Western atheists are steeped in Christian morality whether you or they like it or not. A Christian and an Atheist in the West have more common cultural values than a "Christian" in Kenya.
You can be certain that he does because atheists are (luckily) wildly inconsistent with their own worldview and what it entails. If they were truly consistent they'd be killing Black folk and anyone they disliked on sight because under their paradigm life has no more inherent value than a twig falling off a tree. Most of the time they are better than their worldview, basically what said
because it's what it logically leads to unless you cope or insert other shit into it
>I would rape and murder if god didn't forbid me from doing so.
not what i said. you're an atheist, you can't make any moral claims. why would thinking this be bad under your worldview? why would rape and murder be bad if humans are animals that came to exist through the same flux and evolution as all other animals? is it wrong that animals kill and rape each other in the animal kingdom? know your place, Black person
2 months ago
Anonymous
>because it's what it logically leads to
Care to offer a single reason for thinking that's the case?
2 months ago
Anonymous
under atheism life is the product of a random chain of chemical reactions that ended up in the way it exists today over the course of a bajillion years. there is no possibility for metaphysics and as such there is nothing that gives human life (or any life) any objective value over any other piece of matter. if you're truly consistent with this belief system, you'd see yourself and your fellow human as nothing but bouncing atoms and nothing else. there'd be nothing binding you to a social contract, there'd be no reason to respect life or not just kill anything and everything you see. there's no morality, no telos, no nothing
>not what i said
So there are reasons why you wouldn't rape and murder besides god forbidding you from doing so, and religion is superfluous?
>there are reasons why you wouldn't rape and murder besides god forbidding you from doing so
yeah, now answer my questions. you're not in charge
2 months ago
Anonymous
>yeah, there are reasons apart from theism why I wouldn't rape or murder
So not raping and murdering is not exclusive to theists after all. Thanks for playing.
2 months ago
Anonymous
i don't rape not just because God tells me it's wrong but because since in my worldview human life is made in the image of God and thus has inherent value, to attack or damage any other human would belittle the same image that makes my life valuable >thanks for playing
you haven't answered a single question i asked, tried to weasel your way into a reddit gotcha moment and still fricking lost. you're pathetic. better luck next time homie
2 months ago
Anonymous
How does it follow from humans being made in the image of god that human life has inherent value?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>God is the supreme definition of all goodness >God makes things in his image >things made in His image are good >God tells us to preserve the good
badabing badaboom
>atheism can't even account for the possibility of any knowledge at all
How can theists account for the possibility of knowledge?
knowledge can be accounted for in the Christian worldview because the world was created by an all powerful, all knowing personable God and since we were made in his image we share some similarities (roughly speaking) with him, one of them being the ability to know things and interact with the universe in meaningful ways
What if god commanded you to rape and murder?
>what if the definition of all good told you to do bad thing
not possible because God doesn't go against his nature. this reddit tier shit doesn't work
2 months ago
Anonymous
>not possible
So you're denying god's omnipotence
2 months ago
Anonymous
nope. my belief system is that God is supreme good, you can't just go "but what if what you say is X is actually Y??"
and roll with it is as if you're doing something. denying the premise of my belief system is not a gotcha moment
>knowledge can be accounted for in the Christian worldview because the world was created by an all powerful, all knowing personable God and since we were made in his image we share some similarities (roughly speaking) with him, one of them being the ability to know things and interact with the universe in meaningful ways
But how do you know this?
due to the impossibility of the contrary, all other options reduce to absurdity
>god is the supreme definition of all goodness
Refuted by Euthyphro dilemma
>Euthyphro dilemma
you can't just name drop a literal false dichotomy and call it a day, get real. God loves good action because He himself is good, and the goodness of the action is due to it being His will
>matter in and of itself has nothing that makes objectively valuable in any way
You've given no justification for that claim. Why would humans not have moral value if they're material beings? >this is where all the epic edgy nihilism came from, it's the result of taking this belief system to its logical conclusion.
I think rather that it just comes from inadequate reflection.
