/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.541911]

since /lit/ seems to also be /philosophy/, what "religion" are you and why?

[Anonymous No.541913]

I worship cock

[Anonymous No.541914]

I worship his cock as well.

[Anonymous No.541915]

Literature
Philosophy
Religion

Philosophy has a place on /lit/ , but keep religon on /b/ .

[Anonymous No.541918]

>>541914
>>541913

I worship these guys' cocks while they worship cock.

[Anonymous No.541920]

>>541915
>implying religion != philosophy

[Anonymous No.541925]

Taoist. My natural philosophical stance is quite similar to that of the Taoist stance, so it is what I claim.

[Anonymous No.541927]

>>541911
None, but I'm a nihilist. Also act utilitarian.

[Anonymous No.541928]

Theravada Buddhist for the most part.

[Anonymous No.541937]

>>541911
Militant godless. Raised in a western buddhist cultural context. (Fucking hippy parents).

[Anonymous No.541939]

Atheist.

[Anonymous No.541940]

Non practicing pagan. I'm talking mainly about life philosophy and values of men of antiquity, not some modern neopaganism which has in fact nothing to do with the real thing, because it's based on warped, christian point of view of ancient religion.

[Anonymous No.541941]

Atheist, though I don't push my belief upon other people.

My moral code could be described as Chaotic Good.

[Anonymous No.541942]

I'm an atheist who lives by Aristotelian ethics.

[Anonymous No.541950]

>>541920
>implying

Atheist

[Anonymous No.541952]

Protip: Atheism isn't a religion.

Also, inb4 people improperly labeling themselves as "agnostic."

[Anonymous No.541953]

Christian
Denomination: Independant

[Anonymous No.541957]

>>541925
I would have had more respect for you if you were a evangelical christian , that eastern stuff is a stupid crossbreed of philosophy and religion .

[Anonymous No.541968]

>>541957

>a stupid crossbreed of philosophy and religion .

False dichotomy is false.

[Anonymous No.541978]

None.

I'm an atheist, so I'm 'no' religion.

[Anonymous No.541985]

>>541957

If you say so.

"When a fool hears of the Tao,
he laughs at it.
If he didn't laugh, it wouldn't be the Tao."

[Anonymous No.541990]

Agnostic atheist here.

[Anonymous No.541994]

Militant atheist. I believe that organized religion is a danger to the advance of mankind as a whole, thus we must oppose it forcefully. Dogmatic faith in anything but nothing is idiotic.

[Anonymous No.541998]

Muslim. Sunni, if you want details. None of that fun Sufi stuff.

I'm quite lax on the actual practicing part. I try to refrain from the big no-nos, and essentially I do believe in Islam.

[Anonymous No.542004]

>>541998

do you blow up things with your own body?

[Anonymous No.542005]

>>541998

>Lax in practicing

Seems like we got a Khafir on our hands, boys. Ready the stones.

[Anonymous No.542006]

>>541998
I like Muslisms for the fact that they know where woman's place is.

[Anonymous No.542008]

Zen Transcendentalist

[Anonymous No.542016]

I worship Satan.

>>>{HAIL SATAN, MY DARK LORD AND MASTER.}<<<

[Anonymous No.542017]

>>542008

If I chill out in just the right way, I am suddenly in paradise.

[Anonymous No.542018]

>>542004
Only if I really have to.

>>542005
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if someone called me a 'Khafir'. I struggle with my faith in general, but I won't compromise on it either because I do "believe". I am stuck, guys.

[Anonymous No.542019]

>>542016

Splendid! Which version of Satan do you worship?

[Anonymous No.542020]

>>542019

The fucking bad ass one, dude!

[Anonymous No.542024]

>>542020

[Anonymous No.542026]

>>542018

Just be you, bro. The Quran is pretty clear that if you are fucking up really bad than Allah will come down and destroy your ass personally. I don't know what bug flew up the collective Islamic ass to think they should be making the decision on who dies and gets smacked around when they are supposed to be kind and merciful pretty much 24/7.

[Anonymous No.542030]

>>542020

Baphomet then? Dude is pretty kick ass for a deity. Like a god of infinite keggars and orgies and shit.

[Anonymous No.542031]

I have no religion.

[Anonymous No.542053]

>>542016
The very fact I even facilitate a board where people have pictures like this stored on their computer make me question my mental state.

[Anonymous No.542068]

Nonreligious

[Anonymous No.542078]

I'm a follower of Dudeism.

[Anonymous No.542079]

Raised Catholic, but never confirmed. No religion right now. I try to live a good life though, no religion is not a reason to do wrong.

[Anonymous No.542082]

Atheist because spouting evolutionary theory gets me laid. YEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHH

[Anonymous No.542083]

>>542068
My friends Bichon got a chunk of her tongue bit off by a snapping turtle two days ago. That picture reminded me of it.

[Anonymous No.542084]

>>542053

Cool story bro

[Anonymous No.542097]

Antitheist agnostic

In the sense that i oppose all organized religious institutions and believe that the belief/perception of the idea of a god should be strictly personal and should influence no social conduct.

[Anonymous No.542099]

Militant atheist here, but only when I'm drunk. Rest of the time I'm a major pussy.

[Anonymous No.542105]

>>542053
>facilitate

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=define%3Afacilitate

[Anonymous No.542110]

Secular Humanism

[Anonymous No.542117]

N/A

[Anonymous No.542133]

If God/s did exist, including a Primum Mobile, it is our responsibility to kill Him / Her / Them / It.

[Anonymous No.542137]

Cosmicist

[Anonymous No.542140]

Militant secularist, moderate atheist. That is, I'm militant to the point where religion interferes with politics and society's well-being but couldn't care less what people believe privately.

[Anonymous No.542142]

>>542110
Something like New Age but in rationalist version. Pitiful.

[Anonymous No.542144]

>>542133
you clunked up bakunin's original sentence:
if god did exist, it is necessary to kill him

[Anonymous No.542185]

A mix of philosophies from Taoist to Gnostic; Cynic to Stoic; Existentialist to Heremtic all on top of a historical, heritage based pagan revivalist foundation.

But if anyone in real life asks, I just tell them Esoteric Order of Dagon so maybe they'll change the subject. It's kind of personal, which is why it's so complicated.

[Anonymous No.542191]

I don't know why we need guidelines to say what we "believe" in. It's silly.

[Anonymous No.542194]

>>542191

Because we're human.

[Anonymous No.542211]

>>542191
Religion is not about belief, it's a code to live your life by.

[Anonymous No.542220]

my faith is as syncretic as it's possible to be. we believe EVERYTHING.

[Anonymous No.542221]

>>541994

My thoughts are the same as this guys.

[Anonymous No.542223]

I'm Manichaean

[Anonymous No.542237]

>>542221
>>541994
This so called advancement and technology caused most damage to humanity. Religion was part of transcendent orientation of humans, without it they became materialistic, soulless animals. Enough said, soon fall of our civilization will show who is right...

[Anonymous No.542245]

Nihilist and "friendly" atheist. I think there is evidence for God's existence, but more compelling evidence against it.

[D No.542247]

>>541985

Or was he not a fool?

[None !4A4P9buxy. No.542280]

Catholic. I was raised that way, stopped going to church around 14, and returned at 23 after a miscarriage, and found a lot of help there.

I'm married to a Jew, though, and am technically Jewish via my maternal grandmother. His orthodox relatives still think I'm a dirty, dirty shiksa though.

[Anonymous No.542288]

Zen Buddhist.
Religion without philosophy is stupid.

[Anonymous No.542292]

God is dead.
Also cock.

[Anonymous No.542294]

>>542288
>Implying being a Zen Buddhist isn't stupid

[Anonymous No.542295]

>>541994
>organized religion is a danger to the advance of mankind as a whole, thus we must oppose it forcefully.

Oh hey Stalin.

[Anonymous No.542298]

>>542280

So you don't have to go jew if you want to marry a jew?

or is that just for women because they don't have foreskins to cut?

[Anonymous No.542303]

>/philosophy/
>religion

I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.

[Anonymous No.542485]

>>542295

I support this post.

[Anonymous No.542508]

Dudebro: My Shit is Fucked Up So I Got To Shoot/Slice You II: It's Straight Up Dawg Time

[Anonymous No.542510]

Atheist. Probably because I was raised as one.

