Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sordid]

Yeah, same.

"But the truth hurts, nya nya nya."

Grow up.

[Leafsnail]

Opposite. With two dogs preforming side by side, when peers are rewarded and some are not, the dogs that weren't rewarded starting to refuse to preform. They rejected their chance for treats in a sort of protest.

Wait, so basically they weren't getting rewarded so they didn't perform?  Isn't this exactly what I just said?

Nature has no place in modern society? Wait for Grek's robot people then you can say this. Though, we are technically already robots and nature is the embodiment of bits of pieces of behavioral coding... so would that even change anything?

Yes, nature isn't in modern society in many places.  For example, we don't only care about our kin and families.  We don't commit crimes all the time.  We don't marshal our families and lead a war against our next door neighbours any more.  Why?  Because we can discard that in modern society.  Yes, maybe religion performed some useful social function at some point, but we have clubs and sports to do that now.  We can throw away the now hindering training wheels.

You sir, sit atop an observation post on a mountain. You see the doomsday meteor. The dilemma is, do you tell anyone they are all royally fucked? It may be a worthy goal to be aware, but not all will even find it worthy or even be capable of handling it. Are all people really worthy of it and who would be better off not knowing? What abstract values gained and lost outweigh which with the knowledge?

Yes, I would tell everyone.  That way, we can build bunkers.  We can prepare.  We can dig down into the ground to help humanity survive.  We can store seeds so we can grow plants later.  This is the equivalence of sciences versus religion.

Religion: We're fucked anyway.  Let's stay ignorant and die at age 30/ get killed by a meteor.
Science: We can make people's lives better.  We can extend people's lifespans by decades, we can improve their quality of life, we can save some people from the doomsday meteor.

And then, when you look at, for instance, the shooting of abortion doctors, you remember that ignorance is only bliss for the ignorant.  For everyone else it's a fucking nightmare.

[Chutney]

This is the equivalence of sciences versus religion.

Religion: We're fucked anyway.  Let's stay ignorant and die at age 30/ get killed by a meteor.
Science: We can make people's lives better.  We can extend people's lifespans by decades, we can improve their quality of life, we can save some people from the doomsday meteor.

And then, when you look at, for instance, the shooting of abortion doctors, you remember that ignorance is only bliss for the ignorant.  For everyone else it's a fucking nightmare.

Wow!! Look at the pot calling the kettle black! You say religious people are ignorant, when you make statements like this. Here's closer to reality!
Religion: People die and that's scary, so let's tell them they'll live forever in the afterlife IF they do good. Then a lot of people will spend their time volunteering at soup kitchens to feed the homeless, animal shelters to help animals, going on missions to poor foreign countries to help there and just overall making life a little bit better for everyone.
Science: Piss off until we fix everything! We're too busy CURING CANCER AND AIDS for the future to worry about you guys now.

Religion and Science can work together! While science does all the busywork in the labs making permanent solutions, religion can bring about temporary solutions.

Also you apparently think that all religious people go around shooting abortionists<--lollin' at dis.


And looking back I suppose you're "Religious people walk this this, while Science people walk like this" comment was referring specifically to in that meteor situation. In that case.

Religion: Let's all gather 'round and pray for a quick end, and peace in death.
Science: Let's make everyone panic while we try to save the elite! Everyone's fucked but us! Now, how long will it take to dig this hole and get everyone+all the supplies in it? A year? How long until the meteor strikes? 2 days? Haha, holy shit we're fucked. *leans back, snaps open a cold one, and takes a sip*

Didn't they have this as an episode in the Simpsons? The scientists said no one was going to live so they all tried to get into bomb shelters and last it out, and when Flanders' was kicked out, he just went out and calmly faced impending doom, singing Church songs, and everyone made peace with death and walked out with him, and it turned out the meteor didn't even kill them all!

