The only reasonable conclusion is that there is no god. — Banno
Humanism is the view that morality is found in what humans choose, and so is not found in divine commendation nor in evolutionary necessity.
Do you agree?
That is, the key ingredient in humanism is the capacity of people to become better. — Banno
...a Darwinist perspective (mainly in the sense of "life is a struggle for survival" and "might makes right") — baker
A common line of reasoning against God's presumed omnibenevolence goes like this:
If God was omnibenevolent, there wouldn’t be ... any earthquakes, tsunamis, droughts, floods, wars, children with genetic dysfunctions, ... and in general, there wouldn't be any suffering.
But why should the absence of these things be evidence of God's benevolence?
Based on what reasoning should we conclude that the presence of those things is evidence that God (if he exists) is not benevolent? — baker
doesn't explain why god is not culpable. — Banno
IOW, atheists and other critics of God operate with their own idiosyncratic definitions of God, thus making their criticism of God a strawman. — baker
we can't make any comment about God at all (good or bad) since it transcends human experience and understanding. We can't know anything about it and it would be better to remain silent about the subject. — Tom Storm
...a Darwinist perspective (mainly in the sense of "life is a struggle for survival" and "might makes right")
— baker
This is a very narrow understanding of Darwinism. — Banno
I'm pointing toward an option that is repugnant to humanists: namely, the possibility that God is pretty much like major monotheistic religions describe him, and that the state of the world (with all its strife and suffering) is an argument precisely in favor of God's existence. — baker
I obviously mean Social Darwinism. — baker
atheists and other critics of God operate with their own idiosyncratic definitions of God, — baker
Not by human morality, but by humanist morality.So the suffering and cruelty of 'creation' is reflective of a cruel God who behaves like a Mafia boss in scripture? I think a lot of humanists have identified this scenario. It certainly makes sense that if there is a god he is either non-interventionist or 'evil' as far as human morality is concerned. — Tom Storm
Sure. But again, it's not supposed to be goodness by humanist standards, but by God's standards.Nevertheless, the intrinsic goodness of God is central to most traditions I am aware of and human beings are supposed to please god by being good also.
No. The reason why God cannot be held accountable is because he is God, not because he is a Social Darwinist.No, it wasn't obvious. God is a Social Darwinist and so somehow evades responsibility for his actions. — Banno
Ah. I'm trying to make sense of the God idea. This doesn't automatically include that I take for granted that God is on my side or that he will be or could be. Quite the contrary, actually....and your subservient pandering to a tyrant god is not at all idiosyncratic.
Sure. But again, it's not supposed to be goodness by humanist standards, but by God's standards. — baker
Maybe you in particular don't know God's mind, but who's to say nobody else does either?I agree but since we don't (can't?) know God's mind, how could anyone assume to know if God's standards based on the information available? — Tom Storm
No.By the way, what is a humanist standard of good? Isn't this largely Christianity without Jesus?
A benevolent parent does not spoil their child, does not wrap them in cotton-wool but pushes them towards independence and responsibility. — unenlightened
I'm trying to make sense of the God idea.
— baker
And in doing so you renege on your responsibility to decide right from wrong. — Banno
What do you think has driven monotheistic conquerors to kill, rape, and pillage, if not the conviction that they have God on their side? — baker
The God of the Taliban.I have to say the more I think about this idea of a god the less coherent and comprehensible I find it. If you reduce the idea to an anthropomorphized cartoon - a fundamentalist style of deity - it become more coherent, if less believable to me.
Do you have a view about what the most plausible form of deity could be? — Tom Storm
That it's impotent.What do you think of the Paul Tillich style 'ground of being' conception?
Do you have a view about what the most plausible form of deity could be?
— Tom Storm
The God of the Taliban. — baker
Cool. Coherent but unlikely.
For me if God is the jealous, dictatorial, error-prone fuck-knuckle he appears to be in the Old Testament, then we should blow a raspberry in his direction. — Tom Storm
I think you are worthless. — James Riley
I'm not willing to pay any of your bills. If you don't social distance, don't mask and don't vax, and if you get sick and go to the hospital and take up a bed that my wife or kid or me need for covid or some other reason, I will not only not pay your bills, but I'll rip the vent out of your mouth and dump your worthless carcass out the window and tell the Hippocratic Oath doc to forget your ass and get to work on me or mine. — James Riley
:100: — tim wood
Regarding the rest of your post, it's not worth my time. It's stupid Faux News, Tucker Carlsonesque BS. — James Riley
And how is that supposed to help you?then we should blow a raspberry in his direction. — Tom Storm
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.