BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Guestlex
Date: 13 Feb 13 - 01:37 PM

The team achieved incredible results using vibration and language. For instance, they successfully transmitted information patterns from one set of DNA to another. Eventually, they were even able to reprogram cells to another genome — they transformed frog embryos into salamander embryos without lifting a single scalpel or making one incision.

The Russians' work provides scientific proof of why affirmations and hypnosis have such powerful effects on human beings. Our DNA is inherently programmed to respond to language. Esoteric and spiritual teachers have known this for ages. All forms of affirmations and "thought power" derive in part from this underlying principle" "............................................................. Got to admit it takes some grasping/swallowing but all the same the possibilities are mind blowing.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Guestlex
Date: 13 Feb 13 - 12:59 PM

Jumped the gun there Mr Red 8)

Badly phrased that,better way.. does the dna alter/change come into play whatever when somebody has the full kundalini exp.Is what I meant to say. rgrds

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Guestlex
Date: 13 Feb 13 - 12:32 PM

For the purposes of what I'm about to write, let's assume that the word 'god' implies a conscious, sentient being of some sort who is able to listen to what we have to say and who takes an interest in what we do. 'God' also has the ability to perform miracles and has communicated codes of behaviors to it's adherents. If we don't constrain ourselves to this definition, there is not much point in using the word, since it then takes on lots of different meanings and no one knows which is being used by anyone else." " ..............             Great post btw When I think of God it is outside of human concepts non personal something of Greater love greater wisdom than each of us.We each have the free will whether to tune to it or not imho.How can a God like this do miracles.See link,lots more research pointing to this too exciting days if science and religion could come together.As usual don't trust the one source as there is lots more credible out there to make a case.Other odd one even religions that don't believe in a deity believe in an afterlife,usually from listening to a Master ie "experienced" the eternal thing. Another thing I am thinking is the kundalini riseexperience this dna phenomena.Regards sorry about other post it just posted no click...............http://undergroundhealthreporter.com/dna-science-and-reprograming-your-dna#ixzz2JUQVEOcl

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Mr Red
Date: 13 Feb 13 - 12:30 PM

Well! atheist taking the moral high ground ?

Sweeping generlisations ?

Religious people tend to hand that baton on to their deity and thence speak on her behalf. (God was a woman you know).

Some atheist have sufficient detachment to see a bigger picture. viz:

Religion comes with some very nice benefits, but it ain't at zero cost.
Atheism on the other hand has a cost, but some useful benefits.
Totally different you see!

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Feb 13 - 12:19 PM

For the purposes of what I'm about to write, let's assume that the word 'god' implies a conscious, sentient being of some sort who is able to listen to what we have to say and who takes an interest in what we do. 'God' also has the ability to perform miracles and has communicated codes of behaviors to it's adherents. If we don't constrain ourselves to this definition, there is not much point in using the word, since it then takes on lots of different meanings and no one knows which is being used by anyone else. " " great post btw When I think of God it is outside of human concepts non personal something of Greater love greater wisdom than each of us.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Feb 13 - 09:12 AM

LOL, Stim.... "chuffed by chaff" (I just invented that phrase... you get 50% credit)

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Feb 13 - 11:25 PM

"Show me the true evidence and I will concur." Stringsinger

Frank, have you ever been truly in love? :)

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 12 Feb 13 - 10:43 PM

We do the best we can to sort the wheat from the chaff, Bill, though there are some who prefer to sort the chaff from the wheat (present company excepted).

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 13 - 09:02 PM

Well you didn't manage it very well this time, and I see you're still in patronising mode. Too bad.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Feb 13 - 08:36 PM

...thank you Stim... I try. Sometimes opinions are mis-read, and I usually try to be sure I 'get' a poster's meaning(s).... over time it is usually not too hard to get a good idea.

