My Atheist Friends, Help Me Understand
I read posts here that call different things, "harmful to humanity." Others call something, "good" or "bad" or "evil."
A very simple question, who gets to decide the definition of "harmful to humanity" and what is there critieria? The same for "good," "bad," and "evil?" These are not material terms. If everything is material isn't there just "is" and not these moral declarations if one is being thoroughly atheist?
Help me understand your position so I am fair and honest about the views. Thanks.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John Major on -
Seems sensible to call it an effect but must that debar it from being a cause once in existence? If so, why?
-
Permalink Reply by Unseen on -
You may have to rephrase that question. I'm having a hard time parsing it.
Just let me say that effects become causes. That is how you get causal chains.
-
Permalink Reply by John Major on
-
So consciousness, whatever it is, can be a cause of something? Or are you saying it is incidental or uninvolved in determining actions?
-
Permalink Reply by Unseen on
-
I'm not sure what difference it would make. Subconscious actions have conscious effects which themselves have effects. Still, consciousness is passive. We are only conscious of what appears to our consciousness, aren't we? The real activity is going on behind the scenes in our brain where we can't see it.
-
-
Permalink Reply by John Major on
-
Until consciousness is better defined I am still open minded to it not being a slave to the subconscious.
-
Permalink Reply by Unseen on
-
It's an epiphenomenon of the brain. Even what comes through the eyes and ears goes through the brain before you're aware of it.
If it isn't subject to the control of the subconscious, then it must be spirit, right? What else could it be?
If you believe in spirit, then you are religious in some sense of the word. Believing in spirit is probably the only thing common to all religions.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Unseen on
-
So...?
How about coming out with some declarative statements. I don't want to indulge you in a guessing game.
-
-
Permalink Reply by onecae on -
We've talked about the need to define terms earlier. Contrast the concept of "influence" with the concept of "control". I accept direct observation as a form of proof. How about you? Can you get closer to a concept of proof? There are some basic words that are very difficult to define and agree upon. These words include the personal pronouns, the word "understand" and the word "know." They are surrounded by controversy, yet we use them as if we understand what the other means.
-
Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on -
RE: "A rainbow doesn't really exist in space, though it appears to."
The water droplets that refract the light exists in space, as does the refracted light.
What's new today
Forum
insane comment following tornadoes in Oklahoma
Started by Ron Humphrey in Welcome to Think Atheist. Last reply by Misty: Baytheist Living! 2 minutes ago. 28 Replies 1 Like
Blog Posts
So the Pope said I can go to heaven...
Posted by Misty: Baytheist Living! on May 22, 2013 at 6:56pm 3 Comments 0 Likes
Events
Services we love
Check out our new mobile/tablet version of Think Atheist! www.ThinkAtheist.com/m
© 2013 Created by Morgan Matthew.
