1. The emerging moral psychology

Comment #176168 by FreeThink25 on May 6, 2008 at 6:27 pm

MPhil

Thanks! That's great information....any specific writings you would recommend by Mill, Rawls or Scanlon?

2. The emerging moral psychology

Comment #176026 by FreeThink25 on May 6, 2008 at 11:51 am

Spinoza and MPhil

You've struck upon an issue that often comes up when I talk with theists and I wanted to see if you could elucidate it for me.

I'm often told that writings on the evolutionary nature of morality are only descriptive morality and not PRESCRIPTIVE morality, which, I guess they find to be evidence that a God is necessary for moral truths to exist.

I think maybe I read in Richard Carrier's writings that the is/ought problem is solved by adding a premise? Not killing one another IS a beneficial way of having a peaceful society. If one wants to exist in a peaceful society, then one OUGHT not to kill.

I guess what I don't get is this magical element of the OUGHT problem. IS there really an ought problem? Can it not be resolved by agreeing on the goals of what "is" and what one "wants"?

3. Rep. Davis: The Worst Person in the World

Comment #157511 by FreeThink25 on April 9, 2008 at 8:03 am

This is simply fantastic. The more publicity stuff like this gets, the better it is for us.

I wish this happened more, because it forces the average christian american to re-evaluate their beliefs about atheists, and forces them to rationalize what exactly it is that they have against us. The more this happens, the less reasons they'll be able to come up with.

Let's get some more idiotic legislators pissed off!!!!

4. The Atheist Next Door

Comment #156922 by FreeThink25 on April 8, 2008 at 11:55 am

What do you place your trust in during time of need?

5. Evidence can't shake your faith if your faith excludes it as evidence

Comment #132415 by FreeThink25 on February 24, 2008 at 6:13 pm

Ouch....my brain hurts.

This guy is a law professor??

6. US military accused of harboring fundamentalism

Comment #127785 by FreeThink25 on February 15, 2008 at 3:47 pm

It professes belief in "the eternal blessedness of the saved; and the everlasting, conscious punishment of the lost."

7. Bill Maher on Larry King Live

Comment #125928 by FreeThink25 on February 12, 2008 at 9:23 am

"Simply put, theists don't deny, agnostics don't know, atheists don't believe, and apatheists don't care about the existence of gods. "

8. Bill Maher on Larry King Live

Comment #125826 by FreeThink25 on February 12, 2008 at 5:49 am

All medical students learn about the social determinants of disease and western medicine also teaches us the concept of health is a state of â€Å"total mental, physical and social wellbeing, not merely the absence of diseaseâ€Â� (WHO definition). That western medicine seeks to treat symptoms only is a myth.

9. Bill Maher on Larry King Live

Comment #125578 by FreeThink25 on February 11, 2008 at 4:06 pm

I didn't really have antibiotics in mind. And I don't think Maher did either. Infectious diseases are not really on the radar anymore when you're talking about disease-related death. It's the chronic ones...the ones of affluence...that are the focus. It's cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes.....

If Bill Maher specifically stated that antibiotics are bullshit, then I missed that, and would disagree. My point is that there are better alternatives than prescription drugs for the biggest causes of disease that I just listed.

Steve, I'm sure you're very well-read. In fact, I didn't ever say you weren't.

10. Bill Maher on Larry King Live

Comment #125544 by FreeThink25 on February 11, 2008 at 3:13 pm

but the other day I heard him talking about his conspiracy theory about prescription drugs. He seemed to think we'd all be better off without modern medicine.

He's as bat shit insane as Tom Cruise.

11. Battle of the Chambersburg billboards

Comment #124503 by FreeThink25 on February 9, 2008 at 4:28 pm

He said his group is not saying the atheists are anti-American. However, they appear to be, he said. Still, he said, "this is a free country and everyone is free to believe what he or she chooses."

12. The New Atheist Movement

Comment #123154 by FreeThink25 on February 6, 2008 at 2:15 pm

I love how they mention the "glaring flaws" in atheism....and then fail to mention them.

This is typical of Christian response to rational argument. An anecdote. "Well, I met a professor, and he was embarrassed, blah blah blah"

The anecdote is their only weapon. That's ALL Dinesh D'Souza seems to rely on...Ravi Zacharias...etc, etc

How pathetic to have to rely on anecdote....

