Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Forum - Perennial Ideas and Debates that cross societal/time boundaries


View Poll Results: What is most important to you, in regards to human qualities?
Wealth and productivity 7 25.00%
Compassion, sympathy and niceness 21 75.00%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 13th, 2012, 02:15 AM   #31
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Denmark
Posts: 1,582

Quote:
Originally Posted by Halomanuk2 View Post
Well if you think you can get compassion back on a global scale then good luck with that !
I don't.

I can't.

And I will not.

Atheists destroyed the last hope of a better future.
They proved the Divine to be wrong. Then they proved the Divine to be unneccessary. And finally they proved the Divine to be non-existant.

Then they concluded that there is no higher purpose of life and that we are basically just animals taken to a higher level of the evolutionary curve, but with the same instincts.

With this non-existence of any purpose of life or theory of relative happiness, evil and goodness, with the non-uniformity and individualistic approach to life and its scientific research for the sake of scientific research or for the sake of productivity for the sake of productivity, they have taken this approach to a higher level:

That he (or she) who is the most wealthiest and/or the most productive is the one who is going to win the votes. By this statement, which seems innocent, it is followed by the thesis that he/she who is the strongest has the might.

This concludes that he/she who has the might has the right.

In other words, humans have, since the decline of religiousity and the rise of Atheism, moved towards social darwinian approaches to not only eugenics but also taken democratic as a captive for their own purposes.

I can't do anything about it. It is too late.

Humanity ate the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge.
The tree of knowledge being the Tree of Life.
The Fruit is the acknowledgement that God doesn't exist.

Thus the only thing we can do now is to have no purpose of life.
We have no meaning. We, human beings, are meaningless.
philosopher is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 13th, 2012, 03:05 AM   #32

Sicknero's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
From: Here to Eternity
Posts: 4,022

Quote:
Originally Posted by philosopher View Post
I don't.

I can't.

And I will not.

Atheists destroyed the last hope of a better future.
They proved the Divine to be wrong. Then they proved the Divine to be unneccessary. And finally they proved the Divine to be non-existant.

Then they concluded that there is no higher purpose of life and that we are basically just animals taken to a higher level of the evolutionary curve, but with the same instincts.

With this non-existence of any purpose of life or theory of relative happiness, evil and goodness, with the non-uniformity and individualistic approach to life and its scientific research for the sake of scientific research or for the sake of productivity for the sake of productivity, they have taken this approach to a higher level:

That he (or she) who is the most wealthiest and/or the most productive is the one who is going to win the votes. By this statement, which seems innocent, it is followed by the thesis that he/she who is the strongest has the might.

This concludes that he/she who has the might has the right.

In other words, humans have, since the decline of religiousity and the rise of Atheism, moved towards social darwinian approaches to not only eugenics but also taken democratic as a captive for their own purposes.

I can't do anything about it. It is too late.

Humanity ate the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge.
The tree of knowledge being the Tree of Life.
The Fruit is the acknowledgement that God doesn't exist.

Thus the only thing we can do now is to have no purpose of life.
We have no meaning. We, human beings, are meaningless.
That's such a cynical view of atheism. For one thing atheism has certainly not proved the divine to be unnecessary or nonexistent. Maybe to their own satisfaction, but proving something to one's own satisfaction hardly qualifies as objective proof.

Secondly you seem to think that atheism per se has no morals, no ethics, and no motivation to be "nice" or "good". While this might well be true of some atheists it's definitely not the rule - I'd also go so far as to argue that it isn't atheism itself that makes people this way, I'd suggest that they'd be like that anyway regardless of belief.

Thirdly, are you seriously claiming that before (popular) atheism the human race were all kind, considerate, compassionate, selfless and guided by the highest motives..?

Last edited by Sicknero; December 13th, 2012 at 03:54 AM.
Sicknero is offline  
Old December 13th, 2012, 03:51 AM   #33

Jhangora's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2010
From: Dehradun
Posts: 1,923

Quote:
Originally Posted by philosopher View Post
Which is exactly the problem I addressed:

There is no incentive to be nice and compassionate these days.

Back in the Middle Ages there was a high incentive for being nice and compassionate. But in todays materialized and atheist world, there simply isn't any incentive for being nice and compassionate.
I've heard this argument before. Human beings are same. Those living in the Medieval, Ancient, or Pre-Historic times were no more or less compassionate than the people living today. No doubt the human population has never been so high on the planet as it is now.

