/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13575076]

BASED DAWKINS

[Anonymous No.13575107]

[Anonymous No.13575113]

>>13575107
This is probably my favorite image from /lit/, along with this

[Anonymous No.13575136]

>>13575076
I thank God this man got to live a long and healthy life, his legacy will resonate for generations

[Anonymous No.13575795]

>>13575076
What does he replace it with? Leaving a God-shaped hole in our youth will only bring about more suffering and other assorted degeneracy.

[Anonymous No.13575806]

>>13575107
Einstein's quote is basically pic related. Pretty cool.

[Anonymous No.13575816]

>>13575107
based schrodinger

[Anonymous No.13575885]

>>13575806
Vagabond?

[Anonymous No.13575903]

>>13575885
Yeah.

[Anonymous No.13575958]

>>13575795
The religion of Progressivism.

[Anonymous No.13576209]

>>13575076
Dawkins can only make buck off of those who don't know any better.

[Anonymous No.13576217]

>>13575076
I've met atheist hedonists women who would say something like "lol you must be fun at parties" if you challenge them at all and they tend to only have read neil degrasse tyson and richard dawkins at best.

Dont waste your time on this. Life is short. Read meister eckhart.

[Anonymous No.13576256]

Every day, every darn day, atheists and christians compete fiercely with eachother to try get the title of world's most stupid belief system.

They do a good job too, my opinion of which one is stupider bounces back and forth from day to day. I may have to start considering them as one group, like I do with Football. All football teams are stupid. I don't ever ask myself who's dumber, the brooklyn stampeders or the New York Generic Footballers. (I'm not very familiar with team names, I don't watch sports)

[Anonymous No.13576266]

>>13576256
>being this much of a centrist

[Anonymous No.13576276]

>>13576266
>being a binary thinker

[Anonymous No.13576280]

>>13576276
for a centrist you like normie anime

[Anonymous No.13576282]

>>13575107
fpbp

all these nu-atheists are irrelevant old miseducated farts, and the zoomers who worship them today will be the Gen X retards of tomorrow. there is forming now a groundswell of reactionary philosophic sentiment that regards metaphysics as worthy, something these tired old dinosaurs never learned because they were too busy thinking about politics and appearances.

[Anonymous No.13576292]

>>13576266
>should I voraciously believe in god with no evidence because the bible said so?
>or should I fiercely believe god isn't real because some book said so?

uh yeah real great options

[Anonymous No.13576295]

>>13575076
Is it 2011 again?

[Anonymous No.13576298]

>>13576292
>because the bible said so?
wrong. siri, explain to this brainlet about Aristotle.

[Anonymous No.13576299]

>>13575076
God isn't even taught to children anymore so what's the point of this

[Anonymous No.13576329]

>>13576299
the point is destroying any semblance of a moral order completely. the point is capitalism and centralizing control. if all social and sexual norms are "glass ceilings" and "discrimination" that should be destroyed, and morals aren't allowed to exist, then where should the average serf in our oligarchic feudalism find his guide in life? who will inform his genius, the voice of his conscience? I'll tell you: his employer, or his best interest as regards personal income, which in these social media days includes what he thinks or dares to say. And then 1984 will have been fulfilled.

[Anonymous No.13576344]

>>13575795
Why do you feel having god is even slightly necessary. only the unintelligent require the threat of the supernatural to live a meaningful, virtuous life.

[Anonymous No.13576348]

>>13576344
>he doesn't know there is an absolute morality
Alright bigshot. If you say one can be virtuous without God, then this should be a secular question you can answer:

Can you tell me where virtue comes from? Can you even say what it is?

[Anonymous No.13576356]

>>13576348
Yourself.