>You've given no justification for that claim
if all you have is matter, then you only have what "is", and you can't derive an "ought" from an "is". It'd all just be matter in flux with no direction or idea of what it "should" be or do
Modern theists also believe life is a product of a chain of chemical reactions?
they think the chemical reactions were started/designed by an intelligent mind. that alone changes everything, come on now
>in my worldview
Your worldview doesn't account for all of theism.
i'm arguing for Christianity, not generic theism. You're not doing anything
2 months ago
Anonymous
Do you believe cars and computers have moral value because they were designed by an intelligent mind?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>due to the impossibility of the contrary
How do you know this?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>false dichotomy
Do you think a red circle can become a red circle?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>if all you have is matter, then you only have what "is", and you can't derive an "ought" from an "is". It'd all just be matter in flux with no direction or idea of what it "should" be or do
If you're claiming that I'm illicitly deriving an ought from an is, you need to show where I've supposedly done that in anything I've said. Otherwise, the is-ought problem is just completely irrelevant to what we're talking about here.
2 months ago
Anonymous
calm down homie, I'm saying you can't derive (the worldview itself, not you specifically) an ought which, like i said, is the realm of ethics from an is. In materialism, which is entwined with atheism, you only have what "is" and therefore have no possibility of any "ought"
>due to the impossibility of the contrary
How do you know this?
it's a long ass argument that i'm not dedicated enough to type out on this basket weaving forum but you can look up the Transcendental Argument which is pretty much exactly what i'd say in response to this
As an adherent of the christian faith, god's omnipotence is also a tenet of your belief system. Or do you deny that god is omnipotent after all?
he is omnipotent but he also does not go contrary to his own nature. again, reddit tier shit. you'll have to try harder
2 months ago
Anonymous
You're presuming the possibility of knowledge in order to prove the possibility of knowledge, which is fallacious. Ultimately, you don't have any account of knowledge over an atheist.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>he is omnipotent but also there are limits to his potency
2 months ago
Anonymous
>I'm saying you can't derive (the worldview itself, not you specifically) an ought which, like i said, is the realm of ethics from an is.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that this is right. I don't see why that would matter, because one can simply sidestep the whole is-ought problem by just starting with some normative claims. And so then you won't have the problem of deriving normative claims from descriptive claims.
2 months ago
Anonymous
As an adherent of the christian faith, god's omnipotence is also a tenet of your belief system. Or do you deny that god is omnipotent after all?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>knowledge can be accounted for in the Christian worldview because the world was created by an all powerful, all knowing personable God and since we were made in his image we share some similarities (roughly speaking) with him, one of them being the ability to know things and interact with the universe in meaningful ways
But how do you know this?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>god is the supreme definition of all goodness
Refuted by Euthyphro dilemma
2 months ago
Anonymous
What if god commanded you to rape and murder?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>in my worldview
Your worldview doesn't account for all of theism.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>under atheism life is the product of a random chain of chemical reactions that ended up in the way it exists today over the course of a bajillion years
Why exactly would that entail that life has no objective moral value? >there is no possibility for metaphysics
That's very strange claim considering most philosophers who work in metaphysics are atheists. They seem to be able to do metaphysics just fine but ok. >if you're truly consistent with this belief system, you'd see yourself and your fellow human as nothing but bouncing atoms and nothing else.
I don't see why humans being "nothing but bouncing atoms" would imply that they don't have moral value. Why would the stuff something is made of have any relevance to whether it's morally valuable?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>that's very strange claim considering most philosophers who work in metaphysics are atheists
and? just because they use metaphysics doesn't mean that the worldview can account for it. if you get really granular, atheism can't even account for the possibility of any knowledge at all, but atheists still valid make discoveries >They seem to be able to do metaphysics just fine but ok
they can do metaphysics because they do but the system that they espouse can't give an account for them. it's another example of them being better than the worldview they hold >I don't see why humans being "nothing but bouncing atoms" would imply that they don't have moral value
matter in and of itself has nothing that makes objectively valuable in any way, it's not even a blip on a radar of the universe. this is where all the epic edgy nihilism came from, it's the result of taking this belief system to its logical conclusion. under Christianity everything can be said to be valuable because it is the product of an intelligent creator who created everything out of nothing
2 months ago
Anonymous
>atheism can't even account for the possibility of any knowledge at all
How can theists account for the possibility of knowledge?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>matter in and of itself has nothing that makes objectively valuable in any way
You've given no justification for that claim. Why would humans not have moral value if they're material beings? >this is where all the epic edgy nihilism came from, it's the result of taking this belief system to its logical conclusion.
I think rather that it just comes from inadequate reflection.
2 months ago
Anonymous
Modern theists also believe life is a product of a chain of chemical reactions?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>not what i said
So there are reasons why you wouldn't rape and murder besides god forbidding you from doing so, and religion is superfluous?