This creates various complexities. However, what is happening now - happened before too.
Jhangora is offline  
Old December 13th, 2012, 04:52 AM   #34
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Denmark
Posts: 1,582

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicknero View Post
That's such a cynical view of atheism. For one thing atheism has certainly not proved the divine to be unnecessary or nonexistent. Maybe to their own satisfaction, but proving something to one's own satisfaction hardly qualifies as objective proof.

Secondly you seem to think that atheism per se has no morals, no ethics, and no motivation to be "nice" or "good". While this might well be true of some atheists it's definitely not the rule - I'd also go so far as to argue that it isn't atheism itself that makes people this way, I'd suggest that they'd be like that anyway regardless of belief.

Thirdly, are you seriously claiming that before (popular) atheism the human race were all kind, considerate, compassionate, selfless and guided by the highest motives..?
Towards their own religious members, to a certain degree, yes.
Except when the jews in Palestine at the time of Jesus, excluded the poor from treatment of their illnesses. However I firmly believe this was not due to religiousity, but real politics where they were using the trend of the day (religion) as an excuse: To keep the people from getting cured from their illnesses so that these people would remain outcasts thus having a stable class-based society where some people were excluded from holding citizenship.

If they didn't have the Judaism as an excuse, they would certainly have used more secular arguments like todays politicians are using.

Likewise the burning of the heretics in Christian countries had nothing to do with religion. The heretics were political enemies, not religious enemies. They all believed in God, the question was rather what they believed God believed in.
philosopher is offline  
Old December 13th, 2012, 05:57 AM   #35

Naomasa298's Avatar
Suspended over water
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 19,184

Pah. Compassion can go hang. The peons will work themselves to the bone in my salt mines to make me money, and if they don't like it, there's plenty more where they came from.
Naomasa298 is offline  
Old December 13th, 2012, 06:25 AM   #36
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Pax juxta probitatem
Posts: 1,621
Blog Entries: 14

It took me fifty years to know myself ;-) That's a bit late but at least I know. The reasons I'm not fond of hard business, while there's nothing wrong with that, are probably because I've always been a humanist and not always fond of materialism or materialists. Possibly the outlook we have is connected to our past experiences and our values and beliefs.

While remembering not to judge or discriminate; I might have more time and be more open to some people more than others. Achievement or wealth isn't always proved by what we've got in the Bank, or property and wealth just for their own sake. I'm privately pleased with the personal development and any challenges I overcame. Worth much more than money and "stuff". Those ancient Philosophers had some worthwhile points.
John Paul is offline  
Old December 13th, 2012, 06:46 AM   #37
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by philosopher
I don't.

I can't.

And I will not.

Atheists destroyed the last hope of a better future.
They proved the Divine to be wrong. Then they proved the Divine to be unneccessary. And finally they proved the Divine to be non-existant.

Then they concluded that there is no higher purpose of life and that we are basically just animals taken to a higher level of the evolutionary curve, but with the same instincts.

With this non-existence of any purpose of life or theory of relative happiness, evil and goodness, with the non-uniformity and individualistic approach to life and its scientific research for the sake of scientific research or for the sake of productivity for the sake of productivity, they have taken this approach to a higher level:

That he (or she) who is the most wealthiest and/or the most productive is the one who is going to win the votes. By this statement, which seems innocent, it is followed by the thesis that he/she who is the strongest has the might.

This concludes that he/she who has the might has the right.

In other words, humans have, since the decline of religiousity and the rise of Atheism, moved towards social darwinian approaches to not only eugenics but also taken democratic as a captive for their own purposes.

I can't do anything about it. It is too late.

Humanity ate the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge.
The tree of knowledge being the Tree of Life.
The Fruit is the acknowledgement that God doesn't exist.

Thus the only thing we can do now is to have no purpose of life.
We have no meaning. We, human beings, are meaningless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicknero View Post
That's such a cynical view of atheism. For one thing atheism has certainly not proved the divine to be unnecessary or nonexistent. Maybe to their own satisfaction, but proving something to one's own satisfaction hardly qualifies as objective proof.

Secondly you seem to think that atheism per se has no morals, no ethics, and no motivation to be "nice" or "good". While this might well be true of some atheists it's definitely not the rule - I'd also go so far as to argue that it isn't atheism itself that makes people this way, I'd suggest that they'd be like that anyway regardless of belief.

Thirdly, are you seriously claiming that before (popular) atheism the human race were all kind, considerate, compassionate, selfless and guided by the highest motives..?
Must entirely agree; in fact, contrary to above suggestion Atheism has "proved" absolutely nothing for any true believer of absolutely any religion, whose faith has never depended on the rules of evidence to begin with.
sylla1 is offline  
Old December 13th, 2012, 07:11 AM   #38

Brisieis's Avatar
Historian
Member of the Year
 
Joined: Sep 2011
From: UK
Posts: 16,033
Blog Entries: 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by philosopher View Post
I don't.

