Go to bottom

is there enough evidence that Richard Dawkins exists?

category: general [glöplog]
What's lacking from this discussion is the fearless embrace of existentialism. Fear and self-doubt are the only things going for afterlife-based moral systems. If you are afraid and stupid, you cannot avoid being drawn in.
We know that there is no deity-defined good, and we've a limited existence. This means we create meaning. For real, in the only way that actually has any relevance. This is actually a fantastic thing! We're not trapped!
It took me several panic attacks to find my way through this, but it's a wonderful thing to be free of other people's concepts.
added on the 2009-01-24 11:49:22 by GbND GbND
that is like the worst possible post to read early in the morning
added on the 2009-01-24 12:34:27 by forestcre forestcre
@GbND: You're on the right way. Some people thinks that atheism or agnosticism leads to nihilism (they are wrong) but they are missing the whole point of being rational and objetive. :)

BB Image
added on the 2009-01-24 12:43:25 by ham ham
BB Image
added on the 2009-01-24 12:51:51 by Optimus Optimus
BB Image
added on the 2009-01-24 13:00:45 by ham ham
i don't really mind you criticizing my drinking. i know i need to quit and i have before.

That was not my intention. In fact, I didn't even expect to be taken seriously...I'm well aware that I need to take responsibility for my actions. Pushing that responsibility onto someone else is just...well...irresponsible.

and if you would like me to take responsibility for my actions. then how i am sorry i got drunk and got emotional about it and upset you. i'd delete it for you if there was an option on here to do that.

I didn't know you had to apologize for getting emotional in a thread like this ;-)

Anyway, you didn't upset me, I did get drunk yesterday, but I don't think I'm going to hell for it (one of the nice things with being an atheist is that hell is pretty much a non-issue.)
added on the 2009-01-24 17:01:19 by how how
Your fantasy metropolis (although it looks pretty on the surface), is a festering sewer of injustice and hypocracy and would lead to complete nihilism for its population.

The idea is not to empower and enlighten people by enabling them to follow their own rational thought processes so that they can create their own sense of purpose - I can assure you! You may be a totally "reasonable" person, not infected by religious dogma, yet STILL your reasoning will constantly be at odds with a rational system which doesn't allow freedom to make personal decisions. Under the excuse of scientific "reason", the technocratic State will decide exactly what is "reasonable" - not YOU. They will design their very own "IF xyz, THEN abc" constructs for every area of your daily life - from the day they allow you to be born to the day they decide you should die. Ultimately, everthing you do will be based on their logic not yours. How is that any different than a theocratic religious dictatorship?

The proposal of a society based purely on Science, databases, knowledge and logical reasoning is NOTHING but an excuse for a carceral totalitarian state and it is totally void of any humanity. You will become a shallow annihilted shell, with no meaningful purpose. Most people will be far more controllable and easy to manipulate because their sense of self-worth will have been shattered. Their purpose will actually become the State and its reasoning. There will no bonding, care for your neighbour and what happens to him because you will not see other people as human. It's pure nihilism for us and total power for the technocrats.

There are no gods. You have no soul. Life is a set of chemical reactions. Everything you experience is nothing more than your sensors working together to create a single state of being.

You can see the gradual dehumanisation of us all today in our changing culture (thanks to people like Dawkins and extremist athiests) and it's going to get worse.

added on the 2009-01-24 18:01:28 by button button
I guess the above was for ham :)
added on the 2009-01-24 18:02:11 by button button
golly wheezers ladies and gentlemen! a lazy day with more than enough posts from both sides without rebuttal to guarantee a vigorous after dinner debate!

as we edge into prime time posting hour, will mainland continental posters have some fresh insight? will how and whoever kiss and make up, will the bravado of last night fall under more careful scrutiny? and perhaps most importantly ladies and gentlemen, how was Optimus' day?!

the crepes, armer ritters, meatballs and polenta are on the table ladies and gentlemen as europe edges into round one while those ever laconic brits scratch their tummies and give their yorkshire puddings a poke. this thread is god's very own schroediger box, giddy and exciting stuff

stay tuned....
added on the 2009-01-24 18:24:28 by forestcre forestcre
@megazoom!: You're quoting artanis, not me. And, anyway, I am a democrat (a proponent of democracy), not a technocrat as you seems to believe.

BB Image
added on the 2009-01-24 18:25:20 by ham ham
BB Image
added on the 2009-01-24 18:28:54 by forestcre forestcre
there is no point, that's the point! :) i love humans!

BB Image

added on the 2009-01-24 18:37:01 by button button
megazoom: where exactly did you get the idea that Dawkins is an anti-human Technocrat? I've always thought of him as a secular humanist.
added on the 2009-01-24 19:20:30 by K-man K-man
this thread does not exist
added on the 2009-01-24 19:21:53 by jazzman jazzman
Reality is that which doesn't go away when you stop believing in it ;x
added on the 2009-01-24 19:25:06 by hexen hexen
Richard Dawkins doesn't go away, even after you call the police
added on the 2009-01-24 19:28:28 by forestcre forestcre
Forestcre is like Mohammed Bouyeri. Completely obsessed with one person he doesn't agree with. Hope you don't go as far as Bouyeri though.
Rob read the opening post. you're taking it too seriously
added on the 2009-01-24 19:56:23 by forestcre forestcre
Rob i only have this one username - believe it or not all those very exciting posts by other people

1. weren't by me
2. were by other people

if you can separate the two in your mind then we can continue with the flamin' and a'hooting lootin and rootin tootin
added on the 2009-01-24 19:57:51 by forestcre forestcre
i don't think anyone is taking it seriously. just airing thoughts, that's not a crime. although wrong-thought which doesn't conform to logic, could well soon be a crime.

oh, here we go again.....go away thread!!! :)
added on the 2009-01-24 20:03:17 by button button
Ok :)

BB Image
for those of you who haven't read it:


recommended reading.

added on the 2009-01-24 20:06:41 by prm prm
rob :)
added on the 2009-01-24 20:07:35 by havoc havoc
BB Image

Here is a proof.

Richard D. :)
added on the 2009-01-24 22:23:01 by Szczupaq Szczupaq


Go to top