>You can be certain that he does because atheists are (luckily) wildly inconsistent with their own worldview and what it entails.
Fortunately, theists have been staying very consistent, yes yes.
it assumes human life has value, that they are deserving of an allegedly fair judgement, and that they are to be punished with dignity. this is all incompatible with atheism, where we're all on equal footing value-wise as an ant
I guess that's just the roll of the dice, now isn't it?
A risk. But, no more riskier than anything else you'd probably face in life.
And who's to say you're completely safe around other religious folks? Even from those of the same religion. Even from those in the same denomination.
Western atheists are steeped in Christian morality whether you or they like it or not. A Christian and an Atheist in the West have more common cultural values than a "Christian" in Kenya.
You can be certain that he does because atheists are (luckily) wildly inconsistent with their own worldview and what it entails. If they were truly consistent they'd be killing Black folk and anyone they disliked on sight because under their paradigm life has no more inherent value than a twig falling off a tree. Most of the time they are better than their worldview, basically what said
>under their paradigm life has no more inherent value than a twig falling off a tree
Why think that?
because it's what it logically leads to unless you cope or insert other shit into it
not what i said. you're an atheist, you can't make any moral claims. why would thinking this be bad under your worldview? why would rape and murder be bad if humans are animals that came to exist through the same flux and evolution as all other animals? is it wrong that animals kill and rape each other in the animal kingdom? know your place, Black person
>because it's what it logically leads to
Care to offer a single reason for thinking that's the case?
under atheism life is the product of a random chain of chemical reactions that ended up in the way it exists today over the course of a bajillion years. there is no possibility for metaphysics and as such there is nothing that gives human life (or any life) any objective value over any other piece of matter. if you're truly consistent with this belief system, you'd see yourself and your fellow human as nothing but bouncing atoms and nothing else. there'd be nothing binding you to a social contract, there'd be no reason to respect life or not just kill anything and everything you see. there's no morality, no telos, no nothing
>there are reasons why you wouldn't rape and murder besides god forbidding you from doing so
yeah, now answer my questions. you're not in charge
>yeah, there are reasons apart from theism why I wouldn't rape or murder
So not raping and murdering is not exclusive to theists after all. Thanks for playing.
i don't rape not just because God tells me it's wrong but because since in my worldview human life is made in the image of God and thus has inherent value, to attack or damage any other human would belittle the same image that makes my life valuable
>thanks for playing
you haven't answered a single question i asked, tried to weasel your way into a reddit gotcha moment and still fricking lost. you're pathetic. better luck next time homie
How does it follow from humans being made in the image of god that human life has inherent value?
>God is the supreme definition of all goodness
>God makes things in his image
>things made in His image are good
>God tells us to preserve the good
badabing badaboom
knowledge can be accounted for in the Christian worldview because the world was created by an all powerful, all knowing personable God and since we were made in his image we share some similarities (roughly speaking) with him, one of them being the ability to know things and interact with the universe in meaningful ways
>what if the definition of all good told you to do bad thing
not possible because God doesn't go against his nature. this reddit tier shit doesn't work
>not possible
So you're denying god's omnipotence
nope. my belief system is that God is supreme good, you can't just go "but what if what you say is X is actually Y??"
and roll with it is as if you're doing something. denying the premise of my belief system is not a gotcha moment
due to the impossibility of the contrary, all other options reduce to absurdity
>Euthyphro dilemma
you can't just name drop a literal false dichotomy and call it a day, get real. God loves good action because He himself is good, and the goodness of the action is due to it being His will
>You've given no justification for that claim
if all you have is matter, then you only have what "is", and you can't derive an "ought" from an "is". It'd all just be matter in flux with no direction or idea of what it "should" be or do
they think the chemical reactions were started/designed by an intelligent mind. that alone changes everything, come on now
i'm arguing for Christianity, not generic theism. You're not doing anything
Do you believe cars and computers have moral value because they were designed by an intelligent mind?
>due to the impossibility of the contrary
How do you know this?
>false dichotomy
Do you think a red circle can become a red circle?