I can't.

And I will not.

Atheists destroyed the last hope of a better future.
They proved the Divine to be wrong. Then they proved the Divine to be unneccessary. And finally they proved the Divine to be non-existant.

Then they concluded that there is no higher purpose of life and that we are basically just animals taken to a higher level of the evolutionary curve, but with the same instincts.

With this non-existence of any purpose of life or theory of relative happiness, evil and goodness, with the non-uniformity and individualistic approach to life and its scientific research for the sake of scientific research or for the sake of productivity for the sake of productivity, they have taken this approach to a higher level:

That he (or she) who is the most wealthiest and/or the most productive is the one who is going to win the votes. By this statement, which seems innocent, it is followed by the thesis that he/she who is the strongest has the might.

This concludes that he/she who has the might has the right.

In other words, humans have, since the decline of religiousity and the rise of Atheism, moved towards social darwinian approaches to not only eugenics but also taken democratic as a captive for their own purposes.

I can't do anything about it. It is too late.

Humanity ate the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge.
The tree of knowledge being the Tree of Life.
The Fruit is the acknowledgement that God doesn't exist.

Thus the only thing we can do now is to have no purpose of life.
We have no meaning. We, human beings, are meaningless.
I absolutely disagree with everything you have written here.

I would suggest that knowing that god does not exist and that there is no life after death, you would value your time on earth more - as there is no expectation of a better world to come after death. It is one of the main reasons that no matter how twisted and painful life can sometimes be, I still always try to be as happy and content as I possibly can - because this is my only chance to enjoy the good stuff, whether I can control the bad stuff or not is irrelevant.

The things you suggest about the affects of Atheism are yet to be proven and are just a theory, your opinion.

I will parrot Nero by asking, do you believe the highly religious past to have been a bed of roses and a paradise compared to countries where Atheistic thought is popular in modern times?

Last edited by Brisieis; December 13th, 2012 at 07:22 AM.
Brisieis is offline  
Old December 13th, 2012, 07:12 AM   #39

Spartacuss's Avatar
If I'm lyin' I'm dyin'...
 
Joined: Jul 2010
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,352

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Paul View Post
It took me fifty years to know myself ;-) That's a bit late but at least I know. The reasons I'm not fond of hard business, while there's nothing wrong with that, are probably because I've always been a humanist and not always fond of materialism or materialists. Possibly the outlook we have is connected to our past experiences and our values and beliefs.

While remembering not to judge or discriminate; I might have more time and be more open to some people more than others. Achievement or wealth isn't always proved by what we've got in the Bank, or property and wealth just for their own sake. I'm privately pleased with the personal development and any challenges I overcame. Worth much more than money and "stuff". Those ancient Philosophers had some worthwhile points.
Move over, ya'll. I'm sittin' with this guy. Well said, John Paul.
Spartacuss is online now  
Old December 13th, 2012, 07:18 AM   #40

Halomanuk2's Avatar
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2012
From: Flitwick,Bedfordshire,UK
Posts: 221

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brisieis View Post
I absolutely disagree with everything you have written here.

I would suggest that knowing that god does not exist and that tehre is no life after death, you would value your time on earth more - as there is no expectation of a better world to come after death. It is one of the main reasons that no matter how twisted and painful life can sometimes be, I still always try to be as happy and content as a possibly can - because this is my only chance to enjoy the good stuff, whether I can control the bad stuff or not is irrelevant.

The things you suggest about the affects of Atheism are yet to be proven and are just a theory, your opinion.

I will parrot Nero by asking, do you believe the highly religious past to have been a bed of roses and a paradise compared to countries where Atheistic thought is popular in modern times?
Well said Bri !

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacuss View Post
Move over, ya'll. I'm sittin' with this guy. Well said, John Paul.
OK then but im sitting next to Bri cos i havent sat next to her for ages !!
Halomanuk2 is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology

Tags
compassion, important, wealth


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Self-criticism vs self-compassion Rosi Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 9 August 27th, 2012 10:58 AM
Compassion during world war 2 sturm War and Military History 47 July 25th, 2012 09:11 AM
Asking about wealth and income Naomasa298 Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 27 April 22nd, 2012 09:53 PM
Liberty or wealth? philosopher Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 12 March 22nd, 2012 02:43 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.