... but sometimes any perceived criticism just seems to lead to a refutation of ANYTHING one posts.... *wry smile*

You & I Stim, managed to clear up most confusions without insults... I do appreciate that.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Feb 13 - 08:01 PM

Well, with the caveat that there are plenty of things I can't define or quantify that I wouldn't regard as particularly "spiritual", I'll buy that. Part of the problem is quantifying or defining the oft-misused word "spiritual" itself. If you'd regard it as subjective responses to art, nature, music, and so on that provide edification through joy as well as knowledge, a synergy of experience and personal response, that would do me. As long as I'm allowed to stop there and enjoy the reverie without having a divine bolt-on suggested to me. I never really feel I have to say thank you to anyone when I've enjoyed a "spiritual" moment or two.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: BrendanB
Date: 12 Feb 13 - 03:45 PM

I believe that, for many people, there is a spiritual dimension in their lives which has nothing to do with religion. I also believe that this has a great deal to do with semantics. Many people find themselves greatly moved by certain experiences, these may be triggered as a response to art, music, the natural world etc. such experiences are not regular or even predictable and we can struggle to define or categorise them. Some of us therefore use the word 'spiritual' to describe these experiences, perhaps as an acknowledgement that we cannot always quantify or define what we feel. Can I present evidence that such experiences are in fact 'spiritual'? No, obviously I can't - I can only say that the word 'spiritual' best sums up what I feel.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Stringsinger
Date: 12 Feb 13 - 01:59 PM

Christians are not benign on this subject. They attack. They defend their "faith" as if it were their very beings.

"Left minded fundamentalist" name calling is the very thing that belies an intelligent
conversation on this issue.

I think you can be a fundamentalist on every issue including that of atheism but to proclaim that there is a "spiritual dimension" is playing into the very notion of a theistic doctrine of sorts. This notion is unsupportable by scientific evidence.

I don't need a "spiritual" guide to appreciate the beauty, the wonder and the inspiring awe of the world, the universe or life. I certainly will not attribute this to any "Great Spirit", "God" or any other all encompassing deity so sorry Ebbie, I have to part company with you on this.

I can see how this notion might provide comfort in a chaotic world but that doesn't make it real for me.

I don't see this as a semantic issue either. You either "believe" this or you don't.

I think we have the potential to know more than we give ourselves credit for and that search is worth the effort.

To use ignorance as a basis for defending a "spiritual" or any other kind of notion seems
compromising and this is why I am not an agnostic.

Show me the true evidence and I will concur.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Feb 13 - 06:18 PM

Nice defence, Stim, but on this occasion they have both transgressed in a rather offensive manner. I was trying to make my points in a carefully-considered post written in good English, remember. I don't much care for being shot at by people having off-days and enduring cloudy thinking when I've gone to those lengths to express myself clearly.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 11 Feb 13 - 04:38 PM

Actually, over the years, both Jack and Bill have been much less likely to have agendas than most around here. Both tend toward a congeniality of spirit and an independence of thought that enhances most discussions.
(And I might as well mention that both JohnP and Ebbie fall it there, too)

Anyway, I am not sure that they disagree with you as much as you might think. As to bad reading, well, the print seems to be getting smaller every year, doesn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Feb 13 - 02:52 PM

That's OK, Stim. I like to be challenged, as long as I don't keep having to backtrack to tell bad readers such as Bill and Jacko what I really meant in the first place, when all they have to do is leave their agendas at the door as they read. I might be a lot of things but I don't think my powers of written communication are that bad.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 11 Feb 13 - 02:22 PM

That was me, Steve. And thank you for sharing that. I am not searching for strange motives, really not. Given that, I probably should mention that it seems to be rather easy for people to misconstrue my intent.

I gave BillD a rather hard time in another thread, on the subject of gun control, and he got the idea that I was one of those 2nd Ammendment guys who just wanted my guns. I just thought that his solution didn't address the right problem. And so it goes...

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Feb 13 - 01:42 PM

Hmmm - I thought we didn't do "commandments" because there is no godlike authority?

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 11 Feb 13 - 01:19 PM

Whether I agree or not is irrelevant. I don't have to check to see what I think, and that is the important bit. Free will and all that.

Starry Pete says Christians say this and atheists say that blah blah.   Really? If wishing to carry on with child abuse and perpetuating medieval myth to scar people for life instead of finding out how the universe works is being polite then I'm glad I'm a foul mouthed c&nt really.

If Christians did lay down for once we can make headway in stopping superstition from buggering up society.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Feb 13 - 12:42 PM

Everyone must by definition agree with Ebbie's post below.

except for a left minded fundamentalist.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Feb 13 - 08:15 AM

Where's your evidence that we want Christians to lie down and play dead? Where are the attacks on Jesus Christ? Where are the quotes showing how atheists claim the moral high ground?

