Fear of Atheism

[Cypress]

Cypress....your denial is getting out of hand.

Ross, you want to help Team Liberal lose even more presidential elections and become a permanent minority?

Then feel free to wander the Midwest and Appalachia, preaching on behalf of the Democratic Party that Jesus was a teacher of immorality, and western civilization would have been better off without him.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Circumcision, dietary laws, ritual purity, shellfish prohibitions are not moral laws

I have never suggested that they are. I was replying to what you wrote.

You are the first person I have met in six decades who seems to be resolutely suggesting Jesus taught immorality.

Have you gone nuts? I think the teachings of Jesus, with the exception of a very few, are outstanding. I just wish more people who identify as Christians paid heed to his teachings.

I could care less if people get circumcised or avoid shellfish. Those aren't moral matters. They are ritual laws, and even Orthodox Jews practice them today, without me thinking it reflects on their morality

I have never suggested otherwise.'

I never wrote anything about polytheism being inferior.

You extol monotheism. You mention it favorably in a majority of your posts.

What I did was clearly state the case that Western monotheism was instrumental for why experimental science and formal logic took root in Europe, and nowhere else on the planet.

Rome, while at it most pagan and debauched, contributed significantly to art, architecture, science and logic. For 500 years it was the most powerful and contributory empires on the planet.

Then Christianity took root...and within 100 years the world devolved into what is now know as the dark ages.

You certainly are free to think monotheism made positive contributions to the human condition...I guess I could make some cases myself for particulars if I wanted. But the most part, monotheism (Christianity) was a blight.

The fact that I spoke about a ying and yang specifically showed I have respect for Eastern intellectual traditions, because humans can't just be focused on the empirical, rational, and technological at the expense of other dimensions of human experience.

If I thought Eastern religions were a complete waste of time, I never would have invested the time and effort to read the Dhammapada, the Bhaghavad Gita, the Analects of Confucius, the Dao de Jing, the Zhuangzi.

I have never accused you (or even suggested) that you think Eastern religions were a complete waste of time.

Why do you roll out nonsense like that?

 

[Ross Dolan]

Ross, you want to help Team Liberal lose even more presidential elections and become a permanent minority?

Then feel free to wander the Midwest and Appalachia, preaching on behalf of the Democratic Party that Jesus was a teacher of immorality, and western civilization would have been better off without him.

You have fallen off the ledge, Cypress.

Too bad, that.

 

[Cypress]

You have fallen off the ledge, Cypress.

Too bad, that.

I see, your conviction that Western civilization would have been better off without Jesus only goes as far as an anonymous keyboard, but it's not an opinion you'd care to share on behalf of Democrats with undecided voters in Pennsylvania and Michigan.

 

[Cypress]

So morality is learned which means there must have been a society which was the first to "discover" that murder was wrong. Which society do they think was the first to discover this? Are the Israelites the first society we read about that clearly calls out murder as morally wrong?

Or is there evidence of societies predating the Israelites that expressly forbade murder as immoral?

We're born with a moral conscience, but it has to be appealed to.

Without a moral conscience, we would strictly live by the tenets of Darwinism evolution and survival of the fittest. That's why we don't complain about the morality of bears when they kill the cubs of a male rival, or why we don't condemn the morality of a male rabbit who forcibly copulates (rapes) a female rabbit.

That's why you weren't born knowing slavery and rape are wrong, but once your conscience was appealed to, it became self-evident and felt right to you.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I see, your conviction that Western civilization would have been better off without Jesus only goes as far as an anonymous keyboard, but it's not an opinion you'd care to share on behalf of Democrats with undecided voters in Pennsylvania and Michigan.

I have never said anything like that.

What the hell is wrong with you?

 

[Cypress]

I I have never said anything like that. What the hell is wrong with you?

You did insinuate it. -->

We MIGHT be better off if we had used the foundations used by eastern cultures.

You don't, I suppose?

My apologies if my interpretation of your statement was incorrect.

I'm tired of Team Democrats losing elections because a vocal minority continue to insinuate that Christianity is evil or that Christians are ignorant. That's not going to fly in the culturally conservative Midwest and Appalachia.

 

[gmark77]

We're born with a moral conscience, but it has to be appealed to.

So morality is inherent in us, we just have to discover it?

That's why you weren't born knowing slavery and rape are wrong, but once your conscience was appealed to, it became self-evident and felt right to you.

How do you know people aren't born knowing slavery and rape are wrong? Humans are born without several developmental steps in their brain function many of which develop naturally without being taught. Eg the "theory of mind" is a developmental step that toddlers go through. Which I think is kind of key to developing an internal morality without being taught it per se. But if we simply assume that all things toddlers lack have to be "taught" then, of course, morality would have to be taught.

I guess the bigger question still stands: who was the first society to understand that these things are wrong and who discovered "morality"? How did they discover that murder was wrong? Was there a particular breakthrough in thinking that helped people understand that?

 

[Cypress]

So morality is inherent in us, we just have to discover it?

I think so.
If you want to believe morality is just whatever is taught by a tribe, a nation, a culture, then that's moral relativism and you're going to have to pay a price for holding that belief.

The price is that there is no absolute right and wrong. Morality is just whatever society teaches you, whether it be Nazi society, or Mormon society, or Quaker society.

How do you know people aren't born knowing slavery and rape are wrong?

It's self evident to me.
You're welcome to make the case newborn babies are aware that slavery and oppression are wrong.

I guess the bigger question still stands: who was the first society to understand that these things are wrong and who discovered "morality"? How did they discover that murder was wrong? Was there a particular breakthrough in thinking that helped people understand that?

Already addressed this. The first literature in human history that had any kind of ethos oriented towards either the humane treatment of slaves, or that slavery and oppression were sins was Hebrew and Christian literature.

The Axial Age religions were a pivot point in the evolution of the moral conscience

 

[Ross Dolan]

You did insinuate it. -->


My apologies if my interpretation of your statement was incorrect.

You did insinuate it. -->


My apologies if my interpretation of your statement was incorrect.

I'm tired of Team Democrats losing elections because a vocal minority continue to insinuate that Christianity is evil or that Christians are ignorant. That's not going to fly in the culturally conservative Midwest and Appalachia.

You had said, "

...I believe Western monotheism was an important foundation for Western ethics;

My response was, "Nothing wrong with that at all. I also think that Western monotheism was an important foundation for western ethics and morals. I find that to be unfortunate. We MIGHT be better off if we had used the foundations used by eastern cultures."

You don't, I suppose?

And you interpreted that to mean, "I see, your conviction that Western civilization would have been better off without Jesus only goes as far as an anonymous keyboard"

That is why I said, "I never said that." And considering my reply, I do not see how you interpreted that as "insinuating" it.

I certainly did not mean to.

I have often written that I have integrated (quite a lot) of the teachings of Jesus into my personal philosophy of a reasonable, decent life. I have no problems with his teachings...other than the "god/father" aspect. He, or the amalgam that is now considered him, had a great sense of morality and decency.

But the Christians of today focus on shit that obviously Jesus did not deem important enough to highlight.

That is my point.

Cypress: "I'm tired of Team Democrats losing elections because a vocal minority continue to insinuate that Christianity is evil or that Christians are ignorant. That's not going to fly in the culturally conservative Midwest and Appalachia."

Personally, I do not think "Team Democrats" are losing any elections because of a vocal minority insinuating ANYTHING...Christianity or economic. I don't even think Democrats are actually losing all that often. They have won majorities in the House and in the Senate in recent years...and the White House also.

The House and Senate do seems to be dominated by Republicans...but that appears to have more to do with the dynamics of congressional districts and with the inequality of Senate distribution than with any mistakes being made by Dems.

I suspect...JUST SUSPECT...that more will happen to favor Democrats during the next several years as a result of what Republicans do...rather than as a result of what Democrats do.

I am not a Democrat myself...but I am a leftist and find the Democratic agenda much more in keeping with the teachings of Jesus than the Republicans. MUCH MORE.

 

[gmark77]

I'm tired of Team Democrats losing elections because a vocal minority continue to insinuate that Christianity is evil

I think the bigger hit is that the Dems often call out the version of "Christianity" the GOP practices as "evil" because it is the antithesis of Christian virtues being espoused by "ravening wolves" who call evil good.

 

[gmark77]

Already addressed this. The first literature in human history that had any kind of ethos oriented towards either the humane treatment of slaves, or that slavery and oppression were sins was Hebrew and Christian literature.

The Axial Age religions were a pivot point in the evolution of the moral conscience

So before about 800 BCE it was not understood that murder was wrong? Do we have any idea why they originally thought it was wrong? How could they figure out it was wrong to murder and rape?

 

[Cypress]

So before about 800 BCE it was not understood that murder was wrong?

Correct, if you look at the widespread multitude of societies that practiced ritual child sacrifice, infanticide, human sacrifice, killing of twins, the widespread practice of executing of defeated and captured prisoners, ritual sacrifice of the king's concubines and servants upon his death, etc. It wasn't considered wrong.

The idea first emerging in the Judeo-Christian tradition that every life had innate value because it was created in the image of God, was a radical evolution in human ethos. It only seems like "common sense" to us now because for two thousand years our societies have been percolating in a religious sentimentality that first began in the Axial Age

 

[NiftyNiblick]

I
In that case, there is no morality, and moral values are really just an illusory religious concept.

Moral values evolving genetically are no less real than if they were freely willed, are they?

It's not that they're fully developed, either.
We kill living things and eat them. Not just plants, but sentient animals not too dissimilar to ourselves.

Lions eat zebras, giraffes, antelope, buffalo, etc, but it's not socially acceptable in their prides to eat one another.
We eat bovines, sheep/lambs, hogs, chickens, fish, etc, but it's not socially acceptable in our communities to eat one another.

Other than having more technical and artistic skills,
far less impressive physical fortitude,
and not being nearly as majestic looking,
how are we any different?

If they had electricity and running water, I might have preferred to be a lion.
The sleeping outside thing is the main deal-breaker for me.

 

[gmark77]

Correct, if you look at the widespread multitude of societies that practiced ritual child sacrifice, infanticide, human sacrifice, killing of twins, the widespread practice of executing of defeated and captured prisoners, ritual sacrifice of the king's concubines and servants upon his death, etc. It wasn't considered wrong.

The idea first emerging in the Judeo-Christian tradition that every life had innate value because it was created in the image of God, was a radical evolution in human ethos. It only seems like "common sense" to us now because for two thousand years our societies have been percolating in a religious sentimentality that first began in the Axial Age

Interesting. So before the Axial age people were OK with murder because it wasn't considered wrong?

I gotta admit my mind is kind of blown by this.

I thought the Sumerians way back in like 2000 BCE had written codes against murder (Ur-Nammu). Could it be that the discovery that murder is wrong goes back even before the Axial Age? Or were the Sumerians an outlier?

Either way I'm glad SOMEONE discovered it, I can't imagine what life would have been like in one of those societies you talk about where murder was "ok" and no one complained.

 

[gmark77]

Moral values evolving genetically are no less real than if they were freely willed, are they?

It's not that they're fully developed, either.
We kill living things and eat them. Not just plants, but sentient animals not too dissimilar to ourselves.

Lions eat zebras, giraffes, antelope, buffalo, etc, but it's not socially acceptable in their prides to eat one another.
We eat bovines, sheep/lambs, hogs, chickens, fish, etc, but it's not socially acceptable in our communities to eat one another.

Other than having more technical and artistic skills,
far less impressive physical fortitude,
and not being nearly as majestic looking,
how are we any different?

If they had electricity and running water, I might have preferred to be a lion.
The sleeping outside thing is the main deal-breaker for me.

I'm struggling with Cypress' theory of the discovery of morality. It makes sense because we DO have to teach toddlers to behave, but there's a part of me that thinks that like "theory of mind" which naturally develops in children as they age, certain moral inclinations will emerge as their brain develops and they start to understand that individuals around them are separate beings with similar mental states to them, thus inculcating a degree of compassion, which is the essence of morality.

