• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

So you're an atheist. Ok, what next?

If there were no objective moral truths then international law would be impossible. Yet there it is.
 
Last edited:
I think everyone knows he's a troll... we just like baiting them on occasion here for our own amusement. We add to the merriment of our fellow atheist beings in the process-- which is an act of charity... and we learn from each other and celebrate the fact that we weren't made stupid by faith as he has been.

The trolls enjoy the attention and they feel they are suffering as they must for their faith. So, it's really a win win situation, you see. They cannot learn from our responses, but smarter people can. And it inoculates them against the people who are convinced they have "divine truths". Moreover, some of the responses are poignant and eloquent even if the OP is daft and pretentious beyond belief. Plus, while the troll is sputtering his delusions uninvited on a skeptics forum, he is sparing the trusting people in his reality from getting bad information from a man convinced of his authority on a subject he is clueless about. And some other delusional folks may even aim to be unlike Plumjam and more like Roadtoad in the process of reading this thread --and thus gain a clue that is unavailable to plumjam at any price.

Don't you feel holier than thou now?
 
Hokulele said:
On a second note, it was a great pleasure to meet Roadtoad, Toad's lovely wife, and Normal Dude the other night (as well as the other fine skeptical gentlemen on this thread I met previously in Houston). If anything, I work on making sure I deserve my husband rather than the other way around, although he did spend a rather lot of time last night after picking me up from the airport requesting that I "pull his finger". *Sigh*
Click to expand...
Yeah, you're the Official JREF PartyGirl/Tease. You just fly around the world to hold micro-TAMs in various cities. Am I jealous because you got to meet the World Famous Roadtoad and Normal Dude? I have a finger for you too.
 
Radrook said:
If there were no objective moral truths then international law would be impossible. Yet there it is.
Click to expand...
For each species with a social structure, there seems to be a set of objective moral rules that the species follows. Homo sapien is no different and we are starting to see the biological basis for this objective moral structure.
 
plumjam said:
My position is that when people dogmatically believe in exclusive materialism they are very often persisting in a state of denial about how their beliefs should relate to morality.
This is currently easier to do due to society now having reverted back to a moral system based on the spiritual view of the human, rather than the prior moral systems based on the exclusive material view of the human.
Click to expand...

Huh? Which society?

plumjam said:
It is an uncomfortable subject for exclusive materialists. And so it should be.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. In fact, as nearly every materialist on this thread has given you good examples of why you are wrong and you have avoided responding to any of them, it only seems to be an uncomfortable subject for you.

plumjam said:
In fact another motivation behind my thread is to show that, in day to day reality, exclusive materialists do not act within the moral realm in harmony with their intellectual beliefs, instead they act within the moral realm using a spiritual view of the human being.

This is a central inconsistency, which I just felt needed pointing out.
Click to expand...

Ahh, but you haven't shown this at all. All you have done is repeat similar statements as if you think that somehow constitutes a proof.

So please, by all means, show us why a material view of the human being cannot lead to the same (or better) values as a spiritual view of the human being.
 
joobz said:
Well, according to DOC, The gate's foundation's attempts at dealing with the AIDS problem in africa could be considered evil.
Click to expand...

This is a false statement. You lose credibility when you make several different false statements about someone like you have about me.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
This is a false statement. You lose credibility when you make several different false statements about someone like you have about me.
Click to expand...
What's false about the statement?


Do you wish to take my credibility challenge? The offer still stands.
 
plumjam said:
*sigh* I have never argued this, I have been arguing about what happens when exclusive materialism is formulated into moral systems which are then adopted by societies.
Click to expand...

Again, you have not been arguing anything of the sort.

If you wish to, please start providing examples of the materialist societies you have in mind, examples of the moral systems their materialism led to, and examples of "what happens."
 
joobz said:
When's the party bus coming to lexington?
Click to expand...

You live in Kentucky? Isn't that the most bible beltish place in the world-- a place of DOC clones and the like? This forum must be an oasis for you. If anyone needed a skeptic party bus it would be a skeptic in Kentucky I would think... maybe we should start a fund... surely TAM 6 is a possibility, eh?