13. Apologetic billboard replaces atheistic sign

Comment #123140 by FreeThink25 on February 6, 2008 at 1:56 pm

What does "imagine no religion" have to do with morals?

14. Dawkins is third most prolific internet Briton

Comment #117717 by FreeThink25 on January 29, 2008 at 12:49 pm

Imogen Heap IS a brilliant musician/composer....very revolutionary.
Incredible music. I remember when she lost a Grammy for Best New Artist to Carrie Underwood. I think I threw up in my mouth.

Pretty sure she was a man at one time...not that there's anything wrong with that.

15. New atheists or new anti-dogmatists?

Comment #117303 by FreeThink25 on January 28, 2008 at 2:27 pm

If we are against dogmas, are we against having opinions? Given that's what dogma means.

16. New atheists or new anti-dogmatists?

Comment #117178 by FreeThink25 on January 28, 2008 at 11:33 am

I agree with Janus.

I think if you fly the "anti-dogmatist" banner too soon you get the liberal theist on your side, sticking to their belief in god but unable to really articulate why. It will not resonate with them that the foundation of their belief in god is dogmatically-derived. They'll just say "not my religion" and be on their way.

The reason attacks against religion are so thorough is that they simultaneously address the GOD issue and the DOGMA issue.

GOD + DOGMA = RELIGION

God without dogma is just a benign belief.

Dogma without god is just irrational ideology.

I think it's clear which of the two is more dangerous, but that doesn't mean we cannot attempt to deconstruct both.

17. New atheists or new anti-dogmatists?

Comment #117034 by FreeThink25 on January 28, 2008 at 6:12 am

Well.....yeah! Is someone really just realizing that this is what we've been talking about?

I've thought about that last paragraph before. I cannot think of a religion that is not based on dogma or faith. Sure, people can stretch the meaning of the word, and lump in the things like "the religion of mathematics", or the "religion of physics"...but that does not convince me that "religion" is a valid term.

Anyone else?

18. A Letter From Hell

Comment #115951 by FreeThink25 on January 25, 2008 at 5:56 am

I loved the end the most.

"I have stuff to do...classes, sports, partying. If you're supposed to be God, and omnipotent, and I'm just a wretched sinner, made of dust, don't you think you could handle all this mess of telling people about how you became your own son, sacrificed yourself to yourself and saved humankind?"

So funny on so many levels....God exists outside of the universe, right? But he's left to still depend on earthly elements, namely sulfur, to devise his lake of fire? God's omniscient, but he has to go look up in a book to see if you're name is there???

19. Fish out of water: Your Inner Fish

Comment #111297 by FreeThink25 on January 14, 2008 at 8:54 am

As a medical student, I confront these fascinating defects in the body everyday, and it amazes me still how many "theist" students there are. I don't understand how people who study these problems all day long can still contend that we were "designed" by a Creator. With a god, there would be no need for medicine. But alas, he's imaginary and the reverse-engineering and study of several thousand years of scientists has led us to where we are today.

It makes me laugh when people use the "doctors playing god" cliche disparagingly. Of course they're playing god....someone has to!! The real one isn't there to do it!

I've also become very interested in the history of religious opposition to advances in medicine, and the ones that are, of course, still present. It's amazing how religions are still granted a place in discussions of medical ethics. Anyone know of any work done in the overlapping fields of religion, medicine, and ethics?

20. Priest who committed suicide for rebirth cremated

Comment #103203 by FreeThink25 on December 24, 2007 at 1:28 pm

You have to at least give him credit for truly believing in his delusion....THAT was faith. And proven to be foolish. But how many Christians display this degree of commitment? It's easy to have faith when all it requires you to do is go about your business and profess to "believe." A tithe does little to impress me. Neither does a baptism, or a meal of bread and juice, or singing with your hands up towards the ceiling.

At least this guy put it out on the line. I despise the luke-warm Christian...as did Jesus, I hear.....smart fellow.

21. CBC News: Sunday - Richard Dawkins

Comment #100082 by FreeThink25 on December 18, 2007 at 8:21 am

Wow....I'm always impressed with how Dawkins deals with these snide questions and biased journalism.

Good to see that Skippy from "Family Ties" has found work these days....

