DT

Although I am an atheist, I often find myself agreeing with some of the principles of religions such as Buddhism and Taoism. I know other atheists that agree with some of the fundamental principles of Christianity too.

My question is: Did the people who created these principles have genuine wisdom, or did they just make them up for sociological reasons?

I'd especially like to see people's opinions about religious figures such as Confucius and Jesus.

I really don't understand what would lead anybody to believe this. Surely 'the truth' is absolute and exists independantly of what we think about it?

People often say that if we do not have free will, we are not morally responsible for our acitons.

But free will means acting in the absence of determining factors. These include desires, inclinations, moral prejudices, our character etc. So surely if we were totally free to make an action, whatever we did would be arbitrary and random, and thus not morally significant.

So the question is, does moral responsiblity actually require some degree of determinism?

Do Christians really think that before Moses brought the Ten Commandments from the mountain, they didn't follow most of these rules anyway?

Did people say:

"Thou shalt NOT kill? Wow, I never would have thought that could help me reach God/help to order society!"

If we 'need' to invoke some sort of creator to explain the universe, should it not be the simplest one imaginable, in the absence of evidence of other qualities attributed to God/s?

For example, a random number generator that only displays 0 or 1, and when it hits 1 the Big Bang happens. Would this not be the 'most logical creator being'?

I just saw a great quote from somebody recently:

"Just because you can throw words together to make a sentence doesn't mean the sentence makes sense"

So, here is a real philosophy question. I do not mean 'give me examples of things that are good' or 'find some arbitrary and apparently meaningful poem' or 'Attribute everything to God'.

What I mean is: What makes something Good?

Whatever has value in our world now does not have value in itself, according to its nature - nature is always value-less, but has been given value at some time, as a present - and it was we who gave and bestowed it. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Do you agree?

If we define agnosticism as 'a state of uncertainty as to whether God/s exist', one could make the argument that either you believe in God/s or you don't. If you don't know but don't actually have faith, doesn't that technically make you an agnostic atheist? And vice versa.

Plato's Theory of Ideas, Christianity, and Kant

They all seem to promote the belief that the transcendant (or noumenal or metaphysical) is more important than the immanent (or phenomenal or physical).

This leads to a rejection of 'worldy' pleasures and a 'denial of the will to live'.

Choose any topic (metaphysics, ethics etc.) and explain why he was wrong. Keep your answers at a reasonable length. Best answer get 10 points!

My response would be that faith cannot tell us anything about reality, as it is a process of non-rational thought.

However, I would like to hear any justifications you may have for faith having any epistemological value. Bible quotes won't convince me, sorry.

And why?

Life and suffering are inseperable. We suffer because we live. All of the suffering of humanity is the result of our needs and desires, and happiness is just a temporary absence of suffering. So, why bother to get up in the morning?