[Anonymous No.542512]

Athiest because all religions were invented by people. None of them have any real evidence and they all make contradictory claims. One day I came up with a view of an afterlife that, for me, was far better and more satisfying than any religions I have heard of. When I did this I realized if I can come up with a better set up than gods then it can't be real.

[Anonymous No.542525]

apparently, i'm the only roman catholic on /lit/

[Anonymous No.542533]

Non-religious / atheist
I was raised Catholic but I gradually felt less and less conviction towards a belief in a personal god and all that
Went through a pantheist stage, but hated the term and thought it sounded too new-agey so I decided to drop the 'God' all together, though I still in a sense 'revere' nature and the universe in a spiritual kinda way

[Anonymous No.542546]

>>542298
She technichally is a jew as orthadoxically it is passed down through the mother. it is very important in most orthadox jewish families to marry a jew, so that the children may also be jewish and so the faith continue.

[Anonymous No.542552]

i'm going to be fundamentalist christian just to be ironic

[Anonymous No.542556]

Atheist. I was raised a Christian, but after some thinking and research, I changed my mind.

[Anonymous No.542589]

Non-religious. I was raised by an atheist and a half-assed Catholic. They baptized me when I was 6 because I was to receive the first holy communion the following year and wanted to have a nice white dress. I was religious for a while, at 14 it actually started to resemble a cult and my parents got very scared (they were right, I was becoming a fanatic). After that period of fanatic piousness I decided to steer clear of any religion.

[Death !GUInzpTIME No.542594]

None, really. The closest thing I got is "Agnostic-Atheism", but that's not a religion.

[Anonymous No.542595]

Atheist. I was a practicing Catholic but an image I found on /b/ convinced me that my faith was irrational and Jesus was a fag.

[Anonymous No.542610]

athiest with nihilist slant

[Anonymous No.542614]

Atheist

[Anonymous No.542618]

ATHEISM IS NOT A RELIGION

[Anonymous No.542623]

>>542618

Shut up. It's a stance on religion.

[Anonymous No.542627]

Gay

[Anonymous No.542641]

secular humanist

[Anonymous No.542645]

>>542589
>>542594
>>542533
>>542117
>>542079
>>542068
>>542031
>>541978
>>541952

The few posts who got Atheism "right", in a way.

[Anonymous No.542658]

>>542220

Slacker.

[Anonymous No.542682]

Logically, I suppose I'm an agnostic, but I function day to day on the assumption that there is no god... so I'm a de facto atheist.

[Anonymous No.542720]

I absolutely can't handle being told to dislike/inherently disagree with people of other religions - it's always made me really sad that most of the Abrahamic religions basically hold that people who don't agree with you are horrible and deserve to burn and die, even if they're basically nice folk aside from the heathen thing - so I'm happy to stick with the one I was born into, which happens to hold that every other religion is not "incorrect' and in fact can happily be gotten along with because they're all just different paths towards the same enlightenment. Even atheists and agnostics. We can all be friends. <3

[Anonymous No.542767]

>>542525
Nope. Roman Catholic as well.

[Anonymous No.542778]

>>542720
>most of the Abrahamic religions basically hold that people who don't agree with you are horrible and deserve to burn and die
No.

[Anonymous No.542783]

>>542778

Oh yes, sorry. ALL of the Abrahamic religions.

[Anonymous No.542789]

I'm not religious.

[Anonymous No.542812]

bump

[Anonymous No.542816]

[Anonymous No.542837]

I was raised as a Catholic but currently have no religious affiliation or belief.

[Anonymous No.542847]

>>542783
not Judaism

[Anonymous No.542849]

>>542783
This is not at all true of Judaism, and I can't speak for Islam, since I'm not well versed in Islamic theology.

The contention of Christianity, for the most part, is that ALL people, both believers and unbelievers, are horrible people who deserve to burn. All people are sinners, tainted by original sin, creatures of an imperfect nature. So absolutely everyone deserves to burn in hell. But God, in his infinite mercy and goodness, incarnated himself in human form and gave himself up to the most painful death on the cross; he subjected himself to all the pains and torments of human life. And through this divine sacrifice, the way was opened so that man would not suffer eternal damnation, as he so richly deserved, but instead could gain eternal salvation.