22. Former Evangelical Minister Has a New Message: Jesus Hearts Darwin

Comment #95004 by FreeThink25 on December 7, 2007 at 6:30 am

Someone send this guy a copy of "Darwin's Dangerous Idea"....and let Dennett's universal acid creep through the remaining shred of his religious convictions.

23. Interview with Christopher Hitchens

Comment #93635 by FreeThink25 on December 3, 2007 at 7:21 pm

I was actually rather impressed....this is the first time I feel like an atheist author has been interviewed rather respectably. I would agree with eXcommunicate though....the giggles were not only annoying, but they were completely void of intelligence. Rather than pose a question or rebuttal, just laugh off-handedly....it's sure to help mock Hitchens, right?

I rather wish Hitchens had asked WHY he would be keeping the book away from his sons. Afraid of letting them make up their own minds, are you??? Have you ever seen the media end an interview and not paint the author in a tone of "there's those crazy atheists for you!" I wonder how far away we are from that...

24. Atheism's Wrong Turn

Comment #93486 by FreeThink25 on December 3, 2007 at 8:47 am

Just once I would like an author who uses the term "dogmatic doubt" to describe what they think that would be.....and once they have finished describing it, realize what a grand practice it would be. Because, of course, the very contradiction of those terms eliminates any future dogma. In fact, I may start using that one...I'm a dogmatic doubtist. My dogma is to doubt until reason and evidence convince me (a process in which dogma is conveniently absent).

I also love how they continue to point to the deism of the founding fathers, coming oh, about 75 years before a better explanation for life came along.

Deism + Darwin = atheism

25. Banishing the Green-Eyed Monster

Comment #92114 by FreeThink25 on November 29, 2007 at 10:23 pm

How dismaying to see our rational oasis reacting like this!

One thing most contentious posters keep returning to is that if you make a "PROMISE", then you should keep it. Here's the point: Why is there even a promise to begin with? I'm married, but we didn't promise each other ANYTHING. We love to be together, so we decided to partner up in life. We call ourselves partners. How arrogant to pretend we could make a promise at an early, arbitrary point in time that would govern our biological impulses for the rest of our lives!

The entire notion of a promise and an exclusivity in relationships is a memetic remnant of "religious' morals. Yes, many other mammals who raise young pair bond, but do they stand in front of a number of other mammals and "promise" not to copulate with any other mammal? So help me God?

And Richard is not suggesting that YOU have to live this way. He's not saying it is better. He's saying it should become accepted for those who do. If you choose not to, then don't do it. To each his own.....

The real battle is not in allowing people to break promises to have sex with others, but to stop building relationships on the notion that people have to make promises that they won't.

Beth, great ideas. You've been spot on all night....

26. Golden Compass author hits back

Comment #91173 by FreeThink25 on November 27, 2007 at 1:09 pm

Have you seen Bill Donohue's video about TGC on the catholic league website? Check it out:


I love it! They've prepared a 22 page pamphlet to warn and educate parents on the dangers of this movie....and you can all 22 pages for the wonderful low price of $5!! Does an indulgence come with that as well???

27. The joining of church and state

Comment #88544 by FreeThink25 on November 17, 2007 at 4:05 pm

Jefferson and Jesus both!

28. Secular Fundamentalists: There is no such thing...and the AAI conference doesn't make atheism a movement, either.

Comment #88278 by FreeThink25 on November 15, 2007 at 5:29 pm

Zarcus,

So you're suggesting that tame arguments should not be countered, regardless of how poorly the arguments are reasoned? Is the new discourse to be based on how outrageous the article is, rather than how irrational? That seems silly to me. I, as many others here, actually enjoy Kelly's writing and hope she doesn't take your advice and 'take a vacation' just because you find a poorly thought-out attack to be "timid" enough to be ignored.

And Duff, your tone seems to be a bit hostile as well. Maybe I'm just misinterpreting the demeanor of your sarcasm...I hope so.

It is discouraging to me that any time Kelly writes an article, people respond negatively, or feel that it is their place to offer her their advice and criticism. I'm sure she has more qualified people in her circle to offer assistance, and I truly doubt that she's combing the RD forums searching for some pointers. I'll concede that it is possible that she is, and that she even appreciates it. But couldn't we all just discuss the logic of her arguments? On a site devoted to reason and evidence, that seems the proper choice.

