The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

[burd]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

Is it just another name for UU?

This congregation began in the 1850s and affiliated with UU more recently. The Freie Gemeinde identity is still strong.

[FreshFish]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

No, we don't all believe in something. That's the point.

You are saying that, for you, it's theft only if you get caught? that it's a lie only if you get found out? that there is no reason whatsoever to behave in a moral and ethical manner except for the threat of punishment if you do not?

[Priceless]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

Several years ago, I attended a night "class" at my Freie Gemeinde congregation on the philosophy of religion, taught by a young guy not long out of divinity school at the University of Chicago. A nice guy who was not there to perform intellectual gymnastics, but the class completely kicked my azz. I once thought I could hang with people on this stuff, but not any more. It was so confounding I just threw up my hands and decided to go with the story of two naked people in the garden who ate an apple against orders and changed everything for the rest of us.

And it works. I still enjoy that first cup of coffee in the morning, exchanging insults and thoughts with other hockey fans on this website, and having two fingers of rum when I get home at night--all without the troublesome cloud of confusion or doubt. Most important, I am now entirely accepted as one of the team in my bowling league. I'm thinking captain by the end of summer.

Kant Schmant

.

But all you have to do is knock on any door and say, "If you let me in, I'll live the way you want me to live, and I'll think the way you want me to think," and all the blinds'll go up and all the windows will open, and you'll never be lonely, ever again.

[Priceless]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

You are saying that, for you, it's theft only if you get caught? that it's a lie only if you get found out? that there is no reason whatsoever to behave in a moral and ethical manner except for the threat of punishment if you do not?

Ah, this old chestnut. No, atheists have the ability to tell right from wrong without a guy in a funny hat or a white collar to tell us.

[unofan]

You are saying that, for you, it's theft only if you get caught? that it's a lie only if you get found out? that there is no reason whatsoever to behave in a moral and ethical manner except for the threat of punishment if you do not?

Sure there is. It's called not being an *******.

If you have to believe in a higher being to act nice, that makes you the sociopath, not the atheist.

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

Sure there is. It's called not being an *******.

If you have to believe in a higher being to act nice, that makes you the sociopath, not the atheist.

Exactly. Also one only has to read a bit of Frans de Waal's work to appreciate just how many of our "ethics" are mirrored by other species.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frans_de_Waal

[FreshFish]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

People may quibble but atheism, to me, is just the rejection of other belief systems.

For people to exist in a civilized society, there must be reasons to deny instant gratification of every whim and desire, or else we descend quickly into violent anarchy.

Atheism seems to say that there are plenty of good reasons to behave in an ethical and moral fashion that do not rely on a belief in a Divinity (or phrase it however you will). Yet even atheists must have some reason to justify why we treat others with kindness and compassion. Or else why bother doing so in the first place?

If you are going to say that somehow having reasons to behave well is not a "belief system" then we are just quibbling over semantics.

feel free to attack that any time you feel the need to attack atheism.

How can you read such comments as an "attack"??? "Atheists are human too. They want to belong to something greater than themselves, they want their lives to matter."

That doesn't sound like an attack to me. Saying that atheists are generally NOT selfish hurtful sociopaths is not a criticism.

[burd]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

You are saying that, for you, it's theft only if you get caught? that it's a lie only if you get found out? that there is no reason whatsoever to behave in a moral and ethical manner except for the threat of punishment if you do not?

Silly me. I thought this was a reference to Christianity and that you were confused.

[FreshFish]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

atheists have the ability to tell right from wrong

That was exactly my whole point to begin with!

What is the basis of that ability if not a "belief" in "something"?

You don't have to believe in a Divinity to believe in morality. That was precisely what I said. Whether you are an atheist or any other kind of believer, 95% of the rules of how to get along well with others are the same rules across the board for everyone. The only thing that differs are the reasons presented for "why" we follow the rules.

As a pragmatist, I don't really care about the "why" in this case, what I care about are the behaviors. Sometimes the "why" matters, but not here.

In fact, it is only when we get to the "why" that the arguing starts.

[FreshFish]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

in other words,

I don't need to know how the clock works to be able to tell what time it is.

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

Atheism seems to say that there are plenty of good reasons to behave in an ethical and moral fashion that do not rely on a belief in a Divinity (or phrase it however you will). Yet even atheists must have some reason to justify why we treat others with kindness and compassion. Or else why bother doing so in the first place?

You literally missed the entire point of my comment. My belief system is probably best described as secular humanism. Attack that (meaning argue against those beliefs). I have much more in common with an average secular humanist than an average dictionary definition atheist because they may have a completely different belief system. It is entirely possible that all we have in common is the rejection of others religious beliefs.

I have to term myself an atheist out of necessity because the other beliefs exist. I am also an a-teapotist and if that were as prevent as religion, I would probably have to take up that term as well.

[Kepler]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

What is the basis of that ability if not a "belief" in "something"?

You are confusing two senses of the word "believe": what is vs what is to be done. Theists tie these together because they have a view of the universe as purpose-driven. For the theist, their belief in what is is the basis for what is to be done. Atheists understand that purpose does not exist "out there." Therefore we "create" what is to be done using some mixture of personal and social human values which have no corollary in the non-self-conscious natural world of being.

Sartre had a nice little formula showing the distinction: theistic philosophy rests on "essence preceding existence," while a well-developed atheist morality rests on "existence preceding essence." Atheists (or at any rate Existentialists) know that our hardware and software only constitute our existence, and it is our responsibility to build meaning and morality.

[burd]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

Interesting. On one hand, it seems true that we can use different belief systems to achieve the same target behaviors, in which case the "why" is certainly less important than the "what." But along the lines of de Waal's work cited by WW, it may not be belief systems that enable us to identify and strive toward these behaviors at all. If we show behavioral characteristics that can be attributed to qualities like empathy or ultruism that are shared by other humans and even other species, then maybe those characteristics are as much responsible for "good" behaviors as beliefs are. In other words, maybe we sometimes form belief systems as a means to explain good behaviors rather than as a means to accomplish them.

Sigh. Better stick to insulting gopher fans and bytching about refs.

[Kepler]

Re: The Bible: Real, Fiction, or somewhere in between?

I have to term myself an atheist out of necessity because the other beliefs exist. I am also an a-teapotist and if that were as prevent as religion, I would probably have to take up that term as well.

This is an important point. I am an a-werewolfist just as much as an atheist. It's just that werewolf cults don't exist on every street corner, getting tax exemptions, and blathering on about how people who don't believe in werewolves can't have a solid basis for morality.

[Priceless]

That was exactly my whole point to begin with!

What is the basis of that ability if not a "belief" in "something"?

You don't have to believe in a Divinity to believe in morality. That was precisely what I said. Whether you are an atheist or any other kind of believer, 95% of the rules of how to get along well with others are the same rules across the board for everyone. The only thing that differs are the reasons presented for "why" we follow the rules.

As a pragmatist, I don't really care about the "why" in this case, what I care about are the behaviors. Sometimes the "why" matters, but not here.

In fact, it is only when we get to the "why" that the arguing starts.

I was raised to have compassion. From my parents, grandparents, teachers I learned to be a human being. I don't get my sense of right and wrong from a book of fairy tales and I'm not a decent guy because I'm afraid of an invisible man in the sky passing judgment on me.