Bill O'Reilly"s downfall

[Skip]

I have repeatedly offered the opportunity to all attendant Atheists to give me one moral precept - just one - that follows as a duty from Atheism

There are none since atheism is not a moral philosophy so you should not be demanding atheists provide you evidence of it being one. Now they
may be moral but this has got nothing to do with them being atheist. There is no requirement for an atheist to be moral for that specific reason

The purple was mine; the curtailed version was yours; the real statement was surreptitious 57's

[Skip]

It [universal morality] is a fiction.

Questions have never been more begged than that one!

There was a question? What was it? Who asked it?

No doubt you believe there's no such thing as universal morality.

No doubt at all. If you believe there is, you must have a reason - a grounded reason, obviously - for believing that.
I have not seen it in practice; have not seen it in effect, nor read of it in human history; have not know of a moral precept carved on any stone that is not contradicted by a moral precept carved on some other stone.
Every tribe's imaginary sky-buddy has a different notion of whom to kill, whom to rape; whom to enslave - few forbid those acts absolutely.
Every tribe has taboos about body parts and/or functions, but not the same ones; forbid some relationships, but not the same ones;
prescribe a social hierarchy, but they're not the same, either; a way to deal with the damaged, misbehaving and misfits - all different.
Every tribe has some notion of what they owe the gods or spirits in ritual, prayer, shrines and offerings - various.
They don't even all have a similar notion of what sin is, or whether there is an afterlife.
Grounded in a swamp.
I certainly have seen, heard and read a lot of people's claim that the moral code to which they themselves subscribe is universal.
I'll put you at the bottom of that long list.

That's rather the point I think IC is making, and you've just sawn off the branch your counter-argument was sitting on.

My argument, as you call it, was merely a slight correction in your sloppy use of words and concepts.
If there was an argument, a counter-argument and a branch - feel free to demonstrate.

And in the process shown you have yourself to be less than honest, I think, Skip.

Provide evidence.

An unshakable commitment to intellectual honesty is sine qua non for a philosopher. You clearly don't have what it takes.

Clearly. But then, I haven't claimed - ever, anywhere - to be a philosopher.
All I propose to do is blow a whistle - and maybe the odd vuvuzela - at woomongers and windbags.

[thedoc]

... but are not part of the Atheist dogma ...

There is no 'atheist dogma'.

Put it this way, does you not believing in Santa Claus mean you have a Santa dogma?

You're saying it repeatedly doesn't make it so.

And where did I ever say that I don't believe in Santa Claus, or is that just something you pulled out of your ass.

[Skip]

Quick, somebody! Mount an expedition to rescue Santa before all the ice melts.
He can relocate to a nice religious theme park in Tennessee or Florida.
Artificial ice and lifelike mechanical reindeer, plus perks, for two public appearances per day.

[thedoc]

Quick, somebody! Mount an expedition to rescue Santa before all the ice melts.
He can relocate to a nice religious theme park in Tennessee or Florida.
Artificial ice and lifelike mechanical reindeer, plus perks, for two public appearances per day.

Oh, the unbeliever, don't you know that it doesn't matter if we see all the ice melting, Santa and his workshop will still stand on a sea of ice at the north Pole, it's the magic of Christmas. But it is only real for the believer.

[Greta]

Consider this exchange and observe Immanuel's games:

... there is value in the ancients' reports of their experiments in consciousness. Buddhists and Hindus had a direct approach here whereas the less cerebral Abrahamic religions reported their findings achieved via the devotional path. That's valuable knowledge passed down by our ancestors, and I wouldn't be surprised if there was something more to it all than is supposed by pragmatic materialism. However, most religious material strikes me as culturally specific rather than universal, with the pearls buried amongst the swine.

Buddhists and Hindus...

Take a look around the world. How do you see their countries faring? Any ideas why?

Overpopulation. Also, being in the tropics these countries are the most vulnerable to climate change (mostly caused by Christian nations), with recent extreme weather events affecting them.

So yes, the violent, warlike Abrahamic tribes have beaten down and destroyed all opposition for two thousand years and it looks as though they will continue their dominance. I'm not sure that's much to be proud of.

Again, a question: do you deny that the global climate change currently in train was caused by human activity?

I deny that the explanation for all the human misery in the Buddhist and Hindu worlds is "climate change." That's what I found amusing.

Climate change? Not overpopulation, as I stated first up as the main reason?

Immanuel, I do not want to wade through your games. I keep hoping that if I speak gently with you then you might behave like a normal human being rather than a manipulative politician type.

