A Light in the Darkness wrote:Start a separate thread where I may or may not reply to those questions, depending on my interest level and time available. Right now, I'm interested in establishing what both you and the Dude plainly admit.
But ALITD, the achilles heel of your attack on atheism is just what Shades and I have pointed out --> a theistic worldview also faces nihilism at it's borders. You must either admit this is true (and give up your ill considered one-note crusade) or explain why Shades and I are incorrect. It isn't a topic for another thread -- it's the fundamental flaw in this thread.
When we see you have no interest in addressing legitimate counterarguments, we stop taking you seriously. Then you'll have to start again with another sockpuppet to clear your reputation.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
I object to the insistence that the weight of human actions must be balanced on the backdrop of infinity. The universe may be infinite, but our planet and our existences are not.
But if one insists on accepting this background, then no belief system will remedy this problem. The actions of individuals will not matter one whit, no matter what you believe, once you weigh their actions against infinity.
Let’s take the LDS worldview as an example. The LDS backdrop of infinity is infinite gods with infinite universes, with infinite offspring, becoming infinite gods with their own infinite universes, etc etc etc
The actions of any individual, within any of those systems, doesn’t “weigh” enough, so to speak, to make a sneeze’s worth of difference. In fact, the actions of any given godsystem doesn’t weigh enough to make a sneeze’s worth of difference. This particular “Heavenly Father” could suddenly decide to stop being god and fold up shop, and, in terms of the backdrop of infinity, it wouldn’t matter at all.
The Dude and Shades have pointed you in this direction, already. But it’s not your topic, just like the flaw in the very argument you want us to embrace isn’t your topic.
Moreover, you have yet to explain why this matters at all. It doesn't matter if you are really upset about the idea of a nihilistic universe, if that is what the universe is. It doesn't matter if every human voice on the face of the planet rises to howl in protest, if that is what the universe is.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Thanks for assuming my immaturity. I didn't say I don't believe in right or wrong. I said I'd rather be called a nihilist than believe in a biblical god whose own behavior and commandments to his people contradict every notion of right and wrong. Your original post was about nihilism, so my point was not off-topic. Further, you can provide no evidence for your assertion that "God, our father, helps us develop to realize our potential as far as our will allows." Thanks for your testimony. I find your philosophical meanderings boring.
First of all, I didn't assume anything. I made a conclusion based upon your post. Several of you have to brush up on what it means to assume. Second of all, the opening post was not "Nihilism: Discuss." The opening post is about how a specific worldview entails nihilism and an invintation to discuss an argument to that end. If you can't tell the difference beteween those two, that is a serious failing on your part. Third of all, I do not appreciate you using my thread as a flimsy pretext to attack religion. You have plenty of other oppurtunities to do that on this board; you don't need to derail my thread to accomplish your goal.
The universe is what it is.... our guesses/beliefs/ideas/stories/theories are not the determining factor on what is or is not outside our human experience.
Exactly, TD, but I suspect this isn't ALITD's "topic".
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
A Light in the Darkness wrote:But ALITD, the achilles heel of your attack on atheism is just what Shades and I have pointed out --> a theistic worldview also faces nihilism at it's borders. You must either admit this is true (and give up your ill considered one-note crusade) or explain why Shades and I are incorrect. It isn't a topic for another thread -- it's the fundamental flaw in this thread.
When we see you have no interest in addressing legitimate counterarguments, we stop taking you seriously. Then you'll have to start again with another sockpuppet to clear your reputation.
It doesn't even make sense to say that theism is susceptible to the problem "on its borders." Either it is or isn't. So long as you accept that in a no-god universe, this is the case, then I am not concerned with a universe in which God exists. That is an independently addressable topic. In the context of this discussion, saying "So does theism!" in reply to "atheistic views that accept a, b, and c lead to nihilism" is a form of tu quoque fallacy. As it happens, if God is above spatiotemporal reality and is able to be a sufficient cause to effect aggregate value, then a universe with God retains the modal possiblity of of not descending into nihilism given typical moral realist views and inifite space-time. But, either start a separate thread or stick to the topic.
The universe is what it is.... our guesses/beliefs/ideas/stories/theories are not the determining factor on what is or is not outside our human experience.
Exactly, TD, but I suspect this isn't ALITD's "topic".
Why must everyone here impugn my motives rather than address my reasoning? You have joined the chorus in saying, "Ok, so nihilism is true in an atheistc universe given...but that doesn't mean it's not true." I'm not debating whether your bleak reality, one where Smith struggles to maintain his illusions, is true. I'm concerned with addressing head on whether it entails nihilism, as it is frequently the case that secularists will deny this. One would hope you'd be above the type of nontheist discourse that involves bringing out old-Betsy, the big gun, by challenging a religious person to "prove God" everytime some implication of your views that sounds negative is brought into discussion. It's as lame as me asking you to prove knowledge is possible if you criticized the character of Joseph Smith or any other prophets of the Lord's Church.
beastie wrote:in regards to his "other" identity, he's already slinging the B word. (bigot)
I'm being called dishonest merely for not answering a battery of questions about my posting history on the internet. If that is not evidence of bigotry, then what is? The quicksilver leap to dishonesty simply because I am associated with the LDS faith and mentioned MAD once is about as clear of an example of obstinate prejudice as one can expect to have. It's so easy to ignore the faults of one's own tribe, isn't it Beastie?
Last edited by Guest on Fri May 04, 2007 1:18 am, edited 1 time in total.