tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post8849300507315157501..comments2023-11-05T20:19:44.812+13:00Comments on Ambassador Watch: Looking for DarwinGavinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060097218905523899noreply@blogger.comBlogger66125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-30579719105770204802008-09-11T11:07:00.000+12:002008-09-11T11:07:00.000+12:00http://ironwolf.dangerousgames.com/blog/archives/5...<I>http://ironwolf.dangerousgames.com/blog/archives/563<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>Totally irrelevant to my challenge.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-87509554446186583882008-09-10T09:58:00.000+12:002008-09-10T09:58:00.000+12:00http://ironwolf.dangerousgames.com/blog/archives/5...http://ironwolf.dangerousgames.com/blog/archives/563<BR/><BR/><BR/>Paul RayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-12027701020584237372008-09-09T09:36:00.000+12:002008-09-09T09:36:00.000+12:00"LOL! I guess like how most people know God (or a ..."LOL! I guess like how most people know God (or a god) exists."<BR/><BR/>No, not at all. You see, in stating that murder is wrong, we can collect data and analyze it and come to a conclusion. On the other hand,<BR/>people "knowing" that god(s) exists is backed up by nothing. Nada. No data or evidence to sift through. Nothing. Just "belief."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Paul RayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-82120545072369108092008-09-09T09:33:00.000+12:002008-09-09T09:33:00.000+12:00"Another classic. I guess there is nothing morally..."Another classic. I guess there is nothing morally wrong with that. LOL."<BR/><BR/>Duh, I am an Amoral Atheist, after all. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Paul RayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-36811978674698747742008-09-06T14:28:00.000+12:002008-09-06T14:28:00.000+12:00I'll misrepresent you as long as I wishAnother cla...<I>I'll misrepresent you as long as I wish</I><BR/><BR/>Another classic. I guess there is nothing morally wrong with that. LOL.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-55665379816111016732008-09-06T14:24:00.000+12:002008-09-06T14:24:00.000+12:00I can look at murder, weigh the effects, and decla...<I>I can look at murder, weigh the effects, and declare it evil/wrong, ect. Why can't I, just because Joe Blow doesn't? He's wrong. I know he's wrong.</I><BR/><BR/>LOL! I guess like how most people know God (or a god) exists.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-5734560174496028442008-09-06T12:58:00.000+12:002008-09-06T12:58:00.000+12:00Dear Anon,"So stop misrepresenting me. What I have...Dear Anon,<BR/><BR/><BR/>"So stop misrepresenting me. What I have argued, is that you have no basis for saying that another atheist who might choose to be mean and even rape "decent" folks is wrong/evil."<BR/><BR/>I'll misrepresent you as long as I wish, especially since you are ignoring the underlying issue here- your belief in the Great Pumpkin (God). But as far as having no basis to declare another person's actions as evil, sure I can. Why can't I?? Especially when the actions I declare evil are evident to all humanity, and have been for thousands and thousands of years, by society at large. I can look at murder, weigh the effects, and declare it evil/wrong, ect. Why can't I, just because Joe Blow doesn't? He's wrong. I know he's wrong. I don't need the Great Pumpkin to stand behind me and thunder, "Yes, Paul is right! Killing is a bad thing." And given that the person who thinks it's perfectly okay to murder is such a small minority (we call those special few psychopaths) it renders your point irrelevant. And the majority of those who do murder do know its wrong. Of course, you know all of this. But your belief in the Great Pumpkin commits you to weasel around <BR/>in pseudo-intellectual wranglings. <BR/><BR/><BR/>"If you argued that there exists a Great Magic Pumpkin which absolute morality depends on, then it would be logical for you to pursue this line."<BR/><BR/>And your reaction would be? It's bad question to ask of you, because you would find the situation perfectly plausible, because you yourself believe that morality can only come through your Great Pumpkin (God).<BR/><BR/><BR/>Paul RayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-41399239708464512502008-09-06T11:33:00.000+12:002008-09-06T11:33:00.000+12:00As for the Wiki link, it indicates that "the golde...<I><BR/>As for the Wiki link, it indicates that "the golden rule" was held by many peoples, in many cultures, over many tens of thousands of years (But then, you probably don't believe the earth existed more than six thousand years ago, so you probably blocked that part out.), and by many different religions --- suggesting not that the ethic of reciprocity, or the golden rule, if you like, persists solely because of the Christian religion --- but it exists in spite of all religions, not just as a result of the fairly recent orthodox Christian religion</I><BR/><BR/>I'm sure you cannot point to anything I said which would suggest the golden rule is a result of Christianity. Neither can you point to anything I said to suggest it doesn't exist in most all religions.