₦airaland Forum

SQred:
Hi Atheists on NL. I'm curious to know the basis upon which you use in differentiating between right and wrong since you don't believe in the existence of a transcendent moral authority that prescribes moral principles that are codified in the literature of the said religion.

I was taught by my parents, to start with, to say please and thank you, not to pick my nose in public and to respect others. I know it hurts if you slapped me so I reckon it would hurt you if I slapped you so I don't go about slapping people, or killing them, for that matter. If I came home and found you screwing my partner, I don't think I'd want you coming to my house anymore. I'd feel the same if you ate my dinner or stole my shoes, and I think you'd feel the same if you came home and found me eating your partner or screwing your dinner or stealing your shoes, and besides, I kind of like you as a fellow human being, so I wouldn't do things to you or my dog, for that matter, that I would not like to be done to me. I know that you have feelings just as I do and what would hurt me might hurt you too so why be a prick towards you when I wouldn't willingly prick myself?

If I was a prick all the time, no one would like me and I'd have no friends, and I like having friends and I like sleeping at night safe in my bed, so why be a prick and have to stay up all night making sure I am protected from the consequences of my prickiness? Did I like myself when in the past, I took what belonged to another without their permission? And even though they did not know I took it, did I not know, and did I not hide myself away in shame knowing full well what I had done? Was the fact that I lost a valuable friend worth it in the end, and have I not learnt from the experience? Has atheism made me so stupid that I would think I now get to do whatever I wanted without considering the consequences of my prickiness? And more importantly, do I not mind or care about the consequences at all?

Experience, and knowledge gained from it, and the society one belongs to, my friend, teaches one what is good and what is evil. Life itself would soon set me straight when my prickiness turns me into budanomates!

butterflyl1on:
Budaatum do you see how he went from I don't care to I don't believe because there is no evidence to that effect and now finally back to confessing that .......

Yes, I seen it. And I notice the fact that he said he doesn't believe because......, nor require evidence. I do detect sarcasm however, and frustration at the way you twist and turn words and the argument to suit your position (which is how you would appear to some, no insult intended).

I personally have issues with atheists who claim not to believe in the existence of gods. An atheist, in my opinion, is someone who has checked the evidence and come to the conclusion that gods, definitely, do not exist. However, one must understand that most atheists converted from one religion or the other and tend to stick to the language of their abandoned religion, hence the use of the word, 'believe', which in effect makes them seem like agnostic (atheists). If language were minded much more, no true blue atheist will claim not to believe in the none existence of gods. Believe (sic) when I say we are working on it.

Have you proven the point you said you would, by the way? Could you give me a conclusion please so it is clear?

I can understand how you mean what you are saying. The topic, god, necessitates it, as it strongly involves subjective positions. To make it worse is how whatever one says would tend to come off as personal insults to say the least, even if not intended. I cannot, for instance, say you are being subjective without it being obvious that from your point of view, so am I. (By the way, you have not claimed to being objective in this discussion, I notice.)

butterflyl1on:
The evidence doesn't have to be self generated but they were chosen to be SELF BELIEVED.

We could argue about the level of evidence required to form this so called belief, but I'll rest for now.

butterflyl1on:
Simply put, your position was as a result of self experienced evidence which is not universally verifiable. I hope it's becoming clearer now?

No. You are wrong. It is not based on 'experience'! It is based on an assessment of the historical, psychological, anecdotal, archaeological, metaphysical and theistic, to name but a few sources of evidence for gods. There is nothing self about it apart from I myself performing the investigation.

Do note that while I am aware that performing the investigation, is an experience, I am ensuring to differentiate from a god encountering - talking donkey or angels and burning bush type of - experience.

butterflyl1on:
Notice the usage of the terms I and me a lot in your statement and where they were utilized and then you would realise that you are speaking for yourself....

I am speaking for myself! We afterall, all have different journeys to our atheistic views. That does not however imply that the evidence itself is 'self generated', or anecdotal. Basically, I am claiming a tree fell in a forest, whatever one wishes to think or believe

You will note this fact earlier in the thread when it was pointed out to you that personal opinion is not what proves gods exist or not. You, yourself pointed out that the atheist was proving gods exist.

