悲哀的无神论 (Atheism of sorrow) (ZT)

[ForwardRetreat]

Book recommendation on atheism.

Atheism: A Philosophical Justification
In this book Michael Martin provides logical reasons for being an atheist. Carefully examining the current debate in Anglo-American analytic philosophy regarding God's existence, Martin presents a comprehensive critique of the arguments for the existence of God and a defense of arguments against the existence of God, showing in detail their relevance to atheism. Claiming that atheism is a rational position while theistic beliefs are not, he relies both on logic and evidence and confines his efforts to showing the irrationality of belief in a personal supreme being who is omniscient, omnipotent, perfect, and the creator of heaven and earth.The author's approach is two-fold. By presenting and criticizing arguments that have been advanced in favor of belief, he makes a case for 'negative atheism'. By offering arguments against atheism and defending it from these attacks, he presents a case for 'positive atheism'. