31 Dec 05
This is not meant to be a rhetorical question. What use is atheism/skepticism, if any? Not that is has to be useful: it could merely be empirically or logically warranted. But, crucially, utility is not reducible to, nor necessarily even positively related to, warrant. Indeed, the relation may be negative: for example, theism/credulity may be, on balance, fiarly useful but fairly unwarranted, whereas atheism/skepticism may be, on balance, fairly useless (or "anti-useful"😉 but fairly warranted.
Of course, the issue is made more complicated by the fact that there are different types of utility, if not warrant (and different types of theism/atheism--sheeh). But let's suppose that, on the whole, atheism/skepticism is less useful than theism/credulity, albeit more warranted. (For example, only theism cements social bonds, despite being intellectually problematic). Could an atheist/skeptic ever be under an obligation not to promulgate atheism/skepticism under such circumstances? Why should warrant always be a greater source of moral obligation than use?
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeYou are laboring under the grave misconception that theism is useful. I maintain the exact opposite, that it is, on the whole, very harmful. Atheism/skepticism frees us from the onerous burden of theism and allows us to grow beyond our present intellectually stunted state.
This is not meant to be a rhetorical question. What use is atheism/skepticism, if any? Not that is has to be useful: it could merely be empirically or logically warranted. But, crucially, utility is not reducible to, nor necessarily even positively related to, warrant. Indeed, the relation may be negative: for example, theism/credulity may be, on balanc ...[text shortened]... ch circumstances? Why should warrant always be a greater source of moral obligation than use?
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeFor example, only theism cements social bonds...
This is not meant to be a rhetorical question. What use is atheism/skepticism, if any? Not that is has to be useful: it could merely be empirically or logically warranted. But, crucially, utility is not reducible to, nor necessarily even positively related to, warrant. Indeed, the relation may be negative: for example, theism/credulity may be, on balanc ...[text shortened]... ch circumstances? Why should warrant always be a greater source of moral obligation than use?
This is an outlandish statement. Any positive attributes provided by theism could easily be gotten from non-theistic sources without having to indulge all the negative baggage that theism entails.
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by rwingettI'm not asserting this (though I am suspecting it). It's just an example of the sort of argument that might be deployed in favour of the greater utility of theism.
[b]For example, only theism cements social bonds...
This is an outlandish statement. Any positive attributes provided by theism could easily be gotten from non-theistic sources without having to indulge all the negative baggage that theism entails.[/b]
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by rwingettIf I am indeed labouring under this misconception, why is theism so popular? Why would so many people self-impose something harmful unless they were getting at least something beneficial out of it?
You are laboring under the grave misconception that theism is useful. I maintain the exact opposite, that it is, on the whole, very harmful. Atheism/skepticism frees us from the onerous burden of theism and allows us to grow beyond our present intellectually stunted state.
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by LordOfTheChessboardYour first assertion is only correct if belief in God also implies belief in hell, which it regrettably often, but thankfully not always, the case. Your second assertion I agree with, although many theists don't see it that way. Doesn't one, as a skeptic/atheist who does not believe in immortality, have to suffer the at least equally uncongenial idea that one is merely mortal (similarly assuming belief in God implies belief in immortality)?
You won’t be suffering from the idea that you will burn in hell if you don’t to what your local sect leader or your book wants you to do. And you won’t be suffering from the idea that you will have to live forever.
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by rwingettWhy is theism necessarily onerous and how is it necessarily harmful? Is this purely from an intellectual perspective?
You are laboring under the grave misconception that theism is useful. I maintain the exact opposite, that it is, on the whole, very harmful. Atheism/skepticism frees us from the onerous burden of theism and allows us to grow beyond our present intellectually stunted state.
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by rwingettSounds like someone has been reading from the pages of Lenin/Marx/Stalin's lives.
You are laboring under the grave misconception that theism is useful. I maintain the exact opposite, that it is, on the whole, very harmful. Atheism/skepticism frees us from the onerous burden of theism and allows us to grow beyond our present intellectually stunted state.
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by rwingettLet's not make this an "all or nothing" argument. There is no question that there is such a thing as the burden of bad religion. But not all people of faith find their personal faith to be something that stunts their development. In fact, the development of our spiritual lives in whatever capacity that may be is one of meaning and purpose. Whether it is helping at a soup kitchen for the homeless or participating in a recovery program for addicts or simply taking delight in God's creation, one's faith is not always the "onerous" demon you present.
You are laboring under the grave misconception that theism is useful. I maintain the exact opposite, that it is, on the whole, very harmful. Atheism/skepticism frees us from the onerous burden of theism and allows us to grow beyond our present intellectually stunted state.
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeIsn't the answer obvious? Fear, particulary of death. Pretty much all theists not only believe in a God, but in an afterlife which their God will let them exist in (if they're good) as a reward. However, most theist belief systems impose a ton of regulations on how you can proceed with your life that are quite stifling and usually nonsensical (not eating certain foods as an example). Thus, in order to get the probably non-existent reward, you have to forego tangible benefits and freedoms now. That's not much of a bargain, but fear, social pressure and just plain old inertia lead most people to some type of theism.
If I am indeed labouring under this misconception, why is theism so popular? Why would so many people self-impose something harmful unless they were getting at least something beneficial out of it?
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by kirksey957Can someone help at a soup kitchen or marvel at the wonders of the universe without being a theist? What exactly does theism add to those experiences?
Let's not make this an "all or nothing" argument. There is no question that there is such a thing as the burden of bad religion. But not all people of faith find their personal faith to be something that stunts their development. In fact, the development of our spiritual lives in whatever capacity that may be is one of meaning and purpose. Whether it ...[text shortened]... ing delight in God's creation, one's faith is not always the "onerous" demon you present.
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by no1marauderWell, if they marveled at the soup kitchen and helped out with the wonders of the universe, they wouldn't really need to be theist, now would they?
Can someone help at a soup kitchen or marvel at the wonders of the universe without being a theist? What exactly does theism add to those experiences?
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAre you going to add anything of worth to this thread or just continue spamming with ad hominems (like the one directed at Rob) or idiocies like your last post?
Well, if they marveled at the soup kitchen and helped out with the wonders of the universe, they wouldn't really need to be theist, now would they?
31 Dec 05
Originally posted by no1marauderI guess they could. I guess what I would say that theism brings is the sense of mystery on a grander scale. But I will be the first to admit that many of the theist I know have a very small God.
Can someone help at a soup kitchen or marvel at the wonders of the universe without being a theist? What exactly does theism add to those experiences?