<BR/><BR/>But I don't see how this addresses my challenge. Most people have believed in a god. Does that demonstrate a god exists? I'm sure you'd say no. So just what is it you're saying that makes the golden rule right? If a man chooses to go against it, why would that be a bad thing?<BR/><BR/>I noticed you failed to answer my questions about issues such as homosexuality and animal killing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-70836518275941704312008-09-06T11:22:00.000+12:002008-09-06T11:22:00.000+12:00because you just can't understand why I wouldn't w...<I>because you just can't understand why I wouldn't want to [murder small children]</I><BR/><BR/>This is not the issue. (Purple, pay attention). I don't argue that you cannot choose to be kind and affectionate to everyone you encounter because you are an atheist. So stop misrepresenting me. What I have argued, is that you have no basis for saying that another atheist who might choose to be mean and even rape "decent" folks is wrong/evil. That is, you have nothing to show why your personal preference to be kind is the correct way to live as opposed to what this other might choose.<BR/><BR/>Sure you have your feelings. But why are your feelings better than another's?<BR/><BR/><I>Imagine if I, in all seriousness, asked you to "prove" that there can exist morality in the absence of the Great Magic Pumpkin</I><BR/><BR/>If you argued that there exists a Great Magic Pumpkin which absolute morality depends on, then it would be logical for you to pursue this line.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-29962509671993151182008-09-06T03:41:00.000+12:002008-09-06T03:41:00.000+12:00Anon,Your whole view is built on an assumption for...Anon,<BR/><BR/>Your whole view is built on an assumption for which you provide absolutely no supporting evidence. I think providing evidence that there is a god(s) would benefit this discussion and take out it out of the realm of the absurd. Because right now, it's silly. Imagine if I, in all seriousness, asked you to "prove" that there can exist morality in the absence of the Great Magic Pumpkin, and also ask, in all seriousness, to provide a basis for my abhorrence to murdering small children because you just can't understand why I wouldn't want to if there is no Great Magic Pumpkin to order me not to. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Paul Ray<BR/><BR/><BR/>Paul RayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-43899093726069796392008-09-05T11:56:00.000+12:002008-09-05T11:56:00.000+12:00"Yes I read the info at the wiki link. The other w...<EM>"Yes I read the info at the wiki link. The other was a link to a book on amazon so I could not read that, although the reviews seem to indicate it is not really what I'm looking for."</EM><BR/><BR/>You should be able to read an excerpt from the book. Since it's "not really what you're looking for", of course you're not going to, which is fine.<BR/><BR/>As for the Wiki link, it indicates that "the golden rule" was held by many peoples, in many cultures, over many tens of thousands of years (But then, you probably don't believe the earth existed more than six thousand years ago, so you probably blocked that part out.), and by many different religions --- suggesting not that the ethic of reciprocity, or the golden rule, if you like, persists solely because of the Christian religion --- but it exists <STRONG>in spite of all religions</STRONG>, not just as a result of the fairly recent orthodox Christian religion. <BR/><BR/>This has been proven by neuroscience studies, notably the one published in the Mirror Neurons book that I linked to on Amazon (the one that was "not really what [you were] looking for").<BR/><BR/><EM>"And this is what is so chilling. You simply can't comprehend that human beings can create moral codes without the intervention and guidance of an imaginary being, and that this created moral code needs no blessing or grounding from an imaginary being to be valid. Your view is amoral, and frightening. It also shows a refusal to acknowledge reality."</EM><BR/><BR/>I agree with Paul. The fact that you cannot envision, nor empathize with, a morality that is endemic to the human species as a whole, instead of just your blind god's enthralled portion of it, is truly disturbing. What if you found yourself one day without faith? Would you then go out and start raping/etcetera, as you seem to indicate from your comments?<BR/><BR/>Asking the next question, do you then believe that all atheists and agnostics, those of us who are in your estimation "without god", are somehow deserving of immoral acts by you and other Christians, merely because you believe and we do not?<BR/><BR/>It is consistent with cultic activity that the members of closed high-demand religious groups see no moral problems or "twinges of conscience" with lying, deceiving, or otherwise misrepresenting themselves to those "outside of the pale" (i.e., outside of their religion/nonbelievers).