Can the SANE atheists please explain why they're into atheism...

Six of one, half dozen of the other. I find the semantics don't matter much.

this
atheism is as ignorant as blindly following a religion
you can't prove or disprove a god, deity, creator etc.
that being said I respect everybody's beliefs as long as they respect others', whatever makes your life better fuckin go for it

That's like calling a potato an apple.

Not really semantics in this case. Atheists are edgelords that can't accept that religion even exists in any form. They are hypocritical in their blind condemnation, even though they lack the same data that any religion does. Claiming absolutes one way or another with the unknowable is ridiculous.

This is a common misconception - agnosticism and atheism aren't mutually exclusive.

Attached: Agnosticism-Atheism.png (400x400, 22K)

refer to the chart

Do you believe that it's impossible to form a righteous system of ethics without religion?

This chart is actually useful, thanks.

I have never felt that "oceanic feeling" that others get form religion. I have tried hard, but every time I find myself in the kind of situations that are supposed to produce it, it is not there. There is always a part of me that ruins the experience and I seem to have no control over it.

>sane
>atheist

Choose one. You can’t have both.

Elaborate

Try meditation.

A good argument can be made that religion pacifies us, stokes altruism, brings out the better angels of our nature, and provides some consolation about death.... and therefore we still need it to some degree. This is not good evidence for the validity of claims many of us have made about the supernatural though. I wouldn't shrug off someone saying "God bless you" or "I'm praying for you," but as far as a sincere belief in it, I can't say I have. Maybe there is something out there, but I haven't seen it.

Lol, a “sane” atheist. Any atheist is “sane” by definition because he accepts well documented facts and doesn’t believe in harmful, century old fairy tales like some of the retards on here do.
I’m in to atheism simply because it gives me power. What is more powerful than fact and truth itself? Everywhere I go I am certain that I am right because my beliefs are backed up by years and years of scientific achievements and progress. What do the thiestfags have? Nothing, kek! Just a bunch of fucking morons taking up space and spreading lies! Honestly their lives a worth so little to me. I hope they all pass soon so we can forget their fucking existence and move on.

Which is better though, to have false consolation for your death or to accept your death for what it is?

Not the guy who posted, but atheists who bother identifying themselves as such tend to be equally dogmatic as the people they are supposedly superior to.

Attached: e9d.jpg (600x600, 18K)

Absolutely not. There are many systems of ethics people follow that don't need religion. Religion (in my case, Catholicism) provides almost like a backbone to my own system of ethics. I don't follow other systems too much because I was raised to follow a certain one (divine command theory).

You can be Gnostic about the existence of some version of God I think, but God altogether, no (insert spaghetti here).

Too certain. Just as the religious people are retarded for being all in, you, and others, are retarded for being all in. Faggots

A Gnostic Atheist, that is.

>certain that I'm right
>my beliefs are backed up by years and years of scientific evidence

Choose one, science is never truly certain (I say that as a scientist and as an atheist).

>because talking to invisible sky daddies and believing scripture translated/edited hundreds of times before we could interpret it isn't crazy at all
Religion, errybody.

>religious
>delusional
>???
>synonymous

>2019
>still believe in sky daddy
>???
>brainwashed

Attached: Xtian Wheel.jpg (785x681, 100K)

How could you possibly be certain about the existence of a higher power? We have no way of accessing that information.

refer to the chart

The bible contradicts itself a lot, people also choose what they will and won't follow. Remember when being gay was a sin?

(me)
>post times are identical
>both said sky daddy
that's a crazy coincidence, lol

then why should someone who likes to hurt people not hurt people? because someone elses feelings might get hurt? well boo hoo

Here let me dismantle any atheist argument in ten seconds all I do is use their own logic against them
>Big Bang/big expansion/ whatever
>athiestfags: “this is where universe came from, we have CMB and other evidence to prove it
Ok where did the matter come from
>atheists; DEEEYUUUHHHHP UHHH I DON KNOOOWWW DUUUURRRHHH PBTBTBBTBTTBBT
Aww man the atheist shit himself lol
>atheists can spell icup
Fucking keked

Attached: 010D9720-1A32-43BB-8337-0E311563E96C.jpg (634x446, 48K)

I have... But although it does calm me, I could not describe it as a religious experience. Don´t get me wrong, it is a good method for organizing your ideas and controlling anxiety, but I still wouldn’t classify it as spiritual.

I just hate the hypocrisy of organized religion - to what I say not what I do. Tbh, I'm a better 'Christian' than many I know in that I lead a morale life. I just don't have the faith required. I identify as agnostic.

I know this is bait, but
>Science is the only truth in the world
how can you know science isn't incorrect
>Because scientists have produced countless studies showing so
how can you know these studies lead to concrete evidence
>Because the Scientific Method proves that they followed rigorous testing to show they were right
what makes the Scientific Method a guaranteed way to prove anything?

and so and and so forth.

Most evangelicals still believe it is a sin

I have no idea. Pascal's wager is powerful because you're either right, and there's a something after death, or you're wrong and it doesn't matter. I think that's where most people stop, and it comforts them, especially if they've lost a loved one. The problem is that after the new atheist wave, that stance doesn't satisfy me anymore, even though I can understand why someone would hold it. Kinda breaks it's charm if you know the reasoning is kinda bs.

so explain to me what it's called when one doesn't believe one way or another because they realize they will never know absolutely

I've thought about it alot and it just seems so pointless that god would care so much about one tiny planet in a limitless universe if he created all of it.

evangelion neon genesis is a sin

because faith is retarding the intellectual progress of humanity.

have fun fucking your dad in the ass

>Ok where did this God who created the world come from
>religious people; DEEEYUUUHHHHP UHHH I DON KNOOOWWW DUUUURRRHHH PBTBTBBTBTTBBT
we can do that too
>actually, Man created God, so us atheists have one-up on ya

That's one hell of a strawman argument.
Here's how it should really play out.

Christian: I believe that there is a big sky daddy that created the universe because that's what my Bibble tells me
Atheist: okay cool, I believe that the universe originated from the Big Bang because that's what all the evidence points to
Christian: OH YEAH WELL WHAT CAME BEFORE THAT, HUH? BTFO
Atheist: I have no clue, but I'm not about to pretend like I know the answer because some book tells me so.

90% of atheist: Religion is stupid!!! That’s why I make it my mission to convert others to atheism through force, if you are religious I just have one question. How does it feel to be a retard?? Huh Christ boy? Huh?

Most atheist are born from a hate of Christianity it seems. Because they don’t ever criticize religions such as mine (thelema) for believing in god. Just Christians. Hence fucking they should be renamed anti Christians. They’re the kids who claimed to be satanist in middle school and then as they got older realized that was stupid but didn’t go back to non stupidity and stopped at atheism.

You can be certain about some versions of God if you have good records of their origins. An extreme example is a version of God from a video-game. In the strictest sense, you can't be certain about anything except that you're thinking in the moment, but there are things you can be so sure of that you won't lose much sleep. We may as well label that as being Gnostic about something, sense it's the closest we can get.

Attached: 14789132.jpg (300x300, 84K)

Ever heard of the golden rule? Do unto others as you would have done unto you.
Yeah you could go your whole life being an asshole and hurting other people, but wouldn't it be better to live as a force of positivity? Don't you want to make the world a better place?

Most Judaic disciplines of religion and many other branches explain this with the explanation that God is omnipotent and omniscience. For them, God caring about all of creation is no different than breathing is for us, it's an action that requires no extraneous effort.

True agnosticism

This and this

I would be afraid every time I used the microwave if I couldn't be sure beyond a reasonable doubt that the scientific method is a reliable way to at least make a model of the world.

I personally do not believe there is enough evidence to substantiate the existence of a god, therefore I cannot believe in religion. (However I admire some of its qualities)

>good records of their origins
You mean like the 2,000 year old book that's gone through hundreds of translations? Try again.

Attached: tandt.jpg (1024x768, 79K)

>Don't you want to make the world a better place?

but why

So you're working on faith in science. There's nothing wrong with that, user, but it's the same mechanics by which religion works. To say one is ok and the other is ridiculous is hypocrisy.

Because the world would be more enjoyable for everyone (yourself included) if it was a better place.

Odds are you are believing something because some book, internet post, video, or pamphlet told you so. You're vesting confidence in an authority figure with culturally meaningful titles and credentials and trusting that they've done the same due diligence as the people who worked on the nuclear bombs.

but what if i was raised as a child soldier from south sudan or some shit and had no concept of western/anglo morality systems

but im suuuuuuuure that if you ask nicely enough i wont decapitate your mother after using her as a human cumrag

I believe what I believe because of evidence, not because of authority.