And it's virtue

[Anonymous No.13576358]

Daily reminder it has been empirically proven religiosity stifles scientific innovation.

https://www.princeton.edu/~rbenabou/papers/Religion%20December%201g_snd.pdf
http://www.nber.org/papers/w21052.pdf

Daily reminder the overwhelming majority of leading scientists are atheist

https://www.nature.com/articles/28478

Daily reminder religious people are less intelligent according to dozens of studies.

http://diyhpl.us/~nmz787/pdf/The_Relation_Between_Intelligence_and_Religiosity__A_Meta-Analysis_and_Some_Proposed_Explanations.pdf

Daily reminder religious people are less educated

https://www.economist.com/news/international/21623712-how-education-makes-people-less-religiousand-less-superstitious-too-falling-away

Religious people are literally a lesser breed of human

[Anonymous No.13576364]

>>13576358
>he thinks being anti-religious suddenly makes him a smartboi
Kek

[Anonymous No.13576376]

I already have an answer, and I'll share it, but I want to hear your answer as well. Here it is:

Virtue is that which is good. Good to whom and for whom? Man of course. Virtue is not applied to animals or the inanimate except by anthropomorphising them.

So where does good come from? Good comes from God. God is the Form of the Good, as we know from starting with the Greeks.

Any of our first-world social norms that enforce virtue as something praiseworthy are simply vestiges of a religious social order that is very nearly completely dismantled. Virtue is still sought by women for its romance and by all for its utility under capitalism -- early bird gets the worm, honest is best policy, a fit appearance is a better impression than being a slob -- but these norms do not acknowledge their origins. They are praised for themselves, for their earning or promotion power. But the source of their authority is no longer respected. If they were not useful under capitalism, I promise you... I promise you... they would be dropped and you would be living in a first-world that more likely resembles a Chinese sweatshop where virtue is derived from your lord and how much money you can earn for him.

[Anonymous No.13576379]

>>13576348
Why should one base their morals on something that cannot be proven to exist? Its completely unreasonable. Besides anybody who needs god to be a good person is a psychopath.

[Anonymous No.13576381]

>>13576356
>virtue is yourself, or comes from yourself
wow that's some good reasoning there I'm glad you dropped into the thread

[Anonymous No.13576386]

>>13576295
>Is it 2011 again?
I think you mean 2008, senpai.
>>13575076
Curious this would deal almost exclusively with Christianity.
Really makes you think.

[Anonymous No.13576391]

>>13576282
>there is forming now a groundswell of reactionary philosophic sentiment
no there isn't retard. get off 4chan

[Anonymous No.13576392]

>>13576381
where would virtue come from if it isn't yourself?

[Anonymous No.13576398]

>>13576379
God has been proven. Read Feser.

>It's completely unreasonable.
Divine metaphysics does depend on a faith in something unobserved, but not unknown. And definitely not unreasonable. You call it that because you haven't actually figured it yet and take it on faith from others.

>Besides anybody who needs god to be a good person is a psychopath.
Virtuous people don't need God to keep them in line. They know they are worms, unworthy, and they WANT to be good. They depend on him wholly, not to keep them from breaking laws or doing whatever they want, but for the most excellent virtues of faith and charity and hope. We want to be good, but our bodies and actions are imperfect.

[Anonymous No.13576400]

>>13576392
read Plato. seriously. you shouldn't even be in this argument if you don't know about the form of the good.

[Anonymous No.13576403]

>>13576398
>God has been proven.
no he hasnt

[Anonymous No.13576409]

>>13576400
sorry, I don't need books to tell me what to think. In fact, anyone who does isn't really thinking, they're just being brainwashed.

[Anonymous No.13576412]

>>13575795
Probably evolution that what they want to be their God.

[Anonymous No.13576419]

>>13576376
>God is the Form of the Good
thats why he created evil huh

[Anonymous No.13576431]

>>13576419

[Anonymous No.13576447]

>>13576419
If you need that translated:

He is saying that goodness is the natural disposition of all things. Genesis bears this out, when God saw his creation and said it was good. As does Plato, in Republic, when he derived the form of the Good.

Humans, being created beings and fallen besides, are capable of failing to fulfill that disposition completely. This is how good can cause evil.

[Anonymous No.13576450]

how childish and ignorant does one have to be to think that God = good and therefore because the world isn't 100% good then God can't be.

seriously.

[Anonymous No.13576454]

>>13576358
In general, more niche religions have higher average IQs. Jews, Episcopalians, etc. Atheists used to be smart but the average IQ if an atheist has plummeted 20 points over the last few decades as hoardes of midwits in typical midwit fashion believe it will increase their mediocre intellect.
By the mid 21st century in the West the religious minority will regularly trounce the atheist majority and the process will start to reverse again.