One (the subject) can peruse the evidence, albeit empirically, but objectively, to arrive at a conclusion.

butterflyl1on:
Regarding the last part of this comment of yours where you said your answers are no, no and no. Is this a 100% certainty to you? And if it was totally certain, how then did you arrive at this certainty?

Also, If yes, why then do you suppose atheists still ask for proof of God or evidence of his existence if they are already sure that his lack of existence is a 100% certainty?

Double standards?

But I must respond to this first. Yes, I am 100% certain.

I arrived at this certainty by studying the notion of gods, their history, how they came about and the human need that creates them. I have learnt that human beings have always created gods to fill in the gaps of their knowledge, that they evolve their idea of their god the more knowledge they acquire, and that they abandon their gods and adopt new ones when the old ones become implausible to believe anymore. I have found these to be consistent for all the gods that have ever existed.

To make it worse, those who claim their gods exist, tend to believe their gods exist without realising, it would seem, that the mere fact that they claim to 'believe' their gods exist is sufficient to denote that they do not actually 'know' their gods exist. They then use anecdotal evidence to attempt to prove the existence of the god they believe exists.

As an atheist, I ask those who claim to believe in the existence of gods to present evidence for their claim. If the theists didn't go about making such false claims to me, I wouldn't have to ask them to prove it. I do not, for instance ask believers in the existence of aliens or fairys to prove aliens or fairys exist if they don't stand in my face and ask me to believe they exist! Also, the belief in gods has a detrimental effect on the society I live in and the people around me so it concerns me. The mere fact they blast their nonsense through a speaker affects me, and the way they make the people around me reason is detrimental to the development of the society we share.

butterflyl1on:
Regarding the last part of this comment of yours where you said your answers are no, no and no. Is this a 100% certainty to you? And if it was totally certain, how then did you arrive at this certainty?

Also, If yes, why then do you suppose atheists still ask for proof of God or evidence of his existence if they are already sure that his lack of existence is a 100% certainty?

Double standards?

But I must respond to this first.

Yes, I am 100% certain.

butterflyl1on:
Budaatum I hope you are following.

I am, and will suspend further commenting till you get to where you're going with this.

butterflyl1on:
Likewise a theist. Faith is not a personal switch but a personal conviction. It is a position firmly taken based on self evidence.

I would argue that the theist's faith is a personal switch if you say it's "based on self evidence".

I for instance, cannot talk for all atheist, but I would not say my stance is subjective, or based on self evidence. I am most certain even I can provide evidence for believing in fairys at the bottom of my garden, if I wanted to. I do a pretty good job with the million pound in my bank account.

The evidence for the existence or lack of the existence of a thing is not subject to the self (remember the tree falling in the forest?).

I have looked at the evidence for gods and found it rather wanting.

butterflyl1on:
Now if an atheist once had faith in God and was a theist the moment he looses that faith in God and becomes an atheist something MADE that happen. That thing that made it happen replaced his faith in God with faith in something else.

From your perspective you would say you lost your faith or convictions

Losing faith in god is not what defines an atheist! There are very many theists who have lost faith in their gods too but however do not necessarily claim their gods don't exist no more, just that they have no faith anymore.

The atheist loses belief in god at best. Then there's my sort of atheist who never believed in gods to start with. Faith and believing in a thing are not simply interchangeable as you seem to think.

frank317:
someone can believe in God and have negative faith in him e.g Islamic extremists who kill people because of their faith in God. Pastors who milk people of their hard earn money with the name of God are exercising negative faith. Dont make the mistake of accusing someone who does not believe in your bulshit of having negative faith. They have not faith in ur nonsense and not negative faith!!

Please note the subtle difference in the use of the phrase "negative faith", butter. You, are not using it in this sense, it seems to me.

butterflyl1on:
Be it an absolute negative faith or a negative faith that isn't absolute both of them are derived from each individuals personal experiences but be it absolute or not it does not change the fact that they are working with negative faith since their position is only verifiable largely to themselves and isn't universally verifiable or agreed upon.

That's not true, I'm afraid. An atheist does not rely on faith (negative, positive, or absolutes of either thereof) to claim god does not exist. It's not some personal thing one switches on and off without evidence in support.

Please note the difference in the atheist position, as posted, again. You are not saying the same thing!

My answers to you questions are no, no and no.

butterflyl1on:
No!

My negative faith did not imply no faith which was why i said the below in quote

Thanks for the clarification. Not many atheist are agnostic though., and not many would accept that their view of no gods is based on faith.

I concede that the different perspective give different, and opposing views. And I am glad you noticed the similarities. There are differences too though.

Your "negative faith" sounds more like a "no faith" while that posted defines "negative faith" as a faith held in error.

"Negative faith......is any brand of faith that is based upon ignorance or gullibility. .....an excuse to be gullible and believe nonsense when there's no good, rational, logical reason to believe in the first place."

butterflyl1on:
Consider your post above and mine below it. Like I said, it's all about perspectives. The writer of that epistle up there is an atheist and from his perspective he says religious faith in God as a negative thing since it isn't based on verifiable facts available to him (this is his personal experiential evidence)

From my perspective as a theist I say an atheists lack of belief in the existence of God as a negative thing since I also have my own personal experiential evidence available to me that brought me to that position even though it may not be universally empirically verified but to me they are true and real because it was a personal thing.

Both sides see the other as a negative while seeing themselves as a positive. This is simple common sense and I am glad that it was an atheist who wrote that post from his own perspective which goes to show that for one perspective there is always another.

delexy123:
The first question asked if human are SELF conscious being NOT conscious being...note the difference...

There is no consciousness that does not include the consciousness of the self, so 'self' is a redundant word in that statement! Basically, if I were to cut off your hand and you were not aware I did, we would say you are not conscious, period. However, 'self conscious' could mean a consciousness that comes from the inner being as opposed to one externally imposed on one's self. Do consider.

delexy123:
For the second...Again if one is summit to the philosophy behind atheism then it is suffice to say that there is no such thing as 'absolute reality' but the one man construct in his mind...perceived reality

Please read through the entire thread. We argued for objective truth, but it sounds similar to what you now call 'absolute reality', and no atheist worth their salt would argue that it does not exist! We suggested that if a tree fell in a forest, did it require a subjective observer to fall, or could it fall regardless. The nuances apply to your "absolute reality".

In fact, if there was a "philosophy behind atheism", it calls for 'absolute reality', and not one described in a book 2000 years ago that one requires faith to accept as true!

delexy123:
The third? I love how you wittily gave a vague answer but let me narrow down the question...Does life really have a meaning? Is man really special than let's say a stone?

Important or special to whom or what? Humans are no more important or special than a stone except to those who are in relation with that human being. They are the only one's who rejoice when one's life begins and cry when one's life ends. To the rest of humanity one may as well be a stone!

And I repeat, the only reason for life is to live.

delexy123:
As for last question...the atheist stance is that good or evil simply Do Not Exist...a breakdown?...

Please note, I am an atheist. Not the type who believes gods do not exist, but the type who knows gods do not exist.

Now we got that out of the way, do you think it bothers me when you tell lies? Okay, perhaps that's not personal enough. Do you think I would mind if you insulted me? Do you seriously believe the fact that I am an atheist makes me believe its okay for me to put my hand in your pocket and take your money and spend it without your approval, or take your partner and sleep with him or her without expecting you to be pissed off at me? Lets look at it another way. Do you think the fact that I am an atheist would mean if you took my money, or my partner, I wouldn't mind? Do I need something to tell me that if you ate my dinner I should be displeased? Do you need something to tell you that if I ate your dinner you would be displeased?

You give yourself no credit for being self conscious, which really is all you'd need to know that which is pleasing and that which doesn't.

Atheism does not mean one does not care about others. In fact, we militant atheists do care and that's why we are on here (upandan, as some have said) deriding religion and proclaiming theism is based on error and belief that is false. Just imagine for one if all the preachers had to find a living by building factories instead of selling salvation. Would the world not be a better place? Would the world not be a better place if all those tithes people pay was invested in infrastructure?