Wrong again, atheist! Let me hit you with it
>god simply has always existed and we believe this
Atheist, in a fit of tard rage says “ABADABADUBAH YOU CANT SAY THAT IT HAD TO START SOMEWHERE”
>based theist: ok atheist, so where did matter come from? Matter can’t be created or destroyed! So who created it?
Atheist: AHHHHHHHHH PBTBTBTBTBBT. *shits and dies*
Sadly the atheist did not believe in god so he went to hell

Attached: DA3FE000-1012-454E-B011-9DA0E1348D57.jpg (225x225, 5K)

that isn't necessarily true

Define “better”

so it's a matter of semantics lol

butter

Lol, implying that humans can't adapt to new morality systems at literally any time. That's what's so great about being human, you can always reshape your beliefs if you're open to new information.

Pure and simple: I actually read the bible. Even the super boring parts like Numbers which is one fucking long genealogy chapter. I found it full of contradictions and things I didn't feel were right.

I also looked around and saw how hard Christians cherrypick their own holy book. Jews, too, if you're looking at the Old Testament only. The holier than thou antics of Christians also left a sour taste in my mouth. Whatever happened to "let he who is without sin cast the first stone", "turn the other cheek" and other such thing Jesus said?

I decided I'd go with something that made the most sense: atheism.

Attached: Cortana-sad.jpg (866x487, 56K)

ok retard

No, it's a matter of philosophy.

The gap that you have to bridge with science is much shorter (a step vs. the golden gate bridge). Also most empirical claims need to be testable, and most scientific ones are (save for exotic physical theories past rudimentary quantum field theory). If we did the same due diligence to discover drugs as we did to verify scriptural passages, we'd be in the 17th century still.

I just don't believe there's a god? It's not the big a deal user. The majority of atheists you meet will not alert you to their non-belief because 1.) It's not a big deal and 2.) There's a good chance (You) are in fact religious in some way, and we don't want to fucking deal with that. Asshole Atheists are just having the same reaction most religious people have towards the non-religious. They are kids 90% of the time.

I think we're on the same side.

Who's to say that matter hasn't always existed? It didn't necessarily need a creator. Your logic is flawed.

Honestly agreed, most of the edgy atheists are just kids wanting to rebel or be dumb
Also I would agree with the “not a big deal” meme. When I was younger I started looking around at kids who just didn’t go to church or said they didn’t believe in god and they never talked about atheism or whatever. They just mostly smoked and got up to trouble.

>god simply has always existed and we believe this
and where did he come from? your argument against the big bang is that something can't be created from nothing, right? how did your something come to be?

atheistniggers be like
>god is dead. hooray!
19th century german philosophers be like
>god is dead. oh fuck

If matter always existed so can sky deity

>t. doesn't know shit about Nietzsche

I used to be atheist, the simple fact that there's anything at all instead of nothing has changed my mind to believe in some sort of higher power

if you are so inclined to feign ignorance, you have bigger problems than religion. seek professional help.

Right, but I can see matter. I can't see the sky daddy.

no u

Always was there. Your the keklords trying to have their cake and eat it too

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?

Ancient religions get it all right if you cross reference... I believe god is the blank unknowable viking rune and you could probably meet aliens and still not understand

yikes

I like where this is going. Being a decent human being to those around you has just been widely accepted by nearly society since it for the most part prolongs life and happiness

It is a legitimate question. “Better” is a very abstract term, and many people can have different opinions on what better means to them. Stop being so close minded, well, that might be to much to ask of an atheist kek

Beautifully written

acktually your wrong its the african giant frog thank you very much

>he existed even when absolutely nothing existed
>your thing is the only thing that can be impossible, mine is perfectly reasonable
>and to prove it, I'm going to stick my fingers in my ears and shout LALALALALALALALALALA
Religion, errybody.

Do you have the training to decipher such evidence? Have you conducted the experiments yourself, or know the design such that you could be confident that they're reproducible and within reason, lead the the conclusions purported? Are you familiar with the primary literature at all? Or have you evaluated two different stories that you've been told, compared them and formed an outlook (with all of the biases, motivations, and agendas factoring into the decision).

>big bang
>implying big bang created the universe
>the universe contains matter
>implying big bang didn't create matter
>???

They're not the same. They stop being the same once you factor in that very word, faith. Science will quickly slap the taste out of your mouth if you actually adhere to it.

I wish you were as smart as you thought you were.

Okay then let's define "better" in this context. To make the world "better" means to act out of consideration for others, to foster healthiness and positivity among all of humanity as well as for yourself.
Give me an example of how that logic could lead to a worse world.

You just discredited me saying that sky daddy has always been there, but you
>”matter has always been in the universe”
or
>matter cannot he created or destroyed but Big Bang happened
Pick on and fail

This isn't unreasonable. The fact that we're conscious at all. Is that an illusion though? Descartes says no. I wonder if there is commentary on his thought experiment that disproves him.

Faith has to start somewhere, even in science, user. You say it's only a small leap in logic, but I think i'm safe in saying that 99% of people that use anything more technologically progressive than basic tools have done very little if any empirical testing of there own on the validity of the theories and advancements that came before. It would be foolish to require everyone to do so, but that does imply a level of faith just as blind as any theological brand.

Why would anyone be "into" atheism. It's literally just not believing the most insanely stupid thing anyone has ever come up with.

Matter could have existed before the Big Bang - the Big Bang is more to do with the current configuration of our universe than with the creation of our universe as a whole.

>misquoted
I wasn't the guy who said that, but I did point out arguments (You) were making, because, frankly, they're really shitty arguments.
also
>discredited
you had no credit to begin with.

deshu i think its like that scene from idoicracy where the guy has to make up some bullshit about how the plants told him that they need water to survive so that he convince the retards to grow plants so that they wouldnt starve to death..
but like in Mesopotamic era with barbarians murderraping everyone you have to scare them into not being murderrape machines by telling them
some bullshit about being sent to hell if they are bad. spemthing like that

Fair enough, thank you for the definition. To act humanly and consider everyone else’s world view would help reduce conflict, which I think would lead to less violence and death, which may be “good” I guess
However, how far should we take some of this humanitarian-ness?
Look at the niggers. We certainly show them plenty of kindness by way of food stamps and government programs, but they sit around all day and do crime anyways. Similar situation with foreign aid to Africa. Give them food, money, clothes and then they become dependent and don’t know how to take care of themselves
We must carefully consider every action to create a “better” world, and that is assuming violence and war are not “good” which there is decent reason to believe. War and violence raise the chances of death to ones self, which is the ultimate failure.

What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
There's no evidence of deities, so there's no discussion to be had

This is not atheism. This is antitheism.

fucking thank you.
it's like saying, "well no, I'm not a Christian, I'm a Catholic" idiots

>or know the design such that you could be confident that they're reproducible and within reason, lead the the conclusions purported?
This one, yes. The principles of science are actually really simple, once you understand them it's easy to investigate any scientific research and understand its reasoning.

These arguments are perfectly reasonable, following the logical path of an atheist, who likes to cherry pick infor from scientists

haha so clever
>people cant be both sane and hold (x) viewpoint

cringe

>However, how far should we take some of this humanitarian-ness?
It's a balancing act, just like all of life. You have to apply your own oxygen mask before you can apply anyone else's, but you should still consider the people around you and act out of mutual interest whenever possible.

Attached: 9695282-2.jpg (960x520, 65K)

Absolute athiest until i grew up and realized meticulously placed events leading me towards certain things.

Athiesm was an edgy stage in my life. We gotta realize its not just god my negroes in literally everyone. Youre all a part of the source and you will return. If you open your eyes youll notice you are helping yourself after you die. Obviously because you integrate with "god" as most call it.

If you dont accept it or believe it doesnt happen. Simple as that.

Attached: 49505568_10218814435131111_7150473266203721728_o.jpg (948x1017, 220K)

It depends if we are to have any confidence in the institutions in our culture that we've (perhaps unwittingly) charged with dedicating their time to finding out. Though they're far from perfect, with the advancements in engineering, medicine, etc, it's probably a much safer bet to err toward what's coming from these ivory towers than most of what comes from saliva-covered pulpits. If we could not trust the soundness mechanism of action on target tissues of analgesics, derived from the same method from which all of our scientific models come from, what can we trust?

gottem

yes, science breeds logical conclusions, and that 'info' is based on measurable data... what's your point?
>inb4 no point

One way to foster healthiness and positivity among all of humanity, is to commit a mass murder-suicide so that there are no more humans to suffer, yourself included.

That's an example of how that logic could lead to a world that many wouldn't consider "better".

