Atheist good? Atheist evil?

What does it mean?

Category:

Education

Tags:

• #atheism

[kmsoileau]

@arkatitrain

(Part 4)

“Defining good and evil, - subjectivelly its pointless”

Perhaps you mean that any subjective morality is no better than any other subjective morality. If so, I agree.

[kmsoileau]

@arkatitrain

(Part 3)

“morality is provable”

Mathematical theorems are provable. One can present a rationale for a given code of morals, but no one has any obligation to accept the rationale.

“Objective - Not objective or moral the interpretation of dodgy scripture from a God no one will prove,.-- enlighten us - no?”

Perhaps you could rephrase the above in English.

[kmsoileau]

@arkatitrain @arkatitrain

(Part 2) “Atheists - intelligent animals (without magic Objective Morality)”

Indeed, atheists have no reason to distinguish humans as “special” members of the animal kingdom.

It’s not clear to me why an objective morality would properly be called “magic.”

“are bad things permissible - not generally - morality is provable”

Who defines “bad?” You?

“are bad things permissible - not generally”

Circular reasoning.

[kmsoileau]

@arkatitrain

(Part 1)

"God - Command genocide the Canaanite gets it."

If indeed a God created mankind, who are you to say that God is immoral?

"Morals are different for Gods (they are big),"

If indeed a God created mankind, who are you to say that God is immoral?

"Animals. - When a Lion kills the cubs of a Lioness its not murder"

If humans are just members of the animal kingdom, why is killing a human called "murder," but killing some other species not called "murder?"

[arkatitrain]

@kmsoileau God - Command genocide the Canaanite gets it.-Morals are different for Gods (they are big),

Animals. - When a Lion kills the cubs of a Lioness its not murder.

Atheists - intelligent animals (without magic Objective Morality) are bad things permissible - not generally - morality is provable

Objective - Not objective or moral the interpretation of dodgy scripture from a God no one will prove,.-- enlighten us - no?

Ps

Defining good and evil, - subjectivelly its pointless

[arkatitrain]

@kmsoileau See the World Bank website and search for wellbeing ilbeing, Or ask an Afgan woman

[kmsoileau]

@arkatitrain So what? Does that mean you agree with me? Well and good...

[arkatitrain]

@kmsoileau but so what?

[kmsoileau]

@arkatitrain "I dont understand the 'without God we are just animals'"

Without a God, what are we but animals?

[kmsoileau]

@arkatitrain "The theist does not prove the existance of God"

Right. The Theist believes in a God.

"but assumes God given morals,"

The Theist's belief in a God leads to an acceptance of that God's moral requirements.

"the atheist assume their morals as basic ethical facts but cant justify their foundation."

Right.

"'Good and evil' can be replaced by 'what makes good and bad lives' then evaluating the consequences of an action we get A was good, B was bad."

The problem is how to evaluate "good."