<BR/><BR/>You also seem to indicate that you believe all atheists (of which I and Paul number among, if I am not mistaken) are thieves and liars and murderers, etcetera. Now, you can't look into the whites of my eyes here, this being the Internet and all, but I assure you, I am neither a liar nor a thief nor a murderer. And I don't need a Sky Buddy to tell me not to do those things.<BR/><BR/>I, alone, am responsible for my actions. And their consequences. And so are you. Unfortunately, you can avail yourself of the convenient cop-out "the devil made me do it".<BR/><BR/>Which is the other side of the morality question few Christians dare to address, when it's brought up. Do you have the theological fortitude to do so, anon?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-827867105062794122008-09-04T13:50:00.000+12:002008-09-04T13:50:00.000+12:00One other thing I had intended to say to Paul, reg...One other thing I had intended to say to Paul, regarding the assertion that everyone knows right from wrong. Hitler seemed to have thought it right to eliminate certain races. On what basis could one condemn Hitler for such a view? Or do we know that deep down Hitler knew he was wrong and felt guilty about it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-17694823172345263292008-09-04T13:41:00.000+12:002008-09-04T13:41:00.000+12:00I provided links to information that meets that re...<I>I provided links to information that meets that requirement above. I note, anon, that you chose not to answer any of that infomation presented.</I><BR/><BR/>Purple,<BR/><BR/>Yes I read the info at the wiki link. The other was a link to a book on amazon so I could not read that, although the reviews seem to indicate it is not really what I'm looking for.<BR/><BR/>As to why I didn't bother to respond to your post, I thought after you thought about it some more, and saw more of my response to Paul, that you'd realise that what you provided doesn't address my challenge. How does the ubiquitous concept of the golden rule demonstrate a basis for absolute morality? <BR/><BR/>Or is your point that the golden rule is the basis itself? Well you might think it is a good concept, and I would agree with you, but if some disagrees, on what basis would you say he is wrong?<BR/><BR/>Also, how does anything you directed me to, instruct one on whether there is anything morally wrong with homosexuality? How about killing animals -anything wrong with that? What would be the basis for saying whether any of these things is wrong?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-45268450577240138232008-09-04T13:22:00.000+12:002008-09-04T13:22:00.000+12:00You simply can't comprehend that human beings can ...<I>You simply can't comprehend that human beings can create moral codes without the intervention and guidance of an imaginary being, and that this created moral code needs no blessing or grounding from an imaginary being to be valid</I><BR/><BR/>Human beings (including atheists) can create moral codes. That is not the issue. But if I've not made myself clear by now, then no point trying again.<BR/><BR/>You suggested that everyone knows rape is wrong. Unless you have gotten into the mind of rapists, how can you make such a claim? Just because you feel that way? Yes I know, you have become your own god so naturally you feel people would see things your way. But don't forget that just as how you've made yourself your own god, each person can do the same. Don't be surprised to find these other gods disagreeing with you.<BR/><BR/>As to the homosexuality comment I made, I thought you implied it. You keep arguing that we all know right from wrong regardless of the veracity of the bible or the existence of God. So we all know homosexual practice is abominable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-18727757420162655402008-09-04T05:13:00.000+12:002008-09-04T05:13:00.000+12:00"Of course morality exists. I never suggested othe..."Of course morality exists. I never suggested otherwise."<BR/><BR/>You misunderstand- morality exists. God doesn't. Therefore...<BR/><BR/><BR/>"The issue is, how does one demonstrate any basis for morality without the existence of God?"<BR/><BR/>But it's sorta irrelevant- God doesn't exist.<BR/><BR/>"If you say something is right or wrong, is it just from your perspective, or is there any basis for you to say it should apply to others too?"<BR/><BR/>Yes, there is a basis. It's a common understanding built on individual and societal experience over time. Man developed morality, it didn't come from an imaginary being named Thor, or Jupiter, or Jehovah.<BR/><BR/> <BR/><BR/>"Isn't purpose to life a bit subjective from individual to individual?"<BR/><BR/>And this is your problem. Since it is subjective, then one's moral values must be subjective too."<BR/><BR/>No it's not. My concept of my purpose in my life has nothing to do with morality. Two individuals may have two different ideas as what their purpose in life, yet both know on some level that killing and stealing tennis shoes is wrong.<BR/><BR/><BR/>"So for you, it is wrong to rape someone; for another, it is perfectly alright, as it aligns with his subjective purpose."