Your posts serially insult science and the honest, hard work that scientists do, now you come out with this pack of lies. Give me the evidence to back up these statements or desist from making them, charlatan.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 11 Feb 13 - 08:02 AM

funny how most of the threads on religion on mudcat are stearted by atheists .funny how they expect christians to lay down and play dead.
funny how fundy atheists attack the church and her saviour and then complain that they dont leave them alone!funny how most christian responses are polite while many if not most atheist are agressive and insulting.funny how they claim to possess the moral high ground but exhibit such venom.its a funny old world!

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 09:57 PM

Well, no-one to date has issued a fatwa against me (to my knowledge) but I imagine that it probably isn't the most edifying thing that can happen to one. Perhaps you could give us a link to this case. I haven't heard about it.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Futwick
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 09:35 PM

I was reading about that all-girl Muslim rock band that broke up after a cleric issued a fatwa against them. One of the girls stated that no one forced them to break up. To go against the cleric is a sin because he is "a saint."

All it takes is them to stand up and tell him to fuck off but it is unthinkable. They'd rather be miserable than free. Can't help those who don't want to be helped.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 09:11 PM

Who are you ? Stim??

To some extent I was talking from personal experience, though I imagine mine was relatively benign by some standards. I also know, from working among Muslim families when I was a teacher for six years in Walthamstow, that leaving Islam can be even more fraught than leaving Catholicism. To a large extent it depends on your family circumstances. A strict religious background, replete with fear factor and parental pressure, can make it fiery at best and next to impossible at worst. But I would far rather you stopped trying to search for strange motives in what I say, which is as honest and from-the-hip as I can make it, and take what I say at face value. In not doing that, Jacko and Bill are convicts and you are beginning to sound like a prime suspect. You can leave the Catholic church and not be bitter. I have always respected (believe it or not) everyone's right to have whatever private beliefs they like. Not one single self-respecting atheist would ever raise the issue of anyone's beliefs if only they would keep them to themselves. And away from their children. You wouldn't even know we existed.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 06:17 PM

Ah, well, Steve, I assumed when you said, "You are caught before you leave the cradle, and as you grow up more and more draconian notions are thrown at you. You can leave only with difficulty, surrounded by threat of hellfire, social ostracism and, occasionally, much worse." that you were speaking from your own personal experience.

As to this, "I think that rejecting that, and questioning whatever system of values or beliefs is used to justify it intuitively, makes much more sense than trying to refute all the argumentation that is used to support it." When I say, "I think" it is about what I think, not about what you think.

I don't really care if you are a bitter ex-catholic or not. I don't care if you are an ex-catholic or not. I think it's important that you play the harmonica, the rest of it, not so much...

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 04:03 PM

Great post, Ebbie.

As for not knowing, well we can know very few things, from the spiritual right down to the mundane, with certainty. The fun comes in keeping looking. Religion would rather you didn't do that.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 02:18 PM

I guess we're done with the subject and are back to religion vs no religion again?

I'm fine with not knowing, and being skeptical. For me, the possibilities are what make living special.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 02:09 PM

OK- I'm laying myself open to assault. That is fine. Here goes:

It is my belief that there exists a dimension that, for lack of a fresh word, can be called spiritual, something far behind our physical life, something that is connected to a deep and almost forgotten knowledge. It is apparent that many people- whether priest, shaman, medicine man, saint, hermit or ordinary person in duress- have glimpsed it; some may even be able to access it repeatedly.

Religions stem from that knowledge, but many religions- perhaps all – have perverted it. Somehow, people within religions have over thousands of years learned how to force large groups of people to fear or venerate, - whichever is needed – the inherent power that enables it to compel them to follow and obey the rules that the religion's authorities desire.

This dimension is often called God or Allah or Nature or the Great Spirit. I tend to call it the Flow. It seems to me that on the occasions when we find ourselves in the Flow there is an ease in that moment that has little or nothing to do with one's religious beliefs or station in life or upbringing.

That Flow is what I would like to live in.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 11:05 AM

but if accurate ,it seems that the notion that it is untuitive to believe in God is just atheist bluff.