But if there were societies in which murder was considered OK because no one had discovered it was wrong, then I would think there would be lots of evidence of those societies collapsing very quickly under the weight of all the rampant murder.

But I'm no historian, so if someone says murder was not understood to be evil before the Israelites and the Axial Age I guess I'll have to consider that as a possibility.

 

[Cypress]

I think the bigger hit is that the Dems often call out the version of "Christianity" the GOP practices as "evil" because it is the antithesis of Christian virtues being espoused by "ravening wolves" who call evil good.

I rarely see the mockers and denigraters of Christianity explicitly make that distinction, and you can't expect people to read your mind and figure out what subset of Christians you're mocking.

Every time liberals mock evangelical Christians, you are also mocking a lot of evangelicals who aren't white, who aren't conservative, who aren't steadfast Republicans.


A lot of liberals haven't reflected on what has happened the last two decades to Midwestern and Appalachian states that used to routinely vote Democrat.

It's not because they hate traditionally liberal policies like minimum wage, social security, Medicare. I think it's largely cultural.

But if you don't want to figure that out on your own, you're going to have to expect the Democratic party become a permanent minority.

 

[Yakuda]

Moral values evolving genetically are no less real than if they were freely willed, are they?

It's not that they're fully developed, either.
We kill living things and eat them. Not just plants, but sentient animals not too dissimilar to ourselves.

Lions eat zebras, giraffes, antelope, buffalo, etc, but it's not socially acceptable in their prides to eat one another.
We eat bovines, sheep/lambs, hogs, chickens, fish, etc, but it's not socially acceptable in our communities to eat one another.

Other than having more technical and artistic skills,
far less impressive physical fortitude,
and not being nearly as majestic looking,
how are we any different?

If they had electricity and running water, I might have preferred to be a lion.
The sleeping outside thing is the main deal-breaer for me.

This is the most hilarious one. I literally laughed out loud

"If they had electricity and running water, I might have preferred to be a lion."

You know why they don't have electric and running water you demented punch drunk piece of shit? Because they're fucking lions! You people so fucked up you it would be funny if it was so disturbing

 

[gmark77]

I rarely see the mockers and denigraters of Christianity explicitly make that distinction,

Interesting. I see it a LOT.

Every time liberals mock evangelical Christians, you are also mocking a lot of evangelicals who aren't white, aren't conservative, aren't steadfast Republicans.

Is it ever fair to question the Religious Right when they try to force their beliefs on the body politic?

A lot of liberals haven't reflected on what has happened the last two decades to Midwestern and Appalachian states that used to routinely vote Democrat.

The loss of jobs due to corporate greed is definitely a bad thing. But, by the same token, telling people you stand with Jesus while demonizing the disabled, attacking trans people, calling half the nation "vermin", "disappearing" individuals for saying things the administration doesn't like, deporting children with cancer to undeveloped nations for them to die, imprisoning people for the wrong skin color, decimating the safety regulations and handing billions of dollars over to the ultrawealthy at the expense of the poor is not necessarily the solution to their problems.

 

[gmark77]

If morality didn't exist prior to its discovery during the Axial Age, it makes things like this somewhat confusing:

[The oldest treated bone fracture in Croatia--130,000 years ago] - PubMed

Our analysis suggested successful healing of the fractures of the clavicle, radial bone and cranial bone trauma. Neanderthals treated successfully fracture and wounds and amputated forearm with poor result.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Older Neanderthal survived with a little help from his friends

An older Neanderthal from about 50,000 years ago, who had suffered multiple injuries and other degenerations, became deaf and must have relied on the help of others to avoid prey and survive well into his 40s, indicates a new analysis.

www.sciencedaily.com

Seems that Neanderthals "helped each other" and may have "taken care of each other" which would indicate some understanding of the value of the individual "other". This would seem to indicate the possible existence of "morality" or at least helping another without immediate recompense for the helper.