What I truly dread is that some of this response is based on the fact that she is a woman.....wow....that would really be embarrassing.

29. The evolution of creationism

Comment #88008 by FreeThink25 on November 14, 2007 at 5:40 am

Yes, I didn't mean to say that the museum itself is against evolution. But they have, in fact, told their employees that they are not to use the word. Which just heightens the silliness....they can show an exhibit that is based on evolution, but are scared of ruffling feathers by simply speaking its name.

30. The evolution of creationism

Comment #87872 by FreeThink25 on November 13, 2007 at 12:47 pm

Want to hear something even more disturbing?

Lucy is here in Houston at the Museum of Natural Science. I went to check out the exhibit and see little Lucy with a friend who works at the museum. I noticed the word "evolution" appeared a grand total of ZERO times in the exhibit. When I asked why, I found out that museum staff are actually FORBIDDEN from using the word. FORBIDDEN?!?! It's the Museum of Natural Science! And in one of the largest cities in the US....does this depress you like it does me? Who will stand up for science and evidence when the museums that bear their name will not?

Any advice on what to do? I thought surely a letter to the Houston Chronicle was in order....

31. Are the 'New Atheists' avoiding the 'real arguments'?

Comment #83867 by FreeThink25 on October 31, 2007 at 1:51 pm

My goodness, Edmund Standing....bravo. What a thorough dismantling of the concept of theology!

Edmund Ass-Kicking more like it....

32. Don't write off religion - it can be the key to a stable family

Comment #82586 by FreeThink25 on October 26, 2007 at 8:20 pm

"In a report last month, Harriet Becher found scores of studies with the same findings: religious families were more stable and (to a small extent) happier, the parents more involved, nurturing and family-centred."

More stable than what? And I'd love to see how these studies measured "happiness".

There goes that Atheist Fundamenalists again.....

33. Sam Harris at AAI 07

Comment #82173 by FreeThink25 on October 25, 2007 at 7:31 pm

And RainDear....excellent point. I've noticed that as well, and it seems counter-productive.

The more we feel the need to concentrate our views into the embodiment of one person, the more fragile we become. There is strength and stability in dispersing the focus, much like Sam responded initially in the Q and A.

Ideas are ideas. That's what is great about the ones that happen to be our champions, for the moment...they don't want to be.

34. Sam Harris at AAI 07

Comment #82167 by FreeThink25 on October 25, 2007 at 7:24 pm

I've thought about this issue a great deal since the transcript of his speech was released. And the more I think about it, the more I see the validity in it. Only one thing he said is truly unfortunate and that is this:

We should go under the radar the rest of our lives.

It's almost as if his brain was possessed for that one moment and he blurted out this entirely ludicrous idea.

The Civil Rights movement and the racist/non-racist terminology is, I believe, a valid analogy and quite useful in many ways. But do any of us truly believe our society would be as it is now, where out-right bigots and the Klan and lynchings ARE relegated to the fringes of society, had those believing in the "Civil Rights Movement" simply flown under the radar?

Of course not. And perhaps I'm misunderstanding his use of this phrase. Maybe the true solution when asked "what we are" is to turn the question not into the response of a label, but merely to a conversation about what we believe and how we think.

Catholic: I'm a Catholic, what are you?
Me: (blinking) I'm sorry, I don't believe I understand the question.

Catholic: You know, WHAT are you?
Me: Just a human being. So tell me...what do you believe in?

At least labels are no longer being used, with all the assumptions and baggage that go along with. And a conversation has begun, one in which the brass tacks are exposed for what they are....real beliefs, real ideas, subject to real intellectual honesty and reason.

I think Sam is right, but maybe a little ahead of the curve on this one.

35. War in Heaven: Hitchens Meets D'Souza on Home Turf

Comment #81138 by FreeThink25 on October 24, 2007 at 8:34 am

Evolution cannot account for morality.

This is a commonly posited argument, but one that I think exposes a contradiction. Shermer had an opportunity to lamblast this in his debate, but as usual, was too overly laid back to attack.

If you're gong to say that evolution cannot account for morality, you should be ready to explain how God/theism accounts for morality. Souza says that our human nature, our tendency to know right from wrong indicates this, but this asks more questions than it answers: why do people do wrong then? Why do we disagree on the finer details of morality? And why if our morality is built in did God have to resort to murky revelations to give us FURTHER instructions, and why in such an incremental order? If we all knew killing was wrong, why did God have to write it in stone in the 6th century BCE? Is this not paradoxical? Shame on Shermer for not pushing this issue in his debate when the subject lingered on homosexuality and marriage.