That is the promise, the central attraction of Christianity: that despite all our evil, all our faults and flaws, God loves us and will save us, provided we believe in him.

So it's not that all non-believers deserve to burn; it's that they have not taken the opportunity for salvation from the punishment all human beings deserve. This is a massive tragedy, and the essential justification for evangelical activity.

Of course, I don't believe any of this, but it's important to understand, I think.

[Anonymous No.542861]

>>542849

[Anonymous No.542868]

sure is /r9k/ in here.

I wish we would talk about books more often.

[Anonymous No.542872]

Agnostic atheist on the religion side

as to my 'code of life'; apathy.

[Anonymous No.542886]

>>542868
>>542341
>>542639
>>542527
>>542850

[Anonymous No.542887]

Was it not Moses that sought the destruction of false idols?

The first crusader.

[Anonymous No.542899]

>>542887
God split open the earth and swallowed the idol worshippers. It was pretty much his fault.

[Anonymous No.542942]

>>542872
>I'm agnostic, yet atheist when it comes to religion
What the fuck am I reading

[Anonymous No.542943]

[None !4A4P9buxy. No.542986]

>>542546
This. Being Jewish isn't just a religion, it's a ethnicity, and by Jewish custom and law that's passed down through the maternal line because there's never any doubt who someone's mother is. So I'm Jewish by ethnicity, but because my grandmother and mother both married Catholics, and raised their children in Catholicism, to my husband's orthodox relatives it doesn't matter, because I've fallen away from the faith or whatever. They're also the sort of Jews who don't believe in showing your elbows or shaving your beard, and the rest of his family (who are reform jews) thinks they're nuts and like me just fine, but that doesn't stop extended family gatherings from being delightfully awkward.

[Anonymous No.543015]

>>542942
agnostic means you're unsure of the existence of a god
atheist means you do not believe in a god.
So an agnostic atheist is someone who recognizes that there's no way to prove or disprove god, but personally does not believe in it.

[Anonymous No.543021]

I don't practice religion, but my worldview is shaped by Taoist and Buddhist concepts and I do derive some form of spiritual satisfaction via that, but I don't believe in any discrete higher power or goal.

[Anonymous No.543024]

Anarchristian

[Anonymous No.543032]

I follow the valar

[Anonymous No.543038]

[Anonymous No.543064]

>>541927
say what you want about nazism, but at least its a belief!

[Anonymous No.543065]

>>543015
>agnostic means you're unsure of the existence of a god

Not quite.

>So an agnostic atheist...

You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.543071]

get it right. atheism is a lack of a SYSTEM OF BELIEFS, that's why it's (almost) non-existent.

seriously, even those who call themselves "atheists" because they don't believe in god, they believe in science. they have no proof that man got to the moon (as they didn't see it for themselves, by not being a fucking astronaut) but still believe we did it. they believe in quantums, atoms, and yet they didn't see it for themselves (mostly). they believe sometimes in random chance, luck, or whatever you wanna call it. proof? none. that's faith all the same. that's why atheism is an utopia, the same as marx's socialism.

seriously, and don't give me the dictionary def of atheism - i'll kick you in the face. go for the actual roots of the words and think about it a little (time it was made up, by whom, based on what, etc.)

[Anonymous No.543079]

There either is a god, or there is not a god. I don't care either way.

Those are my thoughts, how would I be classified?

[Anonymous No.543089]

>>543071
>they have no proof that man got to the moon (as they didn't see it for themselves, by not being a fucking astronaut) but still believe we did it. they believe in quantums, atoms, and yet they didn't see it for themselves (mostly). they believe sometimes in random chance, luck, or whatever you wanna call it. proof? none. that's faith all the same.

ಠ_ಠ

[Anonymous No.543093]

>>543079

Agnostic?

[Anonymous No.543099]

>>543079

apathetic?

[Anonymous No.543159]

I worship the state, the land and the nation.

I'm not a fascist, just a Swede.

[Anonymous No.543164]

>>543079

Muslim

[Anonymous No.543294]

No religion (=non-believer / "weak atheist"; that is, one who has seen no compelling reason or argument that leads him to believe that any proposed divine entity exists), secularist, but libertarian in the personal sphere.

