Wala ba talagang "morality" ang mga Atheist?

[Cerebellum]

of course since i don't recognize the bible as authority

leave it that way na lang .. lol

 

[NOUGHT]

Wala ba talagang "morality" ang mga Atheist?​

bakit mo natanong?
mukhang meron po
hindi naman kasi iisa utak ng mga atheist meron lang talaga mga atheist na asal troll na walang ginawa kundi inisin ka

 

[Frustrated Burger]

Morality ng athiest ay acting as they see fit

 

[dummy01]

Morality ng athiest ay acting as they see fit

Hence, the inferiority of its moral foundation.

 

[BT-X]

Hence, the inferiority of its moral foundation.

Elaborate please

 

[Frustrated Burger]

Hence, the inferiority of its moral foundation.

Mismo

 

[plhbg1]

Hence, the inferiority of its moral foundation.

this only applies to whoever regard the bible as authority
non-theists will also say this back to you (slaves)

 

[Cerebellum]

Elaborate please

ganito din ako pag di ko na ma-gets eh

 

[Asherah Goddess]

Hence, the inferiority of its moral foundation.

Ang pagkakaintindi ko ay realistic ang mga atheist. Mataas naman ang pagka-idealistic ng theist. Nabasa ko na ang moral ay ma coconsider na normal at consider na mabuti, and tama kapag acceptable siya ng maraming tao.

Papaano naging inferiority ang moral foundation ng atheist? Or sadyang subjective lang based on kung ano ang nakikita ng mata? Sabagay mahirap din e distinguish kung ano ang subjective sa objective dahil lahat ng human is subjective creature ika nga.​

 

[BT-X]

Ang pagkakaintindi ko ay realistic ang mga atheist. Mataas naman ang pagka-idealistic ng theist. Nabasa ko na ang moral ay ma coconsider na normal at consider na mabuti, and tama kapag acceptable siya ng maraming tao.

Papaano naging inferiority ang moral foundation ng atheist? Or sadyang subjective lang based on kung ano ang nakikita ng mata? Sabagay mahirap din e distinguish kung ano ang subjective sa objective dahil lahat ng human is subjective creature ika nga.​

Kaya nga eh, kaya diko magets yung sinasabi nyang inferior daw, that's a giveaway that that statement is suuppeerrr subjective and biased

 

[dummy01]

yeah, ito din talaga ang iniisip ko .. some says that their morality is based on what they think right and wrong .. pero ang tanong kasi doon, paano nila nasabing tama at mali iyon? dahil ba sa iyon ang iniisip ng karamihan na acceptable, kaya tinanggap na rin nila yon?

mga ganyang bagay ba ...

Basically, their sense of right and wrong are based on whatever they thought is beneficial or harmful to well-being of either majority, minority, themselves, or any of the combinations depending on any given situations. At the end of the day, it is not that important because according to many prominent atheists, we are only just stardusts that are randomly mutated by yet unexplained evolutionary process. So you better believe that because that is what Science says. How cool to say that to a person who is experiencing an existential crisis. What is the point of struggling forward and thriving and suffer unnecessarily later when you know the meaninglessness of your existence. It maybe best to kill yourself then with an optimism that you give natural selection a fovor as one step forward to human evolution.

Ang pagkakaintindi ko ay realistic ang mga atheist. Mataas naman ang pagka-idealistic ng theist. Nabasa ko na ang moral ay ma coconsider na normal at consider na mabuti, and tama kapag acceptable siya ng maraming tao.

Papaano naging inferiority ang moral foundation ng atheist? Or sadyang subjective lang based on kung ano ang nakikita ng mata? Sabagay mahirap din e distinguish kung ano ang subjective sa objective dahil lahat ng human is subjective creature ika nga.​

I didn't get what you mean by atheists as realistic. People in general are likely realistic. It should not be a surprise that theists are idealistic because the nature of its belief is to look up to the most ideal a person could possibly perceived. Your thought about "normal" ethics is pointing to a secular idea of utilitarianism, which is also flawed and will inevitably fall down to moral relativism if challenged.

I had pointed out in the past the subjective nature of atheistic morality and why it is inferior. A morality based on a whim is not the ideal grounds for a flourishing society to stand on. Atheists are wrong when they claimed that human beings will be happier, more peaceful, and good when they divorce themselves to their divine roots. That is a naive, shallow, and over-optimistic understanding of human nature. Rationality and Science are not enough for mankind to create new values to usher us in a utopian reality. It is the failure to recognize the not-so obvious fact that human beings are not as rational as we thought. Human nature could manifest in the worst possible way when you remove the shäçkles of their divine innate which is responsible of holding down their own demons. To those who are aware of human history, it is evident that we are capable of doing many incredible good things. But despite our positive influence to the world, we should always be aware that our capacity to do evil should never be under-estimated. It is no coincidence that the most murderous people who ever lived happen to appear in one century alone. Nietzsche's famous quote 'God is dead' is the scary prediction of what happened in the 20th century when mankind attempted to kill God.

As a final note, the burden of proof for the non-existence of divinity lies on them, the atheists. As long as they are unable to provide undeniable proof of its non-existence, the objectivity of religious morality to mankind will remain bedrock-solid and relevant.

P.S. Here is a quick insight for you to grasp the difference between objective and subjective. Objective is by definition independent to human opinions. For instance, the laws of physics, mathematics, and scientific facts are independent to any kinds of opinions. Subjective is relative and influenced by personal feelings like human experiences.

 

[Frustrated Burger]

So nabubuhay ang mga athiest na walang purpose kasi wala naman silang paniniwalang may lumikha sa kanila dahil sa layunin ng manlilikha na iyon. Kagaya lang sila ng singaw na sa sandaling panahon ay lumilitaw pagdakay napapawi, malaya silang magpakamatay o pumatay kasi pagkakaalam nila walang manguusig sa kanilang ginagawa? o walang judgement day, ang morality nila ay naka depende lang sa sitwasyon at pakiramdam nilang tama daw ito at iyan na nakakabenefit ang kanilang pagkatao? Pwedeng maiba ang morality nila depende sa gusto nila? sa pagoobserba at sa mga sinasabi ng Bibliya ang judgement ng tao ay mahina pwedeng ma sway sway ng paroot parito mga kasaysayan na rin ang nagsasabi

 

[Away From Keyboard]

sure ako atheist nag embento nang mga technologies sa akin PC at smartphone. sana kung mga sira ulo mga atheist at walang saysay buhay nila edi sana wala nang phc.onl/#forbidden# at iba pang mga technologies ngayun.

ironic, kasi naging sikat ang mga mega church sa america dahil din sa technology, which is tv broadcasting.. that most of it are invented by a non-believer.

 

[Asherah Goddess]

I didn't get what you mean by atheists as realistic. People in general are likely realistic. It should not be a surprise that theists are idealistic because the nature of its belief is to look up to the most ideal a person could possibly perceived. Your thought about "normal" ethics is pointing to a secular idea of utilitarianism, which is also flawed and will inevitably fall down to moral relativism if challenged.​

Oo. Realistic in general speaking pero pag-uusapan between Atheist at Theist ay realistic o practical mag-isip ang Atheist lalo na sa problema na kailangan nila esolusyon versus sa Theist na mataas ang idealistic nito. Iyon ang ibig kong sabihin.

Take example sa crime.

If ever patayin ang lahat ng mga mahal sa buhay ng mismong tao, sakaling Theist siya ay malamang ang tao na ito ay susundin niya kung ano ang mabuti na nakasulat sa biblia na sabi daw ni God. Iyon ay patawarin ang kaaway. Huwag malamang ipakulong kung sino man pumatay sa mahal niya sa buhay. Hindi siya mag seseek ng justice. Tipong mataas ang ideal niya na human being ay magiging mabuting tao siya, andoon na rin ang ideology about God will protect them o tipong God will punish a person na gumawa ng crime- mga tipong ganoon.

Faith lang ang pagaganahin diyan.

Unlike sa Atheist, halimbawa lang naman ha? Mag-iisip siya ng practical solusyon na katulad ng ipakulong ang may sala para makakuha ng justice sa mga mahal niya sa buhay.

Ngayon kung sasabihin naman na keyso hindi lahat ng Theist ay ganoon, meron naman din kase Theist na nagpapakulong sa criminal na meron sala then meron ibang Atheist na ang sasabihin na hipokrito ang mga Theist dahil hindi naman nasusundan daw nito ang nilalaman ng biblia which is nasasabi ko na iyon ang reason why idealistic ang mga Theist. Masyado kase sila sumusunod ang mga Theist sa ideology written in bible dahil andoon lang kase nakasulat kung ano ang tama at mali, masama at mabuti.