I kept engaging because I enjoy challenging spiritualists. I am curious about spirituality but leery of the claims made by those who claim to be spiritual and will test them to see how solid they are. Interactions must be direct and honest to be of any use. Lawyer-like gaming is pointless here, unless one is hoping to convince a few stray clueless people who may stumble on to a page via Google.

Most edits to correct spacing between paras.

[Arising_uk]

You're saying it repeatedly doesn't make it so. ...

Point me to this 'atheist dogma'?

Point me to the authority which lays this dogma down?

And where did I ever say that I don't believe in Santa Claus, or is that just something you pulled out of your ass.

I wouldn't be surprised if you did as it seems to be a habit of your's believing in such things.

[Skip]

By the way and for the record:
There is still no atheist dogma.

And it still hasn't drained, voided or purged the world of all its insane, cruel, destructive, conflicting, absurd moral strictures.

"Good night and good luck."
Edward. R. Murrow

[thedoc]

Point me to this 'atheist dogma'?
Point me to the authority which lays this dogma down?

Here you are,

I would agree with you that Atheism has a dogma...though a very limited and anti-intellectual one.
For example, these are the Atheist commandments:
No gods.
No allowing that anyone else has reason to believe in gods.
All "religions" will be treated as the same. (All will be kept in fuzzy focus only.)
No part of the achievements of any "religion" will count. Every sin committed by any will be attributed to all.
No Atheist is to be required to justify his/her disbelief in any way.
That's pretty much the dogma.

IC is a good enough authority for me.

[Dubious]

Point me to this 'atheist dogma'?
Point me to the authority which lays this dogma down?

Here you are,

I would agree with you that Atheism has a dogma...though a very limited and anti-intellectual one.
For example, these are the Atheist commandments:
No gods.
No allowing that anyone else has reason to believe in gods.
All "religions" will be treated as the same. (All will be kept in fuzzy focus only.)
No part of the achievements of any "religion" will count. Every sin committed by any will be attributed to all.
No Atheist is to be required to justify his/her disbelief in any way.
That's pretty much the dogma.

IC is a good enough authority for me.

Nietzsche should have complemented the statement that God is dead by also including the brains of theists. I'm beginning to think that it's theists who killed god and not atheists...the god who couldn't survive the collective intelligence of his flock.

[Immanuel Can]

The purple was mine; the curtailed version was yours; the real statement was surreptitious 57's

Don't you just hate the way this program indicates quotations? It's so ambiguous.

[Immanuel Can]

Climate change? Not overpopulation, as I stated first up as the main reason?

Take your pick. They're both implausible. But the first more than the second, admittedly.

I wonder if tribalism, wars and rebellions, political corruption, totalitarianism, misguided foreign aid, drugs, epidemics, Islamic fundamentalism, resource depletion, the diamond market, the denigration of local women...any such things strike you as comparably good explanations to "too many people" and "the weather''s not right."

[Greta]

Climate change? Not overpopulation, as I stated first up as the main reason?

Take your pick. They're both implausible. But the first more than the second, admittedly.

I wonder if tribalism, wars and rebellions, political corruption, totalitarianism, misguided foreign aid, drugs, epidemics, Islamic fundamentalism, resource depletion, the diamond market, the denigration of local women...any such things strike you as comparably good explanations to "too many people" and "the weather''s not right."

I note that the west's historical tribalism, wars and rebellions, political corruption, totalitarianism, misguided foreign aid, drugs, epidemics, Christian fundamentalism, resource depletion, the coal market and the denigration of local women did not prevent it from prospering.

The west does not yet understand the corrosive total effect of overpopulation but we are only just starting to get lessons in what it's like to have a population too large to work with the infrastructure - and the US has already become desperate after a short time of being placed under a tiny proportion of the pressure placed for generations on those in Buddhist nations. It could be that the accepting philosophies of Buddhism promote more resilience under extreme hardship over generations than Christianity.

[Immanuel Can]

I note that the west's historical tribalism...etc.

There were good reasons, many of which had to do with the prevalence of Christian values and morality.

But as for the Developing World, as they call it (though much of it continues not to "develop" well) check this out...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/as-a ... xj9bm80h8m

This is the fairest, most accurate description of what I've seen first-hand that Africa is really struggling with...and by an Atheist, no less.

And it's not the weather nor overpopulation.

[Greta]

Immanuel, I can't read the article without registering and on principle I won't give my details to organisations for the sake of one article. Perhaps you can provide some quotes from it?

I must say, you are one of the most forceful and determined Christian warriors I've ever encountered online. I marvel at your drive and passion for it. I could never submit to a tradition so completely. Flawed as my mind is, I want to remain independent and neutral - to be an observer rather than a promoter. Also, I find so many theistic ideas and notions to be irrational, retrograde and sometimes pointlessly cruel.