Philosophy Discussion Forums

Na, it's just really simple: you believe there is an "ought". You can't get that from what just is. Chemicals and particles just are. To explain your claim to what ought to be, you need something outside matter.

Dlaw wrote: ↑November 26th, 2022, 9:36 pm Is atheism closest to a choice, a rebellion or something more like color-blindness.

I've always been an atheist so sometimes it's hard for me to understand to understand the impact my atheism has on others.

I feel like I take religion and religious people seriously, but sometimes that seems like it might be worse - might appear cynical or insulting in some way.

Thanks.

Would you like the long answer or short answer? The latter would be Yes. It's your fault because as volitional creatures we are doomed by choice. And choices have consequences, one way or another (good, bad, or ugly). Is that the answer you're looking for?

3017Metaphysician,

Yes, but I guessing you might agree that every individual is some combination of choice and circumstance.

N693 wrote: ↑November 30th, 2022, 9:51 am 3017Metaphysician,

Yes, but I guessing you might agree that every individual is some combination of choice and circumstance.

Oh absolutely! I didn't mean my answer to be disparaging in any way. The OP question has an excruciatingly obvious answer. It's kind of like saying is it my fault I'm a painter, Christian, racecar driver, and so on. We exist as creatures who make choices.

Nonetheless, I'm thinking your "circumstance" has broader implications. For instance, if one is influenced by his circumstances that would obviously have an impact on the choices one makes. And as such, one must make choices good, bad or ugly. What's the takeaway? Well one is to first 'know thyself'. And another is to educate oneself. As Maslow would say, life is both the discovery and uncovery of Being.

With respect to the OP, I am only guessing that the OP feels like a victim of some kind. You know, kind of like in far-right political debates!

Agreed! But I never know what "far-right" means anymore. That and the fact that the characteristics of the "far-right" and the "far-left" are the same.

N693 wrote: ↑November 30th, 2022, 11:02 am Agreed! But I never know what "far-right" means anymore. That and the fact that the characteristics of the "far-right" and the "far-left" are the same.

True that! Both parties have swapped ideologies, to some extent. Far-left used to be racist, now the far-right is more racist. Far right used to be the party of law and order and small government; they're pretty much the opposite or the same now. And both parties spend gobs of money now. They're just for different things.

Anyway, as it relates to religion, the far-right fundamentalist can't get out of his own way. In Christianity, interpreting every single thing in the Bible literally makes no sense. Afterall, the lord's prayer starts with 'our father' which is just a metaphor/he's obviously not our real biological father. Metaphor, allegory, early church politics, lost gospels, I could go on. The point is one has to educate oneself, be more sophisticated in their interpretations, and not throw the baby out with the bathwater either. A source of much consternation, to say the least.

I suppose it's yet another lesson relative to the existential human condition/exaggerated self-worth/ego. Some religious people, those typically from the far-right/Fundies, feel as though they have to have all the answers. If you don't know something, say you don't know. Just don't make things up to look like you know. It becomes excruciatingly obvious. Kind of like playing the victim/OP.

Well, again, I don't know what "far-right" means. Are there "far-right" groups that are racist? Sure. But the left calls everyone they don't happen to like "racist" and "far-right". And yet it is the left that want's segregation; it's the left that believes people are either good or bad based on skin color; it is the left that condemns whole groups based on categorical generalizations. That, by definition, is racism and it's prevalent in the mainstream media and accepted as normal. Raise a question and be denounced, shouted down, and kicked off social media.

Whom should I fear? The 6 rednecks in West Virginia who have a swastika in their garage, or the media apparatus that will show up in my driveway if I fail to swear fealty to the latest fake hate crime, or question obviously false history, or that Trump isn't just a loud-mouth a##hole, but a comic book supervillain, or fail to shut off my brain and pretend whatever they tell me?

Bible thumpers? Yes, but that's just a human fault. Human beings will always find something to twist, it might be religion, it might be whatever.

N693 wrote: ↑November 30th, 2022, 12:22 pm Well, again, I don't know what "far-right" means. Are there "far-right" groups that are racist? Sure. But the left calls everyone they don't happen to like "racist" and "far-right". And yet it is the left that want's segregation; it's the left that believes people are either good or bad based on skin color; it is the left that condemns whole groups based on categorical generalizations. That, by definition, is racism and it's prevalent in the mainstream media and accepted as normal. Raise a question and be denounced, shouted down, and kicked off social media.

