EVIL!!!!!!!!

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

Moderators: AMod, iMod

gaffo
Posts: 3239
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by gaffo » Tue Sep 03, 2019 4:04 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm


The problem with the UN just deciding to preach human rights is twofold: firstly, the UN has no real authority, military or moral.

I'm glad it does not have the former. a world military would be a disaster for liberty.

as for the latter, the UN does serve a "moral" role (more aptly a universally suggested and promoted moral LEGAL Code of conduct - "international law" stuff.

and hey!

that GREAT! i affirm and support a legal codex for international conduct.

you don't? if not why not?

UN was created to prevent ww3, and the league of nations was to prevent ww2 (sadly the league FAILED and we got ww2).

you wish for the UN to fail and we get ww3?



Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
So what they "agree" (even if we suppose that they do) has no compulsion behind it of any kind -- not force,
good, i do not like the idea of a world gov with the power of force to make all nations comply (this of course will never happen since the UN is a "debating society" not a government with an army.

thank your God.

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
not rational integrity and not morality.
since 1948 i've found the UN to be both generally rational and moral body, and has served my (american myself) nation's interests.

and suspect she has served other's nations as well since 1948 - moreso than would be the case without her.


Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
Theirs is just an opinion, and an opinion that many of their members do not even practice in their own countries. Secondly, there is no rational grounds behind their claims. Instead, they're borrowing from John Locke, and from a worldview that the UN itself does not hold. So their own ideological position undermines any rational basis for their public declarations about "rights."

other than affirming that the UN has and is at times hypocritical, your point? we would be better off without her?

i disagree.

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
In short, they have neither a logical basis, an authority,
UN has authority for the Rule of Law per the conventions of international treaties.


Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
nor have any history of personally practicing these claims they make about universal human rights.
nor should they, the UN is a legal body - a debating club - not a world government!

just like NATO, but bigger (and weaker - lol).


Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
They're really no more than a collection of the world's most hypocritical impotent scolds. Their human rights commission, for example, routinely condemns places like Israel, while letting places like Iran and Saudi off the hook. So how serious as a moral authority can they be?

ya, UN could do better, your solution is to nullify the UN instead of reform it in this particular?

and removing the UN from existance will serve the world better how????????????

BTW:

Israel is a signatory of the 4th Geneva Accords (1948) - and has violated it since that time (more aptly since 1967).

I tell you how SA and Israel differ per the Geneva accords they both signed if you are interested, but i do not think you care to learn.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 8381
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am

gaffo wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 2:12 am
a negation of a belief in your god/gods does not negate the the Atheist's morality due to his nature as a social animal.
To say that some men still happen to believe in morality is not the same as to say they have a rationally justified belief in it. Without rational justification, the idea that humans tend to believe in it only means, "People like delusions."

Under Atheist assumptions, Materialism is true. Under Materialism, there is no such thing as morality...only peculiar, contingent social practices that are not legitimate at all...and it may well be the case, as Nietzsche thought it was, that once we decide "God is dead," then rationally, there is no good reason continue to follow purely imaginary moral precepts, and many advantages in not doing so....the greatest of which is that amoral people are more realistic than those who naively follow one or another moral code, and not the least of which is that amoral person has every strategic advantage over those who continue to delude themselves by being moral when they don't have to be.

Your quarrel is with Atheism, and with guys like Nietzsche, not me, gaffo. You may not like to hear it, but it's the truth. Materialism is necessary for Atheism, and as sure as night follows day, Materialism destroys any hope morality can be legitimate.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 8381
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:10 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 3:13 am
  • 1. There are empirical evidence slavery is evil and violent that cause tremendous sufferings to humans. There are many complains and recommendations to end slavery. This is the empirical "is."
    2. From the empirical "is" in 1, humanity came together to establish 'oughts' i.e. No Slavery [especially Chattel] is permitted - Article 4.
    3. Then the people slowly graduate to understand the truth of this conventions and they agreed and signed on to the Slavery convention.
    4. Thereafter each Nation will establish laws to prevent slavery.
This doesn't work either.

Firstly, slavery is far from over. There are more slaves in the world today than at any time in history, and they are held in more degraded conditions than often pertained under the old-style chattel slavery. Many are women and children, held and exploited for sexual purposes. So much for the "agreement" on that.

Secondly, the UN is nothing. It has no power, no authority, no moral compass, and no integrity. It's a rotten, corrupt mess. Nations routinely sign up to their "accords" merely to fend off criticism, or to gain the upper hand on each other, and then persist in enslaving people anyway.

Thirdly, you've still got a huge jump from "is" to "ought", with absolutely no warrant. So it seems you figured out there is a problem there, but you don't really seem to know what it is, and have no idea how to fix it.

Finally, you've gone ad hominem, which means you've run out of relevant data.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 8381
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:13 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 3:32 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
As stated, humanity must work within the brain of all humans to make it spontaneous.
Well, really, this only means, "We must indoctrinate the masses, because we can't convince them with logic."

And I disagree. It would be immoral and contrary to basic human rights to do that, even if one were to imagine we would thereby "improve" the world. The chances we would indoctrinate someone with some poisonous collective madness is historically very high. But even if it were not, it would be wrong to do, if one believes in people's freedom of conscience, which is the most fundamental human right of all.
..
This is a very typical response I get from bigots
And this is the tactic of ideologically-possessed Leftists. When someone corners you with reason, then you call them a "Fascist," a "Nazi," "privileged," "bigoted," or "male." And you hope that they forget reason.

I can see you've stopped thinking. The ad hominem is always a dead giveaway on that. Too bad: you had half of the equation figured out, but you'll never get the rest of it like that.

gaffo
Posts: 3239
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by gaffo » Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:15 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
gaffo wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 2:12 am
a negation of a belief in your god/gods does not negate the the Atheist's morality due to his nature as a social animal.
To say that some men still happen to believe in morality is not the same as to say they have a rationally justified belief in it. Without rational justification
Morality is based upon feelings, and is an instinct.

reason is irrelevant.
Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
Your quarrel is with Atheism,
nope
Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
and with guys like Nietzsche,
yep
Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
not me, gaffo.
nope, if you think morality is tied to reason and that is why atheists are immoral then your view on this matter is counter to mine and so........

nope.

Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
Materialism is necessary for Atheism
I'm not a materialist i'm a Solipsist!!!!!

if you think i can be a materialistic solipsist - i'll show you the flying pigs.

I'm still an Atheist, though not a materialist - i'm talking to/arguing with myself again.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 4178
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:26 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:10 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 3:13 am
  • 1. There are empirical evidence slavery is evil and violent that cause tremendous sufferings to humans. There are many complains and recommendations to end slavery. This is the empirical "is."
    2. From the empirical "is" in 1, humanity came together to establish 'oughts' i.e. No Slavery [especially Chattel] is permitted - Article 4.
    3. Then the people slowly graduate to understand the truth of this conventions and they agreed and signed on to the Slavery convention.
    4. Thereafter each Nation will establish laws to prevent slavery.
This doesn't work either.

Firstly, slavery is far from over. There are more slaves in the world today than at any time in history, and they are held in more degraded conditions than often pertained under the old-style chattel slavery. Many are women and children, held and exploited for sexual purposes. So much for the "agreement" on that.

Secondly, the UN is nothing. It has no power, no authority, no moral compass, and no integrity. It's a rotten, corrupt mess. Nations routinely sign up to their "accords" merely to fend off criticism, or to gain the upper hand on each other, and then persist in enslaving people anyway.

Thirdly, you've still got a huge jump from "is" to "ought", with absolutely no warrant. So it seems you figured out there is a problem there, but you don't really seem to know what it is, and have no idea how to fix it.

Finally, you've gone ad hominem, which means you've run out of relevant data.
To explain the basis you have arrived at your defenses and view is not exactly ad hominen when that is justified. I did not resort to derogatory and vulgar terms.
I don't mind a justified psychological analysis of why I am not-a-theist.

Yes, slavery is far from over.
I have already explained the UN approach is crude but indicate an inkling of how the introduction of 'ought' can and will work.

This is why I proposed humanity need to establish a framework of morality and ethics that will increase the average moral quotient [if 100 now] to 1000 i.e. 10 times in the future to ensure the ought imputed in the mind of the individuals are manifested spontaneously without enforcements.

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 4178
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:37 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:13 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 3:32 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm

Well, really, this only means, "We must indoctrinate the masses, because we can't convince them with logic."

And I disagree. It would be immoral and contrary to basic human rights to do that, even if one were to imagine we would thereby "improve" the world. The chances we would indoctrinate someone with some poisonous collective madness is historically very high. But even if it were not, it would be wrong to do, if one believes in people's freedom of conscience, which is the most fundamental human right of all.
..
This is a very typical response I get from bigots
And this is the tactic of ideologically-possessed Leftists. When someone corners you with reason, then you call them a "Fascist," a "Nazi," "privileged," "bigoted," or "male." And you hope that they forget reason.

I can see you've stopped thinking. The ad hominem is always a dead giveaway on that. Too bad: you had half of the equation figured out, but you'll never get the rest of it like that.
Note 'bigot' is not derogatory and is a valid intellectual term, i.e.
"a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions."

'Stupid' is a person who do not intelligent enough to use the appropriate knowledge for the relevant argument. When I state 'stupid' it is with reference to a particular argument and not to the person as whole. A person who is intelligence on modern issues could be stupid when tackling localized problems in the middle of a jungle.

It is very natural and typical of a theist to invoke defense mechanisms when his/her belief is threatened, thus your confirmation biases.

You have not provided any sound counter arguments to my proposals, except keep insisting,
"no ought from is" based on Hume and basic logic.

I have already provided justifications on how the introduction of 'ought' as in the UN case has already work, albeit it is still VERY crude and need serious improvements to qualify as a complete and efficient framework of morality and ethics.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 8381
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Sep 03, 2019 1:22 pm

gaffo wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:15 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
gaffo wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 2:12 am
a negation of a belief in your god/gods does not negate the the Atheist's morality due to his nature as a social animal.
To say that some men still happen to believe in morality is not the same as to say they have a rationally justified belief in it. Without rational justification
Morality is based upon feelings, and is an instinct.

reason is irrelevant.
Then morality also is nothing more than a feeling. An "instinct" to have it may exist, but this doesn't suggest it's a good instinct: because we also have an instinct toward aggression, promiscuity, violence, dishonesty, etc., all of which "morality" (whatever that is, tells us often can be evil) So that doesn't help either.

And if reason is irrelevant, then you can supply no reasons to show that it's irrelevant. They're all irrelevant.
Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
Your quarrel is with Atheism,
nope
Yep.
Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
and with guys like Nietzsche,
yep
Well, literally millions of people, and every expert you can name, (except Jung) has acclaimed Nietzsche as a major Atheist. However, only gaffo has proclaimed himself as a true Atheist, a good representation of the view. So we onlookers are in a pickle: if we have to judge which is the authentic Atheist, which are we to think? How much testimony do we need? What's the threshold of the reasonable there?

I don't think it's reasonable to call Nietzsche "not an Atheist." I think it's also not reasonable to call him "Not a real Atheist," or "Not a representative Atheist," or even "Not one of the most highly-regarded and enthusiastically cited Atheists in history."
Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
not me, gaffo.
nope, if you think morality is tied to reason and that is why atheists are immoral then your view on this matter is counter to mine and so........
Morality is destroyed by Materialism, and Materialism is necessitated by Atheism. That's my argument in a nutshell. I didn't mention reason, but it's another grounds on which to criticize Atheism. Atheism has no power to give any reasons for morality either.
Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:04 am
Materialism is necessary for Atheism
I'm not a materialist i'm a Solipsist!!!!!
That's like saying, "I'm not a husband, I'm a male." You can easily be both. They don't contradict.
I'm still an Atheist, though not a materialist

If you're not a Materialist, then by definition, you must believe that something beyond the material world, something real that never can be reduced to materials, exists. What would that be?

And if something beyond the material world is real, then you believe in what...spirits? ghosts? gods? The God? Impersonal metaphysics, like "luck, "fate" and "fortune"? But in that case, on what grounds would you be an Atheist anymore? What do you believe in, that is not merely materials, that makes you "not a materialist"?

I'm sincerely asking, because I can't see how that makes any logical sense. But I'm open to being informed.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 8381
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Sep 03, 2019 1:28 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:37 am
It is very natural and typical of a theist...
Ad hominem.
You have not provided any sound counter arguments to my proposals, except keep insisting,
"no ought from is" based on Hume and basic logic.
Heh. :)

If that were all, it would be more than enough. But as it is, you're just not being honest there.
I have already provided justifications on how the introduction of 'ought' as in the UN case has already work,
It hasn't. Their attempt to impose morality without rationality is just as logically ineffective as yours...but theirs is more hypocritical and more impotently authoritarian then a version you can propose can ever possibly be.

In terms of moral authority, the UN is nothing. It has been nothing, and will remain nothing, because its internal structure is corrupt to the core. Nobody believes that what is does or says is more than the collective manipulations of diverse interest groups warring, lying, strategizing and jostling for position on the "moral high ground," while doing just as they please at home.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 8381
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Sep 03, 2019 5:45 pm

gaffo wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 4:04 am
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
The problem with the UN just deciding to preach human rights is twofold: firstly, the UN has no real authority, military or moral.
I'm glad it does not have the former. a world military would be a disaster for liberty.
Absolutely.

But since it has no moral and rational grounds for its pronouncements, and no real power, what can it do? :shock:

"Propagandize," is the answer. And that, too, is disastrous for liberty, if we believe what they say.
that GREAT! i affirm and support a legal codex for international conduct.
That would mean putting power behind the international collective, because a "legal codex" that cannot be enforced is powerless. Once again, that would be disaster for personal freedoms.
you wish for the UN to fail and we get ww3?
If we think that UN is what stands between us and WW III, then God help us all...and I mean that.
thank your God.
I do. So should we all.

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
not rational integrity and not morality.
since 1948 i've found the UN to be both generally rational and moral body, and has served my (american myself) nation's interests.
Heh. :D

I guess you were asleep for this: https://globalnews.ca/news/4283234/u-s- ... s-council/

And this is the "moral" group of the UN!
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
Theirs is just an opinion, and an opinion that many of their members do not even practice in their own countries. Secondly, there is no rational grounds behind their claims. Instead, they're borrowing from John Locke, and from a worldview that the UN itself does not hold. So their own ideological position undermines any rational basis for their public declarations about "rights."
other than affirming that the UN has and is at times hypocritical, your point? we would be better off without her?
Beyond a shadow of a doubt. The UN has been useless at best, and a screen for hypocritical, tyrannical governments, at worst. Goodbye, and good riddance to that.
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
nor have any history of personally practicing these claims they make about universal human rights.
nor should they, the UN is a legal body - a debating club - not a world government!
But wait a minute -- you just said (above) you believed in them having legal authority. How are you going to do that, without a world government, a world army, some kind of world-level judiciary, and a local world police force to boot?
Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Sep 02, 2019 3:28 pm
They're really no more than a collection of the world's most hypocritical impotent scolds. Their human rights commission, for example, routinely condemns places like Israel, while letting places like Iran and Saudi off the hook. So how serious as a moral authority can they be?
ya, UN could do better, your solution is to nullify the UN instead of reform it in this particular?
It's a bad idea in the first place. It cannot be reformed, only removed.

What you have to remember is the lesson of history about this: the bigger the collective, the more abuses of individuals are countenanced in order to maintain its authority. The greater the concentration of power, the more human rights are wiped out.

There has been no exception to that rule. And the UN is the most ambitious attempt to concentrate power in one location that the world has seen. Fortunately, it's a complete failure so far.
and removing the UN from existance will serve the world better how????????????
By keeping power in the hands of those who can be held accountable by their local people. By national and local democracy, instead of autocratic rule by foreign powers.

surreptitious57
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Sep 03, 2019 6:32 pm

Your attempts to find moral philosophy within atheism are seriously flawed even if your enthusiasm for flogging that dead horse is relentless
And the reason is because human beings are by default moral agents regardless of whether or not they have a belief system to reference this
All that does is merely reinforce their morality but it cannot be the foundation for it otherwise all atheists would be either amoral or immoral

What is problematic from your perspective is that atheists can be moral agents without actually requiring a belief system
Because it means that anyone can be moral without one it therefore renders such systems unnecessary as a consequence

When I became an atheist nine years ago I retained my morality and just discarded my belief in God . And so my moral values remained the same
Were it necessary to discard my morality as well as my belief then that would be evidence of causation or correlation but I did not have to do this
So atheists can be moral agents the same as any person of faith can and the only real difference is that their morality is not prescribed by atheism

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 8381
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Sep 03, 2019 7:00 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 6:32 pm
Your attempts to find moral philosophy within atheism are seriously flawed
No, no...we agree on that. Any attempt to find moral philosophy within Atheism is flawed. Atheism is amoral, and presumes the world is also an amoral place, because it needs Materialism.
human beings are by default moral agents

That's what an Atheist can never explain. Why would we be moral agents, when morality is, under Atheist suppositions, a delusion? And if we were moral agents only contingently -- that is, only accidentally, because that's the way things happened, not because it was in any ultimate sense "right" for us to be that -- then why should we continue it a minute more? Where's our obligation to do that?
otherwise all atheists would be either amoral or immoral
All rationally-consistent Atheists would always have to be amoral. Fortunately for us all, there are few or no rationally-consistent Atheists. The world would be a very amoral place if there were. But people are often inconsistent: they SAY they believe there's no God, but they want a church or synagogue wedding for their daughter. They say they are Atheists, but teach their kids it's "wrong" to steal. They claim to believe Materialism, but still are kind to neighbours.

Thank God for the inconsistency of Atheists! :D
When I became an atheist nine years ago I retained my morality and just discarded my belief in God .
You can do that. But why do you HAVE to? :shock:

That's the point. You are probably a decent person. But you're not a rationally-consistent Atheist if you hold to any moral position on principle. Because as per Atheism, there is no grounds for moral duties of any kind. You can do what you want -- good, evil or indifferent -- and those words have no objective referent anyway.
Were it necessary to discard my morality...
It's not physically necessary. It's only rationally necessary.

A person can choose to be as rationally-inconsistent as they like; especially since, under Atheism, rational-inconsistency or even blatant hypocrisy are not "evil." They're nothing.

surreptitious57
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Sep 03, 2019 7:46 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Why would we be moral agents when morality is under Atheist suppositions a delusion
We are moral agents because we are human and atheism makes no claims about morality
Atheism is only a privative expressed as the non acceptance of all Gods and nothing else

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 8381
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Sep 03, 2019 7:55 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Sep 03, 2019 7:46 pm
We are moral agents because we are human
That's contingent. We're also violent agents, avaricious agents, cruel agents, and so on...you can't imagine that "we are agents" tells us anything about the legitimacy of illegitimacy of our "agency."
and atheism makes no claims about morality
Indirectly, it has to. For Atheism requires Materialism.

Or can you explain to me why your Atheism does not require Materialism, perhaps?

surreptitious57
Posts: 4134
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Sep 03, 2019 7:57 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
They say they are Atheists but teach their kids its wrong to steal
They claim to believe Materialism but still are kind to neighbours
Its wrong to steal because one does not have the right to take property without permission from someone else
Materialism produced the human brain which is capable of kindness so this is not one of your better arguments

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 12 guests