Is Atheism demeaning?

[DanieltheDragon]

In another thread someone suggested that atheism was demeaning in totality. In other words it demeans not just women or men but everyone.


Question for debate is Atheism demeaning?

If so how and why?


Definitions. To avoid false equivocation I am debating under the assertion that atheism is not a religion.

Religion is defined as: the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

so we have universality on the word of gods or god

god

(in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.

I think your point can still be made if we agree to these terms.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 50 by Artie]

Of course for the victims. The ones that survive might have adaptations to pass on to their children.

In evolution all humans are animals. That's why.

[Neatras]

[Replying to post 51 by Wootah]

You're suggesting that a group of psychopaths murdering a group of non-aging humans is a progressive step for evolution... Even setting aside the fact that gene selection in a relatively uniform killing spree has a very small chance of occurring, why would there be any deciding reason to refer to that activity as 'moral'? We don't decide that any form of evolution is morally greater than a state of stagnation. We tend to look forward to opportunities where humans express allele variations that allow them to survive and assist humanity, but that doesn't mean any of it falls into ethical equations. We still rely on our former values of protecting human life to avoid committing regular genocide.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 52 by Neatras]

What former values? Why are they needed for you? Why doesn't evolution have values?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to Wootah]

You know all evolution does is explain the diversity of life. It can be used to show how certain behaviors form, but the theory of evolution is simply genetic change over time.

There are Christians Muslims Hindus Buddhists and more that believe in evolution. Evolution does not exclude any of supernatural beliefs one could want to have. So why are you trying to claim that 5 hose who believe in evolution can't believe in morality etc.

[KenRU]

How does murder exist within an evolutionary framework?

We evolved a survival instinct and don't want to die. Survival is good death is bad. Murder causes death. Therefore murder immoral.

Death is essential to evolution. Without the danger of death that survival provides there would be no impetus to evolve. Murderers increase the opportunity for survival opportunities and are therefore moral.

Why does one need the danger of death to evolve? Death is not necessary for evolution to occur (other things sure). In fact, it would seem quite obvious that it is a very successful impediment to reproduction and the passing on of one's genetic code.

[Bust Nak]

Death is essential to evolution. Without the danger of death that survival provides there would be no impetus to evolve. Murderers increase the opportunity for survival opportunities and are therefore moral.

Naturalistic fallacy. What increases evolutionary fitness is not necessarily moral. Besides, artifically rising the "enviromental risks" would only steer the population down one narrow evolutionary path. Think along the lines of hospital superbug, while well adapted to hospital enviroment, they won't survive in the wild.

But my point before was that there is no metaphysical basis to claim there is a a type of action called murder at all. Can a lion murder a lamb? Can one animal murder another animal?

It's just a label for the undesirable kind of slaying.