Hokulele and I will get you drunk as only skepchicks can.
 
Last edited:
joobz said:
What's false about the statement?
Click to expand...

I'm saying you "again" made a publicly false statement about me (see post #367) and these things seriously damage your credibility and the credibility of your cause. It's up to you to prove I'm wrong and your statement was not false.
 
Last edited:
Radrook said:
If there were no objective moral truths then international law would be impossible. Yet there it is.
Click to expand...

Oh, I think basic reciprocity and do unto others... which humans were engaged in long before the bible... and primates too -- works pretty damn well.

Where goods cross borders, wars tend not too. Humans evolved to barter and cooperate and form cooperative societies, because those that do so, survive better than those who don't. But we first evolved to be tribalist--to have in-group amity and out-group enmity... but further evolution shows cooperation works better within groups and between groups--hence ecosystems, biospheres and the like. Natural selection chooses for certain kinds of "morality"... tit for tat-- game theory... it can't not happen when it has a survival value for the participant species.

And if there were an agreed upon morality given by an invisible guy in the sky, we wouldn't need international laws or jails or threats of hell or social shunning or any of the things we've evolved to help enforce cooperation in and amongst groups.

Why do you think my dogs don't kill my cats? Why do they look guilty when I scold them? Why do ants cooperate to build huge colonies and bees give up their lives for their colonies? You, like plumjam, are only able to perceive the world through the imaginary truth you think you have. But you guys have different truths.-- You're a Jehovah Witness and he's into that Mehar baba guy or whatever.. So what the hell objective morality are you talking about when you don't even subscribe to the same god, heaven, morality, magic man, salvation plan, belief requirements, etc. I think plumjam believes in reincarnation... so you see how idiotic you all sound to us... how you pretend to have something objective, but it's not based on anything but the delusions that have been inculcated directly in your head via indoctrination. What fabulous examples of morality are you exhibiting from these divine truths you imagine you have from this objective source you've pulled from thin air as far as we can tell?? And why should we take your Messiah Complex more seriously than Tom Cruise's certainty that Scientology has the answers for what ails the world?

Faithers are nutty and too nutty to realize they're as nutty as the ones they find nutty. How long have you had these delusions of grandeur while imagining yourself more humble than everyone else? How is it you manage you imagine yourself as more moral than say, Randi, or Sagan, or Dawkins or many of the fine posters here. From my perspective the morality is in your head but not in the real world.
 
Last edited:
Civilized Worm said:
Disbelieving is a negative position and therefore bad, so you should always believe everything you hear in order to remain positive and good.
Click to expand...

Oh... and per pascal-- you better believe everything just in case you will be punished eternally for disbelieving. I say believe the religions with the scariest hells the most if you can-- because that way the odds are you will suffer less if they turn out to be the true ones. And if you can't make yourself believe it...just say it over and over and pretend you believe and don't ever think too hard and maybe you'll be able to fool the omniscient one. If that doesn't work, try brain damage.

And because you are only supposed to believe in one god just tell yourself they are all the same--it's part of the mystery blah, blah blah..
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
This is a false statement. You lose credibility when you make several different false statements about someone like you have about me.
Click to expand...
Sounds like he made a true statement about you, which is why you have zero credibility on this site. Atheists and almost all the theists here have you pegs for your dishonesty and your ugly attitudes. The fact that someone like you, who has shown himself to be completely amoral, would have the stones to act sanctimonious towards others? It would be funny if it weren't so goddamned sad.
 
DOC said:
I'm saying you "again" made a publicly false statement about me (see post #367) and these things seriously damage your credibility and the credibility of your cause. It's up to you to prove I'm wrong and your statement was not false.
Click to expand...
I know that's what you claim, but my statement isn't false.
Are you willing to take my credibility challenge?
 
articulett said:
Oh... and per pascal-- you better believe everything just in case you will be punished eternally for disbelieving.
Click to expand...
Well, Pascal was a bit of an enigma. I don't know if he changed between the time he made his famous "wager" and the time he made this quote (taken from the book that both you and I own;)) or if he was alternately lucid and loony.
Blaise Pascal said:
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom