Is Atheism unethical?

[rainshine87]

murex said:

I think people will become more aware that religions do little spiritually overall, and have negative aspects to them. People will eventually choose their own path to becoming spiritual- a personal path.

Enlightenment can't be bought at a church.

I agree. I think the major problem with organised religion is that it is considered as an end in itself rather than as a means to a greater end. Religions are kind of like maps, they are supposed to give you a nod in the right direction, act as a guide to the truth. If you consider the map itself as absolutely divine and then never bother to follow it, you have missed the point. In my opinion, that is.

[rainshine87]

tourniquet said:

nickelfire said:

This is what I'm saying, we all need to come to our own answers, and rejecting anyone else's, be it naive or even destructive, is prejudice because most answers that mankind has come to usually are all the same in some ways.

I'm not specifying what my beliefs are but I have an issue with what you are saying here. I don't see why it would be prejudicial to reject another persons views... To not reject them would be to accept them and if you accept them than that makes them your views.

I think what he meant was that you shouldn't say that someone elses views are definitely wrong. This is different from merely disagreeing with them. It is pretending to absolute wisdom, rather than recognizing a difference of opinion.

nickelfire said:

I’d criticize Christianity as much as Islam or someone’s atheistic views because each are flawed, and each have incited division, and each are destructive, and I daresay that each have changed us in necessary ways, for good or bad.

I agree that criticism is perfectly valid, but we need to be more careful. Many people criticize Christianity, for example, without ever having studied it. It's a fact that many people who call themselves Christians are not actually Christians. For example, there are a lot who believe in revenge, despite the fact that it is made quite clear in the 'Sermon on the Mount' that if a person believes in "an eye for an eye" they are not a Christian - it's as simple as that. A man can call himself a Christian without actually following the ideology laid out by the writers of the Gospels. Therefore, basing your criticism on the actions of people rather than study of the ideology can lead one to error. This is what I am trying to express.
I would criticise Islam myself, I'm currently reading the Qur'an and it seems more like a book of law than a spiritual book. However, many people base their criticism of Islam on suicide bombers. It is made quite clear in the Qur'an that such conduct is unislamic. As an example:
"Never should a believer kill a believer... If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein: and the wrath and the curse of Allah are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him."
Equally, the whole Sunni/Shia battle that's been going on for so long is just as unIslamic:
"Be not like those who are divided amongst themselves and fall into disputations after receiving clear Signs: for them is a dreadful Penalty."
Indeed, most people (ascribers to Islam included) don't know that the Qur'an considers Christians and Jews to be 'Muslims', seeing as 'Muslim' is applied as a word indicating any earnest monotheist.

Those examples were probably unecessary, but I felt like getting it off my chest, seeing as how I've met so many people who criticise ideologies based on the actions of those who claim to ascribe to it, and I think that's naive.

[piper]

Hey Rain....its a breath of fresh air to hear someone spouting about something they have actually taken the time to understand. The Qur'an .....big book. We have one in our library and I can't say I've even tried to read it, should tho. Many people make criticisms of religions and ideologies that one they have never studied or two practiced. Also what gets me about this is that some people will criticise something in defense of something else of which they know nothing about either of them in reality . Wow that's confusing.
I guess what I've come to realize is that if you have studied and practiced something you are less prone to take a reactionary stance against either side of coin. You can actually imbue the topic with wisdom instead of emotion and reaction which has no basis in truth. More peace.

[nickelfire]

jupiter said:

I for one am just not getting your point anymore on this nickelfire. This thread seems to have pretty well described why people feel one idea might be worse than another. You are entitled to your opinion but I am having a hard time figuring it out.
I think it almost goes without saying that we can all be more understanding and practice a better brand of tolerance in our daily lives, I just don't see how this is bring a greater relevance to that issue.
What exactly are you proposing a world where everyone is hailed as perfect and righteous regardless of conduct? Until we reach that evolutionary status as near perfecrt species I think we would all kill each other. Or do you want someone to point a finger at one of these and say one is worse than atheism?

It wasn't a serious question, I honestly don't care if it's answered, and I was simply trying to keep the thread going. Although it might be interesting to see where everyone stands... Does anyone practice any of the above religions/non-religions? If not, which one would you be more attracted too? OR, which was one is the least unethical? See where I'm heading?
As for perfection, it’s overrated; life would be boring if we didn’t have serious problems within and without. The day anyone leads a perfect life is the day they die and head to heaven. Life is drama, drama is rife with conflict, and so as much as I dislike the aforementioned discrimination, if we didn’t have to deal with it and other negative issues, we would have no purpose.

