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.

Views: 7801

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Morality seems to be something that is required of philosophical insight for that philosophy to become complete. My behavior demonstrates my morality...let's start here. I base my morality on certain facts about my self that allow me to then observe the phenomenal universe accurately. 

I will give a couple of quick examples don't think too hard about them, I'm not, I think soft...I am an entity that exists, I see clearly, hear clearly, and cogitate at the minimum level it seems most others do because I can share in most of the conventions of reality. Conventions such as 'that is the ocean' 'that is a stop sign' 'it is time to pay taxes'. So, I am perceiving reality clearly one, two I am an entity that is alive in a body...very important....I am in an able body....I can acquire my necessities and desires...because I am an entity, sovereign, free, unbound and I have properties such as an able body I am naturally allowed to acquire other property whether I need it or not. This fundamental set of concepts is from the 'objectivist' school and I found agrees with both Aristotelian, Buddhist and Liberal foundations of temporal moral and ethical structures. That's important because of the good qualities they share.

    If I accept that my existence is good, for me, and my capacity and need to acquire property to keep the aforementioned, me, alive...being alive and obtaining what I wish pleases me rather than displeases me...my happiness is an indicator of what is good for me. Now, if this is true for others it is best for me to try to not inhibit another entity's happiness....I can't really do much else, think hard about that one. I can't MAKE you happy, I can keep you from being mired in conditions that should naturally make you unhappy. 

This system fails when people accept mistreatment of others in the name of some future happiness that isn't coming, such as an afterlife. Most of this stuff twisted the life out of morality because agriculture is difficult, civilization is energy dependent rather than energy producing and both tend to require fiat currency to be made by a state with a mercenary army structure. Evil is obstructing others necessities and erecting walls in front of their desires and creativity, it inhibits the potential of the species, the good is natural, I feel, it is what the Austrian economists call a 'win-win' proposition, that's why language allows us to negotiate. You have a right to 1)YOUR LIFE, 2)YOUR FREEDOM-from violence and theft, 3)Property and the pursuit of your happiness (original version correct?)...you are endowed at birth with these violations of these rights are the pith of evil.

   "Good," "bad," and "evil" are not absolute terms.  They mean different things in different contexts.  For the theist, there is no such ambiguity, though.  For theists, "Good" is believing in God; "bad" is not believing in God; and "evil" is REALLY not believing in God.  There is no shortage of Christians who would consider me "bad", perhaps even evil because I don't believe in their Magic Man in the Sky; but in the context of how I try to treat other people with compassion, you might be hard pressed to find anyone who would overtly accuse me of being "evil."  What they think, though, is hard to know.  

    If I had been one of the Canaanites trampled under foot by General God and his Israelite army as described in the Pentateuch, and my wife and children were among those countless innocents slaughtered when "Joshua fit the battle of Jericho," I might have a hard time understanding how that would be "good" as asserted by Christians and Jews, and not "evil" as asserted by atheists.

   If my child had been among the 42 children ripped to shreds by two God-sent bears just for laughing at a bald man, as described in II Kings, Chapter 2, Verses 23 & 24, I might find it difficult to call God "good."  Theists, though, have no such difficulty.  For them, anything God does is, by definition, "good."  It was put to me this way by a Jehovah's Witness: "It was good and righteous for God to kill the children, because the man they mocked was a holy man."  I pointed out that they did not know that.  They said that didn't matter.  I'm glad these good Christians had a moral compass to guide them.  It's what allows Christians to be such enthusiastic supporters of war, I guess.

   For Christians and Jews, a "good" Christian would be Abraham, who willingly - almost eagerly - agreed to slash and burn his son, Isaac to appease God.  

   When I'm asked from where I get my moral compass, I assure them it's not from II Kings, 2:23&24.

This truly resonated with me on several levels.. One, the unholy alliance btw the xtian, jewish, and god thingee. Two, I wonder how Black xtains can sit in church praising how the Cannanites, who where Black too, were wiped out by the Israelis army...

Most religious Black people I know are not just mildly religious, they're deeply committed to the Christian religion, and it has always been a source of wonder to me how they could have so thoroughly accepted the religion of their slave-owners and passed it down through the generations.

I suspect some extreme form of Stockholm Syndrome.

Arch, it is a continued source of wonderment for me and just how ignorant and socially confused it has made them.  As an example, and this is true.  There's this christian church on central avenue in Bowie, Maryland where the entire congregation is Black and the pastor and his wife are white. It's a MEGA  church too, brand new. When putting on their christmas play they dress a black woman up, put a long blonde wig on her, have her ride a donkey as Mary.. check it out!!!


Wierd.  Mary is hardly ever blonde in iconography.  What would possess them to do it... A textbook on multicultural issues that I am going through mentions that some black people have been socially influenced to believe the misguided notion that white people are better.  It has been a problem for quite a few decades, though things have gotten a lot better in terms of black Americans knowing they have equal worth.  In like of this, something of this nature seems like a regress.

John when I talk about white supremacy that's what I mean..it's a system that has been in place since Alexander of Macadonia put the final sword into the black world.  America is only the latest and greatest manifestation of white cultural supremacy. Due to this historical "achievement", Blacks feel inferior by virture of their ancestry.  Why do you think Obama invited a police sargent to the white house for a beer when he arrested a black man in his own home?  Would W do such a thing? like hell he would.

And white supremacy is a two way street. It makes whites feel inherently superior.  It's interesting to watch how it works in this society but you must take an objective position to see clearly.  Well as much a humanly possible.

@Shabaka, I haven't responded to a lot of your posts because I can't tell if you're joking, angry, or something else.

For example, on this post... I'm not going to hate myself because of what my ancestors did.

I don't mean to offend you. I'm just curious, and can't figure out yet what I'm missing with respect to not understanding where you're coming from a lot of the time.


if you did hate yourself I'd say you have a serious problem...however my position is focused around what your ancestors did and for you not to exacerbate the problem by adhering to and denying that white cultural supremacy exist, with all its nuances.


BTW white guilt is useless for both of us especially you because it prevents you from examining present conditions in an objective light. 

So, we are supposed to feel guilty that "white culture" is supreme?

I'm not particularly sorry to be a representative the strongest culture in the world, and it did for sure not come unchallenged. Why apologize for strength?

strength in this case=killing, you don't need to aplogize for being the best killers in the world if that's something you are proud of..

grow up dude...

There are all kinds of cultural and racial supremist whackos and cults out there. The whities are just as evil as the rest of them.


© 2016   Created by umar.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service