32: Godless

[Scumhook]

Originally Posted by Bucho

It does follow the same principle. Worms eat the soul too.

Maybe your fucked up Maori worms eat souls.

Fuck knows, a dead kiwi soul wouldn't provide much sustenance. Poor bastard worms are probably starving.

Or they're immigrating to Oz, like the rest of you cunts.

[MichaelApproved]

Originally Posted by Scumhook

You choose to believe in something that you have no evidence for - this sounds like faith... Albeit faith based on reasoning.

It's not faith, it's reasoning. Those two words mean two completely different things. Reasoning is based on facts and actual information. Faith is defined by lack of proof.

Faith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reason - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My understanding about what happens when the body dies is based on reason, not faith. The phrase "faith based on reasoning" does not compute.

Originally Posted by Scumhook

When we die, our bodies stop moving around and donate their energy into worm food. The energy within us is neither created nor destroyed - why couldn't our "soul" (for want of a better word) also follow this principle?

Back up. You're assuming we even have a soul when there is no evidence a soul even exists. So, before you wonder what happens to the soul, you should first prove that a soul exists. If you can't prove that something exists, then there's no need to worry what happens to that thing after life is over.

[Scumhook]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

It's not faith, it's reasoning. Those two words mean two completely different things. Reasoning is based on facts and actual information. Faith is defined by lack of proof.

Faith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reason - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My understanding about what happens when the body dies is based on reason, not faith. The phrase "faith based on reasoning" does not compute.



Back up. You're assuming we even have a soul when there is no evidence a soul even exists. So, before you wonder what happens to the soul, you should first prove that a soul exists. If you can't prove that something exists, then there's no need to worry what happens to that thing after life is over.

Fuck, so all the times I've been called a "soulless bastard", they were right???

Seriously though, thanks for the answers. I'll think about them and drop back in later.

[MichaelApproved]

Originally Posted by Scumhook

Fuck, so all the times I've been called a "soulless bastard", they were right???

Can't agree with the bastard part but soulless is true. A soul is a made up concept with no bases in reality.

Originally Posted by Scumhook

Seriously though, thanks for the answers. I'll think about them and drop back in later.

No problem

[Scumhook]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

Can't agree with the bastard part

You may need to read some of my other posts before arriving at this conclusion

[Scumhook]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

A soul is a made up concept with no bases in reality.

I can see where you're coming from, but I honestly don't know if I am capable (or want to) agree with that.

Kind of like incest - if you fuck your sister in the arse or use protection, there should be nothing wrong with it (I think that was briefly mentioned on a KATG a while ago), but there's an ingrained taboo against it, so sis's naughty bits are off limits.

Years of personal and cultural indoctrination may be too difficult to overcome.

Like you & Myq said, "better to believe the wrong thing and do the right thing".

Or in my case "believe the wrong thing, generally do the wrong thing and make poor life choices, then wash them all away in a flood of booze and tears".

Moar thinking for now...

[MichaelApproved]

Originally Posted by Scumhook

I can see where you're coming from, but I honestly don't know if I am capable (or want to) agree with that.

I can understand that. I'm still fighting life long, faith based, lessons I was taught growing up.

Originally Posted by Scumhook

Like you & Myq said, "better to believe the wrong thing and do the right thing".

The trouble I have with that is that it makes it hard to be dynamic. If your beliefs are based in non-fictional stories that don't make logical sense, it'll be hard to reason on your own when a new situation comes up.

The question of right and wrong becomes a list of bullet points rather than reasons for doing the right thing. If you have a reason for doing the right thing, you'll be able to apply that to more situations. If you're just given a list of things that are correct to do, it's harder to apply that to new situations.

I believe that religion and faith based morals give people bullet point lessons. You're not taught to reason, you're taught to just listen, obey and follow these rules. Well, what happens when a new life challenge comes up? Your ability to reason is not developed. Your ability to tackle that life challenge is harder.

[Scumhook]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

The question of right and wrong becomes a list of bullet points rather than reasons for doing the right thing. If you have a reason for doing the right thing, you'll be able to apply that to more situations. If you're just given a list of things that are correct to do, it's harder to apply that to new situations.

I believe that religion and faith based morals give people bullet point lessons. You're not taught to reason, you're taught to just listen, obey and follow these rules. Well, what happens when a new life challenge comes up? Your ability to reason is not developed. Your ability to tackle that life challenge is harder.

I was never that good at the "obey and blindly follow the rules" part. Too many annoying questions kept popping up in little Scummy's mind. Obviously, the devil was causing me to question what I was being brainwashed with taught...

What I took away from my Christian upbringing was:
1) Treat other people like you're OK with being treated
2) You reap what you sow

I try to live my life according to these two principles. I reckon that was what Jesus (or his ghost writer) was getting at.


I would still like to hear you and Jesse (for example) debate the atheist vs agnostic sides. Maybe cHemmo could line that up down the track?

[MichaelApproved]

Originally Posted by Scumhook

I try to live my life according to these two principles. I reckon that was what Jesus (or his ghost writer) was getting at.

When someone points out that there are good messages in the Bible, I like to ask why bother with the baggage that comes with the Bible? The same package that gives you the "nice" messages also classified women as property and advocated stoning of people as punishment.

I'd like to give my child a book of moral lessons that doesn't require me to say "ignore this part, we don't do that anymore." You can't do that with the Bible. You can't give the bible and say "everything in here is cool. Follow it exactly." Well, most people wouldn't do that. Though, some of the craziest people do.

I understand that you've already heard those biblical stories while growing up and you've chosen the "good" ones to help guide you through life. That's good. It's a shame you have to skip most of the book before you get to the "good" parts. It'd be better to drop the whole book and start with something better. We are not required to get our morals from such a damaged and outdated book.

Originally Posted by Scumhook

I would still like to hear you and Jesse (for example) debate the atheist vs agnostic sides. Maybe cHemmo could line that up down the track?

I'm always happy to debate but a debate of atheist VS. agnostic would most likely be splitting hairs. We'd probably be spending most of the time trying to define the words and terms we are using in the conversation.

[Scumhook]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

When someone points out that there are good messages in the Bible, I like to ask why bother with the baggage that comes with the Bible? The same package that gives you the "nice" messages also classified women as property and advocated stoning of people as punishment.

To be fair, there was a big CTRL-Z whacked down by JC in the New Testament. He said forget about the old stuff, and just be nice to people. I view the OT as basically Jewish history. And some ancient porn in the Song of Solomon.

JC advocated him who is without sin casting the 1st stone.

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

Though, some of the craziest people do.

Yes, and that's why you have the Republican Party.

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

I understand that you've already heard those biblical stories while growing up and you've chosen the "good" ones to help guide you through life. That's good. It's a shame you have to skip most of the book before you get to the "good" parts. It'd be better to drop the whole book and start with something better. We are not required to get our morals from such a damaged and outdated book.

Yep, there's a lot of shit in there, but teaching kids (or whomever) to pick out the good bits and to avoid indoctrination is a valuable tool for forming their own opinions about stuff. Being able to sort the good bits from the shit is very useful for life. Also useful for smorgasboards.

There's also a bit in the Bible about "test everything". I.e. only do stuff if it aligns with what you think God would want you to do. Change "God" to "your conscience", and is that pretty much what atheists use as their compass?

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

I'm always happy to debate but a debate of atheist VS. agnostic would most likely be splitting hairs. We'd probably be spending most of the time trying to define the words and terms we are using in the conversation.

I'll defer to your judgement on this one. I'm a noob in this whole "God doesn't exist" area.

NB: I just typed "God doesn't exist" and I have not been struck by lightening. Maybe you're right...