Are atheists nobler than christians?

[ShieldAxe]

If an atheist and a christian perform the same exact good deed, is not the atheist more noble in his actions? The christian has a heavenly reward as motivation. The atheist doesn't. The christian's deed is cheapened by the selfish motivation. The atheist's deed is more selfless. (All other conditions being equal).

[ShieldAxe]

Because that particular person is a good person.

Morality is a subjective term to the atheist.

I believe it is subjective to everyone. If there were absolutes there would be a lot more agreement on what they were don't you think?

It's like saying that someone has a good taste in Chardonney. In the ultimate sense of the term, why does it make any difference if someone has a good taste in Chardonney if their philosophy is based on nuclear destruction coming the day after next? Their priorities are messed up. They should be counting the seconds before doomsday--not sipping Chardonney for the best tasting wine.

I found your example illogical and inapplicable to the question at hand.

Why if doomsday is approaching should you focus on it at all (unless it can be stopped of course)? And I don't see how the atheist view relates to this example. Not knowing why the universe was created does not obviate the good deed.

[harvey1]

I believe it is subjective to everyone. If there were absolutes there would be a lot more agreement on what they were don't you think?

Morality is subjective only to a point. For example, there's not a society in the world where one can violate each and every one of the 10 commandments in front of everyone at a market and not expect at least some of those violations to be seen with disgust if televised throughout the world.

Why if doomsday is approaching should you focus on it at all (unless it can be stopped of course)?

Oh, a nuke about to destroy my city would have me thinking about something other than the taste of Chardonney, just put it that way.

And I don't see how the atheist view relates to this example. Not knowing why the universe was created does not obviate the good deed.

The deeds of humans are ultimately meaningless if we accept the atheist version of the world as the gospel truth. Infinitesimally sooner, or infinitesimally later, we'll be gone, and it will be as though we'd never been. There is no significance in a good deed in that philosophy. What is the significance of a Raptor that sniffed a blade of grass hours before the K-T asteroid hit? It has no significance at all. If atheism were shown to be right, then our actions are no more significant than that Raptor who sniffed a blade of grass hours before doomsday. It's a meaningless view. Good deeds are completely infinitesimal (zero) in their value.

[ShieldAxe]

If atheism can show that the world has mindful intent without a mind, then I could see how nihilism can be avoided. However, that's not possible since mindful intent is intent that comes from a mind. And, without mindful intent, the sender's message cannot have any real meaning. It is a random stream of raw data.

Are you implying that the theist knows what the mindful intent of the world is? How is that possible? And if they don't, then they are on the same ground as the atheist.

[McCulloch]

Rational people value ideas for which there is evidence, and the things inside and around us that make life worth living. By not putting humanity's intrests second to those of an unprovable supernatural god, atheists must appear nobler.

[harvey1]

Are you implying that the theist knows what the mindful intent of the world is? How is that possible? And if they don't, then they are on the same ground as the atheist.

No. The theist may not have any insight to the mindful intent. The difference though, is that the theist believes there is mindful intent--which when we say God exists--the theist is correct. Regardless of whatever meaning we believe the world to actually possess, the theist can only be wrong on the exact nature of the meaning, the theist cannot be wrong that the world has meaning.

Let me provide an analogy. Let's say that someone is vacuuming the carpet when an important news flash comes on. You cannot hear the news flash, but you know it has meaning. Just a few seconds before the news flash concludes, the vacuum is shut-off and you hear the last few seconds of the news. Now, you might have totally taken the news flash completely out of context because you heard the last few seconds, but nonetheless you call your friends. They too had noise in their background so they have a conflicting interpretation to the news flash. You argue and try to come up with a consistent interpretation. The news flash is a meaningful event for all of you as you seek to understand what it means.

Your credit card collectors call you, and just out of curiosity you ask them about the news flash. They too only saw the telecast, but they couldn't hear the telecast. However, they emphatically say that the news flash didn't say anything meaningful. It wasn't news, they say. For them, the news flash was a very non-meaningful event since it had nothing to do with the events of the day. They insist that the news flash still has personal meaning because the news made everybody talk about it and such, but they see nothing to absorb any meaning as it relates to their life. They go on with the conversation wanting you to pay up.

Now, in this scenario, notice it is the theists who obtained meaning from the world (news flash) even though they could only vaguely make out what the world (news) was. The atheists (credit card collectors) didn't see any meaning from the world (news flash) since they didn't believe there was any meaning to it in the first place. They held a meaningless view of the world, and therefore they continued on with their life as if it held no meaning.

[harvey1]

Rational people value ideas for which there is evidence, and the things inside and around us that make life worth living. By not putting humanity's intrests second to those of an unprovable supernatural god, atheists must appear nobler.