>>543071

I don't think "proof" or "evidence" means what you think it means (i. e., autopsy). You are also conflating at least two essentially different senses of "believe": in religion, "belief" (="faith") tends to mean that a person holds certain statements, narratives or concepts to be fundamtally (not necessarily literally) true; in scientific and other scholarly discourse, "belief" (="theory" or "knowledge") tends to mean that a person is provisionally persuaded of a particular view on the basis of observation, argument, or the fact that that view is consistent with what is known, has explanatory power, and is not inconsistent logically or with the results of observation or experiment. That is, "I believe in one God, the Father Almighty" is a different kind of assertion from "I believe that Australopithecus sediba is a previously unrecorded species of hominid" or "I believe that Aeschylus may not be the author of the Prometheus Bound".

[Anonymous No.543302]

i am christian atheist and so is our minister, but don't tell anyone or we'll get kicked out.

[scarletisred !EWO1S5XDG2 No.543322]

>>541911
Pyrrhonian skeptic reporting in

[Anonymous No.543328]

I believe that all religions are false.
To add to that, I believe that religion is what people resort to in times of desperation, further supporting my belief that all religions are false.

[Anonymous No.543340]

>>543328
I believe you're a self-satisfied teenager.

[Anonymous No.543349]

>>543340
I believe that you're wrong.
But I'm a tolerant atheist.

[Anonymous No.543385]

>>543349
Well, either you are or you aren't, but whatever. Congratulations on being tolerant.

>I believe that religion is what people resort to in times of desperation, further supporting my belief that all religions are false.

How much desperation have you actually witnessed in your life? In my experience, people's stance on religion is pretty entrenched long before they experience any kind of tragedy. What are you basing this on, if anything?

[Anonymous No.543418]

>>543385

I'm not >>543328, but I suppose that anon is referring to the fact that rates of religious observance in societies where people have a choice tend to rise during periods of economic and social difficulty, warfare, or natural disaster. This is, however, a poor basis for concluding that religion per se is so motivated, because it fails to account for the significant body of believers who are observant regardless of the favourability or unfavourability of the circumstances of the moment (and it could also be that some of those drawn to religious observance in hard times are attracted by the sense of community and mutual support, rather than the religion).

[Anonymous No.543443]

I have no religion. I am a nihilist.

[Anonymous No.543467]

>>543443
You believe in nahzing?

[Anonymous No.543480]

>>543467

[Anonymous No.543501]

>>543467
>>543480

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism
Sorry for linking to wikipedia, but it does help to clear up a lot of misconceptions.

[Anonymous No.543508]

>>543501
Nihilists may not believe in anything, but they sure love amphibious rodents.

[Anonymous No.543511]

I'm a Catholic because it's what I believe in.

[Anonymous No.543606]

>>542943
jeezus khrist, that's one of the worst set of bolt-ons i've ever seen.

[Anonymous No.543617]

'nuff said

[Anonymous No.543618]

I am atheist/agnostic because I cannot into belief.

[Anonymous No.543815]

>>543618

or action verbs, it would appear.

[Anonymous No.543821]

>>543815

[Anonymous No.543960]

Atheism is the new pussies way out of personal accountability.
>Dogmatic faith in anything but nothing is idiotic.
This sentence should be two:
Dogmatic faith in anything is idiotic.
Faith in nothing is idiotic.

Agnostic here. Keep an open mind. Follow the Golden Rule (Do unto others as you'd have done unto you). and society might survive.

[Anonymous No.543987]

>>543815

lurk moar

[Anonymous No.543994]

I am atheist because I arrest Pope and doesnt afraid of anything

[Anonymous No.544002]

Deist

[Anonymous No.544013]

>>544002

fag

[Anonymous No.544029]

>>544002
Me too. I am also a fag but it didn't take much spiritual inquiry to figure that one out.

[Anonymous No.544034]

Agnosticism.

I don't know shit about the universe and neither do you. Stop pretending that you do.

[Anonymous No.544035]

>>544002
Weird. I was just doing homework and the last question was to define a deist. :/

[Anonymous No.544039]

>>544035
The fuck kind of homework are you doing?