[Andir]

Wow!! Look at the pot calling the kettle black! You say religious people are ignorant, when you make statements like this. Here's closer to reality!
Religion: People die and that's scary, so let's tell them they'll live forever in the afterlife IF they do good. Then a lot of people will spend their time volunteering at soup kitchens to feed the homeless, animal shelters to help animals, going on missions to poor foreign countries to help there and just overall making life a little bit better for everyone.

Science: Piss off until we fix everything! We're too busy CURING CANCER AND AIDS for the future to worry about you guys now.

Religion and Science can work together! While science does all the busywork in the labs making permanent solutions, religion can bring about temporary solutions.

One could argue, long term vs short term goals and personal vs. social goals.  The way I look at it, the religious person helping others just so they can get into heaven is only looking out for themselves in the long term.  The scientist working on cancer is looking out for society in the long term.  The religious person feeding the homeless person is only helping them for a week.  The scientist trying to come up with cheaper building materials is helping them in the long term by providing a more reasonable cost of living.  Besides, the person you may be helping is less likely to work harder because they are getting what they need to live for free.  So, help society become better and evolve, or keep things going like they are and keep throwing bandages on it?

Also you apparently think that all religious people go around shooting abortionists<--lollin' at dis.

If it wasn't a religious person that did it, who did?  I don't see a motivation for an atheist.  They don't have "Godly laws" to maintain.  Morals could vary from person to person, but I could argue that any true atheist would look out for the good of society before their moral ground.  If a person is having an abortion because they can't afford [edit: to raise a kid] and would likely end up in the food lines you described above, maybe it's better for them to abort and try to live their life before trying to support two lives.

Science: Let's make everyone panic while we try to save the elite! Everyone's fucked but us! Now, how long will it take to dig this hole and get everyone+all the supplies in it? A year? How long until the meteor strikes? 2 days? Haha, holy shit we're fucked. *leans back, snaps open a cold one, and takes a sip*

Laws of survival.  Save the most intelligent people with the most to offer.  If you had to rebuild a city, would you hire people off the street or hire a trained construction worker?  In your opinion, we should just accept people on a first come, first serve basis?

Nobody mentioned how far away that meteor was.  It very well could be a year.  If it were two days, one could hop on a plane to the other side of the globe in hope that the explosion not killing them would afford a rough life of ash filled skies, but they'd be alive, maybe long enough to record as much of the events as possible to even if they died, the knowledge wouldn't.  Heck.  Two days would give you time to rocket the human genome into space with hopes that aliens do exist and will learn about us as a people.

[Sordid]

Religion: People die and that's scary, so let's tell them they'll live forever in the afterlife IF they do good. Then a lot of people will spend their time volunteering at soup kitchens to feed the homeless, animal shelters to help animals, going on missions to poor foreign countries to help there and just overall making life a little bit better for everyone.
Science: Piss off until we fix everything! We're too busy CURING CANCER AND AIDS for the future to worry about you guys now.

Jesus Fucking Christ...

Religion and Science can work together!

No, they can't, because religion doesn't do any work. All it does is guilt people into giving their work.

Science: Let's make everyone panic while we try to save the elite!

You say that as if it's a bad thing, which only serves to show just how little thought you put into it. It's very unlikely everyone would die, some pockets of humanity would likely survive. Now the quality of life of those who do survive will be directly determined by the knowledge and resources they have at their disposal. Telling a pregnant unemployed waitress that she can't get into the shelter because we're taking an elderly agricultural engineer instead only seems cruel until you realize that the engineer's expertise will enable the survivors and the generations descended from them to live without fear of famine and so save countless lives. The science approach is more like this: "Given that most of what we have now is fucked either way, let's do as much for future generations as we can." As opposed to religion's "we're fucked and screw everyone who comes after us".

[Chutney]

Religion: People die and that's scary, so let's tell them they'll live forever in the afterlife IF they do good. Then a lot of people will spend their time volunteering at soup kitchens to feed the homeless, animal shelters to help animals, going on missions to poor foreign countries to help there and just overall making life a little bit better for everyone.
Science: Piss off until we fix everything! We're too busy CURING CANCER AND AIDS for the future to worry about you guys now.

Jesus Fucking Christ...

I don't get it. I portrayed both as doing good. Your reaction implies you think I portrayed science as bad, even though they're curing cancer and aids? The reason I gave them the "argh piss off" attitude is because that's what I'm seeing from this thread. It also has no effect on what they're achieving so it doesn't matter. The point is, both are doing good, in different ways, and for different time spans. The scientists statement would be exactly the same if I wrote
"Scientists: We are curing cancer and aids." which apparently, I should have, as my "opponents" are too dull to extract the meaning of my words, and are blinded by the "flair" and insignificant details I add

Religion and Science can work together!

No, they can't, because religion doesn't do any work. All it does is guilt people into giving their work.

No, of course. let's forget all the good done in the name of religion that I previously mentioned.

One could argue, long term vs short term goals and personal vs. social goals.  The way I look at it, the religious person helping others just so they can get into heaven is only looking out for themselves in the long term.  The scientist working on cancer is looking out for society in the long term.  The religious person feeding the homeless person is only helping them for a week.  The scientist trying to come up with cheaper building materials is helping them in the long term by providing a more reasonable cost of living.

That's what I was saying! Scientists work with the long-term, religious people work with the short-term. And who the hell cares what the motivation is? If a man saves another man from being executed, why do you care if he saved him because the man-to-be-executed held an antidote for a poison the savior was afflicted with, or if the savior did it of his own good heart? The end result is: A man was saved from execution.

If it wasn't a religious person that did it, who did?

A psychopath. A psychopath did it. Psychopaths do these kinds of things! Holy shit, you just basically replied to my statement with "Hell yes all religious people are murderers and lunatics". fffffffffffffffffffffff I can't even believe that

Also you two with the "save the elite, fuck the scum!" mentality, hahaha. Obviously you didn't learn ethics. I guess it has no place in a logically thinking society. The human race isn't even worth saving anyways. All we are are another insignificant life form scarring the universe. This is TRUE LOGIC. Life is inefficient and damaging to the universe, therefore there should be no life.


EDIT:
What I learned from this thread.
the religious: We don't give a fuck! We're goin' to Heaven to chill with Jesus t('-'t) ALL OF YOU SHOULD BELIEVE OUR SHIT, OR BURN IN HELL! We are unstable shitheads who will NOT HESITATE TO KILL YOU if you don't convert immediately goddamn HEATHENS. How can you not believe in G-d? He exists. here's proof: He exists! Infallible, bitch. Evolution is a LIE OF THE DEVIL!
atheists: We are the only people capable of thinking clearly. Religion causes all wars! Abolish religion and all of our problems are solved! Logic over emotion, ethics are for suckers! Dissect animals, experiment on humans (as long as they're dumb and unskilled!) Let the elite come live in our mansions, as the proles wallow in their own filth. We're so fuckin' smart and clear thinking we don't understand different people's viewpoints HOW RAD ARE WE!?

[Chutney]

Double post because I know most of you will stop reading halfway through my last post, and then reply with a question/statement that I already covered in the post.

If morals come from the individual, not from the religion (which I believe, because yes Atheists have morals too!), then why can't you let an individual be an individual? Why can't you just let people be there own? You may reply "Well, religious people don't let US be!", well the majority do.
There are a lot of people who will try to get you to convert, but most people won't. Most of the atheists in this thread seem to be trying to get people to turn away from religion, whereas a lot of the religious people I see posting are coming from the viewpoint "Well, I don't really care what you believe, but I'm going to believe in G-d". This is what I see on every forum I find people debating the subject. The atheists come out and scream "But it's wrong, and it's stupid! You have no proof! Just be an atheist like the smart people!" While the religious ones say "Welp, I believe what I believe, and you're not really gonna change that"

This is a complete contradiction to the atheist viewpoint that "We don't try and FORCE others to subscribe to our beliefs, THEY do".

Why can't people just get along?


EDIT: I GET IT NOW!!! All of you are actually normal people, trolling me! This is the most elaborate troll ever, I was actually convinced there was people that held your opinions. Hahaha, Now that the jokes over, you guys can all go back to being normal people, with normal viewpoints, and letting everyone live together in peace and harmony like you normally would. Lead the kind of stuff I see in this thread to the ridiculous extremists 
Woo, you guys sure got me good. I'm glad it's over now though.

[MrWiggles]

EDIT:
What I learned from this thread.
the religious: We don't give a fuck! We're goin' to Heaven to chill with Jesus t('-'t) ALL OF YOU SHOULD BELIEVE OUR SHIT, OR BURN IN HELL! We are unstable shitheads who will NOT HESITATE TO KILL YOU if you don't convert immediately goddamn HEATHENS. How can you not believe in G-d? He exists. here's proof: He exists! Infallible, bitch. Evolution is a LIE OF THE DEVIL!

atheists: We are the only people capable of thinking clearly. Religion causes all wars! Abolish religion and all of our problems are solved! Logic over emotion, ethics are for suckers! Dissect animals, experiment on humans (as long as they're dumb and unskilled!) Let the elite come live in our mansions, as the proles wallow in their own filth. We're so fuckin' smart and clear thinking we don't understand different people's viewpoints HOW RAD ARE WE!?

o.0
Well for the religious part, the second to the last one happened. Yea, if a group of theist are doing public good. They aren't really doing it for the public good. They are doing it for themselves. The motivation is selfish. That not a bad thing. It should be recognized and be kept in check.

I been in this thread from the get go, and I don't think we've really said that. Those christian/religious exist. I've encounter one. But that not the reason to deny their god or any god. It doesn't help.

The atheist part. Yea, we are thinking clearer. A god person is a delusion as are lots of claims of any religion. Delusion are bad. I don't think the stance of the thread is that religion caused all wars. It caused some. And has been used as a motive for lots of conflicts. Its not the sole cause.

Now the last bits is a YMMV. Myself, is that emotion should be tempered by logic. I have a good set of ethics and morals. I don't get why logic and no emotion would mean no ethics. Maybe you didn't mean to say that those things followed. Yea, sure dissect animals. And experiments on humans. I'm more for by consent and oversight. I would really like for a few links about elitism from the entire thread.

There are no fundamentals or dogma for atheism. Just because one atheist says it, doesn't mean that it applies to all. At most you can say that on atheist thinks that.

I'll admit, I don't understand the need for a god person. Like they don't understand the reason to not have one. I've entertained it. It lacks substances. Most atheist will probably agree, that using religion as a motive for anything doesn't make any sense. It doesn't matter what the action is. The religious motives for working in a soup kitchen are equally inane as blowing yourself up. It all started up from unsubstantiated actions, rewards and punishments.

Double post because I know most of you will stop reading halfway through my last post, and then reply with a question/statement that I already covered in the post.

If morals come from the individual, not from the religion (which I believe, because yes Atheists have morals too!), then why can't you let an individual be an individual? Why can't you just let people be there own? You may reply "Well, religious people don't let US be!", well the majority do.
There are a lot of people who will try to get you to convert, but most people won't. Most of the atheists in this thread seem to be trying to get people to turn away from religion, whereas a lot of the religious people I see posting are coming from the viewpoint "Well, I don't really care what you believe, but I'm going to believe in G-d". This is what I see on every forum I find people debating the subject. The atheists come out and scream "But it's wrong, and it's stupid! You have no proof! Just be an atheist like the smart people!" While the religious ones say "Welp, I believe what I believe, and you're not really gonna change that"

This is a complete contradiction to the atheist viewpoint that "We don't try and FORCE others to subscribe to our beliefs, THEY do".

Why can't people just get along?

We contained our atheism in the thread of the atheism. They've come into the thread and state their belief, we ask for substantiation, they don't have any. Intellectual honest says that it should be dropped.

The stance of 'It works for me, and that what matter.' Doesn't follow through. If someone used that to justify eating babies, no one would be like 'Well that shouldn't be challenged. It works for him, that what matters.' Its not logically sound defense of any belief.

If beliefs can be wrong.

And you shouldn't believe in wrong things.

Then you should strive to believe in the least of wrong things.

And because minds are hard to change, doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried. Some minds are lost. And then you aren't debating them for the TBer but for those reading.

The majority do not let atheist be.

Least trusted minority.

Religious clause in state stuffs.

Its annoyingly on my money.

We're surround by it.

Most atheist aren't anti theist. I'm not. I'm not all in favor of religious abolishment. I'm not much in favor of promoting human secularism or atheism. I'm for crit. thinking.

[Chutney]

MrWiggles. We have to be friends. Chutney Wiggles is my...my online alias... You complete me here on this board!!

Its annoyingly on my money.

"Novus Ordo Seclorum" means "New Secular Order". Why that's directly under an image of "G-d", I don't know. I guess the dollar has trouble on deciding whether it wants to be secular or spiritual.

We contained our atheism in the thread of the atheism. They've come into the thread and state their belief, we ask for substantiation, they don't have any. Intellectual honest says that it should be dropped.

Ahh! What an excellent point! I suppose I am bringing the fight to you!
Now I have to try to justify my actions, I suppose. I'm myself am not as theistic as my posts might make me out to be. I'm merely trying to defend the other sides viewpoint. Me seeing this thread was about the equivalent of me seeing a thread where a bunch of people were trading comments such as "Black people are all idiots!" "Blacks smell bad, why don't they wash!". Albeit, I don't view atheists as bad as racists (I don't hold a negative view for atheists at all, I hope you'll believe!), but the effect is the same. I saw a group of people taking advantage of the fact that they have little opposition to flinging insults about a group of people, and decided to play the role of valiant defender of the undervoiced.
EDIT: and also isn't this a lot more fun than a whole bunch of people spouting "Religion is dumb!'" "I agree!" "religion h8rs raise their hands! *raises hand* WOOT!". I'm adding a level of thinking and debate, which I hope most of you appreciate.

The majority do not let atheist be.

Least trusted minority.

We're surround by it.

Okay. This is going to be harsh. I apologize in advance.
These statements are equivalent to a black person entering a KKK rally and complaining that they're not trusted, and surrounded by members of the KKK. You are actively choosing to be a minority, and placing yourself amongst the majority.
And I honestly have no idea how you're not being left alone by the majority. The only way they would know you are an atheist is if you told them, and wouldn't it just be better NOT to tell people that might give you trouble you're an atheist? If I moved to a new town with a group of skinheads, I wouldn't approach them and say "Hey guys, I'm the new Jew in town!"
In fact, if you aren't actively preaching your beliefs, it's very hard to tell what religion you follow/don't follow. I guess it could come up in casual conversation, or with someone you wouldn't THINK to treat you poorly upon the learning of that knowledge but... idk, I guess.

so yea, let's be friends MrWiggles!! Think of what we could do, if we teamed up!

[Cheeetar]

If you're in a small town, I'd imagine it would be a bit of a giveaway if you didn't go to church on sunday.

[Andir]

Its annoyingly on my money.

"Novus Ordo Seclorum" means "New Secular Order". Why that's directly under an image of "G-d", I don't know. I guess the dollar has trouble on deciding whether it wants to be secular or spiritual.

