Interesting and Humour - page 1937
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
And now a lot is already known - the collider is awake :) And more will soon be known:
Only:
Nobody's there...
They are out hunting. The medics are swamped with work. Blood guts dismembered.
*
They are out on the hunt. The medics are swamped with work. Blood guts dismembered.
I gave a small quote... It is rather subjective and comes from the fact that the author recognises the division of all actions into right and wrong.
By the way! If we admit that such a division exists - it is a proof of the existence of God. If to admit that such a division does not exist - then there is no difference between a prostitute and a schoolteacher, as this difference is subjective and depends on the view of a particular person.
The book speaks very well on this subject. I looked it up now - the introduction takes less than an hour.
By the way, it's not a sophism at all :) It's a sophism to say: "The author is wrong - because he wrote a fairy tale, and authors of fairy tales always make things up".
An example of sophism:
It does not follow from the fact that human morality classifies actions into good and bad that a god exists. Aborigines in the jungle still eat the flesh of a defeated enemy, and for them this ritual is definitely good, but it does not follow that their god exists. In our society their act is considered savage and unacceptable, in their society it is part of their distinctive culture. If you think about it, religious morality is quite different from secular morality. For example, murder is a bad act for our, secular morality, no matter to whom and for what reasons it is applied. That is why we have a moratorium on the death penalty. Another thing in Christianity: if the Christian father-god orders Abraham to kill his son, he must do it, otherwise he is a sinner and an apostate. If he kills his son for the glory of God, then he is good and will be placed in heaven. So killing is bad, but if God commands it, then it is good. There is a lot of such lack of principle in religion, and in reality it is only covered by general human norms and turns out to be not at all what it pretends to be.
By the way, it is not a sophism at all :) It's a sophism to say: "The author is wrong - because he wrote a fairy tale, and the authors of fairy tales always make things up".
A sophism, and what a sophism it is. What is good and what is bad is what believers are told by their god (through scriptures and priests). And if objective reality does not correspond to concepts of good and evil in religion, it is not a problem of atheism that diagnosed it, it is a problem of religion itself, because its concepts of good and evil do not find confirmation in the world.
By the way! If one accepts that such a division exists, then that is proof of the existence of God. If we admit that such a division does not exist - then there is no difference between a prostitute and a schoolteacher, as this difference is subjective and depends on the view of a specific person.
Who says there is a difference? For me, for example, it is not obvious that a teacher is better than a prostitute. They both perform socially important functions and are necessary for our society. Generally speaking, the most expensive and cynical prostitutes are those who give not for money, but for more valuable goods: a stamp in the passport, a life time allowance, expensive gifts... The list goes on and on.
It does not follow from the fact that human morality classifies actions into good and bad that a god exists. Aborigines in the jungle still eat the flesh of a defeated enemy, and for them this ritual is definitely good, but it does not follow that their god exists. In our society their act is considered savage and unacceptable, in their society it is part of their distinctive culture. If you think about it, religious morality is quite different from secular morality. For example, killing is a bad act for our, secular morality, no matter to whom and for what reasons it is applied. That is why we have a moratorium on the death penalty. Christianity is different: if the Christian father-god orders Abraham to kill his son, he must do it, otherwise he is a sinner and an apostate. If he kills his son for the glory of God, then he is good and will be placed in heaven. So killing is bad, but if God commands it, then it is good. There is a lot of such unscrupulousness in religion, and in reality it is only covered by general human norms and turns out to be not at all what it pretends to be.
What a sophism, and what a sophism. What is good and what is bad, believers are told by their god (through scriptures and priests). And if the objective reality does not correspond to the concepts of good and evil in religion, it is not a problem of atheism that diagnosed it, it is a problem of religion itself, because its concepts of good and evil do not find confirmation in the world.
And who says there is a difference? It's not obvious to me, for example, that a teacher is better than a prostitute. They both fulfil socially important functions and are necessary for our society. Generally speaking, the most expensive and cynical prostitutes are those who give not for money, but for more valuable goods: a stamp in the passport, a life time allowance, expensive gifts... The list goes on and on.