Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
No, I do not grant that those are similar types of belief at all. There is no "objective" outside of humanity's scope, therefore by definition it matters. Once the last observer in the universe dies, the universe does not exist and does not matter for all intents and purposes, whether it lasts for a year or an infinity afterwards.
Human flourishing is a real and evident thing, choosing to believe in its importance is an opinion. Choosing to believe into an external source of objectivity, especially deliberately, is self-brainwashing.
The rest is just "you simply haven't prayed hard enough" goalpost moving, not to mention that a perfectly loving being cannot by definition be imagined by an imperfect mind. I suggest you try harder to be a thinking atheist who doesn't need nor want a God to lord over and judge him, and if you can't, well, you're just not thinking hard enough.
Right, it’s a faith statement unevidenced by the atheistic framework. Why an animal would care about “animal species as a whole” does not make sense scientifically in an evolutionary sense. “Thinking atheism” does not support the importance of human flourishing as a personal pursuit.
It’s no less unevidenced than your dogma that a human is motivated by species-global flourishing.
Not at all. You failed the exercise in being able to imagine a “loving God”. That’s not goalpost moving, that’s an inability to understand religious language.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link