[nickelfire]

rainshine87 said:

Those examples were probably unecessary, but I felt like getting it off my chest, seeing as how I've met so many people who criticise ideologies based on the actions of those who claim to ascribe to it, and I think that's naive.

Ideologies are created by those who claim to ascribe to it. Philosophies don’t materialize without the help of people. People following it now may not be the same as people following it then, but this is not so important, reality is how we perceive it. And Christianity has been defined by un-Christian actions more than the opposite. So when I criticize an ideology, I criticize its followers who have, from the beginning, distorted their fundamental beliefs to suit themselves.
The fundamental philosophy, I.E. the Christ message is infallible; because it is pure and uncompromised. However, religions as we know it are rampant with contradictions to this standard; Christ has only been but a symbol to their hypocritical claim on a holier-than-thou position over the rest, and the same goes for the other religions.
Moreover, when I criticize a theology I’m not attacking its pure fundamental message, but I am indeed attacking its distortion which includes the people who follow it and the religion itself, which was created by such people.
I’ll have more to say on this later, G2G!

[piper]

nickelfire said:

Ideologies are created by those who claim to ascribe to it.

I think that they also are truths that become evident through the observation of natural order and law.

nickelfire said:

And Christianity has been defined by un-Christian actions more than the opposite.

Sorry Nicklefire but this just bugs the *&^% out of me when you make these statements. Every single day many "Christ" inspired actions take place. How can you possibly be the one determine how that scale tips? Atrocities vs. good deeds........I understand that you are ranting against injustice but I think it is misplaced.

nickelfire said:

Moreover, when I criticize a theology I’m not attacking its pure fundamental message, but I am indeed attacking its distortion which includes the people who follow it and the religion itself, which was created by such people.

This seems like a clearer statemnt. But I think if we're going to condemn religion here let's flip the coin and look at it another way.

"Is Atheism unethical? What atrocities are commited under the guise of atheism? what inspiration comes into our lives in the ideologies of atheistic thinking and action?"

[nickelfire]

piper said:

I think that they also are truths that become evident through the observation of natural order and law.

Sure, but that’s not entirely the case for many religions, if they were based on natural order and law, they would actually have been more cohesive with people who were more inclined to think along those lines such as Africans with their ancestral reverie and pagans throughout the world. It’s far more unnatural to worship some dudes from the desert and their religion, thousands of miles away, over your ancestors whom can believably keep you in line because they are directly related to the individual. Or a pagan philosophy, who revered gods who, they believed, directly influenced the world around them, the rain, animals, light, seasons, etc, all very conducive to natural order and law.

piper said:

Sorry Nicklefire but this just bugs the *&^% out of me when you make these statements. Every single day many "Christ" inspired actions take place. How can you possibly be the one determine how that scale tips? Atrocities vs. good deeds........I understand that you are ranting against injustice but I think it is misplaced.

You may have a point there but in general you don’t really hear about those good deeds do you? We can all agree that Christianity changed the world with its inception, life was not the same and it became a powerful force in the world. But it had a very negative effect on most of Africa, so that’s number 1, a very BIG number 1.
The crusades waged for about 180 years, I haven’t tallied the fatalities but if you can give me a real Christian reason for them, I’ll retract them as my number 2.
The “holy” inquisition lasted roughly 1200 years. Jews, protestants and women were slaughtered in the name of holy hypocrisy, 75 million were killed. Number 3.
This isn't counting Christianity's initial conquering of its practitioners which I'm sure was anything but peaceful. Therefore if the unification and then swift degeneration of so many people came at this price then I stand by previous statement.
As far as I can tell Christianity has done little more then educate the masses, this is worthy of a huge amount of praise, but the religion itself has been corrupt from the beginning, IMO. If you can name some positive things done by Christianity that have had an impact as major as the three things above, then I won’t change my mind.

piper said:

This seems like a clearer statemnt. But I think if we're going to condemn religion here let's flip the coin and look at it another way.

"Is Atheism unethical? What atrocities are commited under the guise of atheism? what inspiration comes into our lives in the ideologies of atheistic thinking and action?"

Atheism is another story, and I have to go, maybe I’ll have an answer later.

[piper]

Okay I can see that you are doing homework on this. But I think that we are going in circles about 2 different things.

