Religion and Atheism

[hipeter924]

Re: Religion and Atheism

Good or bad for who? The mentality of the government/rulers determines the policies imposed on the people.

Yes it does, if you have a dictator then obviously everyone is going to be oppressed or repressed in some way. If you have a democracy it might be corrupt, hate a particular religion/ideology, and/or be racist and oppress or repress in its own way too.If Secularism is in place as it should be then it is good, Turkey is an example of a state that claims to be secular but really isn't due to Islamic Nationalist control of the education system.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Religion and Atheism

Atheism without Secularism = Bad
Religion with Secularism = Good
Doesn't actively discriminate against either but not Secular = Neutral
Atheism with Secularism = Good
Religion without Secularism = Bad

Good or bad for who? The mentality of the government/rulers determines the policies imposed on the people.

[hipeter924]

Re: Religion and Atheism

It doesn't matter if you vote democrat or republican, the results are decided by higher powers that are out of your control. This is called corruption.

It doesn't matter if you are a spiritual being who makes decisions based on empathy or an atheist robot that makes decisions based on statistics and data. You're prone to manipulation either way.

It doesn't matter either way and people are wasting their time over the debate.

What does matter is being sucessful in life and the goal of either camp is to make sure that doesn't happen.

The U.S.S.R was founded on state sponsered Atheism and built a Communist Empire. Religion was forbidden. America fought for the freedom of religion and built a Capitalist Empire under the belief of a deity. Both systems have been successful in controlling human life.

Truth is knowledge. Knowledge is freedom.

Why all the fuss?

Any Atheist that has any sense understands that religion or supernatural belief can only be ended through freedom of consent (meaning people adopt Atheism from a free choice or decision).

For this reason the best system is one based upon Secularism, the notion of no one religious belief controlling society (aka like the Catholic Church did in the medieval ages) and the church and state being separate (so neither can violate or damage the rights of the other) and if there is any religious teaching it has to be given on an optional basis.

The USSR was not secular, and used force to prohibit religious belief (which any sensible Atheist would be against because that violates what I said earlier as free choice or decision) and tried to eliminate the Armenian church (and failed) and many other religious groups when they were in power.

Or in simple terms....

Atheism without Secularism = Bad
Religion with Secularism = Good
Doesn't actively discriminate against either but not Secular = Neutral
Atheism with Secularism = Good
Religion without Secularism = Bad

[Muhaha]

Re: Religion and Atheism

So why is it wrong to be "Robotic"?

[KanadaHye]

Re: Religion and Atheism

So true. I believe the moment you 'open your mouth', it is inspired with an ideology.

I'm sure you have your own views of the world. Some formed by popular opinion, some by upbringing and some by personal experience. You have your own ideology. Whether it's inspired by a teacher, role model or personal heroes, it's a way that you see things and it affects the decisions you make on a daily basis.

[Lucin]

Re: Religion and Atheism

If someone requires evidence supported by data and numbers to base decisions, empathy is pushed aside. It is a way of thinking... a robotic way of logic. It's an ideology.

So true. I believe the moment you 'open your mouth', it is inspired with an ideology.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Religion and Atheism

People who believe in some type of supernatural being or power(s) but don't know who it is, are generally called Agnostic.

People who don't believe in any type of super natural being or powers(s) are generally called Atheists.

People who believe in many gods are Polytheists.

People who believe in one God are Monotheists.

There are other descriptions of what people believe as well. But the difference is in America all the above have a right to some type of self determination. So all the groups of people listed above have a right to their belief in America. So when it comes down to politics everyone has an equal vote, the Agnostic, Atheist, Polytheist and Monotheist. What the focus needs to be on is the people running governments.

So Monotheists have met God whereas Agnostics haven't?

As far as America goes... the government clearly states one nation under God. Not one nation under gods or one government that doesn't care what you do or think. Further more, if it was up to the government... it would rephrase it to one world under God.

Science is a means of acquiring knowledge. Sure, we should try to make rational decisions, but that doesn't push aside empathy. I don't see the incompatibility.
Robots do what they are programmed to, there's not thought, so this isn't a good analogy. Finally it's a METHOD of acquiring knowledge not a belief system, so no, it's not an ideology.

It's a way of making decisions... much like a business decision which is made on what is more profitable, empathy doesn't play a role in a data/evidence based decision. The data/evidence presented (whether true or false) overrules any gut feeling or personal sentiment. Robots make decisions based on logic... their actions/thought processes depends on the data/input. It is an ideology (way of looking at things).

That's not how it works. They don't just publish or report their conclusion, but exactly what pre-existing information supports their prediction, precisely how they tested their prediction, describe the data, the results of that test, and what those results can mean. Then people go over that to make sure there aren't problems with that specific study's methodology, statistics, reasoning, etc. Even if there's not, others attempt to replicate the findings. We don't just take one dude's word for something. Replication is very central to science.

You're confusing how it's supposed to work with the corruption that is involved at top levels.

[Siggie]

Re: Religion and Atheism

If someone requires evidence supported by data and numbers to base decisions, empathy is pushed aside. It is a way of thinking... a robotic way of logic. It's an ideology.

Science is a means of acquiring knowledge. Sure, we should try to make rational decisions, but that doesn't push aside empathy. I don't see the incompatibility.
Robots do what they are programmed to, there's not thought, so this isn't a good analogy. Finally it's a METHOD of acquiring knowledge not a belief system, so no, it's not an ideology.

Evidence can be created to manipulate belief... it's rather simple for those who have the power to do so. Unless the evidence is first hand or can be proven repeatedly, the belief is blind. It's like somebody trusting a car mechanic about diagnosis when they know nothing about cars or everything they know, they learned from their mechanic.

That's not how it works. They don't just publish or report their conclusion, but exactly what pre-existing information supports their prediction, precisely how they tested their prediction, describe the data, the results of that test, and what those results can mean. Then people go over that to make sure there aren't problems with that specific study's methodology, statistics, reasoning, etc. Even if there's not, others attempt to replicate the findings. We don't just take one dude's word for something. Replication is very central to science.

[Yeznik]

Re: Religion and Atheism

People who believe in some type of supernatural being or power(s) but don't know who it is, are generally called Agnostic.

People who don't believe in any type of super natural being or powers(s) are generally called Atheists.

People who believe in many gods are Polytheists.

People who believe in one God are Monotheists.

There are other descriptions of what people believe as well. But the difference is in America all the above have a right to some type of self determination. So all the groups of people listed above have a right to their belief in America. So when it comes down to politics everyone has an equal vote, the Agnostic, Atheist, Polytheist and Monotheist. What the focus needs to be on is the people running governments.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Religion and Atheism

Also I see the terms "spiritual" and "atheist" often used as if they are mutually exclusive. I don't think that's correct. One can certainly reject God while still being highly spiritual ... I don't know much about Buddhists but it strikes me that they are more of this mixed category.

I agree... spirtuality comes from the understanding of mankind and nature. While there are many that believe in an almighty and intelligent creator, they don't believe in a personal God which would make them atheist in terms of the American concept of God (all controlling).