Yes, atheists are "humanitarians, freedom fighters, human right activists, animal right activists, environmental activists etc". Since the atheist knows there ain't no god who's gonna come down from wherever gods live to come and make the existence of human beings better and their existence better than that of a stone, they get off their asses and give their lives purpose by making the world a better place for all!

My dear friend, I'll ask you to become "self" conscious. Do not let others tell you what your consciousness must be.

superhumanist:
"No faith" is now negative faith? Lol.

Then having no hair is negative hair.

No car is negative car


Bloody clown

I think I get it, I think.

No money is negative money, so one would say, "butter has negative naira in his pocket", instead of "he is broke".

Daejoyoung:
But the Chinese do not pay tithes and they have so many of these factories, paying tithe is your choice, but l fail to see how it correlates with factories or employment for the youths.

Oh, one can say the Chinese did pay tithes in the form of human sacrifice. Very many people's blood was shed for the cultural revolution that transformed China. But that's China. They want to transform their nation into a modern society so they create employment for their citizens. Do you know that they insist on producing things rather than importing? Silly people. They could let other people make stuff for them to import while they spend their time singing hosanna to the highest, shouting aleluya to the almighty and Allahu akbar Jesus is lord!

Nigerians, on the other hand, we don't need factories! We don't need jobs! We are going to heaven, so more church please, and pastors instead of entrepreneurs. And people, don't bother investing your money where the moths will get at it. Pay tithes and go to heaven!

delexy123:
Hmmn...Just a few questions will tell if my assertion holds or not...
Is man really a self conscious being?
Does 'reality' exist or just a construct of the mind?
Is there really a purpose for living?
Does good or evil really exist?

A few questions will?
Humans are conscious.

Reality exists.

The purpose for living is to live.

Good and evil are brought into being by conscious beings.

You are going to have to explain how any of this shows if your assertion holds or not. Can't say its obvious.

Dongreat:
Wait, international worship center worth 10 billion and Nigeria don’t have a factory that produce polyethylene bags. Nigerians never see suffer. When their counterparts are busy building factories, employing the masses, making their economy and currency great by doing such, Nigerians are busy building churches and mosques.
A time is coming when the youth of that generation will set fire to every worship center and build factories on the lands. A time is coming.

China today is leading the world with tech and every tech company has an headquarter there. In China, every corner you turn to is a factory, not a church and mosque. Now compare China the land of factories to Nigeria the land of churches and mosques.

Jamaica, Haiti and Nigeria is know to be very over religious in nature, guess what’s common in these land; yeah right POVERTY

My friend, going to heaven is way more important than daily bread. Please pay your tithes so you can go to heaven and more of these sorts of buildings can be built.

osisi2:
From an American singer Dewayne Woods



http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art47832.asp

Woods claimed that he got HIV from a sexual encounter, and eventually he was healed by God. Wiki

I find it amusing that you input consciousness to the universe such that it needs to be aware of ones existence. If I read you correctly, the gods are aware of ones existence for some reason or the other, and the universe also is aware of ones existence. I wonder if the gods and the universe are considered to be the same thing by you? And I wonder at the sense of self importance one must have to assume the entire universe knows and cares that one exists. Vanity is the word that is used in Ecclesiates to describe existence.

Existence itself cannot be an illusion, though one can be deluded in ones perception. It is a similar predicament facing the schizophrenic who sees demons where nothing exists. Indeed, anyone who sees things that are not there is deluded, but thankfully, most believers don't claim to have seen their gods which is why they merely believe in their gods' existence. If they actually know their gods exist, they would not claim to just believe.

