EVIL!!!!!!!!

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2662
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Fri Aug 23, 2019 3:19 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:40 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:34 am
My syllogism,
  • 1. Humans exist [self-evident] grounded in reality.
    2. No human [except rare exceptions] will want to be killed.
    3. Therefore no human being shall kill another human being.
Okay, VA, let's take a logical look at this:

Premise 1 is true, but manifestly entirely irrelevant. It fails even to include the term "Atheism." A premise missing one of the key terms is irrelevant.
Re Premise 1, why should I be bothered with 'atheism' which is actually groundless.
What I have started is with reality and how to deal with the reality of evil [as defined].

Note atheism is groundless;

1. Theism is a belief in God
2. The prefix 'a' denote a negative, or absence.
3. Therefore [a]theism is the absence of a belief in a God.

1. God is an impossibility
2. Theism is a belief in God
3. Therefore theism is a non-starter grounded on an impossibility, thus groundless.

My syllogism in this case is not the basic formal logical forms like,
  • ALL A is B
    B is C
    Therefore C is A.
and its other official forms.

Btw, wherein in reality can be ever get such reality as 'ALL A is B' with 100% certainty.
I understand it need more explanation or extra syllogism for each premise. As it is, it may not be formal logic 100%, but it is very inferential and rational.
Last edited by Veritas Aequitas on Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3517
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:55 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
surreptitious57 wrote:
An atheist who had a moral philosophy that was entirely compatible with their atheism could say a lot more than nothing at all
What can an Atheist say premised solely on his Atheism about evil
This restriction is entirely unnecessary but you have to apply it in order to maintain the fiction that atheism is a redundant moral philosophy
You know very well it is not a moral philosophy at all but persist with the straw man rather than debate openly with any of the atheists here

surreptitious57
Posts: 3517
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Aug 23, 2019 5:12 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
why then would you ever want to follow an ideology you are afraid to explore on its own terms
Atheism is a privative not an ideology - there is nothing to follow - it is not a belief system or a philosophy
And there is nothing to explore beyond the non acceptance of the existence of God because this is all it is

surreptitious57
Posts: 3517
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Aug 23, 2019 6:22 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Deal with how Atheism can speak of morality
Making this request yet again when it has already been answered multiple times
Atheism has absolutely nothing at all to say about morality as it is strictly amoral

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2662
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:26 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:40 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:34 am
My syllogism,
  • 1. Humans exist [self-evident] grounded in reality.
    2. No human [except rare exceptions] will want to be killed.
    3. Therefore no human being shall kill another human being.
Okay, VA, let's take a logical look at this:

Premise 1 is true, but manifestly entirely irrelevant. It fails even to include the term "Atheism." A premise missing one of the key terms is irrelevant.

Premise 2 takes for granted, with no proof at all, that "wanting" is a morally-binding quality. And it again fails to mention the key term.

The conclusion does not follow from the premises.
Ask them or anyone 'do you want to be killed by another human being'?
Why do you need to ask them? Darwin, Nietzsche or Rand would say, "Who cares what they want?" What makes you certain that humans are the kinds of creatures one owes to ask anything? Why aren't they the kind of creatures one simply uses as one wills?

Look at it this way. No lion says to a zebra, "Do you wish to be killed?" (And if it did, and took that seriously, it well might starve.) Humans are animals too, right? So why should one human "ask" another if he/she "wants" or "likes" anything, especially if doing that thing stands to advantage the first person?

I'm not saying that's my view. But a consistent Atheist would be obligated to think that. If you think an Atheist owes us to "ask" each other whether we "like" this or that, you would need to show that beyond a reasonable doubt. It's not obvious.
You are blabbering with lions, zebra, excuses and deflections.

Re Premise 2,
  • 1. -you can test it yourself by asking yourself and getting a confirmation from personal experience.
    2. -you can then ask the question to your family, friends, and
    3. ask anyone you can communicate with.
    4. ask your friends to do the same survey
    5. Do an internet poll that will cover as many people as possible.
Do you think you will get an affirmative answer 'yes' to the question re Premise 2 from people in 1 and 2?
If there is someone close or you know well who answer 'yes' and insist they want to be killed, you are likely to recommend they see a psychiatrist or counselor.

If you have reasonable average intelligence you should be able to form a strong hypothesis from your survey [enforced by personal conviction and experience] and has the confidence your hypothesis will be proven right in a matter of time.