I am referring to the application of a certain mindset. And there is no way of counting how many single acts of kindness and compassion take place from people on a daily basis because of simple religous concepts being applied. Things like

love your neighbor
turn the other cheek
tolerance
compassion
do unto others

the list is countless. I believe that by people having a religous practice that they have a much better chance of remembering to do these things. I know on a personal level that if I don't have some sort of meditation or prayer or inspirational thought during the day the crudeness starts creeping in. My tolerance takes a dip. The tongue gets sharper quicker.

I am not arguing that lots of religous people are utter failures. The crusades were devastating. But these are also colonizing/ evolutionary/politico/ issues, not the issue of is religion good for people or not, or is atheism unethical. Mine is a case for how we can strengthen our goodness and not fall lazy to sloth.

Can atheism provide you with a guide to improved more en'lighten'ed action?

And you do hear about these good deeds everyday. I do I see them.

[nickelfire]

The five ethics you listed are very admirable and I can fully appreciate what you are saying. A true Christian mindset would be the highest moral standard, and that is unquestionable to me.
What I’ve been trying to do though, is draw a line between the Christian religion (with all its un-Christian history), and the Christian philosophy (the mindset if you will).
Anyone practicing and preaching the true Christian message is venerable, and I have no quarrel with them, (even if I think it’s creepy sometimes ;D ), but it’s a hard act to follow, to often the other kind receives a larger voice.
Also, I don’t see how a Christian, any Christian would be more tolerant than an atheist. For what reason would an atheist be intolerant of race, gender or sexuality? Many Christian’s casually say “hate the sin, love the sinner” in reference to gays and lesbians, Jesus was white and therefore Blacks and Asian’s are inherently inferior even if it’s unsaid. Of course these are childish notions, but the question remains, why would an atheist be more intolerant? This would be one of the only places where I think atheism has had a better impact than all other religions, if it’s negative, at least it doesn’t discriminate. ;D
In the end your point still stands, as does mine… We all need to adhere to peaceful and truly Christian, Islamic, or whichever messages, but the callous and inhumane acts of their past need to be left behind.

[piper]

Okay I understand your point about Race and that, but again that is a distortion an ugly one. As all hurtful bigotries are. But we are not just talking about Christianity and interpretations of the Bible, but a guiding ethical principle in life.

We are talking about the belief/non belief in God and whether it is ethical.

That the belief in God, higher consciousness, whatever you want to call it is what gives us our moral compass and that without some guide we tend to stray.

How does Atheism guide you to higher ground?

You have only yourself to believe in, which is our ultimate state of consciousness I think but we are God in origin but how am I to get back there without a guide?

Would an atheist be more tolerant of race or sexuality? I don't know why they would be. Do religous groups persecute people on that basis, sure they do but again that is a distortion on any level. These are fundamental ills of the human condition.

The question for me is what is the way to get us to stop doing them.

[nickelfire]

piper said:

We are talking about the belief/non belief in God and whether it is ethical.

Absolutely, And I've yet to see that it is. I mean aside from the valid point that moral decisions might be affected, I don't see why someone can't ethically hold the view that God doesn't exist, but I may need more life experience to build a better opinion.

That the belief in God, higher consciousness, whatever you want to call it is what gives us our moral compass and that without some guide we tend to stray.

How does Atheism guide you to higher ground?

You have only yourself to believe in, which is our ultimate state of consciousness I think but we are God in origin but how am I to get back there without a guide?

I don't know hot to competently answer this one... but we all have our separate paths right? Surely someone who has gone through life not believing in God even until the very end doesn't simply cease to have some after existence if everyone else has one? If we're meant to unite in the end, then I don't think anyone, no matter how resistive they might be, won't be united as well.

Would an atheist be more tolerant of race or sexuality? I don't know why they would be.

I think so, like I said in a previous post. Predominantly, Homosexuals can't live in many Christian (let alone Islamic ) communities for fear of segregation and/or hate crimes, but in say an atheist community? I can't see what harm would befall them that would be unequal to their straight neighbor. But this is mostly an opinion.
Race is an issue I'm even less familiar with, but the amount of separation from their roots, and confusion that African descendants all over the world have to deal with, regarding their beliefs is tragic. The choices left to them are two white religions, and neither can be copasetic with any African tradition and thus their own personal pride is under fire. But I’m repeating myself.

These are fundamental ills of the human condition.

