Naturalism ( Atheism ) is Irrational 2 of 6

a paper by the Russell Manion THE OTHER SIDE:METAPHYSICS AND MEANING . this is a conversation between a garden variety pop naturalist and a real but rare Naturalist.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• apologetics
• philosophy
• naturalism
• metaphysics
• epistemology
• atheism

[lovinsjoey]

throwing aphorisms and over-simplifications at an argument you refuse to adress is not convincing and quite ironically "jello spined." you also continue to approach this discussion from the standpoint of societal circumstances. know that the government that i evnision has not the power to enforce my philsophical ideals. it is always up to the individual. thus i differ from the historical tyrants who you reference. please adress me with some substantial argument or i am finished with you.

[grandconjunct]

"Its always up to the individual"? since individuals individual ethic always change, reverse and contradict others individual ethic, all your really saying is Ethics dont exist and you want people to battle over whos ethic will rule, religious simply call this the slow road to chaos, you can try to put a happy face on your "individual ethic" but the reality is it doesnt even exist anywhere but your mind.

[lovinsjoey]

"unchecked self intrest is Evil"; first let me clarify that i do not blieve in "unchecked" self-interest. the restrictions are non-violence, objective honesty, absolute rationality, and posession of only property that has been earned. if you still believe that this type of self-interest is evil then i need you to prove that; if you cannot, my argument still stands in full.

[grandconjunct]

Typical atheistic crazy talk about rights

that are not absolute, your defintion of honesty,rights non-violence,"earned property"

are diffrent from other atheists. hence its all jello spined crazy talk, if it stands it falls

[lovinsjoey]

What is immoral is to pretend that there is a more specific standard of objective good. If you go any further (e.g. violate the individual's right to pursue self-interest) then your government has become the nightmare you so fear. specific "good" is a subjectivity; what you need is a specific, objective "right", which provides resolution, not ideological expression. Any atheist who contradicts this I consider just as wrong as any theist.

[grandconjunct]

Almost all atheists reject a Good above all other goods that judges between competing brands of atheist "goods" , Only morality blindness would deny objective good, unchecked self intrest is Evil, with dualing moralities this is what I fear, clearly there is a Morality that judges me, Hitler lovinjoey, and all of there dream socities even if everyone on planet has same idea of a dream society.

[elroy2112]

Even the greatest Greek Minds knew atheism was irrational they used Logic not culture or subjective opinion to decide Gods existence,A Moral law requires a Moral law giver , trying to deny Morality or God or denying your brain is designed to find truth is what is incoherent, As Plato so eloquently said "Atheism is a disease of the Soul before it becomes an error of the Mind. You simply stated your faith that God is "incoherent" without giving any reasons because atheists have no reasons.

[sum1unxpected]

saying the bible is the source of morality, is about as arbitrary as saying: "the illiad is the scorce of greek culture"

there is no logical connection.

the validity of the moral argument in favor of gods existence, is dependent on gods existence, which intern is dependent on god being a coherent entity.

as far as i know, there is nothing in the definition of god that alows for him to be called an entity, or even a concept.

a disembodied personality isn't a concept or a thing.

its nonsence.

[elroy2112]

Yes objective Morality is an unanswerable question for atheists,I agree completely, what atheists misunderstand is that a Universal Moral law Logically follows from a Moral Law giver. The only thing that is "purported" is the atheists who think either A). objective Morality exists but doesn't imply a moral law Giver B). there is no Objective Morality its just a subjective opinion or feeling (chemical feeling via evolution ) not a real Ought or obligation, Atheisms Animal morality is irrational

[braino2000]

Hmm, yes, looks like youve posted three. Oh well, your not helping yourself. All you can say is "Where did GOD get this". Have fun in your absurd worldveiw.

[braino2000]

Some how, I get the feeling that you either didn't watch these videos or they are just way beyond your understanding.

[braino2000]

This is exactly what atheists wind up with every time "where did god get this, where did god get that". What a cop out.

[sum1unxpected]

the question of objective morallity is an unanswerable question; because you have to extend the question of morality

to anything that is purported to be the sorce of morality. ie. God.

[lovinsjoey]

I am not saying it exists; I am saying it should exist and yet it has never been tried (meaning it is important to note that your rebuttal is no less completely in your mind than my belief). This does not create chaos because no violent conflict is allowed (one of the few roles of the government) and no ethic will rule. When it is imperative that a sovereign body act for self-defense, objective people will never contradict. there are on contradictions with two valid points, only reality.