Ako, hindi ko ma gets na sinasabing keyso objective daw ang mga Theist pagkatapos subjective ang mga Atheist daw.

Katulad na lang sa katagang money is the root of all evil. Kapag Theist ang tao o extremely religious, hindi importante ang pera diyan kahit hirap na hirap na sila mag survive sa pagkain at pangangailangan ng buong pamilya. Iyon kase ang para sa kanila na mabuti at tama dahil iyon ay nasusulat sa biblia unlike na kilala ko na mayayaman na some of them is mga Atheist. Alam kase ng Atheist na money is not the root of all evil kaya alam nila paandarin ang pera at gamitin ito para sa pamilya nila na nangangailangan.

It is a reason why some of Atheist ayaw nila mag pa enslave sa nilalaman ng biblia o any God in bible.

​

P.S. Here is a quick insight for you to grasp the difference between objective and subjective. Objective is by definition independent to human opinions. For instance, the laws of physics, mathematics, and scientific facts are independent to any kinds of opinions. Subjective is relative and influenced by personal feelings like human experiences.​

It is a reason why subjective ang mga theist talaga dahil meron silang personal feelings to a God. Ang mga Atheist ay wala naman personal feelings iyan to a God. Independent silang tao at objective silang tao na hindi nag rerely sa influence ng ideology ng God in bible.​

 

[JackFrost10]

Basically, their sense of right and wrong are based on whatever they thought is beneficial or harmful to well-being of either majority, minority, themselves, or any of the combinations depending on any given situations.

tama

At the end of the day, it is not that important because according to many prominent atheists, we are only just stardusts that are randomly mutated by yet unexplained evolutionary process. So you better believe that because that is what Science says.

It was never implied to morality as "not that important", that quote from Neil Degrasse Tyson was meant to be poetic not scientific.

How cool to say that to a person who is experiencing an existential crisis. What is the point of struggling forward and thriving and suffer unnecessarily later when you know the meaninglessness of your existence. It maybe best to kill yourself then with an optimism that you give natural selection a fovor as one step forward to human evolution.

We are the universes way to experience it self as the show elaborated, ang nega mo naman sir, yan talaga ang conclusion mo sa quote na yun.

“We are stardust brought to life, then empowered by the universe to figure itself out—and we have only just begun.”

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

this was part of the discussion from the show startalk(correct me if I'm wrong), they implied that we are part startdust which makes us atomically identical to celestial bodies.

 

[plhbg1]

So nabubuhay ang mga athiest na walang purpose kasi wala naman silang paniniwalang may lumikha sa kanila dahil sa layunin ng manlilikha na iyon.

the purpose of life is survival, it is not for slavery to a mythical creator

 

[Cerebellum]

the purpose of life is survival, it is not for slavery to a mythical creator

that's your opinion and not necessarily true, and that's his belief, and for him that is true

 

[plhbg1]

that's your opinion and not necessarily true, and that's his belief, and for him that is true

it does not have to be true since it only opposes an opinion din by someone who as if knows what is life for atheists

 

[Cerebellum]

it does not have to be true since it only opposes an opinion din by someone who as if knows what is life for atheists

aah okay, may punto ka naman din

 

[dummy01]

Oo. Realistic in general speaking pero pag-uusapan between Atheist at Theist ay realistic o practical mag-isip ang Atheist lalo na sa problema na kailangan nila esolusyon versus sa Theist na mataas ang idealistic nito. Iyon ang ibig kong sabihin.

Take example sa crime.

If ever patayin ang lahat ng mga mahal sa buhay ng mismong tao, sakaling Theist siya ay malamang ang tao na ito ay susundin niya kung ano ang mabuti na nakasulat sa biblia na sabi daw ni God. Iyon ay patawarin ang kaaway. Huwag malamang ipakulong kung sino man pumatay sa mahal niya sa buhay. Hindi siya mag seseek ng justice. Tipong mataas ang ideal niya na human being ay magiging mabuting tao siya, andoon na rin ang ideology about God will protect them o tipong God will punish a person na gumawa ng crime- mga tipong ganoon.

Faith lang ang pagaganahin diyan.

Unlike sa Atheist, halimbawa lang naman ha? Mag-iisip siya ng practical solusyon na katulad ng ipakulong ang may sala para makakuha ng justice sa mga mahal niya sa buhay.

Ngayon kung sasabihin naman na keyso hindi lahat ng Theist ay ganoon, meron naman din kase Theist na nagpapakulong sa criminal na meron sala then meron ibang Atheist na ang sasabihin na hipokrito ang mga Theist dahil hindi naman nasusundan daw nito ang nilalaman ng biblia which is nasasabi ko na iyon ang reason why idealistic ang mga Theist. Masyado kase sila sumusunod ang mga Theist sa ideology written in bible dahil andoon lang kase nakasulat kung ano ang tama at mali, masama at mabuti.
​

I know that a lot of people who do not believe in Christianity find the idea of love your neighbors, enemies, and those who do injustices to you as how you love yourselves is bizarre and insane. Honestly, I am not sure if I can love, or even forgive the perpetrator if something unfortunate as that happened to me. I understand that it is a serious concern. But, thank god we have a state which is responsible for making judgement in my behalf to your hypothetical event. Though, I do not think it is hypocritical to seek justice in a secular way if you are a theist. It is the responsibility of the sovereign state to protect and provide a just and humane way of living for its constituents. Our constitution, fortunate enough, is founded on the idea that we are under God. Let us not give too much credit to non-theists like they are the greater people when the law they implement to thrive in this society is founded on the idea of individual divinity. Practicality may seem be more attractive to you, but it does not always work in many complex situations.

Ako, hindi ko ma gets na sinasabing keyso objective daw ang mga Theist pagkatapos subjective ang mga Atheist daw.

Katulad na lang sa katagang money is the root of all evil. Kapag Theist ang tao o extremely religious, hindi importante ang pera diyan kahit hirap na hirap na sila mag survive sa pagkain at pangangailangan ng buong pamilya. Iyon kase ang para sa kanila na mabuti at tama dahil iyon ay nasusulat sa biblia unlike na kilala ko na mayayaman na some of them is mga Atheist. Alam kase ng Atheist na money is not the root of all evil kaya alam nila paandarin ang pera at gamitin ito para sa pamilya nila na nangangailangan.​

I do not get exactly what you want to say here but I say misuse of money is bad. Money sustains our material needs. If a person with good conscience has enough money, there is a fair chance he/she would thrive, which is good. There are some who live with less material possessions but that may just be their preference, or likely economic issues.

It is a reason why some of Atheist ayaw nila mag pa enslave sa nilalaman ng biblia o any God in bible.​

Yes, this is most likely the reason why there is a strong rejection of the biblical God who imposes human restrictions which limits their proclivity to live the way they see fit.

It is a reason why subjective ang mga theist talaga dahil meron silang personal feelings to a God. Ang mga Atheist ay wala naman personal feelings iyan to a God. Independent silang tao at objective silang tao na hindi nag rerely sa influence ng ideology ng God in bible.​

If your basis of objectivity to atheism is because it does not rely on any theistic ideology, then it is fair to say that theism is objective if it does not rely on atheistic ideology. I agree that the idea of personal God in some Christian doctrines are subjective, however it is different when you are talking about a revelation supported by scriptures with historical evidences. Whether you believe if it is true or not, it does not matter. It only indicates that there is an objective basis why Christians believe that God exists. On the other hand, atheists have not provided any objective basis of why God does not exist other than the untestable hypothesis that everything is created by some random evolutionary process by which it does not require certain intelligent design. But when you question the almost incalculable precision of how the material reality become what it is today, it does not make any sense logically how it just existed randomly out of nowhere. If I have to make sense of it then I have to recall the concept of magic in my childhood fairy tales. It now begs the question of which belief system is based on blind faith.

tama

You just affirmed my view on atheism that its morality is subjective. I appreciate it.

We are the universes way to experience it self as the show elaborated, ang nega mo naman sir, yan talaga ang conclusion mo sa quote na yun.

“We are stardust brought to life, then empowered by the universe to figure itself out—and we have only just begun.”

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

this was part of the discussion from the show startalk(correct me if I'm wrong), they implied that we are part startdust which makes us atomically identical to celestial bodies.

I do not know the show you are talking about, but the thought I laid out is how naturalists view the world. You can say poetic and lovable things about our physical connections to the cosmos but it does not change the fact that I am as meaningless and insignificant as a rock to the vastness of the material universe.