[Anonymous No.544057]

>>544034
>and neither do you.

How do you know I don't. Such unsupported claims.

[Anonymous No.544065]

>>544057
Oh for fucks sake...

[Anonymous No.544074]

>>543093

Agnosticism is a stance on knowledge. It literally translates to "without knowledge." It is a qualifier; you can be an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist.

"Agnostic" is not a stance on faith.

Cock breath.

[Anonymous No.544121]

>>543960

Go and read Sade's "Dialogue between a priest and a dying man" - you'll find a notorious atheist advancing the "golden rule" (also in Dolmance's pamphlet in La Philosophie dans le Boudoir). And how exactly does atheism give anyone a route out of personal accountability (unless you mean that there has to be the possibility of a vague threat of comsic retribution in order for people to be moral, which is logically and empirically false, both as there exist moral people who believe in nothing suprahuman, and as there exist believers who do immoral things)? Also, for somebody who claims to exalt openmindedness and reject dogma, your dogmatic condemnation of atheism seems a touch ... inconsistent.

[Pendulum !ysVdKsdUyc No.544131]

I BELIEVE THAT LIFE ITSELF IS A MIRACULOUS OCCURRENCE AND IS TO BE CHERISHED
RELIGION POISONS THE MIND AND CLOUDS PERCEPTION
PEOPLE ARE CONTENT WITH BEING PASSIVE OBSERVERS IN THEIR OWN BODES, VICTIMS OF THE WORLD THEY THEMSELVES CREATED
SO HERE, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND HAVE A CAT
RABBLERABBLERABBLE

[Anonymous No.544144]

>>544121
So what is the foundation of moral behavior in your estimation? From what source do moral laws derive their authority?

[Anonymous No.544185]

>>544144

Not an atheist, bro, but I would like to answer this question.

It is basic animal instinct to want to look out for your own species. The want to protect children, the women (for breeding and tending the young), and basically to look out for one another to better increase the survival of your species (and that gets broken down into tribe survival when it becomes more personal).

Going with the flow increases the likelihood of you surviving comfortably with the least amount of effort. For most people anyway. Despite how much we may put this great emphasis on the root of morality, we are merely just expressing base survival traits that are present in all animals.

[Anonymous No.544194]

I'm an apologist bordering on nonspecific theism.

[Anonymous No.544199]

[Anonymous No.544200]

Mostly Hindu, influenced by Buddhism, but I'm very reasonable.

[Anonymous No.544203]

To bring this into /lit/-related territory:

"All right," said Susan, "I'm not stupid. You're saying humans need ... fantasies to make life bearable."
No. Humans need fantasy to be human. To be the place where the falling angel meet the rising ape.
"Tooth fairies? Hogfathers?"
Yes. As practice. You have to start out learning to believe the little lies.
"So we can believe the big ones?"
Yes. Justice. Duty. Mercy. That sort of thing.
"They're not the same at all!"
Really? Then take the universe and grind it down to the finest powder and sieve it through the finest sieve and then show me one atom of justice, one molecule of mercy. And yet you act, like there was some sort of rightness in the universe by which it may be judged:
"Yes. But people have got to believe that or what's the point?"
My point exactly.

[Anonymous No.544221]

>>544185
this is a fine point of view for most of every day life, but it does not provide a very good guide for situations out of the ordinary where difficult decisions re: morality are called for. and i would argue that's where a code of morality is most important. so that's a nice justification for behaving morally in everyday life, but what about extraordinary circumstances? why should i not commit atrocities against enemy civilians during war-time, for example?

[Anonymous No.544231]

>>544185
While things like altruism may have grown out of evolutionary processes, it is false to say "basic animal instinct is to look out for your own species". The basic instinct is to propagate your own genes - this is where protective behavior generates from in the family group.

[Anonymous No.544243]

We believe in nothing.

[Anonymous No.544255]

>>544221

Why should you not commit atrocities during war time? If another nation has declared war with you and is the aggressor, you should hold nothing back until the enemy is destroyed or asks for mercy. You give the requested mercy because it means potential ally to further your chances of survival in case of any future attacks from another source. You don't show mercy until then to let anyone else know what exactly it means when you try to take away the peace of your land and jeopardize the survival of your people.