[Anonymous No.13576457]

not only that but "100% good according to my (mortal) judgment"

yikes. truly toddler level understanding.

[Anonymous No.13576472]

>>13576419
Evil is a privation of good, i.e. is not ontologically real in itself

[Anonymous No.13576497]

>>13576358
>Daily reminder religious people are less intelligent according to dozens of studies.
This might interest you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrsQY9Bw-kk

[Anonymous No.13576501]

>>13575076
Dawkins is poisoning the minds of youths, his books should be censored.

[Anonymous No.13576513]

>>13576501
based and redpilled, all sins are pardonable except blasphemy against the Holy Spirit

Dawkins should be whipped in the stocks at midday and excommunicated

[Anonymous No.13576533]

>>13575806
No, the comparison was between observing 1000 trees and still not seeing the forest. It is not an analogy of tunnel vision or failing to see the bigger picture, but one of understanding the deeper meaning behind the observation itself. These concepts only share in their observation of trees. They are not basically the same, they are significantly different.

[Anonymous No.13576538]

>>13576513
>all sins are pardonable except blasphemy against the Holy Spirit
I went through and edgy atheist phase before growing out of it in college. How fucked am I?

[Anonymous No.13576545]

>>13576538
I don't know. Ask a priest. I think how fucked you are depends on how truly contrite you are. I.e., how much sorrow you feel for having actually offended God and perhaps even misled others away from him.

[Anonymous No.13576571]

>>13576538
You are not fucked, God forgives all who ask.

[Anonymous No.13576592]

>>13576571
Protestant garbage. Luther's demonic horde may have been about sola scriptura once, but now they just make shit up. Listen to the words of Jesus Christ.

Matthew 12:31
>And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

[Anonymous No.13576595]

>>13575107
When those scientists were alive you couldn't even be friends with a black person, much less admit you didn't believe in god.

[Anonymous No.13576598]

>>13576595
Is there anything stupider than believing the world was stupid the last few hundred years

[Anonymous No.13576628]

>>13576592
Read parable of the lost sun, see peters multiple transgressions aginst even Jesus. And so on. Saying someone is doomed is completely anti Christian. As long as you repent an atone for you actions you can be saved.

[Anonymous No.13576633]

>>13576628
you mean the prodigal son? and

>hey yeah I know those are the words of Jesus but like he contradicts himself over here and over there because I said so

[Anonymous No.13576644]

>>13576633
Yea.
What are you even trying to say there.

[Anonymous No.13576646]

>>13576538
talk to a priest and read about the distinction between a formal sin vs a material sin.

[Anonymous No.13576648]

>>13575076
Dawkins going for 10/10.

[Anonymous No.13576656]

>>13576648
You don't need God to have a purpose. Even if you are a believer you're still the one that's supposed to the care of your life, not God.

[Anonymous No.13576660]

>>13576644
I'm saying you're a brainlet. Peter's transgressions against Jesus were not transgressions against the Holy Spirit. The parable of the prodigal son is about reconciliation and forgiveness between family, men, mortals.

[Anonymous No.13576668]

>>13576648

>BAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWW THE UNIVERSE OWES ME A PURPOSE BAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWW
>WAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH IF MAGIC SKY MAN ISN'T REAL THEN NOTHING MATTERS WAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH

Grow the fuck up

[Anonymous No.13576669]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVE4UXZE7XY
>Most people in Western societies now are so dumbed down and so degraded by almost every aspect of life that nearly any philosophical speculation about life is indeterminate and almost completely meaningless. It’s a channel which they never turn on.
>[...] the society that we have now is the result of the fact that every politician in all of the parties represented in the major assemblies, including radical Right parties essentially of a populist hue actually, believe in Homo economicus. They believe that man is an economic integer and nothing else matters. Immigration? It’s good for the economy, don’t you know? Everything is based upon the freeing of people from prior forms of alleged servitude due to economic enhancement.
>What is life really about? Is life really about shopping? Is life really about making more and more money? Is life really about eating yourself to death? These are the sorts of things that Evola’s viewpoint pushes before people, which is why the majority will always push it away.
>I personally believe, as with Evola, that people are hardwired for faith. Maybe 1 in 10 have no need for it at all. But for most people it’s a requirement. The depth of the belief, the knowledge that goes into the belief, the system they come out of, is slightly incidental. But man needs emotional truths.
>George Bernard Shaw once said, “The one man with belief is worth 50 men who don’t have any” Philosophical, quasi-philosophical, religious, semi-religious, philosophical melded into religious and vice versa. Without the belief that there’s something above you and before you and beyond you and behind you that leads to that which is above you, we seem as a species content to slough down into the lowest common denominator, the lowest possible level.