In my view, atheists are rejecting God, their Creator, their confident. It is really not much different than spitting in God's face. How does that make someone a noble person?

[ShieldAxe]

Are you implying that the theist knows what the mindful intent of the world is? How is that possible? And if they don't, then they are on the same ground as the atheist.

No. The theist may not have any insight to the mindful intent. The difference though, is that the theist believes there is mindful intent--which when we say God exists--the theist is correct. Regardless of whatever meaning we believe the world to actually possess, the theist can only be wrong on the exact nature of the meaning, the theist cannot be wrong that the world has meaning.

Let me provide an analogy. Let's say that someone is vacuuming the carpet when an important news flash comes on. You cannot hear the news flash, but you know it has meaning. Just a few seconds before the news flash concludes, the vacuum is shut-off and you hear the last few seconds of the news. Now, you might have totally taken the news flash completely out of context because you heard the last few seconds, but nonetheless you call your friends. They too had noise in their background so they have a conflicting interpretation to the news flash. You argue and try to come up with a consistent interpretation. The news flash is a meaningful event for all of you as you seek to understand what it means.

Your credit card collectors call you, and just out of curiosity you ask them about the news flash. They too only saw the telecast, but they couldn't hear the telecast. However, they emphatically say that the news flash didn't say anything meaningful. It wasn't news, they say. For them, the news flash was a very non-meaningful event since it had nothing to do with the events of the day. They insist that the news flash still has personal meaning because the news made everybody talk about it and such, but they see nothing to absorb any meaning as it relates to their life. They go on with the conversation wanting you to pay up.

Now, in this scenario, notice it is the theists who obtained meaning from the world (news flash) even though they could only vaguely make out what the world (news) was. The atheists (credit card collectors) didn't see any meaning from the world (news flash) since they didn't believe there was any meaning to it in the first place. They held a meaningless view of the world, and therefore they continued on with their life as if it held no meaning.

Great analogy. So you would not do anything differently in your life based on the newsflash since no one knows what it said. You would continuously try to find out what it actually said before it would affect your life as anything other than a nagging curiousity. Unless you are irrational and assume what the newsflash said and mold your actions around that. That's my point. Since you don't know what the meaning of the world is, how can it affect you meaningfully? It can't (unless you presume a meaning), therefore you forge ahead without knowing.

[ShieldAxe]

Rational people value ideas for which there is evidence, and the things inside and around us that make life worth living. By not putting humanity's intrests second to those of an unprovable supernatural god, atheists must appear nobler.

In my view, atheists are rejecting God, their Creator, their confident. It is really not much different than spitting in God's face. How does that make someone a noble person?

Harvey that's a bit silly don't you think? You think someone who rejects your god is ignoble? I think belief in god is a terrible measure of nobility. Actions and their intent are a much better measure.

[harvey1]

Harvey that's a bit silly don't you think? You think someone who rejects your god is ignoble? I think belief in god is a terrible measure of nobility. Actions and their intent are a much better measure.

Well, I would much rather live next to a peaceful atheist than a vengeful theist, if that's what you mean. However, I think I'm more likely to live next to a peaceful atheist who's kids shave their heads and shoots bee bees at my windows. Like I said before, it's not the atheist that concerns me, it has always been their kids that concern me. So, I have to weigh those considerations in any evaluation of an atheists righteousness. (Although, I do think there are righteous atheists. Perhaps QED is such a person.)

[ShieldAxe]

I believe it is subjective to everyone. If there were absolutes there would be a lot more agreement on what they were don't you think?

Morality is subjective only to a point. For example, there's not a society in the world where one can violate each and every one of the 10 commandments in front of everyone at a market and not expect at least some of those violations to be seen with disgust if televised throughout the world.

Depends on the circumstances and people involved, etc. This should be or already was a thread of its own so i'll leave it at that.

Why if doomsday is approaching should you focus on it at all (unless it can be stopped of course)?

Oh, a nuke about to destroy my city would have me thinking about something other than the taste of Chardonney, just put it that way.

And I don't see how the atheist view relates to this example. Not knowing why the universe was created does not obviate the good deed.

The deeds of humans are ultimately meaningless if we accept the atheist version of the world as the gospel truth. Infinitesimally sooner, or infinitesimally later, we'll be gone, and it will be as though we'd never been. There is no significance in a good deed in that philosophy. What is the significance of a Raptor that sniffed a blade of grass hours before the K-T asteroid hit? It has no significance at all. If atheism were shown to be right, then our actions are no more significant than that Raptor who sniffed a blade of grass hours before doomsday. It's a meaningless view. Good deeds are completely infinitesimal (zero) in their value.

I think I'm grasping your message here. Are you saying that since atheists don't believe in an afterlife, they should think this life is pointless? So life is meaningless without an afterlife? That makes no sense whatsoever to me.