<BR/><BR/>No. Both I and the other person know on some level that raping someone is wrong- either through human empathy, direct experience, or societal norms that were developed by man through empathy or experience. <BR/><BR/>"You had asked me to provide evidence for my argument that without God there is no purpose, and without purpose all value systems are equal. If you try to demonstrate morality apart from God, the truth of my argument will be evident."<BR/><BR/>But I don't believe in God. The onus is on you. You are the one claiming a magic dragon hidden in your garage.<BR/><BR/>"I just don't get what basis you have for saying someone has wronged you. I can understand you might feel pain and even think something wrong was done. But from the other man's perspective, you might simply be nothing, even an object to be destroyed. Why should your estimation of yourself be taken over the other man's view of you?"<BR/><BR/>And this is what is so chilling. You simply can't comprehend that human beings can create moral codes without the intervention and guidance of an imaginary being, and that this created moral code needs no blessing or grounding from an imaginary being to be valid. Your view is amoral, and frightening. It also shows a refusal to acknowledge reality. <BR/><BR/>"Btw, I'm glad you still denounce homosexual practice."<BR/><BR/>I did? I don't remember denouncing anything this week.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Paul RayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-18355459462309493452008-09-04T03:34:00.000+12:002008-09-04T03:34:00.000+12:00"The issue is, how does one demonstrate any basis ...<EM>"The issue is, how does one demonstrate any basis for morality without the existence of God?"</EM><BR/><BR/>I provided links to information that meets that requirement above. I note, anon, that you chose not to answer any of that infomation presented.<BR/><BR/>Or did you even bother to read it at all?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-30019461787345032552008-09-03T13:58:00.000+12:002008-09-03T13:58:00.000+12:00Paul, Sigh.Of course morality exists. I never sugg...Paul, <BR/><BR/>Sigh.<BR/><BR/>Of course morality exists. I never suggested otherwise. But then, I believe in God. The issue is, how does one demonstrate any basis for morality without the existence of God? <BR/><BR/>If you say something is right or wrong, is it just from your perspective, or is there any basis for you to say it should apply to others too? <BR/><BR/><I>Isn't purpose to life a bit subjective from individual to individual? </I><BR/><BR/>And this is your problem. Since it is subjective, then one's moral values must be subjective too. So for you, it is wrong to rape someone; for another, it is perfectly alright, as it aligns with his subjective purpose.<BR/><BR/>You had asked me to provide evidence for my argument that without God there is no purpose, and without purpose all value systems are equal. If you try to demonstrate morality apart from God, the truth of my argument will be evident.<BR/><BR/><I>...in order to demand accountability of another human who has wronged me?</I><BR/><BR/>I just don't get what basis you have for saying someone has wronged you. I can understand you might feel pain and even think something wrong was done. But from the other man's perspective, you might simply be nothing, even an object to be destroyed. Why should your estimation of yourself be taken over the other man's view of you?<BR/><BR/>Btw, I'm glad you still denounce homosexual practice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-53448823446040483782008-08-30T11:49:00.000+12:002008-08-30T11:49:00.000+12:00"You jump the gun here. You first need to establis..."You jump the gun here. You first need to establish that right and wrong (morally speaking, in an absolute sense) exist without God."<BR/><BR/>I will do no such thing. It is no different than asking you to establish that the world was NOT created by a magic leprechaun who pulled the universe out of his hat. It's a ridiculous question, and you, as a believer, have the responsibility to provide evidence for your outrageous claim that morality came from a supernatural being named Jehovah in the first place- and without Jehovah, the human mind will never, ever come to understand simple moral concepts. I'm not the one claiming a magic dragon in my garage. You are.<BR/><BR/><BR/>"For without God (an Intelligent Designer), there is no purpose to life, and without purpose, all value systems are equal."<BR/><BR/>Care to provide some evidence to back up that little gem? Isn't purpose to life a bit subjective from individual to individual? I honestly have more purpose to my life now than I did when I believed in imaginary beings. <BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>"Why should that make you feel guilty? Why should you care about others, or yourself? Well even if that's just what you've decided for yourself,..."<BR/><BR/><BR/>It's called empathy. Caring. Something Christians have to be taught.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>"...you cannot expect others to choose the same set of values you have chosen. Therefore, if someone wants to rape your wife, you cannot say he is worthy of punishment. You would have no basis to say he is wrong."