Atheists don't bluff. They don't dedicate whole "education" systems to lying to children either. Let's have your source, eh, instead of your creationist bluff.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 11:01 AM

Ok Steve... you have gone back and edited qualified your own remarks in bold type to show once and for all that you are always clear and precise, while I (and others) just fail to read and comprehend the fuller implications of your remarks. ... and you rest your case.

I spent a long time on that post and all you did is read it with your own agenda at the forefront of your mind. If you can't accept that I think you misread, well that's tough luck, I'm afraid.

What can I possible say in the face of such forthright finality? Perhaps: "yes, Socrates...quite so, Socrates..."

Forthright patience, more like, in the face of a wilful misinterpreter.

I'll say one thing further, Steve. While I disagree with Pete, with 'guestlexic' and with many others, I have never seen the value in demeaning and insulting them. When they fail to rise to your high standards of discourse, you resort to 'wacko jacko' terminology. You were beyond rude with Pete.

Jack's post was a return to form after months of our avoiding conflict. Too bad. He made an offensive, patronising and groundless remark about my scientific background. Pete insults the whole of the scientific community with almost every post he makes. He is wilfully ignorant and he deserves all the flak he gets. This world would be a horrible place if people of his ilk had power. You indulge him and patronise him, and, arguably, give him the kind of succour that makes him even worse.

If someone is worth answering at all, they are worth being answered politely and without name calling. If you decide they cannot be debated fairly, I'd suggest you not bother. I kind of like my own advice in that regard, so rather than descending to that level..... goodbye.

You sure kind of like the sound of your own voice. Thank you for the lecture. If that little "goodbye" means I won't hear another, good.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 10:51 AM

an item from religion today nov 99 relates how pychologists in britain and japan asked children who had made various objects.these were not all from religious backgrounds yet it suggested that all children had a belief in a creator God even if not raised in any faith in a deity.
a japanese researcher said,having reportedly been surprised by the results-
"we japanese dont think about God as creator - its just not part of our japanese philosophy"
admittedly i have not checked the source material but if accurate ,it seems that the notion that it is untuitive to believe in God is just atheist bluff.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 10:43 AM

Steve has made it very clear that he, like a lot of people, suffered from his religious upbringing.

Au contraire. I'm enjoying a reasonable life and came to little harm in the long run from my upbringing and I've said that on this forum several times before. You're falling into the old Aunt Sally trap of saying "he's a bitter ex-Catholic, therefore he doesn't take an objective view of religion". Well every ex-Catholic who dares to mention the fact gets this old chestnut thrown at them. It's unimaginative, formulaic and downright untrue.

I think that rejecting that, and questioning whatever system of values or beliefs is used to justify it intuitively, makes much more sense than trying to refute all the argumentation that is used to support it.

Again, this misrepresents what I said. Firstly, my process, and I dare say that of many others who dare to escape from organised religion, starts with throwing off fear. Next, your intuition tells you there cannot be a God. That's the easy bit. He is, after all, no more believable than goblins, fairies and Santa Claus. And next, you look for evidence. Many times on this board I've said that the whole basis of atheism is a dispassionate look at the evidence for and against the existence of God. There is no "trying to refute..." about it.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 10:32 AM

Good stuff indeed, John. Cheers.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: John P
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 09:19 AM

the fact that lots of people in different traditions have experiences that seem metaphysically meaningful, sorta proves there must be something to it all

This points up one of the problems of definition that I see in discussions of this sort. There is often an assumption that atheism equals materialism and mystical experience equals religion. There is also no working definition of 'god', allowing people who don't really disagree to disagree anyway.

For the purposes of what I'm about to write, let's assume that the word 'god' implies a conscious, sentient being of some sort who is able to listen to what we have to say and who takes an interest in what we do. 'God' also has the ability to perform miracles and has communicated codes of behaviors to it's adherents. If we don't constrain ourselves to this definition, there is not much point in using the word, since it then takes on lots of different meanings and no one knows which is being used by anyone else.

