and as you may have noticed, bugs, mice and cows and other creatures have distinct abilities and limitations. We Humans have big brains and can stand upright, which allow us to do all sorts of things other animals can't. We can speak and write and invent and farm and study science and make up stories. Our ability to tell stories came before learning advanced science, but science is catching up. Now we can more easily recognize the difference between stories (myth and fiction) and fact, but religion - a system based on myth, in the absence of science) still has indue influence on many people. thankfully that is waning. |
You're right. They may feel that way. We have laws in place to protect people and animals against the most egregious harms. And for the rest of it - we can only live the way we feel is right, try to be around others who share our values, and try to convince those who disagree. There is no hammer that I can wield to make other people think that animals are worthy of moral consideration. I can only try to convince them. But, no, there's no higher power I can invoke to try to convince them. I have to use reason and rhetoric. It may not work. |
The fact that I feel the need to for some immutable objective moral code that does not depend on anything or anyone but it is simply the TRUTH is something that I just feel. As a child, I took for granted that such a thing existed. Growing up I realized that there is no proof that such a thing really does exist, everything and anything can be doubted, including the statement "there is no absolute truth". However, I don't think anyone can really live a normal and happy life based on such an all-doubting attitude. If someone punches me in the face for no reason, I will feel that is wrong wrong wrong absolutely wrong, no matter how much "philosophy" tells me that really that is not the case. But rationally, I can't justify that. To take what OP said as an example, let's say the code is "if it hurts someone is bad, if it makes them happy, good". Well, Sayz who? Where did you get that from? How do you know that is the real thing? It seems to me that believing that is "the code" is kind of a leap of faith. So I find my position incoherent if I say I don't believe in God because there is no proof, but I believe that this is the "code" to live by...since I have no proof for that either. |
For clarification, belief in:
- God - Soul - Afterlife Need not to go together. Ancient Israelites believed in a monotheistic God but had no expectations of an afterlife for a long part of their history. The idea or soul/afterlife was sort of imported from Hellenistic culture, and it is a relatively late development in the Bible (first mention probably in Daniel). |
Why would you try to convince someone to think like you? |
This is really getting off topic - but there are all sorts of reasons I might try to convince someone to think like me. One big one for me is that I care a lot about animals, and I am troubled by norms that allow for, say, treating farm animals badly. I'd like to see a cultural consensus grow that pigs and cows deserve decent lives, even if ultimately they will be killed for food. I guess basically, I'd like to minimize pain and suffering in the world, and that takes convincing. I'm not out proselytizing to friends about this, if that's what you're imagining. I work in this field. |
|
Whoops, screwed up the quoting in above post But you do have supporting proof of your "code". You have lots of actual data to drawn from as your proof. You can witness someone being bunched/hurt and see the results. You yourself may have been bunched or bunched someone and can relate/draw from those feelings. Living life itself forms and defines your code according to your life experiences. |
For the record, the triple blind study of 1802 patients that sought to determine whether intercessory prayer influenced recovery after coronary artery bypass graft surgery showed that "the knowledge of being prayed for was associated with a slightly but significantly higher rate of postsurgical complications." |
+1 from New Poster (NP?) The beauty of being an atheist is that we aren't limited to the ethics of one religious tradition. We can learn from thousands of years of human history and pick the best ideas that have been discovered/created? so far. For most of us humans we long to find happiness and a sense of purpose. From the Mennonites/Amish, I've learned the joy of a less materialistic lifestyle and from Eastern thought the contentment found in solidarity. From my Evangelical Christian parents, I learned to have fun getting caught up in the emotion of music, and from my Hindu friends, I've learned to respect and appreciate nature. I could go on. To the hurting person on here who thinks that a human is of negative value, I can see their point. Overpopulation is a growing issue, and there are way too many people now who think indiscriminate consumption is the path to happiness. Our world and grandchildren desperately need more conscientious people who work to improve the health and fertility of soil, instead of covering the land with more asphalt, pollution, and big-box stores. Good humans give back to nature more than they take. This is how I seek to derive my value and self-worth; permaculture. |
Yes. You got it. That's exactly what it means. Everything to extremes, nothing in moderation, no balancing of needs and wants. |
I don't know why I keep responding to you. Probably because I am procrastinating. I do not eat meat, personally, but I am fine if other people do. I'd like to see the factory farming system changed so that fewer animals are eaten and those who are raised for meat are treated better during their lives. That's my set of values. I am also fine with hunting of animals like deer, turkeys, etc. - those who would likely overpopulate if their populations weren't kept down. Seems to me that if more meat eaters hunted and killed their own food, that'd be better for everyone (except the individual deer who are killed). But, look, I wear leather, and I don't think too hard about where it comes from. I go to the zoo. I'm not totally consistent, either. |
Specifically on the issue of the blind study about effectiveness of prayer:
Radio, TV, cell phones, lasers, microwaves, etc allow transmission of sound, light, heat, etc in ways that would probably once have seemed a miracle. Why does one need to believe in God to accept the posssiblility that the combined concentration of many people, or even just one, might actually have a physical effect? As a scientific principle, I think it is fundamental to accept "I don't know why" as a step on the way to knowlege. Even if you believe there must be a purpose to life, does it follow that we know that purpose? |
If I were an atheist and I kill you for your possessions is there any reason I should feel guilty? |
Look, someone - you? - keeps asking this same question in the same way, over and over. Do YOU think there is anything wrong about killing a person, beyond because religion tells you it's wrong? Or do you think the only thing that makes killing wrong is that you're told not to in the bible? If the latter, then, 1. hot damn!, and 2. I hope you would still choose not to kill, because it's against the law, and for other reasons. But it also sounds like you might have some sociopathic tendencies. Atheists aren't the same as sociopaths. |