₦airaland Forum

Seun:
I guess the main problem with the atheist position is its unpopularity.

We can fix that by engaging religious people in constructive conversations more often. Helping them to see that not only is there no good reason to believe that any God or gods exists, but that we can have better morals, success, happiness, health, family lives, etc in our societies without believing in any God or gods.

Isn't morality subjective? What do you mean better morals?

hahn:
It is simple really

There is obviously no god because there is no evidence for it and if there is a god then it is a failure, judging by all the bad in the world, and it is not worthy of my attention or worship.

What would in your own opinion constitute a sufficient eviddnce towards the existence of God(s)?

The position that there is no god is less stressful because if god, as depicted especially by Christianity and Islam, actually existed we'd be all doomed having a psychopath running loose who does not take responsibility for it's failure but is more concerned about burning people up and enjoying the smell of suya

Thank god there is no god

lol

Immorttal:
In every atheist mind 'someone made this for sure but i do not know and ya'll do not know'

Not someone per say. You are making the mistake of equating your everyday experience in a cosmological scale. It doesn't work like that.

It is curious that no religious person has raised any issue they think is a problem with the atheist position. Is it that there is none?

Everyone have reasons for any position they take regarding every issue. The problem of God is one of the most popular and the most lingering through history.

The position of atheism has been one of the most controversial sometimes out of clear valid objective reason, other times out of misrepresentation, misinformation or misunderstanding.

Even atheists have find issues with their position if they look for one. Some of the popular issues i have heard so here like; Do you think everything came from nothing? What do you worship then? Who created you?

These are all valid questions and issues that can be well scrutinized with open mind.

This is a thread to discuss issues or problems philosophically consequential to the atheist position.

What, in your opinion, are the problems of atheistic position?

let's talk about them.

Theist or atheist, anyone can have questions or concerns about the implications of the atheistic position.

That's actually amazing

Lol

hahn:
When you say a few how many is that exactly?

Uuuhm, like 3

raptex:
Are you sure there are Nigerian female atheists or freethinkers?Cos all my life I've been around overly religious females.

I have dated quite a few

theunnamed:
I might have been wrong, but most atheists argument I've seen was always centered in "facts and logic", isn't that part of the reason you folks are called free-thinkers? I don't know what y'all upset for

I'm not in the least upset, just correcting a naive assertion. Anyone can actually be a freethinker, I have seen many atheists argue contrary to logic or reason. Logic or reason is individual not a group thing

I have dated religious girls and atheists (known atheist girl from nairaland) and I'd tell you today, I had better experiences dating religious girls


They were more intuitive, more in touch with the underlying essence of love.

Maybe this is a shady comparison to make since I have not dated every religious or atheist woman out there, maybe it is just an individual thing.

For the OP, fling all you want, you can be perfectly happy doing that, I believe most of guys are equally just as happy with that, fling until you catch the one butterfly that doesn't go away.

That's just it

theunnamed:
Atheists rely mostly on logic, and to most, romantic feelings doesn't make a lot of sense or no sense at all.

This is absurd. There are many things wrong with this statement and I will explain.

1.Atheist do not have a monopoly to logic
2. Theism can be just as logical and a theist can be just as logical or even more so.
3. Not all atheist use logic or even understand it.
4. Atheism can be as a result of personal conviction not logic, most times it is.
5. Romantic love is actually very logical, easily explained in technicality or principles of reason.

But I don't think what you described is due to your disbelief of the existence of God. I'm in my early 20s and I used to feel like that, I've never had a girlfriend, just the occasional romp.

It will pass and eventually you'll want more, that's life. It gets to a point when what you have or feel now is not enough, just be patient with yourself, nobody else matters.


I wish you luck, or whatever it is you believe

I don't have a comment here.

GoodMuyis:
There is no way you can prove that. since the majority of us witness the event that brought about nairaland, and the owner is right here visible. You can only lecture us on what we are not witness to

Don't be so sure.

