/atheism/ - Atheism

Thank God it went to that lady who bitches about video games and not someone like Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Is Anita even an atheist? I know McIntosh isn't one so it's pretty safe to say she'd be unable to utilize enough independent thought to have a differing theological opinion than him but what religion is she even?

See, kids? If you're enough of a con artist, you could be in line to get award after award.

All that oppression must be rough to deal with.

I don't have words to express myself for this, I just can't fucking believe this world. How can people not see through her bullshit and twitter name calling is beyond me, just incredibly stupid.

I have lost all respect for Harvard now.

>>3535
Feminism is the new religion.

Only now it's the religion of white people.

>>3555
You know, if anyone is pulling the strings on this Social Justice shit, they are doing a damned good job.

Many people cannot live without religion. Social Justice endues a strong often false and unjustified sense of strength, independence, and self worth. Didn't care about anything before? Now you care about social issues and happiness for all, above all else, and if you put anything before social issues you're damn near excommunicated until you deeply apologize.

You know, because freedom of speech and the state of the world aren't equally important.

>>3554

Isn't it just a group connected to Harvard and not the institution its self?

>>3561
Knowing academia, I seriously doubt that.

Are you sure it's the humanism that's the problem?

>>3601
I was going to say the same thing.
>Various places give people like Sarkeesian awards simply to look good
>Harvard gave her their Humanist award for the same reason
>Thus Humanism is the problem

They would have given her "Best science fair project" if it meant they'd look progressive.

>>3605
The problem with Humanism is it's just an empty gesture someone says to look good. You accept the agency of human beings, who the fuck doesn't?

>>3607
And humanism is more empathetic than it is rational, it calls itself rational but so many humanists or those who loudly call themselves humanists are anything but. Their reason clouded by empathy. Worst are those who assert empathy unlike other emotions doesn't cloud judgement.

>>3607
>Who the fuck doesn't
Considering how there's people, philosophies, and entire countries that are willing to deny people even the most basic of human rights….

>>3608
Can you give an example of a humanist claiming that humanism is rational?

>>3609
>Considering how there's people, philosophies, and entire countries that are willing to deny people even the most basic of human rights….
Granting or taking away rights is not the same as denial of agency. Suppose I take away your rights you still act in the physical world, I can't really remove your agency aside from killing you. And even me killing you is not a denial of your agency, it's an awareness that in order to remove your influence or agency you need to be a corpse. This is an acceptance of agency. Not denial.

>Can you give an example of a humanist claiming that humanism is rational?
It claimed that most humanists are rational on wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
>Humanism is a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over established doctrine or faith (fideism).

>>3611
So if humanism isn't very good then what's your stance on things? What's your alternative?

>>3607
That's the problem with the false concept of altruism as well. There is no such thing as altruism. Even when we selflessly help someone, we do it for a selfish reason, however small.

>>3612
Nothing, we don't need anything like it and we never did.

>>3614
Precisely. We as humans take care of humans quite well. That's why those who don't are either abnormal or under extenuating circumstances.

>>3614
I remain unconvinced.

>>3618
I never said that.

Humanism is one of those labels that I avoid using for myself due to vagueness but don't automatically think less of people who use it for themselves because they could mean what wikipedia describes >>3611 here, which is both good and nontrivial. But they could also just mean "muh empathy" and "muh leftist bullshit".

>>3613
Altruism occurs with or without humanism, Hamilton's rule applies to species which aren't even conscious. Reciprocal altruism the same.

Altruism always costs the altruists something it gives to the beneficiary. It evolved because of the implications for group dynamics and reproduction. But is the group more important than the individual? Saving others by putting yourself in harms way isn't the best way to ensure your consciousness survives. And since your, my, everyone's consciousness is the necessity for agency humanism is practically contradictory. Saying because altruism is doing good for others which is always at your expense and you must do good for others to be humanist implies you must sacrifice your agency. Fuck that.

>>3632
Humanism serves no function. Humanism is practically racketeering, pretending to solve a problem where there isn't any.

You see humanism is a relic from a time when we killed god by demonstrating the concept lacked evidence. It served to fill the void left by the death of religion. But we never needed that void plugged in the first place. In fact I would argue humanism misses the point altogether, the void left by religion's death is our freedom, no need to chain ourselves down to another feel good ideology.

More importantly ideologies the way I see it are all bad because they prescribes to the person what to think thus limiting what they may think. Methodology or approaches on the other hand shows the person how to think in some way or set of ways expanding their possible thinking. Humanism is not a methodology because it tells you to uphold conventional morality and be good by their convention. But why? Sometimes doing the conventionally immoral thing helps you and those closest to you or your society.

As for humanism being necessary for morality, this is as silly as claiming you need god for morality. I for one hold no morals (I find them stupid limitations people impose on themselves), when people say I'm acting conventionally moral (I've been told to be rather generous with things) they are mistaking morality for instinct or emotional impulse or even calculated coercion (though this doesn't happen amongst friends because it wouldn't make me feel great). Thus one can be "good" without morality and especially without humanism.

>>3655
>not realizing that what you're arguing for is still humanism

"The absurd type of humanism is to glory in 'Man the magnificent' ascribing to all men the value of the deeds of the most distinguished men. Only a dog or a horse would be in a position to declare such a judgement.

"We cannot, either, fall into worshipping humanity, for that way leads to Fascism.

"But there is another humanism, the acceptance that there is only one universe, the universe of
human subjectivity."

Jean-Paul Sartre

>>3648
Yeah you did. I paraphrased, but you did say that.

>>3662
I don't think I did.

>>3659
Except I'm not.

>"We cannot, either, fall into worshipping humanity, for that way leads to Fascism.
Which is practically what most humanists do. For them it's an attempt to replace dead skywizards with humanity and then self-proclaim it's a rational position.

>"But there is another humanism, the acceptance that there is only one universe, the universe of human subjectivity."
Human subjectivity is a product of this universe, it isn't a universe in itself. The only thing in this world that is subjective is our interpretation of it. Now interpretation may be entirely subjective but what we're interpreting does not have to be. There are objective truths otherwise science and engineering would be impossible. Could you imagine if the universe was subjective? Sometimes f=ma, v=ir, J=-D*DC/Dx, or whatever applies sometimes but it doesn't for the same system and same conditions, the only thing that's changed is the universe's mood. LOL, we'd just figure out how to factor that in the analysis if it can be determined. But I digress, the universe we live in is objective even though our perception of it may not be.

For example, consider an almost empty space with nothing else than you (somehow you can survive in vacuum) and an object like a ball. That object moving away from you looks like from your frame of reference like you're either moving away from the object or the object moves away from you. But there is only one correct interpretation, the object is the one in motion not you. Your position is fixed in time while its changes.

There is no rational reason to think this universe ends where our perception of it ends. So much for humanism being a position of reason, it continuously fails to demonstrate this.

>Jean-Paul Sartre
I guess it's hard to see the world for what it is when you have strabismus (or the scientific term: googly-eyes).


The point is either humanism is the position that human life is sacred regardless of the existence of skywizards or it provides absolutely nothing. In other words it provides absolutely nothing.

>>3533
If by doesn't believe in a creator deity, probably.

She does follow the religion of the SJW though.

>>3683
And people still think feminist SJWs are atheists.

>>3685
As some people said before, some are and some aren't.

>>3683
WOW Jonathan is the biggest cunt in the universe. Why is that 'Powered by Intel' bit in there? It seems really unneeded.

>>3699
It's an old #GG image. It was supposed to help get Intel to drop FemFreq.

>>3701
Oh okay, understood. I'm guessing a new one is needed for Samsung now.

>>3689
Most are not, and those that are I question whether or not they say they are agnostics to avoid oppressing theists with their existence, because most atheists are white male oppressors and the majority of Black people in America are religious.

>>3703
>Most black people are religious
Reminds me of the shittyness that was the Secular Students Alliance.

I'm willing to give atheist feminists like Rebecca Watson and PZ Myers the benefit of the doubt that they actually don't believe in a god.

However, they are quite the conspiracy nutters.

>>3709
What's so bad about the SSA? I greatly considered starting a chapter in my southern college. It desperately needed an improvement. Christians everywhere in this supposedly secular school preaching right on the laws with people gathered around.

>>3723
*lawns not laws

>>3723
The one I was at was filled with SJW types. I think there was one guy who wasn't a SJW and when he pointing out that one of the chucklefucks was being racist, the guy stood up and yelled "shut up" over and over again. That was the very first meeting I went to.

There were as many gender/sociology studies as there were science and art students.

Then there was this one bearded guy or whatever who bitched about Dawkins' twitter at the end of just about every meeting.

I didn't go to many meetings. I hated being at college enough already. The last thing I needed was to attend an hour and thirty minutes meetings filled with turbo feminists.