|
Post by beth on Aug 4, 2016 12:31:49 GMT -5
Trump seems to be trying really really hard to get Hillary elected. He certainly has the media on his back this week. Not a tactful individual, at all.
|
|
Chelonian
xr
For she shall judge you...!
Posts: 356
|
Post by Chelonian on Aug 5, 2016 18:35:53 GMT -5
Hopefully Michael Moore is suggesting this in order to get any complacent Clinton voters off their proverbial butts and out voting this election. He could be but he also predicted Trump would win the nomination back be\fore that seemed a certainty. So did the Simpsons. In an episode they have Lisa as president taking over from Donald Trump.
|
|
Chelonian
xr
For she shall judge you...!
Posts: 356
|
Post by Chelonian on Aug 5, 2016 19:09:49 GMT -5
Must be horrible to have a medical procedure funded by the taxpayer 'eh? You'd be buggered if you lived in the UK then. We actually don't mind paying for everyone to have access to medical services. After all, nobody knows when they might need medical services regardless of what it is. A persons beliefs should not come before progress. And how have we progressed? Over 50 million unborn babies murdered in the U.S.....yep, that's real progress. and by the way, I was referring to my Christian beliefs...we have taxpayer funded medical, dental and vision services in California of which I'm able to use without paying. Babies? Infanticide is illegal. Zygotes, blastocysts and early stage foetuses more like. Put the Bible down and read a scientific paper on what pregnancy consists of and what abortion consists of. Nobody has the right to force a woman to bare a child she doesn't want. It's dangerous to her health both physically and mentally. Not to mention the risk of death which happens in 1st world countries more than people think.
|
|
Chelonian
xr
For she shall judge you...!
Posts: 356
|
Post by Chelonian on Aug 5, 2016 19:12:09 GMT -5
I wish you were right Joseph, but in the past youth would receive the moral and ethical foundation from the family and from the church and from the community, in that order. Today youth comes from ailing families, do not attend church and disregard community. The results? Communities which are falling apart. Societies (in various elements) raise and train children to become adults. Responsible adults functioning in community. As these children (youth) become young responsible adults, they were once recognized as reaching that achievement. Recognized by family, by church, by education, by community. They worked, they achieved, they were recognized for that achievement. Youth have not sat in the evening and studied, Kant or Hegel or Schopenhauer, and certainly no Plato or Socrates and debate ethics and morals. They learned locally and usually through their church. Even in the remotest village they teach their children and recognize their children’s achievements to become adult. And this will be done through their religion. But in the modern world we do not do that anymore. If adults do not work to bring that youth into the adult world, the youth will try to do it themselves (without realizing what they are doing). A gang is such a youth effort as are many of the antisocial acts of youth. Face it, such teaching of youth will not happen from Atheist sources. So, teaching morality only comes from religion? What a strange thing for an atheist to proclaim. I wasn't raised religious and my morals are far better than most people's.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 5, 2016 20:57:21 GMT -5
Chelonian offered, “ . . . So, teaching morality only comes from religion? What a strange thing for an atheist to proclaim. I wasn't raised religious and my morals are far better than most people's. . . . “
Apparently I wasn’t clear enough.
My point is that we as adults have the responsibility to bring youth to the point in their live where they are prepared to become responsible adults. Part of that growth of youth is the learning of ethics, of morals, of becoming responsible. In the past this has typically been the (teaching role) of family, of church, of community. All of these have become less influential in the teaching of these ethics, morals, of community responsibility as generally accepted in the local societal community.
There is little formally acceptable educational structure for these things within the concepts of Atheism. It isn’t that such concepts (ethics, morals, community responsibility) don’t exist within the philosophical foundations of Atheism, they do and are just as strong as within any non-Atheistic structure. But few people who consider themselves as ‘without religion’ are actually Atheists and are without the Atheistic philosophical foundations. They are just, ‘without religion’ and that is quite different. They can still develop ethics and morals and community responsibility that is acceptable within their community, but it will be more happenstance because it is without supporting structure.
Obviously, all come to live within some form of ethics, of morality, of community responsibility, but that doesn’t mean they are the same and can be almost diametrically opposed. Each will believe that their ‘approach’ to life is good, even better than other people’s approach to life. For example, we are all aware that those who follow Islam do things quite differently but that doesn’t mean that they are without ethics, without morality, without community responsibility, but theirs will be quite different than such things in Western culture.