Whom should I fear? The 6 rednecks in West Virginia who have a swastika in their garage, or the media apparatus that will show up in my driveway if I fail to swear fealty to the latest fake hate crime, or question obviously false history, or that Trump isn't just a loud-mouth a##hole, but a comic book supervillain, or fail to shut off my brain and pretend whatever they tell me?

Bible thumpers? Yes, but that's just a human fault. Human beings will always find something to twist, it might be religion, it might be whatever.

I wouldn't get too spun-up about the media. Remember, the good outweighs the bad (investigative reporting, uncovering crimes, critiques of those in power, asking the tough questions in press conferences, etc.). It comes with the territory. Politicians who don't have thick skin (i.e., Trump) only exacerbate the condition. He was his own worst enemy. He could give critique but couldn't take it. Bad leadership. One reason why his lawyers always advised him not to testify about his all his nefarious/criminal/questionable behavior.

Anyway, back to projecting, gaslighting and otherwise playing the victim. I would say to the OP; man-up, make your choices and live with them. If your choices impact the well-being of other's, well that's a 'whole nother' ball of wax. Maybe just stick with the basics. Common sense says treat others as you would like to be treated. You know, the golden rule, Christian philosophy...

Lot's of directions we could go there...btw-do you get the sense that the OP is ranting/whining (is the OP a simple rant of some kind)? I'm struggling to find a thesis...

I'm not sure what the motivations of the OP are. At first I thought it was a "fear of hell" type question, or an argument against theism, but it appears not.

BTW, "investigative reporting"? I guess we'll agree to disagree. 4 years of "a US president is actually a Russian spy"? Hunters laptop is only his once we can't deny it any longer? Etc, etc, etc. It's neither investigative nor reporting and this type of delusion destroys societies.

N693 wrote: ↑November 30th, 2022, 2:54 pm BTW, "investigative reporting"? I guess we'll agree to disagree. 4 years of "a US president is actually a Russian spy"? Hunters laptop is only his once we can't deny it any longer? Etc, etc, etc. It's neither investigative nor reporting and this type of delusion destroys societies.

Sure! Lock 'em all up. I'm equal opportunity. I vote for locking up Nixon, Clinton, Trump and Hunter. What do you think?

Oh, and the media is your friend! Think about all the crimes they've uncovered where lawmaker's claimed ignorance about same. You got to take the good with the bad my friend. Oh, and Muller didn't exonerate Trump. He obstructed justice. Otherwise, you'd better be prepared to explain all the guilty pleas from his campaign team! You know, lying to the FBI and that sort of thing. Trumpian/cult of criminality kinds of stuff! He'll do anything to elected, it seems!!! BTW, didn't he say those who plea the 5th are guilty? Stealing documents, too?

The ship is sinking, run while you still can! Lock him up!

If you don't like Trump that's fine with me. But I said his opponents aren't any better and I'm not about to pretend that the golden saviors of the establishment are saving me form the cartoon supervillain.

BTW, just to illustrate: I gave at least two examples where the establishment media incontrovertibly lied to you, and your response was "you got to take the good with the bad".

Uh, no, you don't. You don't need to accept lying, and when people accept the lies--and even promote the lies (ketman)--you have tyranny.

N693 wrote: ↑December 1st, 2022, 7:26 am BTW, just to illustrate: I gave at least two examples where the establishment media incontrovertibly lied to you, and your response was "you got to take the good with the bad".

Uh, no, you don't. You don't need to accept lying, and when people accept the lies--and even promote the lies (ketman)--you have tyranny.

Yep. You do, have to accept the good with the bad. Nonetheless, if the bad outweighs the good, you move on. Accordingly, that's why your buddy Dumper Trumper didn't get re-elected (among many other character flaws). All presidents do good and bad; some tip the scales and do more bad than good. As such, you don't get re-elected. But because of his bad character, instead, he created the big lie so he can still make money. So who's lying now?

And yes FOX news lies all the time.

Anyway, back to the topic. I still say to the OP; man-up, make your choices and live with them. Don't play victim like Dumper Trumper!

"You have to accept the lies" (ketman). That's what people tell themselves on the way to tyranny.

Just wondering, does every conversation you have revolve around Donald Trump? Does he occupy every thought?