I was always told it meant "New Order of the Ages" as this wiki article points out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo_Seclorum

The word seclorum does not mean "secular", as one might assume, but is the genitive (possessive) plural form of the word saeculum, meaning (in this context) generation, century, or age. Saeculum did come to mean "age, world" in late, Christian Latin, and "secular" is derived from it, through secularis. However, the adjective "secularis," meaning "worldly," is not equivalent to the nominative plural possessive "seclorum," meaning "of the ages."[2]

I was always told both phrases mean something along the lines of "He approves of our undertakings in a new world of ages."

[RAM]

I came to a thread about the causes of atheism to discuss the merits of atheism and, therefore, the merits of theism. Going by my exposure to religion it doesn't seem that its total merit is positive. I am looking for good reasons to follow religion, or understanding that there is no good reason to follow religion.

How often do religious people honestly do something purely for its influence on their afterlife? I don't think people think enough for it to be much. I think that most religious people follow their own ethics most of the time and are going to hell because of it, because god created them too ignorant to have the potential to get to heaven. I don't think that soup kitchens are purely a result of religion, I think that they would exist in some form without it. I think that if people abandoned arbitrary beliefs, religious and otherwise, that the world would be a much better place. Also I do not think thta abortion is a case of science versus religion, I would rather not discuss it here. If you want to hear my views on the topic I suggest that you make a thread specifically for the topic.

Religion tells people that god will take care of the long term, I don't think that there is sufficient reason to believe that god will take carte of anything, and that people are willing to sacrifice the long term in order to satisfy religious agendas and are basically accelerating the downfall of the world...

Science recognises that in order to have a long term you need a short term, I think that it is better to sacrifice some people now than to sacrifice everybody later...

[Muz]

Heh, I'd have to disagree with religion not mixing with science:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Islamic_mathematics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Islamic_astronomy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics_in_medieval_Islam
And the guy who coined the term algebra
Brief history how and why Islam encouraged science

I could find more, but those should be enough to disprove the point of religion not mixing with science. I'm sure that other religions have their massive lists of theologist-scientists too, but I wouldn't know where to find the link.

I did read something on how Christian monks would spend their spare time building better watermills and documenting knowledge, but can't find the link to that either.

[MrWiggles]

And in the short three hundred or so years that the middle east was a glorious place for experimentation, math and astronomy. It was all stopped and deemed evil by religion. Religion doesn't foster science. At best it stands aside. Generally its in the way, and science is trying to walk around religion.

[Sordid]

my "opponents" are too dull to extract the meaning of my words, and are blinded by the "flair" and insignificant details I add

If the details are insignificant then you shouln't have added them in the first place.

No, of course. let's forget all the good done in the name of religion that I previously mentioned.

The very fact that it's done in the name of religion, as opposed to by religion, supports my point.

That's what I was saying! Scientists work with the long-term, religious people work with the short-term. And who the hell cares what the motivation is? If a man saves another man from being executed, why do you care if he saved him because the man-to-be-executed held an antidote for a poison the savior was afflicted with, or if the savior did it of his own good heart? The end result is: A man was saved from execution.

Ah but then it's not good that was done, it's just a side effect of a  selfisch act. In my opinion, that's not something credit should be given for.

Okay. This is going to be harsh. I apologize in advance.
These statements are equivalent to a black person entering a KKK rally and complaining that they're not trusted, and surrounded by members of the KKK. You are actively choosing to be a minority, and placing yourself amongst the majority.
And I honestly have no idea how you're not being left alone by the majority. The only way they would know you are an atheist is if you told them, and wouldn't it just be better NOT to tell people that might give you trouble you're an atheist? If I moved to a new town with a group of skinheads, I wouldn't approach them and say "Hey guys, I'm the new Jew in town!"
In fact, if you aren't actively preaching your beliefs, it's very hard to tell what religion you follow/don't follow. I guess it could come up in casual conversation, or with someone you wouldn't THINK to treat you poorly upon the learning of that knowledge but... idk, I guess.

Nah uh, you're the one who got it wrong. The whole damn country is KKK. And what you're suggesting is that the black guy paint his face white to fit in.
Well FUCK THAT.