It is clear that lots of people from throughout history and from all over the world have had what is usually described as mystical experiences. I have experienced them, I personally know many others who have, and I have read of this type of experience -- described in much the same ways -- from every culture there is. I have to conclude that the mystical experience is possible for to humans have, that it is built into us like hearing or taste. Most people experience this as a sense of being connected with everything that exists, a feeling of ecstasy and/or bliss, and the experience of visual phenomena. This is often a profoundly moving, even life-altering, event. A lot of religious rites are stylized descriptions of this experience, which may or may not actually produce the experience in the people performing the rite. There are lots of ways to get there.

I am an atheist who experiences life in a deeply spiritual way ('spiritual' being, of course, another word with many meanings, but I hope you get what I mean). The mystery of the universe is there for us to immerse ourselves in. We are able to experience being a part of everything else. I can have this experience without thinking there is a god somewhere who is giving it to me. Where the chain of logic in religion/spirituality breaks down is between the mystical experience and the belief in commandments from god, virgin births, raising from the dead, and all the other details that religions claim as true but for which there is no evidence whatsoever. A lot of people, apparently, have the mystical experience under the auspices of the devotees of some religion and then assume that everything else the adherents of that religion say must also be true, and that their version of god is only way to have this experience.

On the subject of morality and ethics, it seems clear that belief in god or lack of belief has nothing to do with it. If it did, all religious people would be paragons and all atheists would be evil, or vice versa. All the available evidence says otherwise. I reasoned my way to an ethical code while I was in my teens. It's based on altruism being in my own best interests in the long term, on empathy for my fellow humans being a better state of mind for me to be in than not, and the idea that kindness creates more kindness. As has been mentioned, the Golden Rule pretty much sums up the basis of any rational ethical code. I also liked the Abraham Lincoln quote up-thread. Here's another from Lincoln: "I care not for a man's religion whose dog is not the better for it."

One of the reasons that so many people are so distrustful of religion is that so many religious people - a vocal minority - carry and communicate the belief that there is no morality without god and that their way of behaving toward the world is obviously the only correct way. As we know, they then often pass laws based on this idea, and religion in general gets a bad name amongst those who don't want to be dictated to in these ways. Unfortunately, many religious people espouse a philosophy of hate and bigotry and enshrine these things in secular laws.

Some years ago I was channel flipping when I came across the Dalai Lama on my TV saying something like, "It doesn't matter if someone is religious or not, it doesn't matter if they are Christian or Buddhist, what matters is that there are people of good heart everywhere. They are our spiritual brethren." I've probably mangled it in my memory, but it's essentially the same message as that of the last book of the Chronicles of Narnia. Good people are good people. It doesn't matter how they come by it.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 10 Feb 13 - 02:43 AM

Hello Sailor!

Still full of yourself I notice.

Mr Shaw must feel his mountain needs rope and crampons at times here.   Religion is so hard wired due to abusing children's brains from an early age that many people, bloody huge number too, will never let go of their comfort blanket.   Indeed why should they? presumably because the more vocal adherents of superstitious nonsense confuse religiosity equality with religious privilege.   That means thinking they can impose their views and philosophy on others.   Listen to those who say they live in a Christian country. A bit like saying the Queen rules us. Traditional words in a secular democracy. Im not a chuffing Christian and neither is my mate Omar. He's religious and I'm not. Neither of us claim dominion over others, so that's cool.

Commandments for atheists is at best an oxymoron and at worst an attempt to justify religious mumbo jumbo by thinking we all need something prescribed in the big book of fairy stories.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Futwick
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 10:26 PM

"It is an ongoing, perplexing issue, and I doubt it will ever be resolved. If we raised a generation with NO mention of religion, I would bet that, because human minds CAN drift in various ways, someone would eventually create similar thoughts by just thinking and wondering."

And by imagining things, by hallucinating, by being crazier than a 3 Stooges story plot, etc.

I said the same thing about UFOs. If it were proven there are not, never were and never will be any such things as UFOs in any way, shape or form, people will still see them, still report them, still photograph them and still claim they were abducted by them.

The remark didn't go over so well.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 10:23 PM

Though I probably shouldn't admit it, I've been following this discussion;-)

Steve has made it very clear that he, like a lot of people, suffered from his religious upbringing. Whether there is a God or not, treating people that way is wrong. I think that rejecting that, and questioning whatever system of values or beliefs is used to justify it intuitively, makes much more sense than trying to refute all the argumentation that is used to support it.