It all breaks down to survival. Even religion is a form of control to better ensure the survival of a populace. For example, no eating of shell fish and swine in the old religions is an example of good idea being made a religious law to ensure people follow it. Why is it a good idea? In a time where people didn't know shit about bacteria or proper cooking and meat handling, eating pork and shellfish had a high chance of making one sick. So it became a sin to eat the stuff.

[Anonymous No.544259]

>>544243
Look thirty two posts up, slowpoke.

[Anonymous No.544261]

Jesusism

http://eng.anarchopedia.org/Jesusism

[Anonymous No.544264]

>>544231

If humans were not social creatures, your point would be valid. Since we naturally social creatures, group survival is pretty paramount to us.

[Anonymous No.544269]

>>544144

Not sure there are such things as "moral laws"; rather "moral principles". And those of non-believers derive from the same source as those of believers (remembering that Christianity is not the only religion, and that not all religions have claimed a divine basis for ethics: see Plato on this, for example) - the realization that humans are social animals, and that there must therefore be restraints on the pursuit of perceived self-interest and individual desires, or a society cannot function. This is implicit in the earliest extant law codes, for example. Combine that with the fact that, in the absence of revealed knowledge or divinely sanctioned authority, a non-believer has to rely on human knowledge and capacity to solve problems, and you get to the idea that human beings, individually and collectively, have worth. These two foundations - the necessity of social cooperation, and the basic worth of the human individual - are one possible answer to the question of what philosophical basis a non-believer would have for a system of ethics.

Of course, when it comes to specific conduct, an atheist or an agnostic ethics might look in many ways very much like a religious one, and in fact might even be influenced by aspects of religious ethics, or by their sources, for the simple reason that, logically, the source of an idea does not determine its validity.

[Anonymous No.544293]

>>544255
Atrocities are never acceptable, even in wartime. We musn't create a cycle of revenge/hate. Even if you show an enemy/aggressor that you aren't to be fucked with, if the means to this end is destroying a civilization then it is unworthy and unjust.

[Anonymous No.544299]

>>544269
this is a really interesting point of view, seriously, it's fascinating. i don't agree with it completely, though. I would be fine with basing moral principles on the need for social cohesion and a respect for human dignity. again, however, i would say that this is likely not to be of much value in truly strenuous situations. also, the horrific events of the twentieth century can be seen as sharply limiting the extent to which we can really talk about human dignity. What dignity does a human being have in a concentration camp? If this is a man, what does that say about human dignity?

>logically, the source of an idea does not determine its validity.

except that in this case, the idea is intimately rooted in its source. judeochristian morality is entirely derived from theological mandates, that's where it gets its authority. without god, the idea has no grounding, no reason behind it.

[Anonymous No.544301]

>>544293

While I can respect your line of thought, I also disagree with it.

[Anonymous No.544315]

>>544121

Nah. >>543960 is right. most atheist are from other religions that want out of the guilt or responsibility to society.

[Anonymous No.544335]

>>544255

I'm not all that sure the pragmatic explanation for dietary laws works: after all, in the same regions that produced these laws, other societies did not follow the same restrictions. So I think there might also be an element of group identity formation: WE are different, because we wear specific clothing, have our hair in a specific style, eat or do not eat specific things, and so on.

As to the wartime case, that is in fact often where religious-based moral codes have faltered, in that they have permitted the enemy to be cast as other due to religious difference, and therefore as not just "my enemy", but also "the enemy of my god(s)". An ethics based on inherent humanity (which is also what the so-called "Golden Rule" is, in that it relies on empathy and compassion) is one possible answer to this problem.

[Anonymous No.544339]

I suscribe to absurdism.

[Anonymous No.544372]

>>543960
Dumbest post ever.

[Anonymous No.544387]

>>544299

The twentieth century history of atrocity no more invalidates the idea of a common humanity as a basis of ethics for a non-believer, than does the history of violence in the name of religion invalidate religious ethics. Both simply mean that human beings have a hard time living up to their ideals (which is what ethics always are - aspirations).