The best argument for this is, I believe, still Dawkins' moral zeitgeist, and the notion that morality is still evolving through empathy and fairness. The Christians always try to claim the newest stage of the zeitgeist as their own....well, after they oppose it strongly at first, lose the fight, and then jump through hoops to make it sound like Jesus said it first.

36. Fox News Attacks 'Godless' Free Thought Radio

Comment #78384 by FreeThink25 on October 12, 2007 at 3:54 pm

I like how he asks if they expect some kind of response from Family Values Coalition or other groups. It's funny how the 90% fear the 5-7% so much they have to "respond"...or come up with 10 flea-circus response books to one of ours.

37. A Nation of Christians Is Not a Christian Nation

Comment #76772 by FreeThink25 on October 7, 2007 at 7:30 am

Typical Christian response:

Nuh uh!! We ARE a christian nation!

38. Why are we Muslims so self-destructive?

Comment #73563 by FreeThink25 on September 25, 2007 at 9:45 am

Mark Twain....George Orwell...Lewis Carroll

COWARDS!!!!

I do exist...although clicking on my username may suggest otherwise

39. Like any half-decent atheist, I'm fond of a bit of religion

Comment #67889 by FreeThink25 on September 5, 2007 at 4:30 am

"I cannot, however, share Professor Dawkins's contempt for what he sees as the vacuity of those who proclaim their doubts about an external God, but still cling to the traditions or the comfort of organised religion."

"I cannot, like Professor Dawkins, think the less of anyone who takes pleasure from a familiar liturgy"

Dawkins has never struck me as contemptuous or belittling. His patience in talking to believers is without match, and he has absolutely expressed his perceived value for religion as literature. Just not as a source of truth.

Sam Harris addresses most of these points thoroughly in his first book. These transcendent feelings and emotions are all legitimate aspects of human consciousness...and surely a reasonable explanation will one day emerge, perhaps from his research. No one need believe that Jesus was born of a virgin, however, or that a book that supports slavery, stoning, and child abuse is the source of finding these transcendences, to actually experience them.

Curious: why do atheists keep coming to defense of the religionists? Who are they trying to appease?

40. The Flea Circus moves to your iPod!

Comment #67626 by FreeThink25 on September 4, 2007 at 4:00 am

"exposes its numerous logical fallacies and factual errors, ultimately demonstrating that Dawkins' primary argument is itself a faith-based construction."

I love how it comes out and admits that a faith-based construction is built on logical fallacies and errors. Even if this were true, and we know it's not, this would only put atheism and christianity on an even playing field, neither getting an advantage. And we know that's not true either.

41. I Don't Believe in Atheists

Comment #44332 by FreeThink25 on May 24, 2007 at 11:19 am

"This is not faith in magic, not faith in church doctrine or church hierarchy, but faith in simple human kindness."

Does anyone really need faith to believe in kindness? Or just eyes and ears, and compassion.....

"It is by the seriousness of our commitments to compassion, indeed our ability to sacrifice for the other, especially for the outcast and the stranger, our commitment to justice—the very core of the message of the prophets and the teachings of Jesus—that we alone can measure the quality of faith. This is the meaning of true faith. As Matthew wrote. "By their fruits shall you know them." Professed faith—what we say we believe—is not faith. It is an expression of loyalty to a community, to our tribe. Faith is what we do. This is real faith."

No, my friend, this is "works"....no one need believe in anything in the face of doubt to be compassionate. We're not the only mammals that do it.

This is a favorite tactic of most of my friends that I debate. Hijack the religious terminology, dilute it until all you are really defining is humanity, and then say "a ha!".....it DOES exist!

42. The root of all evil?

Comment #43686 by FreeThink25 on May 22, 2007 at 9:42 am

"He seems so nice, but can say such shocking things." For example, his statement that the God of the Old Testament is jealous, petty, vindictive and unforgiving.


This is not very shocking for anyone who has ACTUALLY READ the Old Testament. he outright admits that he is jealous. I can think of a scriptural basis for each of these adjectives right now without even consulting my bible.