<BR/><BR/>Why not?? Why do I need a supernatural being to write a moral code (a moral code which all of humanity has acknowledged, even in the absence of the Bible)in order to demand accountability of another human who has wronged me?<BR/><BR/><BR/>"His pursuits simply allow him to have a value system that says nothing is wrong with rape if he gets to have some pleasure. Your pursuits might say otherwise, but there is no reason to say your pursuits are what he should subscribe to."<BR/><BR/>The vast majority of people know right from wrong. Some people choose to act contrary to this. It's a choice, not a complete lack of understanding. <BR/><BR/>Here's your problem- morality exists in human culture. Always has, always will. Even in cultures that haven't been exposed to the Judeo-Christian "value system." <BR/><BR/>I really don't want Christian neighbors. What if they forget what their god taught them and revert to their previous amoral state?? <BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>Paul RayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-46175368450072513442008-08-30T05:43:00.000+12:002008-08-30T05:43:00.000+12:00"That leaves you with either agnosticism or atheis...<EM>"That leaves you with either agnosticism or atheism.</EM><BR/><BR/>Or some particular shade of grey in between. Ever heard of Jung? Spare me from his fan club, they're as cultic as we ever were, but a lot of his stuff about archetypes and the human imagination (please note I do not buy into the dualistic "collective unconscious" BS), is fascinating.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-69783418993024909512008-08-30T05:39:00.000+12:002008-08-30T05:39:00.000+12:00"You first need to establish that right and wrong ...<EM>"You first need to establish that right and wrong (morally speaking, in an absolute sense) exist without God."</EM><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/Wiki/Ethic_of_Reciprocity" REL="nofollow">Will this do?</A> If that isn't good enough for you, I <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/Mirroring-People-Science-Connect-Others/dp/0374210179/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220031512&sr=8-1" REL="nofollow">also recommend this</A>.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-68261160224782471422008-08-28T08:46:00.000+12:002008-08-28T08:46:00.000+12:00"But when you reject the truth of the CG..."What "..."But when you reject the truth of the CG..."<BR/><BR/>What "truth?" What "truth" does the CG have that other Christian sects don't?<BR/><BR/><BR/>Paul RayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-58592520314568571112008-08-28T03:17:00.000+12:002008-08-28T03:17:00.000+12:00"Methinks thou doth protest too much"'For John cam..."Methinks thou doth protest too much"<BR/><BR/><BR/>'For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, “He has a demon." The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, “Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-85916206251206755732008-08-28T01:27:00.000+12:002008-08-28T01:27:00.000+12:00But I did not stop believing in imaginary beings u...<I>But I did not stop believing in imaginary beings upon leaving the COG's- I rejected Armstrongism but not Christianity in general</I><BR/><BR/>Oh yes I know. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. But when you reject the truth of the CG, then it makes sense to reject Christianity. And when you reject Christianity, it makes sense to reject religion. That leaves you with either agnosticism or atheism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-18168598440169337462008-08-28T01:17:00.000+12:002008-08-28T01:17:00.000+12:00Without their imaginary god to explain proper beha...<I>Without their imaginary god to explain proper behavior, they don't know right from wrong. </I><BR/><BR/>You jump the gun here. You first need to establish that right and wrong (morally speaking, in an absolute sense) exist without God. This you cannot do. For without God (an Intelligent Designer), there is no purpose to life, and without purpose, all value systems are equal.<BR/><BR/><I>Do I feel guilt if I wrong or hurt someone? Of course, why wouldn't I? I feel guilty because I have harmed myself or someone else</I><BR/><BR/>Why should that make you feel guilty? Why should you care about others, or yourself? Well even if that's just what you've decided for yourself, you cannot expect others to choose the same set of values you have chosen. Therefore, if someone wants to rape your wife, you cannot say he is worthy of punishment. You would have no basis to say he is wrong. His pursuits simply allow him to have a value system that says nothing is wrong with rape if he gets to have some pleasure. Your pursuits might say otherwise, but there is no reason to say your pursuits are what he should subscribe to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28426681.post-38331002709535432002008-08-27T15:46:00.000+12:002008-08-27T15:46:00.000+12:00larry said... Paul Ray,Methinks thou doth protest ...larry said... <BR/>Paul Ray,<BR/><BR/>Methinks thou doth protest too much.<BR/><BR/><B>methinks you do too.</B>Corkyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15894537940881776504noreply@blogger.com