Total Posts:231|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Atheism Does Not Explain Morality

Conservative101
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.
When in doubt, start riots and scream racism
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 7:49:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Why do christians perform acts of kindness with the expectation of receiving heaven back?.....................Oh I see.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,961
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 8:10:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

Advancing genetic material isn't an objective purpose. If you derive objective purpose from a natural process like natural selection you could just as easily derive purpose from the natural process of death. It's logically inconsistent to assume an objectively purposeless species' purpose is to propagate when the purpose of propagation is objectiveless.
Keltron
Posts: 161
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 8:48:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

This is such a tired old argument. Try to come up with something new, will you? Or just check out one of the many, many threads on this topic.
Keltron
Posts: 161
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 9:00:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
For an ad nauseam explanation of what morality actually is, check this thread that Fajita posted wherein he asks why monkeys are not moral.

https://www.debate.org...
Conservative101
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 9:52:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 8:48:52 PM, Keltron wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

This is such a tired old argument. Try to come up with something new, will you? Or just check out one of the many, many threads on this topic.

Well, maybe you're just a tired old man.
When in doubt, start riots and scream racism
Conservative101
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 10:03:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

What if I'm helping out a stranger? There's no genes involved there, so your argument doesn't really work.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

So the theists are illogical, but the atheists aren't. What makes you a theist then? Furthermore, why are you on DDo?
When in doubt, start riots and scream racism
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 10:13:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 8:10:27 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

Advancing genetic material isn't an objective purpose. If you derive objective purpose from a natural process like natural selection you could just as easily derive purpose from the natural process of death. It's logically inconsistent to assume an objectively purposeless species' purpose is to propagate when the purpose of propagation is objectiveless.

Your use of "objective purpose" makes little sense to me. But, I guess you just mean that natural selection is not a process that is directed by some purposed entity.

Obviously. What about altruism requires that? Altruism is a trait that ensures the survival of the species, so it would have been selected by natural selection in the same way that wings probably evolved to escape predators.
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 10:15:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 10:03:07 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

What if I'm helping out a stranger? There's no genes involved there, so your argument doesn't really work.


Other humans share almost all of your genetic material, you derp.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

So the theists are illogical, but the atheists aren't. What makes you a theist then? Furthermore, why are you on DDo?

When the f*** did I say theists were illogical? I said people like YOU and others LIKE YOU are illogical. You and others like you do not represent ALL theists. Thank God for that.
Conservative101
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 10:20:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 10:15:17 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:03:07 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

What if I'm helping out a stranger? There's no genes involved there, so your argument doesn't really work.


Other humans share almost all of your genetic material, you derp.

I'm talking about related genetic material. If I help a stranger, it doesn't affect whether my own genes get passed down or not. Also, when I help strangers, I don't do it because I want to "help my genetic material", I do it out of kindness, because my inner conscience urges me to.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

So the theists are illogical, but the atheists aren't. What makes you a theist then? Furthermore, why are you on DDo?

When the f*** did I say theists were illogical? I said people like YOU and others LIKE YOU are illogical. You and others like you do not represent ALL theists. Thank God for that.

Oh, your profile says you're agnostic. Got it.
Also, I think you either have an anger issue, or like to use caps a lot.
When in doubt, start riots and scream racism
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 10:22:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 10:03:07 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

What if I'm helping out a stranger? There's no genes involved there, so your argument doesn't really work.
At your age you shouldn't be running around without any pants on.
Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

So the theists are illogical, but the atheists aren't. What makes you a theist then? Furthermore, why are you on DDo?

A 15yr old conservative Oi Vey. The things that pass for christianity in that backward country have a lot to answer for.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Conservative101
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 10:24:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 10:22:57 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:03:07 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

What if I'm helping out a stranger? There's no genes involved there, so your argument doesn't really work.
At your age you shouldn't be running around without any pants on.

Lol, intense rebuttal.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

So the theists are illogical, but the atheists aren't. What makes you a theist then? Furthermore, why are you on DDo?

A 15yr old conservative Oi Vey. The things that pass for christianity in that backward country have a lot to answer for.
When in doubt, start riots and scream racism
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 10:30:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 10:24:12 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:22:57 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:03:07 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

What if I'm helping out a stranger? There's no genes involved there, so your argument doesn't really work.
At your age you shouldn't be running around without any pants on.

Lol, intense rebuttal.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

So the theists are illogical, but the atheists aren't. What makes you a theist then? Furthermore, why are you on DDo?

A 15yr old conservative Oi Vey. The things that pass for christianity in that backward country have a lot to answer for.

Ask your teacher what a rebuttal is.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 10:30:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 10:20:15 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:15:17 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:03:07 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

What if I'm helping out a stranger? There's no genes involved there, so your argument doesn't really work.


Other humans share almost all of your genetic material, you derp.

I'm talking about related genetic material. If I help a stranger, it doesn't affect whether my own genes get passed down or not. Also, when I help strangers, I don't do it because I want to "help my genetic material", I do it out of kindness, because my inner conscience urges me to.


Once again, other humans share almost all of your genetic material. Why doesn't that count for you? Natural selection doesn't distinguish.

Worker ants don't help the colony out of any consideration of genetic ends either.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

So the theists are illogical, but the atheists aren't. What makes you a theist then? Furthermore, why are you on DDo?

When the f*** did I say theists were illogical? I said people like YOU and others LIKE YOU are illogical. You and others like you do not represent ALL theists. Thank God for that.

Oh, your profile says you're agnostic. Got it.
Also, I think you either have an anger issue, or like to use caps a lot.

No, caps are just for word emphasis. I could do italics, but it's more of a pain.

I'm a non-religious agnostic theist.
Keltron
Posts: 161
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 1:09:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 9:52:55 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:48:52 PM, Keltron wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

This is such a tired old argument. Try to come up with something new, will you? Or just check out one of the many, many threads on this topic.

Well, maybe you're just a tired old man.

You don't even know what morality actually is or you wouldn't ask this dumb question. You're confusing morality with altruism. And I am tired. Tired of hearing the same idiocy regurgitated over and over. Come up with your own ideas.
ExsurgeDomine
Posts: 176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 1:51:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

It isn't the role of either atheism or evolution to explain morality.
Conservative101
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 1:52:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/25/2014 1:51:13 AM, ExsurgeDomine wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

It isn't the role of either atheism or evolution to explain morality.

Then where does morality come from?
When in doubt, start riots and scream racism
debateuser
Posts: 1,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 1:53:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Two of worlds religious countries USA and India have highest rape rates and not to mention murder. If murder and rape is not immoral then what is. Atheists countries have way less rape rates .

Morality is genetic. Morality existed in humans before belief in God and religion. Do you know China has banned pornography even though it is atheist state.
Scientific Errors In Religion : Atheists are right that religion is a myth

Read this topic on below link:

http://www.debate.org...
debateuser
Posts: 1,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 1:56:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Here is your logic for you

Catholic Church enslaved 30,000 Irish women as forced unpaid labor in Magdalene Laundries until 1996. Even in modern times which shows religious institutions are more interested in power and control. Read the following news article

http://americablog.com...

It shows religions are nothing more than power structures. Do you also know in India widows are burnt alive. Where is the morality in religion.
Scientific Errors In Religion : Atheists are right that religion is a myth

Read this topic on below link:

http://www.debate.org...
Keltron
Posts: 161
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 1:56:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
And since you engaged in ageism, here's my QPQ: At 15 you don't know jack. All you know is what you've been told. Come back when you have some life experience and ideas of your own.
ExsurgeDomine
Posts: 176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 2:03:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/25/2014 1:52:12 AM, Conservative101 wrote:
At 5/25/2014 1:51:13 AM, ExsurgeDomine wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

It isn't the role of either atheism or evolution to explain morality.

Then where does morality come from?

I don't feel qualified to answer the question because I'm not entirely sure. I would tentatively suggest reason, but I'm quite probably wrong.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,961
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 3:39:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/24/2014 10:13:22 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:10:27 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

Advancing genetic material isn't an objective purpose. If you derive objective purpose from a natural process like natural selection you could just as easily derive purpose from the natural process of death. It's logically inconsistent to assume an objectively purposeless species' purpose is to propagate when the purpose of propagation is objectiveless.

Your use of "objective purpose" makes little sense to me. But, I guess you just mean that natural selection is not a process that is directed by some purposed entity.

Obviously. What about altruism requires that? Altruism is a trait that ensures the survival of the species, so it would have been selected by natural selection in the same way that wings probably evolved to escape predators.

So if altruism results in advancing genetic material, and advancing genetic material is the basis for our morality, why are random acts of kindness or self sacrifice viewed as moral?

Morals are purpose driven meaning that they affect our purposeful actions, which then affect outcomes of events in our life, in turn affecting our destiny or purpose of our life. So objective purpose means that there is some desired outcome rather than no desired outcome for the human race.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 5:44:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/25/2014 3:39:51 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:13:22 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:10:27 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

Advancing genetic material isn't an objective purpose. If you derive objective purpose from a natural process like natural selection you could just as easily derive purpose from the natural process of death. It's logically inconsistent to assume an objectively purposeless species' purpose is to propagate when the purpose of propagation is objectiveless.

Your use of "objective purpose" makes little sense to me. But, I guess you just mean that natural selection is not a process that is directed by some purposed entity.

Obviously. What about altruism requires that? Altruism is a trait that ensures the survival of the species, so it would have been selected by natural selection in the same way that wings probably evolved to escape predators.

So if altruism results in advancing genetic material, and advancing genetic material is the basis for our morality, why are random acts of kindness or self sacrifice viewed as moral?

Morals are purpose driven meaning that they affect our purposeful actions, which then affect outcomes of events in our life, in turn affecting our destiny or purpose of our life. So objective purpose means that there is some desired outcome rather than no desired outcome for the human race.

Your purpose is to die and go to heaven if your lucky enough.
I don't understand why you don't accelerate the process.
The purpose your god gives you is very easy to achieve.
Top yourself.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,961
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 7:04:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/25/2014 5:44:35 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/25/2014 3:39:51 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:13:22 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:10:27 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

Advancing genetic material isn't an objective purpose. If you derive objective purpose from a natural process like natural selection you could just as easily derive purpose from the natural process of death. It's logically inconsistent to assume an objectively purposeless species' purpose is to propagate when the purpose of propagation is objectiveless.

Your use of "objective purpose" makes little sense to me. But, I guess you just mean that natural selection is not a process that is directed by some purposed entity.

Obviously. What about altruism requires that? Altruism is a trait that ensures the survival of the species, so it would have been selected by natural selection in the same way that wings probably evolved to escape predators.

So if altruism results in advancing genetic material, and advancing genetic material is the basis for our morality, why are random acts of kindness or self sacrifice viewed as moral?

Morals are purpose driven meaning that they affect our purposeful actions, which then affect outcomes of events in our life, in turn affecting our destiny or purpose of our life. So objective purpose means that there is some desired outcome rather than no desired outcome for the human race.

Your purpose is to die and go to heaven if your lucky enough.
I don't understand why you don't accelerate the process.
The purpose your god gives you is very easy to achieve.
Top yourself.

I believe that our purpose is to love. There's no doubt that enhancing the well-being of everyone collectively can only actualize through expressions of love. If God is omnibenevolent then love is a core aspect of God's character. If we were made to have God's nature in us, then our morality follows the characteristics of God. Obviously if our purpose is to love we'd need to be alive so dying wouldn't entail any part of that.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 7:21:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/25/2014 7:04:39 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/25/2014 5:44:35 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/25/2014 3:39:51 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:13:22 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:10:27 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

Advancing genetic material isn't an objective purpose. If you derive objective purpose from a natural process like natural selection you could just as easily derive purpose from the natural process of death. It's logically inconsistent to assume an objectively purposeless species' purpose is to propagate when the purpose of propagation is objectiveless.

Your use of "objective purpose" makes little sense to me. But, I guess you just mean that natural selection is not a process that is directed by some purposed entity.

Obviously. What about altruism requires that? Altruism is a trait that ensures the survival of the species, so it would have been selected by natural selection in the same way that wings probably evolved to escape predators.

So if altruism results in advancing genetic material, and advancing genetic material is the basis for our morality, why are random acts of kindness or self sacrifice viewed as moral?

Morals are purpose driven meaning that they affect our purposeful actions, which then affect outcomes of events in our life, in turn affecting our destiny or purpose of our life. So objective purpose means that there is some desired outcome rather than no desired outcome for the human race.

Your purpose is to die and go to heaven if your lucky enough.
I don't understand why you don't accelerate the process.
The purpose your god gives you is very easy to achieve.
Top yourself.

I believe that our purpose is to love. There's no doubt that enhancing the well-being of everyone collectively can only actualize through expressions of love. If God is omnibenevolent then love is a core aspect of God's character. If we were made to have God's nature in us, then our morality follows the characteristics of God. Obviously if our purpose is to love we'd need to be alive so dying wouldn't entail any part of that.
Rape, genocide, infanticide and slavery. The morality of the bible god. Thanks but don't you think Jeff Dahmer might be a better option for your morals.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,961
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 7:24:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/25/2014 7:21:57 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/25/2014 7:04:39 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/25/2014 5:44:35 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/25/2014 3:39:51 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:13:22 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:10:27 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

Advancing genetic material isn't an objective purpose. If you derive objective purpose from a natural process like natural selection you could just as easily derive purpose from the natural process of death. It's logically inconsistent to assume an objectively purposeless species' purpose is to propagate when the purpose of propagation is objectiveless.

Your use of "objective purpose" makes little sense to me. But, I guess you just mean that natural selection is not a process that is directed by some purposed entity.

Obviously. What about altruism requires that? Altruism is a trait that ensures the survival of the species, so it would have been selected by natural selection in the same way that wings probably evolved to escape predators.

So if altruism results in advancing genetic material, and advancing genetic material is the basis for our morality, why are random acts of kindness or self sacrifice viewed as moral?

Morals are purpose driven meaning that they affect our purposeful actions, which then affect outcomes of events in our life, in turn affecting our destiny or purpose of our life. So objective purpose means that there is some desired outcome rather than no desired outcome for the human race.

Your purpose is to die and go to heaven if your lucky enough.
I don't understand why you don't accelerate the process.
The purpose your god gives you is very easy to achieve.
Top yourself.

I believe that our purpose is to love. There's no doubt that enhancing the well-being of everyone collectively can only actualize through expressions of love. If God is omnibenevolent then love is a core aspect of God's character. If we were made to have God's nature in us, then our morality follows the characteristics of God. Obviously if our purpose is to love we'd need to be alive so dying wouldn't entail any part of that.
Rape, genocide, infanticide and slavery. The morality of the bible god. Thanks but don't you think Jeff Dahmer might be a better option for your morals.

Where did I argue for the Judeo-Christian God?
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 7:34:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/25/2014 7:24:26 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/25/2014 7:21:57 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/25/2014 7:04:39 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/25/2014 5:44:35 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/25/2014 3:39:51 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:13:22 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:10:27 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

Advancing genetic material isn't an objective purpose. If you derive objective purpose from a natural process like natural selection you could just as easily derive purpose from the natural process of death. It's logically inconsistent to assume an objectively purposeless species' purpose is to propagate when the purpose of propagation is objectiveless.

Your use of "objective purpose" makes little sense to me. But, I guess you just mean that natural selection is not a process that is directed by some purposed entity.

Obviously. What about altruism requires that? Altruism is a trait that ensures the survival of the species, so it would have been selected by natural selection in the same way that wings probably evolved to escape predators.

So if altruism results in advancing genetic material, and advancing genetic material is the basis for our morality, why are random acts of kindness or self sacrifice viewed as moral?

Morals are purpose driven meaning that they affect our purposeful actions, which then affect outcomes of events in our life, in turn affecting our destiny or purpose of our life. So objective purpose means that there is some desired outcome rather than no desired outcome for the human race.

Your purpose is to die and go to heaven if your lucky enough.
I don't understand why you don't accelerate the process.
The purpose your god gives you is very easy to achieve.
Top yourself.

I believe that our purpose is to love. There's no doubt that enhancing the well-being of everyone collectively can only actualize through expressions of love. If God is omnibenevolent then love is a core aspect of God's character. If we were made to have God's nature in us, then our morality follows the characteristics of God. Obviously if our purpose is to love we'd need to be alive so dying wouldn't entail any part of that.
Rape, genocide, infanticide and slavery. The morality of the bible god. Thanks but don't you think Jeff Dahmer might be a better option for your morals.

Where did I argue for the Judeo-Christian God?

Oh you have a different god do you? How do you know of it's morality?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,961
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/25/2014 7:42:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/25/2014 7:34:53 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/25/2014 7:24:26 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/25/2014 7:21:57 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/25/2014 7:04:39 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/25/2014 5:44:35 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/25/2014 3:39:51 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 10:13:22 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:10:27 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/24/2014 8:01:57 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 5/24/2014 7:35:54 PM, Conservative101 wrote:
Atheism and evolution are missing something: morality. While the Darwinian theory teaches survival of the fittest, people like Mother Teresa spend much of their lives helping the poor. Why do humans perform acts of kindness to others and expect to receive nothing back?

Logic doesn't add up.

Look up altruism. Helping others, especially of the same species, advances your genetic material through them. Look at insect colonies. Workers don't reproduce, so they have no purpose in living except the advancing of the genetic material of others like them. If altruism didn't work or didn't exist within species, then a large portion of species that rely on social connections would fall apart; individuals simply have to work together to ensure survival.

Really, I shouldn't bother responding, because you are just another theist who straw-mans everything that doesn't fit your specific worldview.

I'm actually a theist, but I'm tired of people like you. There is nothing "illogical" about the atheist worldview; it is simply a lack of belief in a god. We, as theists, believe in a god; stop acting like it is only logical to do so and anyone who doesn't also believe in an intangible magic man illogical.

Advancing genetic material isn't an objective purpose. If you derive objective purpose from a natural process like natural selection you could just as easily derive purpose from the natural process of death. It's logically inconsistent to assume an objectively purposeless species' purpose is to propagate when the purpose of propagation is objectiveless.

Your use of "objective purpose" makes little sense to me. But, I guess you just mean that natural selection is not a process that is directed by some purposed entity.

Obviously. What about altruism requires that? Altruism is a trait that ensures the survival of the species, so it would have been selected by natural selection in the same way that wings probably evolved to escape predators.

So if altruism results in advancing genetic material, and advancing genetic material is the basis for our morality, why are random acts of kindness or self sacrifice viewed as moral?

Morals are purpose driven meaning that they affect our purposeful actions, which then affect outcomes of events in our life, in turn affecting our destiny or purpose of our life. So objective purpose means that there is some desired outcome rather than no desired outcome for the human race.

Your purpose is to die and go to heaven if your lucky enough.
I don't understand why you don't accelerate the process.
The purpose your god gives you is very easy to achieve.
Top yourself.

I believe that our purpose is to love. There's no doubt that enhancing the well-being of everyone collectively can only actualize through expressions of love. If God is omnibenevolent then love is a core aspect of God's character. If we were made to have God's nature in us, then our morality follows the characteristics of God. Obviously if our purpose is to love we'd need to be alive so dying wouldn't entail any part of that.
Rape, genocide, infanticide and slavery. The morality of the bible god. Thanks but don't you think Jeff Dahmer might be a better option for your morals.

Where did I argue for the Judeo-Christian God?

Oh you have a different god do you? How do you know of it's morality?

By our own purpose-driven morality. Increasing well-being is intrinsically "good" and the maximum good can only be achieved by expressions of love. "Good" is a desired state. So if we were created for a purpose it would be to reach our desired state. Therefore our purpose is to love and if we were made by God that purpose is one he's given us.