Design your own hell

[Elok]

Whoops, that's right, I forgot to hurl a stream of juvenile pejorative at *your* philosophical antecedents. Where are my manners? Okay, your "enlightenment" thinkers were just a bunch of powder-wigged, tight-wearing, wooden-toothed, pretentious whitebread syphilitics. There we go. Now for actual argument.

Atheism is quite literally a lack of beliefs. Every time anybody on this board tries to refer to it as a religious belief, he or she gets (rightly)shouted down, as atheism is just the belief that there is no god. There's not much intrinsic to that message.

The extrapolated value systems of, say, Rousseau, are at heart just wishful thinking themselves, based on how he would like society to be. As there can be no "god-given rights" without god, any insistence that we ought to do this or that "for the greater good" is an appeal to an idea far more abstract than any god, and far less apparent in the world at that. The difference between my beliefs and yours is primarily that there is some slim chance that mine are NOT a social construct. Sabe?

[Ted Striker]

Stream of Juvenile Pejoratives

Elok you ****ing juvenile pejorative piece of **** I bet that you probably **** hamsters with your ****ing dog and then eat his ****ing **** while ****ing an antelope

[Barinthus]

My friend whose sound card I asked about's hell

Parents who bring squalling brats to R-rated movies
Circle I Limbo

Rednecks
Circle II Whirling in a Dark & Stormy Wind

Oakland Raider Fans
Circle III Mud, Rain, Cold, Hail & Snow

can't get hard in the middle of an orgy
Circle IV Rolling Weights

being beind the slowest car on the freeway and having to pee
Circle V Stuck in Mud, Mangled

River Styx

cna't get high no matter how much bud you smoke!!!!
Circle VI Buried for Eternity

River Phlegyas

Osama bin Laden
Circle VII Burning Sands

only stright person on earth
Circle IIX Immersed in Excrement

George Bush
Circle IX Frozen in Ice

Design your own hell

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Elok
"Devout Atheist" is the best phrase I could think of to describe those who go on the warpath for atheism despite the fact that their belief system is not a belief system at all, but a total lack thereof. It's an oxymoron in the traditional sense-the contradiction is used for emphasis. I won't name names, but there are plenty of Devout Atheists on this board...

What's the fun in not naming names?

[Tiamat]

Unfortunatly I don't need a templet to design mine I did that 20+ years ago when I had children!

[Ted Striker]

You listen to Bubba Sparxxx Tiamat?

[Tiamat]

No......never heard.

[Ted Striker]

well you should

white boy does rap but with a country flair

you seem like you would like it

[Tiamat]

I'll have to go find some and download it. Always up for a good laugh.

[Ted Striker]

it's good pretty ish though

song is called "deliverance"

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Elok
Whoops, that's right, I forgot to hurl a stream of juvenile pejorative at *your* philosophical antecedents. Where are my manners? Okay, your "enlightenment" thinkers were just a bunch of powder-wigged, tight-wearing, wooden-toothed, pretentious whitebread syphilitics. There we go. Now for actual argument.

Atheism is quite literally a lack of beliefs. Every time anybody on this board tries to refer to it as a religious belief, he or she gets (rightly)shouted down, as atheism is just the belief that there is no god. There's not much intrinsic to that message.

The extrapolated value systems of, say, Rousseau, are at heart just wishful thinking themselves, based on how he would like society to be. As there can be no "god-given rights" without god, any insistence that we ought to do this or that "for the greater good" is an appeal to an idea far more abstract than any god, and far less apparent in the world at that. The difference between my beliefs and yours is primarily that there is some slim chance that mine are NOT a social construct. Sabe?

Atheism is quite literally (to use your terminology) 'the disbelief in the existence of god' (or a god, since I don't believe that the Christian religionistas' god has precedence over any other cultists' god or gods).

From the Greek a- not- theos- god- .

Not a lack of beliefs, not a huge void bereft of morality or ethics, but a lack of belief in the Flaming Carrot, or Mr Bad Guy, or the Dancing Hippo, or Ten Turtles with Bananas, or whatever other rubbish was thought up to scare children by people who had a bad case of late night dyspepsia.

Of course the infection of the English language by simpering religionistas has meant that the default setting for humans is supposed to be inclusive of some sort of religious credo, so we have 'a- theism' and 'a- gnosticism', which I think shows some kind of linguistic or philosophical arrogance- I don't subscribe to lack of belief in apresumed god, or lack of knowledge of a presumed god- god or gods, it's all so much irrelevance, except when people presume to tell me I believe in nothing.

