Deity?

[DistantCelt]

Originally Posted by ANDY-J3

I'm not an atheist but I don't have any desire to worship anything or anyone. It's possible to believe in a creator without having an interest in religious worship.

Precisely. As i stand right now, i have no reason to either believe or disbelieve in a creator. I am undecieded on that part and its not a pressing issue for me to choose sides pronto.

[patoonce]

Originally Posted by DistantCelt

Well we ARE no more than bacterias in a petri dish in the grand scheme of things. One species, barely in control of an insignificant rock circling an insignificant star in an insignificant galaxy in an insignificant corner of the universe.

So do tone down your high and mighty ego and start acting a bit more responsibly.

Being part of the collective implies knowing where to draw the line on individuality and where to draw the line on collectivism.

Thou must be very scared of death for thou to cling to thy life and comforts so dearly, at the expense of anything and everything.
Tis a pity indeed.

Thank you for your opinion on human nature, but I think there may be a small problem with it. Let me try to explain as best as I can.

If we (human) are no more then bacteria in a petri dish, on what basis do we humans (bacteria) have and place moral value? This is nothing more then a matter in motion worldview, which leaves all morality in ruin, since morality is neither matter nor motion; therefore there is no morality. There can be no evil on this worldview. All the while, you want to assert your value of 'knowing where to draw the line on individuality...and collectivism' and your value of 'toning down your high and mighty ego.' How do you know there is any moral line - any evil? How do you know that having a high and mighty ego is wrong? You don't - if you are consistent in your view of the world. It doesn't matter what one bag of flesh and bones does to another bag of flesh and bones, or what one bacterium does to another bacterium. Why is it ok to kill amebas, ants, ###########, but not human babies? What makes killing babies any different for you? DistantCelt, you’re making ethical judgments, but your worldview must rationally deny them. I think you must either become an ethical nihilist or reject your proposition that humanity is nothing more then bacteria. The problem is you can't have any justification for morality if what you claim is true.

[DistantCelt]

The problem is you can't have any justification for morality if what you claim is true.

No problem.
Morality doesnt exist. There. I have said it.
There is only action and reaction. Morality is arbitary. Causality is the only thing and one has to determine if a course of action is ultimately worth the fruits.

When i said tone down your ego or stop acting like some super-important self deluded species, i meant every word of it. For ego is 'me and mine'. Which seperates yourself from the universe. In reality, we are a part of the universe and a very minor part at that. The me and mine philosophy seperates one from the rest on a totally arbitary basis.
You exist not by yourself but because of other living creatures as well - there are bacterias in your stomach who help you digest food and if they quit, you will die.
Do not confuse it with nihilism, for nihilism is denial of existance, while my viewpoint is to better define this existance.

PS: I dont go around killing ants. As per why save a human baby but not an amoeba - the answer is simple : we cannot do it yet technologically.

[Gypsum_Fantastic]

Originally Posted by DistantCelt

certain Christian denominations require acceptance of Christ as saviour as the sole criteria to be considered Christian and Hitler had declared early in his life that he is a christian, never rescending it.

Yes, he did. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary both in recollections from his peers and written notes during WWII.

Originally Posted by DistantCelt

If you find truth dehumanising, i guess that is why you run to your cosmic daddy to soothe your fragile ego and 'i am special. say so say so say so' insecurities.

Who said anything about cosmic daddies? Any inference you have taken from my statements are entirely your own.

Originally Posted by DistantCelt

Perhaps. Inspiring or uninspiring are irrelevant. Truth is what is relevant. Something that you cannot accept.

Your supposed 'truth' is merely a banality presented as a profundity.

Originally Posted by DistantCelt

Common anecdotal mislabelling of Einstien. Einstien officially released a statement late in his life stating that he does NOT believe in a God.

Yes, he did. He merely stated he did not believe in a personal God, chum-p.

[Bellthecat]

Some light relief:

http://www.cagle.com/news/Muhammad/main.asp

And since the subject has moved off topic and into the realms of whether there is a God (and whether he is personal or not ) take a look at the cartoon where crescents, crosses, and a star-of-David are made to spell out the word god - i.e. religion in general is the real joke.

[ANDY-J3]

Originally posted by patoonce
If we (human) are no more then bacteria in a petri dish, on what basis do we humans (bacteria) have and place moral value? This is nothing more then a matter in motion worldview, which leaves all morality in ruin, since morality is neither matter nor motion; therefore there is no morality. There can be no evil on this worldview.

David Hume the secular philosopher put forward a perfectly credible explanation for morality.Human beings derive pleasure from doing good so they behave in a morally acceptable way towards others. Equally they might have a predisposition towards inflicting suffering on others hence they derive pleasure from behaving immorally. In either case moral attitudes,good or evil, stem only from self interest-it isn't necessarily what I believe and it isn't an idea that a lot of people will be comfortable with but it's a straightforward and coherent explanation that doesn't rely on the supernatural.

[DistantCelt]

Yes, he did. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary both in recollections from his peers and written notes during WWII

From what i've seen, most of it is purely anecdotal.
And regardless,even if Hitler changed his mind on christianity, he most definately was a christian in the early 30s, when he began applying his sick philosophy.

Who said anything about cosmic daddies? Any inference you have taken from my statements are entirely your own.

The cosmic daddy complex is the fundamental reason for people to fall on their knees and worship some exotic being, along with fear.

Your supposed 'truth' is merely a banality presented as a profundity.

Often, the most profound things are the most banal.For our perception of existance-physical and metaphysical- is based on the most banal and fundamental phenomenons, clouded over by layers upon layers of complex psychobabble, largely stemming from fear and ignorance. To see the truth, one has to see through that and the truth is almost always far far simpler than lies.

Yes, he did. He merely stated he did not believe in a personal God, chum-p.

he actually released a statement in the late 40s ( after the war), through the New York Times i think, categorically denying beleif in anything remotely close to the idea of God in western religions. I suppose he had wisened up from his youthful indescretions, which are quoted so often in purely anecdotal form.