolate the example of cannibalism to any other moral that was taught to us by society and it is clear to me that the closest logical fit is amorality or nihilism.
Originally posted by Conspiracy Chicks fan !
14-mile high humans are potentially possible.
Science wouldn't have flourished without open-minded individuals considering unproven possibilities. Let's not forget that many of our scientific discoveries wouldn't have even been considered a few centuries ago.
I think the most open-minded and logical stance is to adopt the ''anything goes'' approach to questions that have not been answered.
Originally posted by Conspiracy Chicks fan !
Originally posted by grahag
If the God of the bible exists as I was taught in the Catholic religion, he loves each and every one of us.
If there's some being up there that's taken on the mantle of God, it's not worthy of being called God.
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
- Epicurus
edit to add the quote from Epicurus.
Well, as far as I see, there is nothing to say that God has to be good or nice. I don't consider God's disposition to be relevant to the question of whether God exists or not.