I'd say you were the juvenile one by imagining I had no belief simply because I have the good taste not to plump for whatever religious patent nostrum you've been swallowing.

'Secular Humanism is a way of thinking and living that aims to bring out the best in people so that all people can have the best in life. Secular humanists reject supernatural and authoritarian beliefs. They affirm that we must take responsibility for our own lives and the communities and world in which we live. Secular humanism emphasizes reason and scientific inquiry, individual freedom and responsibility, human values and compassion, and the need for tolerance and cooperation.'

http://www.secularhumanism.org/

'Types of Humanism:

In the religious arena, many words have a number of different meanings. Some examples are: Christian, cults, Humanist, pagan, Satanist, Witch and Witchcraft. The terms Humanism and Humanist are essentially meaningless when used by themselves; their meanings only become clear when preceded by an adjective, as in:

Christian Humanism: a philosophy based on Christian beliefs about the nature of God, and which advocate people's fulfillment by personal effort.

Cultural Humanism: A concept that knowledge can be obtained through rational thought and experimentation. It has its roots in ancient Greece and Rome. It developed into the scientific method and is the major underpinning of all sciences today.

Literary Humanism: pursuit of the humanities (languages, literature, philosophy, history, etc.)

Modern Humanism: a generic term encompassing both Religious and Secular Humanism.

Philosophical Humanism is a philosophy centered upon the needs and interests of people.

Renaissance Humanism: A movement starting at the end of the Middle Ages which renewed an interest in classical studies and promoted the concept that truth could be discovered by human effort.

Religious Humanism is similar to secular humanism, except that it is practiced in a religious setting with fellowship and rituals, as in Ethical Culture Societies, congregations associated with the Society for Humanistic Judaism and groups affiliated with the Unitarian Universalist Association.

Secular Humanism: a non-religiously based philosophy promoting man as the measure of all things. It had its roots in the rationalism of the 18th Century and the freethought movement of the 19th Century.

This page will deal primarily with Secular Humanism.



Humanist beliefs and practices:

A Humanist Manifesto was prepared in 1933, endorsed by 34 leading Humanists, and published in the 1933-MAY/JUN issue of The New Humanist (VI:3:1-5).

5 It was updated as the Humanist Manifesto II in 1973.

6 Some of the themes of the latter document are:

They trace their roots to the rational philosophy first created in the West in ancient Greece. Many regard Socrates as the first and greatest of the Humanists.

They value knowledge based on reason and hard evidence rather than on faith.

Being secular Humanists, they reject the concept of a personal God, and regard humans as supreme. From this belief naturally follows: "the preciousness and dignity of the individual person is a central humanist value."

a rejection of a created universe in favor of the theory of evolution and a universe that obeys natural laws

a rejection of divinely inspired ethical and moral codes in favor of codes derived by reason from the human condition

the belief that full responsibility for the future of the world, its political systems, its ecology, etc. rests with humans. There is no God in heaven to intervene and save us from a disaster

Many Humanists believe that much historical progress has arisen from the conflict between organized religion and secular society in which the former beliefs and practices have been replaced with secular beliefs.

They feel that religious groups' "promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful."

They accept democracy and reject both theocracy and secular dictatorships as political systems that are dangerous to individual freedoms.

They value freedom of inquiry, expression and action.

They have a history of combating bigotry, hatred, discrimination, intolerance and censorship.

They are energetic supporters of the separation of church and state.

They tend to have very liberal beliefs about controversial ethical topics, like abortion, corporal punishment of children, death penalty, enforced prayer in schools, homosexuality, physician assisted suicide, etc.

They believe that "moral values derive their source from human experience." Since most believe that an afterlife is non-existent, they regard life here on earth to be particularly precious. They are highly motivated to alleviating pain and misery around the world. Many are active in refugee, human rights, anti-death penalty, environmental groups, etc.
Generally speaking, they do not believe in a personal god, a goddess or a combination of goddesses and gods.
supernatural beings such as angels, demons, Satan, Holy Spirit, etc.
heaven or hell or life after death.
the separation of a person into body, soul and spirit.
survival of an individual in any form after death. '

http://www.religioustolerance.org/humanism.htm

I'd say there's an awful lot of 'beliefs' there. Not a pronounced absence of them.