So too with some of the sub-societies within the West. Some will reach adulthood without a belief in acting in a positive way with their community as they will be responding to a quite different ethic, moral, community responsible, system.
While as an Atheist I prefer that all would follow Atheistic philosophies, but also being a realist, I realize that is not going to happen. So, it is that which has typically produce reasonable levels of ethics, morals and community responsibility which will most likely produce responsible young adults. That is, family, church, community responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 5, 2016 21:36:38 GMT -5
So too with some of the sub-societies within the West. Some will reach adulthood without a belief in acting in a positive way with their community as they will be responding to a quite different ethic, moral, community responsible, system. Whoa! Are you saying you believe atheists grow up without a sense of responsibility? Are you saying only professed Christians have a surperior moral/ethical code of conduct? also How do you define "acting in a positive way with their community" ?
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 5, 2016 22:08:18 GMT -5
Boy Beth, you read something there that I didn’t say. My words were, “ . . . So too with some of the sub-societies within the West. Some will reach adulthood without a belief in acting in a positive way with their community as they will be responding to a quite different ethic, moral, community responsible, system. . . . “ Nothing was said about Atheists.
To be more clear, which I was trying to stay away from. During the last week in my community an acquaintance of mine who is chair of the civil rights commission held a public meeting which had a number of speakers. One of them was an African American who made the point that when problems happened (robberies, shootings, etc.) the point was not to call the police, not to even talk to the police. The idea was to handle the problem themselves. To be clear, this meant to find the perpetrator and then take care of them by shooting them.
This is the sub-society I was referring to and I thought it would be quite clear with what is going on right now in Chicago. These young adults were never taught a set of ethics, morals, community responsibility, of working with community but rather believe that they have the responsibility to do as they wish.
None of my words had anything to do with putting Atheism in such a sub-society. If there is a desire to get into such a discussion as to Atheism, I’d be more the pleased to enter such a dialog. Particularly because I believe that actual Atheists (meaning more than simply being without religion) are as a group far more moral, ethical and understanding of community responsibility than any other group.
Here I add . . . . . I should have added, working in a positive way with community means getting involved with the formal structure of the community. That, is know who is elected, know the issues, become knowledgeable about the community, work with authorities to resolve problems.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 5, 2016 22:48:42 GMT -5
Not what you said? But, Men an tol, I quoted you. lol lIt wasn't out of context, it was a whole paragraph.
Whatever.
I grew up in the 70s. Most of my friends and I grew up in Christian homes .. the few who didn't were cut from the same mold we were. Several of the parents were not religious people but we all shared the same basic values. The one I remember being an out-spoken atheist was the brightest and the best in our crowd of teens. The "preacher's kids" lived up to the old saw and were often the ring leaders of all kind of mischief. I do not remember any teens in that WASP middle class community who correspond to your ideas. Were our families some kind of abnormal group of people? I really doubt it. No one took a civic interest except to sing in a glee club and attend mock government meetings a couple of times a year.
Here and now, I am not religious but younger daughter has attended church and Xtian youth camps since she was a kid - her choice.
The picture you're painting sounds drawn from statistics. Mine, trust me, is from real life. It may not be typical real life, but I lived it so I'm inclined to think things are not as cut and dry as you suggest.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 5, 2016 23:55:56 GMT -5
Beth, you said as a reply to my posting, “ . . . Whoa! Are you saying you believe atheists grow up without a sense of responsibility? . . . “
Yes, you quoted that part of my posting you felt was significant, but please where in what you quoted did I say anything about Atheist beliefs or lack thereof?
I’ll answer for you, I didn’t make such a comment.
In my response to Chelonian I do refer to Atheists with, “ . . . . There is little formally acceptable educational structure for these things within the concepts of Atheism. It isn’t that such concepts (ethics, morals, community responsibility) don’t exist within the philosophical foundations of Atheism, they do and are just as strong as within any non-Atheistic structure. But few people who consider themselves as ‘without religion’ are actually Atheists and are without the Atheistic philosophical foundations. They are just, ‘without religion’ and that is quite different. They can still develop ethics and morals and community responsibility that is acceptable within their community, but it will be more happenstance because it is without supporting structure. . . . “
This is just the opposite of what you’re saying that I said. For example, “ . . . It isn’t that such concepts (ethics, morals, community responsibility) don’t exist within the philosophical foundations of Atheism, they do and are just as strong as within any non-Atheistic structure. . . . “
How does this support in any way your comment, “ . . . Whoa! Are you saying you believe atheists grow up without a sense of responsibility? Are you saying only professed Christians have a surperior moral/ethical code of conduct? . . . . “
And how does this not support Atheism? Does it not support the reality that most people are not Atheists and most people got (in the past (the 1940s and 1950s) their ethics and morals and family responsibility from family, church, community. In fact I end that posting with, “ . . . While as an Atheist I prefer that all would follow Atheistic philosophies, but also being a realist, I realize that is not going to happen. So, it is that which has typically produce reasonable levels of ethics, morals and community responsibility which will most likely produce responsible young adults. That is, family, church, community responsibility. . . . “
It doesn’t matter that I personally believe that Atheism is enough, to not recognize that family, church, and community have been the primary influence on ethics and morals and community responsibility would be dishonest. In fact, I believe that even today family, church, community are far more acceptable to most people than is Atheism. It makes no difference that I want it to be different.
My thoughts on this subject also come from personal experiences. Those experiences are wide and varied since I have been an Atheist for more than 55 years.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Aug 6, 2016 1:35:44 GMT -5
Perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying. If so ... mea culpa. It seemed to me you were saying only those with a Christian background and the will and opportunity to perform civic interaction had a chance to form (good) morals and ethics. I didn't parse but read and came away with that impression. Didn't intent to reply to your post but the impression was strong enough it caused me to consider the real world as I know it. From there, I realized I didn't see it as it seemed you were presenting it. If I somehow managed to mistake your meaning, I do apologize.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 6, 2016 4:44:06 GMT -5
So too with some of the sub-societies within the West. Some will reach adulthood without a belief in acting in a positive way with their community as they will be responding to a quite different ethic, moral, community responsible, system. Whoa! Are you saying you believe atheists grow up without a sense of responsibility? Are you saying only professed Christians have a surperior moral/ethical code of conduct? also How do you define "acting in a positive way with their community" ? Whether one believes in the faery tales of old or not, we all have the same basic Judeo-Christian heritage and values. That is the baseline.
|
|
Chelonian
xr
For she shall judge you...!
Posts: 356
|
Post by Chelonian on Aug 7, 2016 12:12:20 GMT -5
Chelonian offered, “ . . . So, teaching morality only comes from religion? What a strange thing for an atheist to proclaim. I wasn't raised religious and my morals are far better than most people's. . . . “ Apparently I wasn’t clear enough. My point is that we as adults have the responsibility to bring youth to the point in their live where they are prepared to become responsible adults. Part of that growth of youth is the learning of ethics, of morals, of becoming responsible. In the past this has typically been the (teaching role) of family, of church, of community. All of these have become less influential in the teaching of these ethics, morals, of community responsibility as generally accepted in the local societal community. There is little formally acceptable educational structure for these things within the concepts of Atheism. It isn’t that such concepts (ethics, morals, community responsibility) don’t exist within the philosophical foundations of Atheism, they do and are just as strong as within any non-Atheistic structure. But few people who consider themselves as ‘without religion’ are actually Atheists and are without the Atheistic philosophical foundations. They are just, ‘without religion’ and that is quite different. They can still develop ethics and morals and community responsibility that is acceptable within their community, but it will be more happenstance because it is without supporting structure. Obviously, all come to live within some form of ethics, of morality, of community responsibility, but that doesn’t mean they are the same and can be almost diametrically opposed. Each will believe that their ‘approach’ to life is good, even better than other people’s approach to life. For example, we are all aware that those who follow Islam do things quite differently but that doesn’t mean that they are without ethics, without morality, without community responsibility, but theirs will be quite different than such things in Western culture. So too with some of the sub-societies within the West. Some will reach adulthood without a belief in acting in a positive way with their community as they will be responding to a quite different ethic, moral, community responsible, system. While as an Atheist I prefer that all would follow Atheistic philosophies, but also being a realist, I realize that is not going to happen. So, it is that which has typically produce reasonable levels of ethics, morals and community responsibility which will most likely produce responsible young adults. That is, family, church, community responsibility. What, pray tell, is an 'atheistic philosophy'? Last I checked, atheism was simply absence of belief in the divine. Certainly no philosophy required. Whether someone 'considers themselves atheist' is irrelevant. If someone says they do not believe in god they are atheist. If they say the do not know, they are agnostic. It's really that simple. It's not the job of Atheism to teach morality. Atheism simply teaches people to use scientific reasoning and not fall for fairy tales aimed at adults who can't think for themselves. Morality is taught by our parents, our teachers, our society, regardless of background or religion. Nobody needs religion to teach something that is so basic as 'do not kill'.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 7, 2016 16:20:20 GMT -5
Chelonian, thank you for the reply and the interesting question. The assumption that Atheism is confined to an absent of belief in a Divined Being is probably pretty common. Certainly it likely dominates the beliefs of many youth entering college where they self-declare as being Atheists. As with most things in life, Atheism can become somewhat more involved and even complex than such a simplistic concept. It has been with us (humans) as long as we’ve been around, at least as long as there has been belief in a Divine Being. So too has there has always been philosophers who, in one form or another, try to explain life. Certainly the world’s religions have had philosophers who have viewed life (inclusive of death) trying to explain such things from the perspective of their religion. Atheism is no different in that regard as philosophers who view the world through Atheistic lens, also try to explain life from that perspective. Philosophers working through religious beliefs have many (some might say an infinity) of philosophical perspectives. Here too Atheism has many differing perspectives. To make the assumption that Atheism simply teaches people to use scientific reasoning, is a misunderstanding. Scientific reasoning has only been with humans a relatively short time (say around a couple of hundred years) but Atheism has always been with humans. I suggest that it is more correct to view Atheism as viewing life through a lens unclouded by a Theist haze. Even so, Atheists have not always agreed on how to view life. Anyway, getting back to Atheistic philosophers, there have been many. For example, today it has become somewhat popular to be an Atheist with a Humanistic view of life. But even here there are differing philosophies with the most obvious being the differing philosophical values between those who see life as simply chance and those who are Determinists. Both are (certainly can be) Atheists, but their philosophical foundations are poles apart. In that difference are various ways of looking at life and both produce a view of morality and ethics. By the way, some Determinists view that no individual can be responsible for making a wrong decision and therefore ethics and morals are not applicable. Of course both of these are quite different relative to the Atheistic Existentialism. This is interesting because the ethics and morals emanating from this (reference Jean Paul-Sarte) can be balanced against another well-known Existentialist Soren Kierkegaard who happened to be very religious. Both were philosophers and they had many commonly accepted positions. Looking at Atheism as not having the job of teaching morality, is one way of viewing Atheism. I would reword it to, Atheism doesn’t have a formalized structure within which to teach morality, or much of anything for that matter. That doesn’t mean that it is sans Ethics, or Morality, or community responsibility. From my perspective Atheism has more of such functional elements than does any religion. But then I am bias toward Atheism. As I have stated in an earlier posting, morality is taught by our parents, our churches, our community, which you expanded to include teachers and society, and then added regardless of background or religion. Now I am reading something into this which you did not expressly say, but with reference to teachers and society you seem to be saying government and there I would have to disagree. While such a perspective is reflective of progressive politics, government becoming involved in such teaching is detrimental to the youth of our culture and is more a tuned to authoritarian teaching. Then, wrapping that up with the phrase, “ . . . Nobody needs religion to teach something that is so basic as 'do not kill'. . . . . “demonstrates a wide difference of views between you and I. That is, first, the correct phrase is not, ‘do no kill’ but rather do not murder. There is a wide difference in these two perspectives. Government needs citizens who will kill. That is kill on command. Without that we’d have no military, and without that, no country. More significantly (more reading into your words here) you seem to be assuming that there is some universal ethics and morals, and that is not true at all. Just keeping this within the realm of religion, Christianity makes that distinction between killing and murder, but Islam makes that distinction only as applied to other Muslims and has no such distinction when applied to Kafir. So too with societies which are primarily non-religious as some will support (as moral) the use of individuals by government unto death and others will applied that only to non-members of their society and yet others will accept no killing. Chelonian, I wish that it was a simple and straight forward as you seem to want it to be, but it isn’t and the truth is, in the West of the last 200 years, most people (certainly not all) obtain their ethics and morals and community responsibilities, from family, church, and community. I am led to believe from reading other postings that you find Wikipedia as a very good resource, in that context following is a link (to Wikipedia) of many Atheistic philosophers. While this is only a partial short list there are too many to list here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_atheist_philosophers
|
|