[Anonymous No.13576677]

>>13576398

>God has been proven. Read Feser.
>language games proving anything

Pathetic. You godfags should just give up and admit to be the delusional fucktards you are

[Anonymous No.13576681]

>>13576677
wowza good argument guess i'm btfo

[Anonymous No.13576685]

It makes sense that he'd aim it at younger readers, given that his arguments against theology are at about the level of a 13 year old.

[Anonymous No.13576686]

>>13576595
You Live in a fantasy world.

[Anonymous No.13576688]

>>13576681

There's nothing to BTFO of. You offered nothing but pathetic language games. You don't offer any evidence, any results, anything of substance, and neither does Feser, or Aquinas, or any of the other sophist muppets you worship. All they try to do is define God into existence. Imagine worshipping a concept so pathetic that you actually need to wish it into existence for it to work. Truly bottom of the barrel, absolutely pathetic

[Anonymous No.13576689]

You can't argue about God, in any denomination, with a atheist because they'll never admit that hierarchy has a moral component. A mercenary is lower than a soldier; a soldier is lower than a warrior. When a pack of wolves attack a herd of deer, the herd scatters thinking only of itself, but the wolves will work as a unit to bring the prey down, so even in nature there is a moral component.

However, we have (as a species) totally disregarded this, atheists more than any others. Because if you accept that hierarchy is natural and good, you will eventually get to the point where no higher power and morality is possible, maybe only impossible, like the terminal velocity of a falling object where it can not go any faster.

[Anonymous No.13576692]

>>13576688
enjoy Purgatory

[Anonymous No.13576695]

>>13575113
Whenever I see this image I think it would make more sense and would be more funny if the second and third one were switched

[Anonymous No.13576699]

>>13576692

>enjoy my empty threats

I won't, I'll be dead by then, nice try though

[Anonymous No.13576702]

>>13576266
Don't conflate centrism with this moron's perspective.

[Anonymous No.13576704]

>>13576660
>The parable of the prodigal son is about reconciliation and forgiveness between family, men, mortals.
Wtf man how can you call others brainlet when you don't understand the most aright forward parabal In The Bible?
https://www.goarch.org/prodigalson
Pls read this.
I
Wtf next you are gone tell me the parabal about the vineyard is not against the Jews

[Anonymous No.13576705]

>>13576689

>they'll never admit that hierarchy has a moral component

That's because it doesn't, hierarchies are mostly based around utility and dumb luck. If a hierarchical system loses its utility, it will simply fall in disrepair, in spite of whatever Platonic fantasy you think it's supported by

[Anonymous No.13576714]

>>13576705
So the wolves that work as a single unit for their own betterment as a group are morally equal to the deer that run away and don't care what happens as long as they're not the slowest one?

And do you think that the "falling in to disrepair" has something to do with a failing moral standard? And if not, why not?

[Anonymous No.13576721]

>>13576364
>he thinks being anti-religious suddenly makes him a smartboi
On the contrary, he's saying being a smartboi makes one less likely to be religious. Quite different.

[Anonymous No.13576732]

>>13576714

I'd like to see an actual study on that pack of wolves. Sounds like you just pulled that one straight out of your ass.

And no, disrepair usually has very little to do with moral standards. Stalin beat Hitler in the second world war, but I wouldn't call him more moral than Hitler

[Anonymous No.13576750]

>>13576732
>I'd like to see an actual study on that pack of wolves.
What do you mean "that pack", and what do you mean "study"? Do I need to go into the wilderness, find the one pack that can be properly aligned with my analogy, and then what? Give them that test where you show people's faces and measure the emotional response?