How many versions of stories, history, folklore, mythology have you heard from both sides?

Martinez19:
lol. There are many reasons people are in the denomination they are :
1) they were born in that denomination.
2) they never read their bible and a charismatic religious leader , circumstances or friend talked them into it.
3) they picked the one that is convenient for them. Many youths prefer trending and fashionable churches.
For a Bishop, lack of allegiance to his sect may mean excommunication and termination of financial benefits. That's not some are not sincerely and willingly rooted in their denomination. If people pick up their bible and study it honestly and thoroughly, they will start being on the same page.



Well, we atheists, who have read the bible, agree on what the bible says. Religion is different from politics. The fact that we agree on religion does not mean that we would agree on other aspects. Johnydon22 has argued that morality is subjective while I argued otherwise. We are atheists for a reason and atheism is expertise in other areas of life.

Correction, my argument is that morality is intersubjective. There is a difference

Originakalokalo:
Agnostics and atheists....

You guys are siblings.....same thing in mind.....different in name.

agnosticism is in a broad sense atheism.

More correctly put, unsure atheism

hahn:
That's a good thing, right?

No. I think we shouldn't lose that value

Seun:
It is wrong and criminal for women to hit men and vice versa. This is called battery. In my view, the severity of the punishment should depend not on the gender of the offender per se but on the amount of damage done to the other person. So if a woman slaps a man and it barely hurts him, and he responds by smashing her jaw with a knock-out punch, the man's punishment should be much greater. (It is ok for a feminist to recognise and take into account the biological differences between men and women. Men cannot make babies. Women are much weaker on average, etc)

Feminists arguments sometimes blur the difference. Lol.

Anyway, even today in the society women receive far less sentence for the same crime than a man.

So don't you think given the strength disparity, it is far more likely for men to be punished since it is far more likely for them to do the most damage hence the need for more responsibility and restraint on their part?

pauloemeka:
Is it proper for me to date my best friend ex.... I like her, i think she likes me too..and she is even bringing pounded yam for me this Xmas.

Though my friend is already in another relationship... advise.

The Bro code dictates you don't unless you asks you friend and he explicitly tells you it is ok by him.

Then you can proceed without breaking the Bro code

OkaNaUbe:
Guy code: Don't date your friend's ex.

You forgot to add unless you ask you friend and he expressly gives his consent.

vaxx:
It is not wrong for a man to hit a woman. It is only wrong for a man to physically abuse a woman without cause. And the same applies in reverse.

hahn:
If it is a stranger is is 100% for me o. I will beat her and her boyfriend and anyone else with her up

I can see the verdict is unanimous, which reflects the first sentence on my post.

We are quickly losing the idea of "It is unmanly to hit a woman"

LordReed:
If after a heated exchange a woman decides to hit me she should also accept that my retaliation is an overreaction.

Hahaha. You are not a gentleman at all.

But shouldn't you consider that you are likely much stronger and could due to this cause more physical damage to her than she would to you?

hahn:
Donate your chin bro. No be by height. You will fall like a mango tree

LOL. Ok oo.

LordReed:
There are areas in which a woman has superiority but is still not obligated to show restraint. In the ability to dish out verbal abuse, most people will agree that women are superior but no social obligation is put on them to show restraint, instead everybody brushes it off, "na woman na" we all say. Unnecessary double standard, if you are going to be comfortable inflicting pain by any means then be comfortable to accept retaliation.

As a practice, the society expects more from men in terms of responsibilities than it does from women, this is fundamentally one of the reasons i disagree with the absurd arguments of modern day feminism.

This expectation is correct in my own opinion.

I agree that there are instances where the society should expect more from women but don't, but i do not think this invalidates the necessity of the masculine expectations on this issue.

hahn:
Then they should be encouraged not to hit men. Simple

Both can be true at the same time.

By the way she will knock you out

Not as easily as she would an average woman.