These are what I'm talking about, I believe we all have them and inflict them, and I think this has nothing to do with belief in God. I really can't say why I think this way, but it seems perfectly clear to me. Morality, or the lack of it, is abundant everywhere, and it has less to do with belief, and more to do with the education and disposition of the individual, who is deeply influenced by the world and people around him or her.

The question for me is what is the way to get us to stop doing them.

This one is definitely beyond me ;D , good luck with that!

[MagnetMan]

The basic problem I have with atheists is that I cannot see why anyone would refuse to accept an absolute standard of perfection as a moral compass to guide and correct one through the twists and turns of life.

Why settle for anything less?

If one chooses to settle for a lesser standard, how does one determine the lesser degree and get everyone to agree on it?

Every secular Constitution that has ever tried to set a moral standard by which all people can be governed, has ended up with a continuous need for amendment and endless new legislation in order to block legal loop-holes. It is costing cultures governed by such man-determined standards, over 60% of their GNP, just in bureaucratic over-sight and police enforcement.

If that is the price of freedom to set one's own standards of conduct in life, you can have it. I have better uses for my time and money.

It is far more efficient as well as morally more satisfactory for me to educate my children to accept that there are immutable Laws of Cause and Effect operating in the universe, and which intuitively prick the conscience of anybody who trespasses on them, than to try to get them to read, understand, analyze, agree to and obey the libraries of man-written laws and statues that are currently bankrupting and corrupting us.

[nickelfire]

magnetman said:

It is far more efficient as well as morally more satisfactory for me to educate my children to accept that there are immutable Laws of Cause and Effect operating in the universe, and which intuitively prick the conscience of anybody who trespasses on them, than to try to get them to read, understand, analyze, agree to and obey the libraries of man-written laws and statues that are currently bankrupting and corrupting us.

This would indisputably be the answer to Piper's last question, and I'm in full agreement. I can also see that belief in god would be more conducive to such ideas, and I have nothing to say to the contrary.
I'm only trivially (by comparison) discussing current beliefs and current mind frames. Right now, Believer and non-believer alike act without thought of cause and effect, but I think I've made my point by now.

I have a question regarding the first part of your post though. What is the absolute moral standard of perfection? Is it god? Because I think that god can be the stereotypical figure of love and endless understanding, and I also think he plays the role of the devil just as often. But it isn’t so black or white, most the time I think he’s indifferent, playing a spectators role, interested in seeing how we do on our own. And if he is us, within us, then he most certainly is both, as we are capable of both, so what is the absolute standard of goodness? Has anyone ever seen it? All I know is that I haven't, I make decisions based on my experiences and relationships, not just my inescapable belief in karma. But I’ve only ever measured myself against myself; it’s never been some unfathomable moral standard… Maybe more years are needed…

[MagnetMan]

nickelfire said:

[
I have a question regarding the first part of your post though. What is the absolute moral standard of perfection? Is it god?]

God is not something or somebody separate from Nature and ourselves. He/She is all and everything - operating under the same positive/negative polarities and atomic attributes that radiate conscious energy through out the Universe.

Nature is a sure guide as to what constitutes absolute standards of goodness. Some 96% of what we see appears to be good. Wherever you look there is a predominant sense of order, symmetry, beauty, art, logic. Any trespass on that order sets off inevitable retribution. Any creative embellishment responds with rewards. Trespass brings pain and sorrow. Creativity brings joy and satisfaction. These Laws of Cause and Effect operate naturally.

Because I think that god can be the stereotypical figure of love and endless understanding, and I also think he plays the role of the devil just as often. But it isn’t so black or white, most the time I think he’s indifferent, playing a spectators role, interested in seeing how we do on our own. And if he is us, within us, then he most certainly is both, as we are capable of both, so what is the absolute standard of goodness? Has anyone ever seen it? All I know is that I haven't, I make decisions based on my experiences and relationships, not just my inescapable belief in karma. But I’ve only ever measured myself against myself; it’s never been some unfathomable moral standard… Maybe more years are needed…

What makes the perfection of the cosmos actively dynamic is the random effect - which projects a perception of distorted mutations. Some 4% of what we see appears to be crippled, misshapen, ugly, nasty, disordered, chaotic. Without that negative dynamic providing necessary perspective there would be no way of seeing and appreciating perfection.

With so much goodness surrounding us, God is taken for granted. The dysfunctional few, desperate for negative attention, carp over the 4% and ignore the 96%. I find that a cheap way to go through life

[murex]

I think a unique personal belief is better than a religion. A person is more refined and more real that way.