[curtsibling]

Creationists
Circle I Limbo

George Bush
Circle II Whirling in a Dark & Stormy Wind

Religionists
Circle III Mud, Rain, Cold, Hail & Snow

Goths
Circle IV Rolling Weights

Marlin Manson
Circle V Stuck in Mud, Mangled

River Styx

Parents who bring squalling brats to R-rated movies
Circle VI Buried for Eternity

River Phlegyas

Republicans
Circle VII Burning Sands

Mel Gibson
Circle IIX Immersed in Excrement

The Pope
Circle IX Frozen in Ice

Design your own hell

Disclaimer: While this was fun, I don't believe in any such thing as a 'hell'.

[Elok]

Yes, that's very good, but they're opinions, not true beliefs. Belief, in my book, implies the idea that something is quite literally true. The idea that "we should be nice to each other" is based mostly on preference. Much as "hot dogs are tasty," or "Dean will lead America to a better future" are merely preferences. They are not based on a supposed reality, just on hypothetical extractions and your own taste. Or "derived by reason from the human condition," which is to say democratic opinion. It is not a belief, either way.

Many of the things you cited are not even rationally based opinions-for example, disbelief in a god not strictly because it has been disproven, which it cannot be, but because the idea of a god is distasteful and conjures up bogeyman images of the Spanish Inquisition.

And tracing your "beliefs" to Socrates is something of a slight to the man's memory. You're talking about a guy whose key idea was the knowledge that all men and women know nothing. Socrates defined truth by questions, but he valued truth in its literal sense, not that it "leads to [perceived] improvement in human culture." Which is all your postmodern sensibilities really amount to. Socrates himself was more mystic than scholastic.

[curtsibling]

My vision of hell...

http://www.apolyton.net/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=2645598

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Elok
Yes, that's very good, but they're opinions, not true beliefs. Belief, in my book, implies the idea that something is quite literally true. The idea that "we should be nice to each other" is based mostly on preference.

So you 'believe' Jesus or Yahweh or Kukulcan or Allah or the Flaming Carrot is the one true whatever, because -

you've seen demonstrable proof?

had a personal interview?

were brainwashed?

Belief is acceptance as true, confidence in the truth of something, to think or suppose is true. Opinion is belief based on grounds short of proof- feel free to show me that your deity/deities exist/s, outside the text of whatever religious propaganda propounds its existence.

I see no reason to believe in a god, pantheon of gods, spooks, the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy. Simply because they are not faith in a supernatural being does not mean they are not beliefs.

'Only a Humanist can suggest that, even if there be a god, it is o.k. to disagree with him, her, or it. In Plato's 'Euthyphro', Socrates shows that god is not necessarily the source of good, or even good himself. Socrates asks if something is good because god ordains it, or if god ordains it because it is already good. Yet, since the time of the ancient Greeks, no mainstream religion has permitted such questioning of god's will or made a hero out of a disobedient character. It is Humanists who claim this tradition.

After all, much of human progress has been in defiance of religion or of the apparent natural order. When we deflect lightning or evacuate a town before a tornado strikes, we lessen the effects of so called "acts of god." When we land on the Moon we defy the Earth's gravitational pull. When we seek a solution to the AIDS crisis, we, according to Jerry Falwell, thwart "god's punishment of homosexuals."

Politically, the defiance of religious and secular authority has led to democracy, human rights, and even the protection of the environment. Humanists make no apologies for this. Humanists twist no biblical doctrine to justify such actions. They recognize the Promethean defiance of their response and take pride in it. For this is part of the tradition.

Another aspect of the Secular Humanist tradition is scepticism. Scepticism's historical exemplar is Socrates. Why Socrates? Because, after all this time, he still stands out alone among all the famous saints and sages from antiquity to the present. Every religion has its sage. Judaism has Moses, Zoroastrianism has Zarathustra, Buddhism has the Buddha, Christianity has Jesus, Islam has Mohammad, Mormonism has Joseph Smith, and Bahai has Baha-u-lah. Every one of these individuals claimed to know the absolute truth. It is Socrates, alone among famous sages, who claimed to know NOTHING. Each devised a set of rules or laws, save Socrates. Instead, Socrates gave us a method --a method of questioning the rules of others, of cross- examination. And Socrates didn't die for truth, he died for rights and the rule of law. For these reasons, Socrates is the quintessential sceptical Humanist. He stands as a symbol, both of Greek rationalism and the Humanist tradition that grew out of it. And no equally recognized saint or sage has joined his company since his death.

Because of the strong Secular Humanist identity with the images of Prometheus and Socrates, and equally strong rejection of traditional religion, the Secular Humanist actually agrees with Tertullian--who said:


"What has Jerusalem to do with Athens?" '

http://www.jcn.com/humanism.html