LordReed:
I do not believe men should show more restraint, it is an unnecessary social burden that allows women to believe it is OK to become physically violent because the man is tasked with more restraint. The burden is on both to show/practice restraint. If a woman slaps a man the man still feels pain, if you will be willing to inflict pain why should the other person be more obligated to not retaliate?

What about the realization that men on average could easily take blows from a woman better than a woman can from a man.

I mean, you can knock a girl out cold if you attack her with similar ferocity as you would attack me physically.

hahn:
So you mean my coach's wife who has won many belts in boxing and is a qualified kick boxing instructor will slap you and you won't feel it?

I laugh in waffi

I am not saying you won't, i am saying you won't feel it as much as from a man with similar qualifications. Women have at least 40% less muscle mass than men. Their blows are averagely much much weaker.

vaxx:
women and men may rightly be equal as a human, but we aren't identical. and this biological difrrence in us, is very obvious that nothing society can do about it to change it . so wirh the this fact, the gap of inequality will always be there as far as human is concern.

Now to your question, You never initiate a fight. When someone tries to start one either woman or men, if at all possible you de-escalate or walk away. If you cannot walk (or run) away from the fight, you beat your opponent so thoroughly that they will never come near you again.. that is my own philosophy.

What about the responsibility that comes with greater power?

Take for instance in the case of tragedy or war, women and children are saved first. More 3rd class women survived titanic more than 1st class men.

Because we know that given this objective reality, equality on this ground will be inherently unfair to women because men have far more likelihood of surviving due to their physical advantages, patriarchy as a fundamental concept infantilizes and pampers women.

I believe this makes every difference, men should take a large % of responsibility when dealing with violence from and against women.

hahn:
As a guy before you hit another guy you go first weigh am to know if you can actually whoop his has in combat to avoid stories that touch but women don't care how big you are they will still try to jump and slap you and start crying after they receive a hot slap

LOL. Because they operate on the social responsibility expected of men to be the responsible one in the face of conflict with a woman. This social expectation i think is right due to the physical disparity.

I can tank slaps from a woman easily, don't tell me that a woman slapping you exerts the same force as a man your size.

CAPSLOCKED:
IT'S NOT ABOUT EQUALITY OR INEQUALITY, TO ME.
WHO WANTS TO HIT BACK SHOULD HIT BACK. WHO WANTS TO SMILE AND WALK AWAY CAN DO SO. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL'S CHOICE.
BUT WOMEN NEED TO REFRAIN FROM HITTING MEN NO MATTER WHAT. "I'M A WOMAN" SHOULD APPLY BEFORE YOU HIT SOMEBODY PHYSICALLY BUILT AND STRONGER THAN YOU, INSTEAD OF AFTERWARDS.

I agree, but I kind of extend this grace till even after due to the obvious physical disparity of the sexes.

LordReed:
I think your social conditioning is speaking.

Anyone who starts it has opened themselves for retaliation whether man or woman. If you can't resolve your differences amicably, walk away.

Oh I am a very traditional person. I believe in the equivalence of responsibility that comes with power.

Equality as an isolated term is meaningless. For it to have meaning, it must be describing a specific subject.

When someone says men and women are equal this is meaningless unless we say how.

So, men and women are socially equal.

Physically? No. They are not.

So, I expect more responsibility as regards physicality from men.

Call me old fashioned.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying it is ok for women to hit men, I am simply saying I expect men to show more restraint on their violent physical interaction with women.

In a way this is not my social conditioning speaking, I have gotten to a cognitive and philosophical stage in life where i have discarded and questioned everything I know, I didn't stop at God.

I was raised to be a gentleman, to not beat a lady no matter what. This is true.

I was raised with the idea that men should protect women that this is a Nobel thing to do.

I was raised like this alright, this doesn't still mean I cannot arrive at this conclusions on an individual judgement basis.

LordReed:
Then you should stop saying murder, its a legal term.

It is primarily moral.