But all this would matter not, if it actually had no consequence. A favorite hymn of mine starts, "We are building a people of power". I unfortunately do not see any power in people who cower in fear of going to hell and who do not boldly go forward in their faith creating heaven on earth as they are asked to do. What I see is people on their knees begging their gods and paying their pastors to save them from hell and damnation. All that effort and resource could make the world a better place, but currently it goes to making a tiny few mighty rich while deadening the brains of its sheep, unfortunately.

delexy123:
I find it funny when atheists mock religion and accuse the adherents of having illusion...if one is to sincerely thread the line of atheism then basically everything one does is an illusion and to an extent 'existence' itself is no more than an illusion...
From this one can say living as an atheist is in itself an illusion as the universe is not even aware of your 'supposed existence'...So an atheist accusing others of being disillusioned while pursuing basic human needs himself is no less deluded than the those he is spiting...
Edit: I thought atheists are supposed to be against any belief in the existence of a 'god' or 'spirit' but here on nairaland athiests are always in 'bromance' with Otematum's and Sonoflucifer's posts even though by atheist standard they are supposed to be 'figment of imagination'...hmmn maybe here atheism is only synonymous to anti-christianity...

Niflheim:
The bigger fool declares with his buttocks:..................................................." I worship a white man in the sky, and yet I do not have his pictures, I do not have his house address, I do not have a certificate of adoption, I do not even know what this white man looks like, but I know he is my father!!! And even though he lives in a city where the streets are paved with gold, I know I will drink garri tonight, with salt...............................no sugar or groundnut!!!"

Bloody liar! Just google Benny Hine. Him email de there, him address de, he even carry go Naija recently, and him certificate de wikipedia and him webpage!!

delexy123:
I just want to ask these thought provoking questions from a neutral perspective to atheist and theists alike.
1. How did the idea of a 'god' first become conceived in the mind of the early man?

Humans have always wished to understand their surroundings. They however started off with next to no awareness or knowledge of things so did the best they could and created gods to fill in the gaps. Surely, they concluded, the earth with its huge expanse could not exist without it being created, so something must have created it. It appeared to them that there was more food when the rains fell, so they bowed down in awe at whatever it was that must have made it so. Thunder struck and someone told them the gods were angry - and in some places, hungry - and had to be worshipped and sacrificed to. Then some people found they could control others with it and a religion around gods was created. There's more to it than this, but basically, the idea of gods filled the gaps in human knowledge.

delexy123:
2. Why is man so attached to the idea of the existence of a 'god' that it has sparked thousands years of debate which is still ongoing?

There is still a lot that humans do not understand. But while some people in some nations seek better answers to explain their surroundings, the poor amongst us still cling to the gods. This is purely by design however. It does not sound popular, but education is actually the antidote to religious ignorance. And the more people.seek, the better informed they will become. It is not however the desire of those in charge that humans kill off their gods, for if they do, they "will become like us, knowing both good and evil" and extend their life. (That's supposed to be a bad thing by the way!)

delexy123:
3. Will there come a time when this debate will stop?

Not really, no, it will never stop. The arguments we have today are the same ones people always had as we seek better ways to exist. Even long after we kill off the gods as we know them today, we will merely have evolved the idea of the gods and debate those instead. An example is the communist/capitalist arguments of the 1950s in America, and the liberal/neo-con arguments there today. We Nigerians would probably get to the point when we will be arguing for the removal of gods from the public sphere and their relegation to the private, someday. But we will continue to argue over whatever we have evolved our gods into.

delexy123:
4. Will there be a time when the receding ignorance will cease to be and man will know all there is to be known? (note that at this point, man would be omniscience therefore, the debate of the existence of a 'god' will cease to be).

I don't think we can ever become omniscient, as in know it all. Knowledge, is like the universe, the more we see of it the less we know of it. Besides, we humans would never all agree that what we know is all there is to know and someone will always come up with new ways of seeing even the things we've always seen and thought we knew everything about. Then there's the fact that we will continue to discover what can be done with what we know which will push knowledge and it's search ever forward. Basically, like the poor, there will always be ignorance amongst us.

delexy123:
5. If there will be a time like that, will man be able to survive up to that time?

I don't think there will ever be such a time, but ask again on 1st January 210,018 (that's no typo!)

delexy123:
6. If possible, what are the chances that man will be able survive and achievements that feat?