Also, you need to distinguish the moral principle from the specific justification given for it. You are right that in traditional Judaeo-Christian-Islamic ethics, the reason given for a rule is essentially "God wills it"; however, the fact that the divine justification no longer holds force does not mean that the rule or principle itself is a bad one, and does not mean that it could not have a different justification grounded in a different system of beliefs. Look at taboos on incest: in some cases, these are simple divine pronouncements; in modern societies they tend to be based on concerns about abuse of power, or the effects of interbreeding. Same rule, different theoretical basis. And, Judaeo-Christian ethics and thought, as a matter of history, are influenced by other traditions - they adopted ideas they found useful, and found ways to argue for them within their own frame of reference. There is no reason other systems should not do the same, and in fact they do.

[Anonymous No.544391]

I'm a Christian

LOLLLLLLLLLLL

[Anonymous No.544394]

>>544301


No no no no no. It's over. There was just a reasonable response to something on 4CHAN. There HAS to be a God now.

[Anonymous No.544399]

>>544315
>most atheist are from other religions

Either you do not understand what "atheist" means, or you do not understand what "religion" means (and yes, I do know that a religion can be atheist; however, most in the wild today are not).

[Anonymous No.544425]

>>544387
I am okay with adapting ideas from Judeo-Christian morality, my point was simply that there has to be some new reason for the principle.

wrt human dignity, it's not the fact that someone committed these deeds; it's the fact of human life in the most debased, the most inhuman conditions in history. It is the fact of the concentrations camps, not the fact that men decided to do it, but the fact that it was done to men.

[Anonymous No.544430]

>>544394
this is /lit/ bitch that's how we ROLL

[Anonymous No.544448]

>>544293
>>544301

There's also a more pragmatic argument: if I have the right to do anything to my enemy in wartime, then my enemies have the same, reciprocal right and I cannot complain when they exercise it against me or my friends. This produces the same result on a geopolitical scale as does permitting murderous family feuds, gang warfare, etc., on the local scale. Societies by and large have imposed criminal law to try to control the latter; and countries treaties and international law to prevent the former. Neither is perfect, of course, but the effort is better than the alternative.

[Anonymous No.544474]

>>544425

I'm afraid I don't quite grasp your point about the concentration camps. Yes, they, or the slums of many developing cities, for example, reveal humanity in grossly debased conditions; but I am not sure how this can be taken to negate the notion of inherent human worth (not "dignity" - the undignified might still have worth). Surely the capacity of some (however few) to emerge from that kind of circumstance and make valuable contributions in one way or another argues for universal worth, rather than against it.

[Anonymous No.544558]

>>544399

I think he's saying that they "start out in other religions" and then decide to become atheist to settle moral qualms about personal decisions

[Anonymous No.544576]

[Anonymous No.544600]

>>544558

You may be right. I don't think s/he is (since most atheists I've actually discussed this with either never had much of a belief in god[s], whether their backgrounds were religious or not; or began as believers, but found themselves unable to continue either having been exposed to a range of other ideas, or having given serious thought to what their religion taught and finding themselves unable to accept it).

[Anonymous No.544601]

Deist and since this is /lit/ Age of Reason for the win.

[Anonymous No.544633]

What are some good books on WW2? I got this off amazon a while ago but haven't started reading it.

[Anonymous No.544641]

>>544633

inb4 post is deleted

[Anonymous No.544653]

Humanist.

[Anonymous No.544658]

Raised Catholic, was going by Agnostic for years but I think Deist is a bit more accurate. I definitely lean more in that direction than atheist, just without any of the dogma bullshit because mankind could never conceive the motives of such a being and put it on paper.

[Anonymous No.544659]

[Anonymous No.544682]

[Death !GUInzpTIME No.544718]

>>544203
YES YES YES.

EVERYONE PAY ATTENTION TO THIS, RIGHT HERE.

But I rather prefer another quote of Discworld persuasion.

"Belief is a powerful Force. It doesn't move mountains, but it creates those who can."

I think that you will things into existence, just because enough people can believe it. Seems logical, compared to the rest of the universe.

[Anonymous No.545541]

Atheist because there is no god.

[Anonymous No.545547]

My parents were Catholic, never really forced it on me, though.

I consider myself a deist who'll go to Catholic services.