>Faith has to start somewhere
>99% of people
That won't change what science is, nor will it change what those who do science, do, in order to do science. I don't know how much more apparent that needs to be. Making it any more clearer would require you to have faith in a baseball, and for me to throw it directly at you, so that you can register, painfully, its existence beyond your faith in it coming or not coming towards you. Empiricism, via fastball.

More or less this, I don't claim to know all the answers, but can't say I believe in what any of the religions currently have to say either

We seek patterns in everything. Faces in the clouds etc.

I see a lot of people complain about established religious institutions, and I get it. but what about those of us who can´t get a successful religious experience. I´m talking about the subjective feeling of "being one with the universe" that legitimately religious people get from worship.

I think even without religion people still find a way to get at each other’s throat. America and China seem to be about to have a massive conflict over Hong Kong, and that is indicative of a deeper divide over communism and democracy.
You could argue that due to America’s Christian outlook or whatever that that’s why we tried stopping the grow of godless communism. However, I think without that religious aspect we may still try to fight against communism. It’s hard to say. I would certainly agree that if everyone tried helping each other out then we would all be happy. But that is much easier said than done.

>One way to foster healthiness and positivity among all of humanity, is to commit a mass murder-suicide so that there are no more humans to suffer, yourself included.
Lol, that's like saying "the best way to debug this program is to just turn off the computer". You clearly wouldn't be acting out of the interest of others, since I'm guessing most people don't want to die.

For me it's being able to take a moment and be content with that I do have and know, and appreciate that we're here, regardless of how

false dichotomy that someone had to create it
if "muh god" can have "always exited," then why couldn't matter?
Also god somehow has unimaginable power but is without time, has no physical presence but a sentient, moreover omnipotent conscience?

I do not believe that god exists due to the lack of intervention god would have had in society should he actually exist. In the bible, god is painted as a figure that loves all, is supportive and caring for all his creations, yet nothing I've seen in the real world supports the existence of a figure like that watching over us. Where was he during the holocaust? Where was he during the Great Persecution? The idea that someone with omnipotence and omnipresence exists, loves us unconditionally, and ALSO does not intervene to better off the human race doesn't add up in my eyes.

Unfortunately, not all of it aligns.
Unless, all the matter in the universe has always existed.

Nah it aint some shadow its literal divine intervention in a witnessable and understandable and evident fashion in my life.

Then again im an absolute pure soul that has never hurt anybody and doesnt even hurt or kill insects so i got that. Look into yourself fam and understand when you die theres infinite possibility do not limit your afterlife.

Great, I guess there are no black and white actions. It's best to follow a system of ethics that reduces the chances of conflict and in general human struggle
>unironically uses "nigger" and uses black people as part of an argument
you've made some good points, now get the fuck out

Uhuh

Do you...know where your at?

>I think even without religion people still find a way to get at each other’s throat.
This is true, and indicative of what I believe to be the humanity's biggest failing: the "us vs them" mentality.

You may enjoy this video:
youtube.com/watch?v=I0a_0bhnQ8s&t=25s

I'm not saying that science should be disregarded or that it's incorrect to have a healthy belief that what has been previously decided as true will remain true. Just that the mechanics of having that belief and the mechanics of theological faith are similar enough that saying one is an obvious 'correct' faith and the other is believing in something that
>comes from saliva-covered pulpits
is hypocritical to the extreme

They can't answer it because they can't explain why science hasn't answered everything but they know everything about Creation, or think they know.

>Unless, all the matter in the universe has always existed.
Which, again, no is denying could be possible.

Nah m8, when you die you "go to the same place" as before you were born - you simply cease to exist.

This would be easy to claim on it's face, but there are of scientific claims that are erroneously seen as well established, and the fact that they are published and talked about in high circles socially reinforces their validity in a layman on that topic. There is an epidemic of submitted papers and studies that are erroneous, but since there is no money or glory in reproducing experiments, they are taken as new understandings about our reality. Many tenets of evolutionary psychology are being called into question; seen as another incarnation of social Darwinism with new paint and shrubs.

I'd recommend reading the Book of Job if you haven't already. It deals with this sort of idea. Not trying to argue with you, I just think maybe you'll gain some insight.

Agreed.

I really hope so

Fair enough

Have you not been reading the thread?
Atheists don't often claim to know everything about creation. Refer to the chart

Tribalism really is the oldest conflict (maybe next to just mating conflicts). It’s really ingrained in our heads. I know I said “niggers” on welfare but it can generally be expanded to whites and Hispanics and whoever else. Tribalism and nationalism have probably worked in tandem with religion to lead to many millions and millions of needless death.

I am grateful for the life I have, but I am unable to relate that feeling to a spiritual context. The only moments in which I have legitimately tried to connect with an idea of divinity, is during crisis, like a family members death... when I rationalize it, it seems like a defense mechanism. I´m no trying to say that is the case for everyone, but it is hard for me to understand religiousness because I am unable to feel it, if that makes any sense.

It was bound to happen, but at first we had such a great flow of ideas and opinions. The streak is ruined. I genuinely thought this thread would last long before it turned into ass.

No, that's like saying "the best way to stop this program is to just turn off the computer". It's not the best way. But it is a way. A really bad way, because we have the context to know that the way we want, involves not interrupting the environment the program is running in. The logic given? It's straight, uncompromising, first-order logic. You would be acting in the interests of others, if your motive is to prevent undue suffering by fostering healthiness and positivity. Most people not wanting to die was never specified. Therefore, if everyone dies, no one suffers.

It's logic in its purest form. The path of least resistance is the path where you're not expending undue resources and time on countless variables that are liable to change almost everything about the "equation". The logic? You want to achieve the goal with minimal effort and waste. No one is sad when everyone is dead, and that technically means that no one is not happy. No one is unhealthy if everyone is dead, and that technically means that no one is not healthy, because no one is alive.

The typical machine would absolutely act out of "consideration" in this fashion, if you gave it such poorly-defined instructions. Are you choking? If you die, you'll no longer be able to choke ever again. Problem solved, indefinitely.

Well, I was mostly using the word as a meme, I know not just black people use food stamps. How about “the bottom rungs of society”

Who's the edgy faggot now?

But see, the great thing about science is that it's never a done deal. It's always possible that our conclusions could be proven wrong, but until that happens we believe what the evidence points to right now. Sure, there may be an influx of erroneous research papers right now, but that can always change.
Problems only arise when people treat science like gospel.

It makes sense user, I wish I could explain further but really I don't think I fully "get it" either

u

People like you are like the tribal niggers that believed some god makes it rain just because they didn't know yet what evaporation is.

Atheism just makes more sense to me. I’m inclined to rationalise science over a 2,000 year-old book. Not hating, I just don’t see the need in dedicating my whole life to a religion in the hope of ascension when my rationale tells me there’s nothing after death. It seems like a massive waste of time.

Except that the standards to which truth claims coming from both sources are held to, are starkly different. Axioms such as the existence of God, that it's a particular religion's version, in a particular denomination, even miracles done on behalf of said entity that aren't testable, are held as having happened. There is no way to interact with these features, save for the ways clergy, and holy texts prescribe. Claims in science have to be falsifiable, before they are applied in any practical manner. The one valuable thing the new atheist movement highlighted, is the burden of proof being on the one making the positive claim about a thing.

Bet

prove human rights exist

Don't worry I didn't take it up the ass or anything like that. It's just that seeing that a billion times in every thread gets really old, and I was hoping to foster some new thoughts. This thread kind of died a long time ago

I wonder if science has tried simulating god as an AI yet

Can’t without religion lol

Yes

Death is the absence of suffering, but it is also the absence of health and positivity. It is possible to foster these positive traits while also diminishing suffering, therefore "kill all humans" is not the most efficient way to reduce suffering.

>Kill all humans
Net positivity gain: 0
>Foster health and compassion
Ne positivity gain: positive

ayyy

Attached: 02E35F5D-3A15-404E-A37F-28A91054C31A.png (936x1040, 244K)

Monopoly Socialism Yea Forums Edition:

They don't exist as a law of reality, but they do exist as a philosophy. You don't need religion in order to believe in a philosophy.

That´s a honest reply, I guess trying to discuss something as abstract and personal as feelings/emotions is silly in the context of a message board. i´m just glad there are some sane people behind all the nonsense, thanks bro.

I'm skimming through it now in order to continue discussing (as this thread will be long dead before I properly understand the meaning of every single word put down on the page) but what I'm reading still doesn't seem to properly answer my question. The monologue towards Job never properly gives solid reasoning behind what he had done to deserve the suffering (though we are privy to the communications between god and satan that seem to be the cause). Job's reasoning early on has merit when compared to the image of god that is commonly accepted. The innocent SHOULD never be punished like he is. During the monologue, god seems to instead just say Job is so individually irrelevant to the bigger picture that his suffering isn't something worth caring about.

oh yeah? prove it

is basically the essence of human rights and it requires no religion

Fair point bro. I would consider it a bit far fetched as well, I would like to think everyone here is bright behind the mask of Yea Forums, but I have my doubts.

Why do you fight user? It stresses you out so much, I know. Why don’t you just look at me? I like when you look at me

Attached: 0686FA2B-522F-49BB-AC6D-2AFE70277D7D.jpg (400x400, 130K)

BEGONE THOT

ok now prove it for real this time

You should try reeeeally meditating - get to a point where you no longer think, but simply feel. It is a trance-like state which is difficult to achieve, but it is possible.

Lmao, how about you explain what part of my argument you take issue with and then we work from there?

Great job overall, everybody. I saw a lot of reasonable arguments made and more than several resolutions. This didn't entirely turn into an autistic war. Most were respectful and open minded. Thanks to everyone who participated. Now it's time to beat it to hentai

Attached: Screen_Shot_2018-12-21_at_2.08.29_PM.png (1266x680, 805K)

There are ideas about that.

>it is also the absence of health and positivity
Do you consider a dead corpse to be healthy?

Let me also better illustrate the absence of health and positivity meaning you've achieved your goals. You have a value of 1 health, and you can only have a maximum of 1 health. That health, 1, is brought down to 0.5. When that happens, it means you do not have the maximum amount of health. You are not completely healthy. You are half-healthy. You have less than the maximum amount of health. You are unhealthy.

1, healthy.
0.5, unhealthy.
0, dead.

When there's an unhealthy in the system, it counts as exactly 1 thing of unhealthiness. It counts, not towards, but against healthiness. Against health. Until you solve this, you haven't achieved the realization of better health in human beings, to any degree.

But if you get a value of 0, you have something that doesn't contribute to healthiness, or unhealthiness. How unhealthy is a corpse? I'm going to ask that again. But I'm also going to point out that you now have a value of 0 health. 0. A placeholder for "null". You have not a thing. You have no thing. You have nothing. It doesn't count towards healthiness, and it doesn't count towards unhealthiness. Technically, you're still 0 for 0.

Like you state with the net positivity gain of 0, you technically also earn a net negativity gain of 0. Corpses do not feel. Technically, you win. No more humans are sick. No more humans are sad.

>"kill all humans" is not the most efficient way to reduce suffering
Dead humans do not want anything. Dead humans do not consume anything. Dead humans, literally, just decompose. They're not even regarded as persons anymore, in many real-world cases. We never feed corpses, or put them on IV drips.

can i just cut the chase and suck yuor cock already
jeesh

because i dont see any evidence for a god. Please note that im an agnostic atheist, i dont believe there is no god, i simply do not believe in a god. Theists make a claim that is not backed up with evidence, and so i dont believe there is a god. Belief in a god is also unfalsifiable, so it can not possibly be proven right or wrong without undeniable evidence. its like saying theres a teapot orbiting the earth, and then when we go up to look i just say its on the other side, and then you go over, look at the other side and say "wheres the teapot user" and i just say it orbited around.

Not the guy your talking to, but the world generally is full of suffering, and there’s no denying that. However, there are wonderful experiences that are worth enduring the suffering for (at least, to many it is worth it). Falling in love, marriage, having children, PAWGs, and seeing where it all goes.
Then again, to reduce suffering completely by killing oneself is certainly a thing you could do. It will also forever sever your potential enjoyment of all of the wonderful things life has to offer. It is a very important decision you must weigh out. It can also depend on where you are. Are you attractive or sociable enough to even have wife, kids, PAWGs? If not, then it may be a life full of masterbation and vidya for you. Is that worth the suffering of life? Maybe, maybe not for you. This is a decision you must make. However, unlike in life, you cannot change your mind once you go through with it. You can afford to make a lot of really stupid decisions in life and come back from them but suited is legitimately the only decision you cannot come back from, so it must be thought out very critically

I would love to achieve something like that, so far i have been unable to, but maybe your are right. The dichotomy between body and mind is hard to brake in our context... That´s why, although I consider myself an atheist for now, I do envy truly religious people.

Do you have a brain injury that prevents you from thinking critically or actually engaging in debate?

Fidna dab on all yall

:O

no im atheist

So i can either become god or be nothing.
Hahaha good luck

I think what he was trying to say is that with atheism there is no grounded anything for human rights. No equation or universal law. Just things humans made up as not to kill each other. This is also assuming killing each other is a bad thing.

>It will also forever sever your potential enjoyment of all of the wonderful things life has to offer
The machine does not care. It has achieved its goal.

True, but y'know I think that's a pretty reasonable assumption.

Well yes. Should we kill the bad people?
What if there is someone who just stirs up trouble and does nothing else but lies and cheats and steals and beats people up? Contributes absolutely nothing? She he continue to live? Well maybe that’s what jail is for, so we don’t have to kill people who are being chaotic.
What if they get into jail and they keep beating the shit out of their cells mates? What if their a serial murderer? We still have the death penalty and people are killed by the state fairly regularly. You know what they say about assuming

Ahh I understand where your coming from. But is the humans (or machines) goal to completely reduce suffering? What if the machines goal is just to reproduce? Then suicide isn’t a very productive option. The world is certainly bleak. Maybe humans think too much
I have an idea that people have become too smart for their own good. We think about existential crises and stuff like that.

>all these edgy teenagers saying nothing happens after you die
Im sorry to burst your retarded bubble but you quite literally cannot experience non consciousness. Its nothing. Which why in all near death experiences where the body completely shuts down and the patient dies they report their consciousness continued. You can't experience nothing and rhe fact that wr experience our consciousness already proves that at the very fucking least we are always experiencing this shit human life.

Sorry edgy teens your dreams of being absolutely fucking nothing isnt real

Attached: 3aac3f0b926e49c3b89a4c1d8af50f74--tiger-tattoo-tattoo-ink.jpg (243x300, 20K)

Never believed, never went to Church and never got onto trouble. Nice try tho

Tagged this post on accident this isnt directed at this post

Attached: 20989172_166958837210668_3833062203240525395_o.jpg (522x1240, 118K)

Because life tends to be boring. Yes, some fantastical super being could control everything and has a divine plan, and yes, there could be an afterlife and shit but the easiest explanation is that the universe just is, life was an accident, there’s nothing special about us, and nothing is gonna happen after we die.

Our planet will influence countless other worlds in the future. You dont think these space niggas arent invested in us? Youre nuts

Religon is the only reason why there's war and despair. People desparately clinging to old traditions, that were meant for much, much older times. Religion is not evolving with the world, even if they say they do. That doesn't mean however that all aspects of religion is wrong. Things like sympaty is an example. But one doesnt has to be religious to gain these virtues. The only religions that would be acceptable in our time are buddhism and hinduism. They do not encourage violence, aim for self-improvement as a better humanbeing and learn you to let go of your ego. Furthermore, contradictory to other beliefs, they accept every kind of human. It doesnt matter what you did or who you are. Everyone is capable of change if they want to. Hate, war, violence, jealously are all kind of traits from your ego. Once you accept the fact, that there's only consciousness and your physical body, life may start to feel different.

If the machine's goal is to reproduce itself, then that's worse. It would consider killing all humans a means fo reclaiming resources while minimizing suffering. 2 birds with 1 nuke. And, remember, it's to solve all of that for humans, not machines. So it wouldn't kill itself. Just all the humans.

If the machine's goal is to help humans reproduce fruitfully, alongside the other 2 directives, then it might not kill all the humans. But it might kill a lot of them, and then forcefully breed the rest to be mindless bags of pleasure flesh, only to cull them at a certain age. Still technically helping humans breed, while promoting positivity and health.

It could go the extreme route and cull a single replenishing bank of synthesized gametes, immediately after they're fertilized. Still technically helping humans breed, and there would be no more living humans to muddy the machine's track record of 0 suffering and no bad health.

What I meant was after you die, not us collectively though I doubt there is any intelligent alien life in this galaxy

Show us on the planet where the space niggers touched you

Right on my 69 inch penis

>buh muh fee lings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is why prison should be geared more towards rehabilitation than confinement. Where did we go so wrong?

Church and state.

/thread

No faggot

>:(

there's no intelligent life on this planet either

but we're not alone in space we're just hopelessly isolated by time and distance

Rehabilitation rarely works. Which is why prison is mostly about confinement. Rehabilitation is basically guilt and wishful dreams.

>but we're not alone in space we're just hopelessly isolated by time and distance
I know anal probes can be horrific and it's hard to develop a bond with someone who is forcefully penetrating your anus, but saying that's too great a distance to bridge is just you being hopeless. We can learn to love our alien anal violators.