There is a commandment to the effect of, "Thou Shalt Not take the Lord's name in vain", which amounts to, "Thou shalt not threaten, intimidate, or abuse children(or anybody else) in the name of God."

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 10:04 PM

Ok Steve... you have gone back and edited qualified your own remarks in bold type to show once and for all that you are always clear and precise, while I (and others) just fail to read and comprehend the fuller implications of your remarks. ... and you rest your case.

What can I possible say in the face of such forthright finality? Perhaps: "yes, Socrates...quite so, Socrates..."

I'll say one thing further, Steve. While I disagree with Pete, with 'guestlexic' and with many others, I have never seen the value in demeaning and insulting them. When they fail to rise to your high standards of discourse, you resort to 'wacko jacko' terminology. You were beyond rude with Pete.
If someone is worth answering at all, they are worth being answered politely and without name calling. If you decide they cannot be debated fairly, I'd suggest you not bother. I kind of like my own advice in that regard, so rather than descending to that level..... goodbye.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 08:01 PM

I don't need a deity to know right from wrong.

I'm thinking of having a tee-shirt printed with this on the front as a slogan. Will you require royalties?

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 07:57 PM

"I happen to think that it is intuitively obvious that God does not exist."

Anyone who believes that is very unlikely to examine at the subject at hand in a scientific manner.

But, just like Bill, you failed to read on. I said that intuition was insufficient to justify one's atheism. I am all too aware of the shortcomings of hunches/intuition/gut feelings, not to speak of witness/edicts from above/the rantings of holy men/tradition/tendentiously-translated incomplete ancient texts. I yearn for evidence. Contrary to what you say, the realisation that intuition is merely the beginning of a process of enquiry is very likely to trigger a scientific response. As for this:

If he had had the scientific training that I have had, he would not have said it.

Well, wacko Jacko, I'm not going to trade qualifications with you as that would be infra dig. Suffice to say that I have enough confidence in my qualifications and long scientific experience to say what I say. Question this any further at your peril, but be my guest.

Steve, The biggest flaw in your argument, in my humble opinion is that you project your experience in the Catholic Church with all other religion. In my small experience, I can assure you that not all denominations are nearly as dependent on generating fear.

Translator's note: Wacko is trying to say, without actually saying it, that I'm one of them thar "bitter ex-Catholics". Well think what you like, old chap. It's a tired old formula that quite a few of us have decided will not get on our tits. For my part, I'll continue to talk with sensible people. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,guestlexic
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 06:18 PM

The trouble with communicating is probably my doing as I'm more of a chatter than typer as my punctifaction shows;-).Steve re alchemy Ug Krishnamurti (thats prob wrong sp) said the fire is more important than the smoke ie the flesh time is what matters never mind what they want (spirit) (para) not my bag but another angle.Me done on this now as we are at that point,plus got to tidy up Mrs due back, but was fun got me thinking,usually ends in train wreck so thought we managed quite well,so i'm qyitting while we are ahead lol.regards

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 05:54 PM

OK Bill. Now we do have some history here. But I wish to protest once again that my position is not absolutist. Here's the bit of my post you quoted in order to promote that claim:

I happen to think that it is intuitively obvious that God does not exist." "....It seemed immediately intuitively clear to me that there was no God." "·....it will be immediately thrown back at me that billions of believers can't all have perverted senses of intuition. But I think they have.

Here it is again, with the bits you chose to gloss over in bold:

I happen to think that it is intuitively obvious that God does not exist." "....It seemed immediately intuitively clear to me that there was no God." "·....it will be immediately thrown back at me that billions of believers can't all have perverted senses of intuition. But I think they have.

Case rested.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 05:46 PM

It sure is interesting debating/discussing all this with both Steve Shaw and 'guestlexic' and trying to a commonality of language to convey points back & forth without one side continuously misunderstanding what the other might be saying. (I used to discuss it with 7 stars pete, but while we did not agree, there was seldom much confusion about just what was said)

So... Steve... even though I understand your point that "...intuition is not enough, ... and is a starting point, a lead-in to further investigation.", what it leads you to is the idea that 'looking about for good evidence and not finding any' somehow justifies what seems to me as an absolutist position as exemplified in these sentences.
"I happen to think that it is intuitively obvious that God does not exist." "....It seemed immediately intuitively clear to me that there was no God." "·....it will be immediately thrown back at me that billions of believers can't all have perverted senses of intuition. But I think they have."

   Your position, even though there are 2 steps to it, ends up almost as absolutist as its opposite, and the reason I take issue with its details is, as I said, that I DO see why "freed intuition" can lead people like 'guestlexic' to very different conclusions. He thinks that (paraphrasing liberally) 'the fact that lots of people in different traditions have experiences that seem metaphysically meaningful, sorta proves there must be something to it all'. I suppose he is using some sort of reasoned intuition... but of a sort that you & I don't agree with. The difference is that I see why he thinks that way and why he feels free TO think/believe that way when so many others do also, and no one can 'prove him wrong'. I know a number of VERY intelligent people..including some close friends.. who are deeply into religion in various ways. We deal with this by just not discussing it much.
I **DO** discuss it when they.. or anyone else I meet... tries to suggest or assert that I ought to believe as they believe.. and I am seriously concerned at the number of people in the USA who would, if they could, get fundamentalist Christianity formally inserted into our politics and legal system. I fight it even as I see exactly why their beliefs tell them they should do this!

I AGREE that there is no convincing evidence for religious beliefs...they are exactly that- beliefs! I also have said many times that when claims are made about important issues, they NEED evidence, and **the burden of proof is on the asserter**
It is an ongoing, perplexing issue, and I doubt it will ever be resolved. If we raised a generation with NO mention of religion, I would bet that, because human minds CAN drift in various ways, someone would eventually create similar thoughts by just thinking and wondering. It would do only a limited good to educate against it and no good at all to ban it. All *I* can do is interact with people I know and try to ease the friction on both sides..... what? You say I merely increase it with my tedious babble? Hmmmppff *grin*

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 05:46 PM

Call me Steve. Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. If you recall, in my original rant, the one you responded to, I was at pains to point out that They remain deluded...at least in one part of their brain...
(excuse the slight misquote of myself, but that's what I meant). Some mighty people have allowed themselves to be compartmentally-deluded in some aspect or other of human endeavour. Isaac Newton, undeniably one of the greatest scientists who ever lived, was convinced right to his grave of the veracity of alchemy. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,guestlexic
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 04:28 PM

No argument here Steve Shaw.Apart from the delusional bit in fact those that I have seen after having this thing happen are the sanest people I know.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 04:01 PM

I put it to all the posters here if you look at all the religions with a logical mind you will see a big picture.You cant help but see it.What it is that THEY ALL are talking about in their many interpretations is the same thing.But what is it.

What it is is one big delusion. You can argue all night about the strength of the pro-God argument in terms of the billions who buy into it, but the billions have been hoodwinked by big religion hook, line and sinker. You are caught before you leave the cradle, and as you grow up more and more draconian notions are thrown at you. You can leave only with difficulty, surrounded by threat of hellfire, social ostracism and, occasionally, much worse. You might even be honour-killed! The deadly cuddle of social acceptance has you firmly in its grip. Apocalyptic? Maybe, but a good number of people, by accident of birth and no more, have to endure this worst-case setup.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 03:54 PM

Well Steve, I see every explanatory point you make in defending that view, and can only disagree with the absoluteness of it.

But Bill, did you stop reading there? I said that intuition is not enough, remember? it is a starting point, a lead-in to further investigation. The further investigation is investigation of evidence. I said all that. I also said that intuition can lead us up the wrong path. There is also counter-intuition. I said all that too. You've lost the whole point of my carefully-constructed post, I'm afraid. There was absolutely no absoluteness to disagree with. I'm surprised, to be honest.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,guestlexic
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 03:30 PM

Just tried to find a link for silly stat list for exp in religions.Top was Buddhism if i remember right but bottom was def RC with 6 percent.Iffy source I know but made sense.

Subject: RE: BS: The 10 Commandments for atheists
From: GUEST,guestlexic
Date: 09 Feb 13 - 02:58 PM

Just reread my post again Bill sorry see no rambling I could talk you through each point.Couldn't flesh it all out for obvious reasons.Every example I gave is what we are talking about.It's where the original commandments come from Moses "trip" process whatever.