We will survive a very long time if we do not manage to obliterate ourselves out of existence first. Humans, though, are rather resilient, and the universe even more so, so I doubt we can obliterate either, we just would never be omnipowerful enough. I personally expect the date to someday work it's way to 1st January 2,000,000 and beyond. Of course I expect humans would have evolved so much that they would look at present day humans and claim we are apes and they are in no way related to us. They will have gods and religion too but nothing like we have today.

delexy123:
7. If there is 'very low' or No chance that man will survive up to that time of being omniscience, then, why do man still debate the existence of a 'god' when he knows that he wouldn't live to proof or debunk it?

Your question is like asking why humans didn't stop seeking knowledge 2000 years ago? The reason we don't stop is simply because there is just so much we don't know and will always be seeking to know. And we do not have to be omniscient, as in know it all, we will just know a lot more and continue to learn more everyday. Just think, going to America seems like going to the moon for people in some countries, but someday, going to Mars would be as easy as going to Dugbe, eventually.

iamvictorbassey:
Nigeria has no credible research centre whether owned by the Government. Church, Mosque or Individual. But we have prayer houses, churches and mosques scattered all over.
Nigeria is the only country that wants to pray technology to reality. Hahahaha.

Hahahaha indeed!

ScienceWatch:
Butterfly1on did not say that top speed is the damn SUV's top speed.

You need to learn to shut up sometimes.

ScienceWatch:
Did you notice that what Butterfly1on calls speeding, is only 10kmp/h above the speed limit.

Not that it matters, but where did he say that?

butterflyl1on:
Now one day within this one month you were driving the car at top speed and someone unknowingly tries to cross the road in front of your moving vehicle.

Are you sure there's nothing wrong with you?

Fvcknames:
I think this works better than anger management

Good training for it at the least.

Fvcknames:
Welcome to the thread

Hello veteran. Your initiation was short, but baptism of fire all the same, it seems.

butterflyl1on:
Nobody to help you does not mean you have nobody in your life. They simply had absolutely no help to render to ensure you came out of your poverty ridden state.

Goes to what we mean by help. They can have encouraged me (with as little as words) to make something of myself. They could share the little food they have with me so I don't starve, they could have educated me (including setting me up in a trade or apprenticeship) to be able to feed myself. They would even have helped by being motivators, after all I might decide to become a murder armed robber thief to feed my loving parents if I had no other option!

You allowed me to think I was an orphan in the original scenario!

butterflyl1on:
Hmm. Even if this person is your mom or dad?

Hold it right there though! The original scenario said "nobody to help" me! So where did these parents suddenly appear from when I am given a 500million don't die suv? Abi dem want die ni? What nonsense!

butterflyl1on:
nobody to help you out in the society to become someone. No uncle, no aunty. No connection and you find it extremely hard to feed yourself.

ScienceWatch:
I think BudaAtums comments deserve commendation. It is laced with out of the box humour. I mean, picture him driving that new car only up and down in his driveway. Lol I am Rolling on the floor with laughter.

Then he goes for the kill when he says that he would rather buy 1000 cars and then drive 100 at a time. Lol really loud !! My stomack is cramping, stop , please stop.

Well, think of it. If I had a 500 million suv, I will probably have to hire a watchman to keep an eye on it when I'm not there, and a yago (get out of my way person) when I drive it. Though, since I wasn't able to feed myself, I probably would not have a bed so I might sleep in it too. I sure doubt I'd let it out of my sight while counting the minutes until I can sell the damn thing!!

Believe me, if there was no condition that I must drive the damn thing, I wouldn't even think of driving it in the first place!

butterflyl1on:
Even if it's your mom or dad?

Or any person I know?

Tough one. But, if I'm stupid enough to be speeding in a 500million suv in the first place, I must be stupid enough to kill my own parents I guess. Both, after all, require super high levels of stupid!

It's only afterwards when the police arrest me for using a vehicle as a weapon, or murder, that my stupid will dawn on me. Can the 500 million suv protect me from prosecution perhaps?

johnydon22:
Lol I don't see how this works but oh well since it is a thought experiment

I am going for the hit.

There are chances that the person won't die and i can help both his/her life and mine with the money from the sale..

Lol! I am going to report you.