If I can contact all 7+ billion of people of earth to ask the question relating to P2, I am confident 99.999% will not what to be killed. You think not?

I believe it is a default i.e. 99.999% would NOT be that stupid and sick to want to be killed, or it would stupid to even think otherwise.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2662
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:50 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:40 pm
Re animals versus humans in relation to morality, surely you cannot be that thick not to know the significant difference between the brain and mental capabilities of humans and other animals.
That humans are higher moral beings is represented by the higher number of mirror neurons [related to empathy] in their brain as compared to minimal in the primates and none in the lower levels of animals.
True, but not relevant. Really, this is not proof of anything at all.

Let us grant that humans are immensely better than all other animals. If they are still animals, so what? Paramecia are immeasurably below lions -- much more distant, in fact, than lions are from us; yet lions still kill. What feature of our sophistication makes it logical to think we can't, or shouldn't, kill?

But in point of fact, this argument too is irrelevant. That's because it fails to refer to the key term at all. It doesn't even make any use of the supposition "Atheism is true," so it's not an argument for that proposition, nor is it an argument from that proposition. It's just off topic, then.

So it may be that not killing has some utility for us, sometimes; of course it's equally obvious that sometimes killing does have utility to us. Either way, the fact of its utility to us won't make it wrong to kill, of course, if Atheism is true. It will merely leave it as optional -- and not as a morally "better" or morally "worse" thing to do than not killing.
Secular morality absolutes are reasoned out logically and not based purely on experiences.

Establishing a reasoned moral absolute do not mean, there will be no killings by humans.

I has stated the reasoned moral absolute is merely an ideal and a guide.
The usefulness of this ideal is to enable us to generate a variance which can be improved upon.

Don't keep bringing in atheism, the concern with this OP is the concept of evil and how can we reduce the problem of secular evil.
Why argue about theism versus atheism, the critical approach is to deal with the problem of evil within reality.
If 10% of the people in your area are malignant psychopaths [potential killers] what can arguing about theism or atheism themselves do about it? If God threatens Hell upon those who kill, what positive results can theists produce in that society when psychopaths are generally [a]theists.

But if we are to establish the moral and ethical model with the idea absolute maxim,
"no human can kill another human" [as reasoned]
we will straight away generate a problem statement that will trigger needed actions to close whatever the variance or moral gap.

The theistic moral model cannot drive continuous improvements to reduce the number of killings.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6303
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Fri Aug 23, 2019 5:06 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 3:19 am
Re Premise 1, why should I be bothered with 'atheism' which is actually groundless.
Only because the question we were considering was "Can Atheism ground any account of evil." So you can't avoid starting with a claim about Atheism, if you want to be on topic.

If you wanted to make a relevant syllogism, then Premise 1 has to be something like:

"Atheism is true," or "Atheism means that such and such is so."

X gives us Y

Then you need a second premise, taking you from

Y gives us Z

And then a conclusion, that should go

X therefore necessitates Z. (Which, in this case, will be something like "Therefore Atheism [ie. X] shows Z is evil [Z being some normally evil-regarded action, perhaps, like say "murder"].

Can you do anything in that form?

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6303
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Fri Aug 23, 2019 6:58 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 6:22 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Deal with how Atheism can speak of morality
Making this request yet again when it has already been answered multiple times
Atheism has absolutely nothing at all to say about morality as it is strictly amoral
Thank you! That's the point.

Now, let's get to the second point: granted Atheism as if it were truth -- namely, no God and a universe that is a cosmic accident -- why was Stalin an "evil" person?

surreptitious57
Posts: 3517
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:44 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
why was Stalin an evil person
I personally equate evil to what someone does rather than who someone is
However to answer your question as posed I would say that Stalin was an evil person purely and simply because he did evil things
I would say he did evil things because he possessed the twin characteristics of dictator and psychopath [ his atheism is irrelevant ]

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6303
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:47 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:44 pm
Immanuel Can wrote:
why was Stalin an evil person
I personally equate evil to what someone does rather than who someone is
It won't affect the problem. One could try to refer the adjective "evil" to anything.

So let's take predatory pedophelia, or maybe axe murder...these are things some people do. And we probably all want to call them "evil."

If Atheism is true, then in what sense is anything "evil"? What does it mean for an Atheist to call something (or someone) "evil"?