Also, by the time both Hitler and Stalin came on the scene the moral hierarchy was totally destroyed as a result of WW1 which almost totally eradicated the aristocratic class and they took Noblesse Oblige to their graves with them. Once you remove the moral component a bloody ruler like Hitler and Stalin, and the wars that result, is the only possible outcome. Joseph de Maistre was saying this even during the French Revolution.

[Anonymous No.13576770]

>>13576668
I think you’re the childish one here. A life without purpose is not worth living.

[Anonymous No.13576787]

>>13575107
What’s wrong with those Dawkins quotes?

[Anonymous No.13576793]

lmao you're all a bunch of fucking idiots

[Anonymous No.13576845]

>>13576750

I mean an actual study, instead of a bullshit anecdote you just pulled from your ass

[Anonymous No.13576854]

>>13576845
You're asking for "a study" that shows that wolves hunt in packs to bring down separated members of a herd abandoned by the rest to its fate?

[Anonymous No.13576868]

>>13576688
I think i saw the Sophist Muppets on the second stage at Glastonbury some time in the 90s

[Anonymous No.13576882]

>>13575076

Considering how inane his previous work is, what would "bringing it to younger readers" mean? Emojis?

[Anonymous No.13577292]

>>13576344
There is a lot of unintelligent folks though.

[Anonymous No.13577297]

https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2007/09/how-dawkins-got-pwned-part-1/

[Anonymous No.13577342]

>>13576854
I’d call it a story rather than an anecdote.

[Anonymous No.13577366]

Why is he still doing this? Is he still laboring under the delusion that it is the highly religious who are guiding our society and making everything so darn terrible? That if only people didn't still share a few common myths, our society would be a little better?

His side won. Hardly any one in the west believes in anything so grand anymore. They still of course have their blind faith in a few things, maybe. Democracy, equality, silly things like that; the dominant ideology of our time is the sort of amoral liberalism coupled with Progressive notions of justice and history which is his ideological primordial muck. Only bizarre foreigners and people who never go to a university have escaped this process whereby any notion approaching conflicting with the Program is quietly eliminated and replaced with other equally ridiculous ideals more congenial to massified life under modern industrial capitalism.

>>13576648
Based. Dawkins is just a snowflake in an avalanche though. He is a cheerleader for something which is as inevitable as the the sun rising in the morning.

[Anonymous No.13577381]

>>13576598
Yes; believing it was stupid the last 2000 years.

[Anonymous No.13577546]

>>13576669
feck off with this fascist bullshit

[Anonymous No.13577571]

all you need to know about metaphysics can be found in the garden of earthly delights. remember bois, hell is real

[Anonymous No.13577578]

>>13576669
This is a pretty based video. I'm not into nationalism at all but this guy is a pretty good and effective speaker.

[Anonymous No.13577586]

>>13577571
let me correct you:

all you need to know about metaphysics can be found in art

[Anonymous No.13577600]

>>13576770
You have so much Abrahamic cum in your head that you wholeheartedly believe you must have particular function to reach fulfillment.

[Anonymous No.13578001]

>>13577292
>>13576344

This. You need at least a 130+ IQ and light autism to even deeply contemplate all morality at that formative age much less take the time to read and educate yourself in this.

[Anonymous No.13578011]

>>13576595
Einstein famously went to black colleges and gave classes there to protest racism.

Marx and Nietzche were already dead.

Please read more before humiliating yourself by sharing your ill-formed opinions.

[Anonymous No.13578107]

>>13575107
dawkins and krauss are not mere pop scientists like the other two. they have both been influential

[Anonymous No.13578272]

>>13576854
You mean wolves fight against each other to steal each others' food while deer bravely sacrifice their lives to save the rest of the herd?

How the fuck even a retard can think animals are moral actors is beyond me. And ascribing their own human morality to them on top of that.

[Anonymous No.13579163]

>>13577578
Jonathan Bowden was amazing. Watch some of his videos on writers like Wyndham Lewis. His best is the Punch and Judy one, but that's a bit "much" for an introduction.

[Anonymous No.13579573]

>>13576409
>reading means you're brainwashed
Based fedora