>if all you have is matter, then you only have what "is", and you can't derive an "ought" from an "is". It'd all just be matter in flux with no direction or idea of what it "should" be or do
If you're claiming that I'm illicitly deriving an ought from an is, you need to show where I've supposedly done that in anything I've said. Otherwise, the is-ought problem is just completely irrelevant to what we're talking about here.
calm down homie, I'm saying you can't derive (the worldview itself, not you specifically) an ought which, like i said, is the realm of ethics from an is. In materialism, which is entwined with atheism, you only have what "is" and therefore have no possibility of any "ought"
it's a long ass argument that i'm not dedicated enough to type out on this basket weaving forum but you can look up the Transcendental Argument which is pretty much exactly what i'd say in response to this
he is omnipotent but he also does not go contrary to his own nature. again, reddit tier shit. you'll have to try harder
You're presuming the possibility of knowledge in order to prove the possibility of knowledge, which is fallacious. Ultimately, you don't have any account of knowledge over an atheist.
>he is omnipotent but also there are limits to his potency
>I'm saying you can't derive (the worldview itself, not you specifically) an ought which, like i said, is the realm of ethics from an is.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that this is right. I don't see why that would matter, because one can simply sidestep the whole is-ought problem by just starting with some normative claims. And so then you won't have the problem of deriving normative claims from descriptive claims.
As an adherent of the christian faith, god's omnipotence is also a tenet of your belief system. Or do you deny that god is omnipotent after all?
>knowledge can be accounted for in the Christian worldview because the world was created by an all powerful, all knowing personable God and since we were made in his image we share some similarities (roughly speaking) with him, one of them being the ability to know things and interact with the universe in meaningful ways
But how do you know this?
>god is the supreme definition of all goodness
Refuted by Euthyphro dilemma
What if god commanded you to rape and murder?
>in my worldview
Your worldview doesn't account for all of theism.
>under atheism life is the product of a random chain of chemical reactions that ended up in the way it exists today over the course of a bajillion years
Why exactly would that entail that life has no objective moral value?
>there is no possibility for metaphysics
That's very strange claim considering most philosophers who work in metaphysics are atheists. They seem to be able to do metaphysics just fine but ok.
>if you're truly consistent with this belief system, you'd see yourself and your fellow human as nothing but bouncing atoms and nothing else.
I don't see why humans being "nothing but bouncing atoms" would imply that they don't have moral value. Why would the stuff something is made of have any relevance to whether it's morally valuable?
>that's very strange claim considering most philosophers who work in metaphysics are atheists
and? just because they use metaphysics doesn't mean that the worldview can account for it. if you get really granular, atheism can't even account for the possibility of any knowledge at all, but atheists still valid make discoveries
>They seem to be able to do metaphysics just fine but ok
they can do metaphysics because they do but the system that they espouse can't give an account for them. it's another example of them being better than the worldview they hold
>I don't see why humans being "nothing but bouncing atoms" would imply that they don't have moral value
matter in and of itself has nothing that makes objectively valuable in any way, it's not even a blip on a radar of the universe. this is where all the epic edgy nihilism came from, it's the result of taking this belief system to its logical conclusion. under Christianity everything can be said to be valuable because it is the product of an intelligent creator who created everything out of nothing
>atheism can't even account for the possibility of any knowledge at all
How can theists account for the possibility of knowledge?
>matter in and of itself has nothing that makes objectively valuable in any way
You've given no justification for that claim. Why would humans not have moral value if they're material beings?
>this is where all the epic edgy nihilism came from, it's the result of taking this belief system to its logical conclusion.
I think rather that it just comes from inadequate reflection.
Modern theists also believe life is a product of a chain of chemical reactions?
>not what i said
So there are reasons why you wouldn't rape and murder besides god forbidding you from doing so, and religion is superfluous?
>I would rape and murder if god didn't forbid me from doing so.
>You can be certain that he does because atheists are (luckily) wildly inconsistent with their own worldview and what it entails.
Fortunately, theists have been staying very consistent, yes yes.
Oh, yeah. Like "Thou shalt not rape."
Oh, wait.
the fact they are far less likely to murder you
Due to the Christian-based court system and law enforcement.
and what exactly is christian based about it
it assumes human life has value, that they are deserving of an allegedly fair judgement, and that they are to be punished with dignity. this is all incompatible with atheism, where we're all on equal footing value-wise as an ant
how exactly is that a uniquely christian value
How would you know if a theist values your life?
You wouldn't. Atheism and theism has nothing to do with valuing life.
You just have to have faith 🙂
I guess that's just the roll of the dice, now isn't it?
A risk. But, no more riskier than anything else you'd probably face in life.
And who's to say you're completely safe around other religious folks? Even from those of the same religion. Even from those in the same denomination.
You want to understand atheists/disbelievers? Then read this: https://quranenc.com/en/browse/english_saheeh/2