That's the sort of thing I'm asking. I'm wondering how good and evil can have any objective content at all, or even any reality to back a subjective claim of the same, if Atheism is the assumption.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3517
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:12 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
how good and evil can have any objective content at all or even any reality to back a subjective claim of the same if Atheism is the assumption
Atheism has nothing to say about morality and you agree with this so then why are you still asking questions about it in relation to good and evil
I could say that the basis for morality is evolutionary psychology but as it has no religious foundation to it you would reject it for this very reason

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 6303
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:33 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:12 pm
Immanuel Can wrote:
how good and evil can have any objective content at all or even any reality to back a subjective claim of the same if Atheism is the assumption
Atheism has nothing to say about morality and you agree with this so then why are you still asking questions about it in relation to good and evil
Very simple.

Atheism stultifies those concepts completely. They refer to nothing. That means that if one is an Atheist, and wants to behave rationally and consistently with what one says one believes, one is also obligated to believe there is no evil.

Can you live with that?

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2662
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Sat Aug 24, 2019 6:48 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 5:06 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Aug 23, 2019 3:19 am
Re Premise 1, why should I be bothered with 'atheism' which is actually groundless.
Only because the question we were considering was "Can Atheism ground any account of evil." So you can't avoid starting with a claim about Atheism, if you want to be on topic.

If you wanted to make a relevant syllogism, then Premise 1 has to be something like:

"Atheism is true," or "Atheism means that such and such is so."

X gives us Y

Then you need a second premise, taking you from

Y gives us Z

And then a conclusion, that should go

X therefore necessitates Z. (Which, in this case, will be something like "Therefore Atheism [ie. X] shows Z is evil [Z being some normally evil-regarded action, perhaps, like say "murder"].

Can you do anything in that form?
Note the OP is not about atheism, it is about 'evil' [as defined].

Note the fact is, there are people who want nothing to do with the theists' belief that a God exists as some entity who imposed absolute moral laws as a threat on believers .

Where theism is within this meaning
  • ism
    /ˈɪz(ə)m/ noun
    INFORMAL•DEROGATORY
    a distinctive practice, system, or philosophy, typically a political ideology or an artistic movement.
    "he loathed isms and any form of dogma"
I have nothing to do with those who claim to accept atheism.

Since "ism' is generally derogatory, I don't believe those who are not-theist would accept their views are within 'atheism'.

As such you cannot generalize with the term 'atheism' but to note the respective views of the various groups who do not accept God as something real.

My proposal is non-theists can establish a moral and ethical system to deal with problem of secular evil based on an absolute moral principle [as justified above].
Even you can reasoned this out [as I had done above] without relying on a God.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3517
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Sat Aug 24, 2019 7:20 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
if one is an Atheist and wants to behave rationally and consistently with what one says one believes one is also obligated to believe there is no evil
The concept of evil can just as easily be understood by an atheist as it can by anyone
So I therefore have no more of a problem comprehending it than you do for example

We may disagree on the origin or cause of it [ I say psychological / you say religious ] but not the fact of its actual existence
And to use an obvious example we would both agree that the Holocaust was evil so acknowledging it is not a problem for me

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6894
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Dontaskme » Sat Aug 24, 2019 9:42 am

There is no such thing as an EVIL doing, the word (evil) is a made up concept made by nothing believed to be real by nothing.

Everything defaults to Nothing...Nothing is Everything and Everything is Nothing.

You were nothing before you were born, you are nothing while you are born, and you will be nothing after you die.
There is only nothing being everything which is nothing.

In a nutshell, you are NOTHING.

Even in the made-up story of EVIL doings...there is nothing there to be anti evil or against evil, it's just part of the illusory show of someone living life as an action figure, in the same context there is nothing evil in the evil doings seen in a movie shown on TV or at the cinema. The characters in the movie don't exist except as mental constructs, just as the characters in a nightly dream don't exist. There is nothing behind the image of a human being in reality making that human being be a human being. That too is a mental construct, and the mind is the nothing that makes everything from it's nothingness. And is why evil does not actually exist in reality.

The sooner the imagined human character faces it's true self which is the bottomless abyss of nothingness fearlessly with full acceptance the sooner one can finally be free of all expectation fear and desire. Being alive is no different to being dead. We have no more importance here than that of the life of a mosquito.



.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests