Why might one wish to mitigate one's lack of belief ...

[mikkel_the_dane]

If atheists are correct, then opinions are worthless!

No, you are confusing atheists with objectivists.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yeah, you and your everyday words as they make sense to you. Stop doing that. Accept that English is not the same to the rest of us.

I goodly speaketh it.

If atheists are correct, then opinions are worthless!

It depends upon the opinion.
Post #77 is worthless.
But post #68 is a gem.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Are opinions worthless? If I am of the opinion that slavery should not take place and should be abolished where it does, and further, I convince a significant number of others to share that opinion such that slavery is actually abolished, has not something worthwhile occurred in eyes of the former enslaved? A tangible and real worth?

A worth is not tangible nor real as objective as per empericism. You are doing this fallacy: Reification (also known as concretism, hypostatization, or the fallacy of misplaced concreteness) is a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete real event or physical entity.

You do that again and again. You confuse how you think and feel with what you can observe.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I goodly speaketh it.

It depends upon the opinion.
Post #77 is worthless.
But post #68 is a gem.

There is no we when you use we and science. That we is not humanity as such. It is a local part of humanity in time and space. A sub-culture.

Science is like other tools, ie, we decide what to use them for.

It reminds me of an alien invasion some years back....
Kodos; Ahhhhh! He's got a board with a nail in it.
Moe: Extinct humanity will ya!
Kang: Run Kodos!
Kodos: It looks like the Earthlings won.
Kang: Did they? Right now they have a board with a nail in it.
But they won't stop there.
Soon they will make bigger boards with bigger nails until they
make a board with a nail in it so big it will destroy them all!

Sorry, there is no we. That is no different than the one and only True God.

 

[PureX]

Yeah, but your goals are as subjective as everybody else's. That is the limit of science and where science doesn't apply when it comes to moral judgments.

And we spend billions of dollars on science, and almost nothing on human ethical reasoning. In fact we still relegate that endeavor to ancient superstition based religions. And then we wonder why humanity is heading for extinction.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And we spend billions of dollars on science, and almost nothing on human ethical reasoning. In fact we still relegate that endeavor to ancient superstition based religions. And then we wonder why humanity is heading for extinction.

Or the idea of really objective, rational as per one version of philosophy.

 

[Colt]

Are opinions worthless? If I am of the opinion that slavery should not take place and should be abolished where it does, and further, I convince a significant number of others to share that opinion such that slavery is actually abolished, has not something worthwhile occurred in eyes of the former enslaved? A tangible and real worth?

If atheists are right, then death is the final result of this infinitely brief fart we call life. Neither the virtuous nor the slave will recall anything so it's all moot.

 

[Polymath257]

And we spend billions of dollars on science, and almost nothing on human ethical reasoning. In fact we still relegate that endeavor to ancient superstition based religions. And then we wonder why humanity is heading for extinction.

And part of the problem is that those ancient superstitions have a lot of devotees that think their system is the only way to conduct ethical reasoning. And many of those people make the laws determining where the money goes.

So I agree with you. It would be wonderful if we could actually start a good discussion about ethics. But the first step would have to be to get people to think beyond their traditional system.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

If atheists are right, then death is the final result of this infinitely brief fart we call life. Neither the virtuous nor the slave will recall anything so it's all moot.

To you. It is all moot to you. The joke is that whether it is moot or not, is in your mind as to you. Just as it is differently in mine as moot is different to me. That is the end game. You are the source for us all as for what moot is, but I still do it differently.

 

[Polymath257]

If atheists are right, then death is the final result of this infinitely brief fart we call life. Neither the virtuous nor the slave will recall anything so it's all moot.

A candle can give light and warmth even if it eventually goes out.

The most meaningful things are temporary. It is the brevity of life that is one of the things that gives it meaning.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And part of the problem is that those ancient superstitions have a lot of devotees that think their system is the only way to conduct ethical reasoning. And many of those people make the laws determining where the money goes.

So I agree with you. It would be wonderful if we could actually start a good discussion about ethics. But the first step would have to be to get people to think beyond their traditional system.

Yeah, but that is not limited to religion as such. And hard science can't teach you that. That belongs to a different kind of knowledge in the end.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

A candle can give light and warmth even if it eventually goes out.

The most meaningful things are temporary. It is the brevity of life that is one of the things that gives it meaning.

To you. Learn to state words which only have meaning relative to a human.

 

[Polymath257]

Yeah, but that is not limited to religion as such. And hard science can't teach you that. That belongs to a different kind of knowledge in the end.

I wouldn't call it knowledge. I would call it wisdom. Knowledge is about what can be done. Wisdom is about what should be done.

 

[MikeF]

If atheists are right, then death is the final result of this infinitely brief fart we call life. Neither the virtuous nor the slave will recall anything so it's all moot.

No, the virtuous nor the slave will recall anything after they die, but while alive they are affected by opinion. Additionally, the opinions that prevail while they are living will continue to influence and affect those who continue to live after their death, and to affect those who have yet to be born. If abolishment of slavery takes root and persists, then no future person will be enslaved, resulting in that opinion having a long lasting impact, even after the death of any one individual. See how that works?

As to the brevity of life, it is not so short that I would wish I or anyone else exist in slavery for that amount of time.

 

[Colt]

No, the virtuous nor the slave will recall anything after they die, but while alive they are affected by opinion. Additionally, the opinions that prevail while they are living will continue to influence and affect those who continue to live after their death, and to affect those who have yet to be born. If abolishment of slavery takes root and persists, then no future person will be enslaved, resulting in that opinion having a long lasting impact, even after the death of any one individual. See how that works?

As to the brevity of life, it is not so short that I would wish I or anyone else exist in slavery for that amount of time.

Death is always the crowning insult of a life well lived in Atheist theology. Eventually the sun will eat the earth and there won't be anyone to remember your virtue or your condescension.

 

[Brian2]

And we spend billions of dollars on science, and almost nothing on human ethical reasoning. In fact we still relegate that endeavor to ancient superstition based religions. And then we wonder why humanity is heading for extinction.

Surely it is the lack of following the ancient ethics which is pushing humanity to extinction.

 

[MikeF]

A worth is not tangible nor real as objective as per empericism. You are doing this fallacy: Reification (also known as concretism, hypostatization, or the fallacy of misplaced concreteness) is a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete real event or physical entity.

You do that again and again. You confuse how you think and feel with what you can observe.

I would disagree with your assessment. Abstract constructs are useful and needed in scientific inquiry, and their use does not automatically constitute reification of the abstraction. If the scientific construct has demonstrable construct validity and especially predictive validity, then use of such a construct is not a fallacy simply by virtue of being an abstract construction.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I wouldn't call it knowledge. I would call it wisdom. Knowledge is about what can be done. Wisdom is about what should be done.

That is your tradition. That is the joke about tradition. We are all a product of those as there is not just one.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I would disagree with your assessment. Abstract constructs are useful and needed in scientific inquiry, and their use does not automatically constitute reification of the abstraction. If the scientific construct has demonstrable construct validity and especially predictive validity, then use of such a construct is not a fallacy simply by virtue of being an abstract construction.

Yeah, but it is not tangible and real as say a piece of rock.

 

[MikeF]

Death is always the crowning insult of a life well lived in Atheist theology. Eventually the sun will eat the earth and there won't be anyone to remember your virtue or your condescension.

A quick check on the internet gives an estimate of 600 million years to 1 billions year before the earth can no longer sustain life due to progressive changes in the sun as it consumes its finite abount of fuel. That is 600 million years of living that can be done here. A lot can happen in that amount of time, wouldn't you agree? You and I won't be around, so its really not our problem, nor our concern, per se. I suggest we focus on shorter time spans and work to make life better for current life and life in the near distant future. I would also suggest that 600 million years may be more than sufficient for life on earth to expand beyond the confines of planet Earth and even this solar system. Time will tell.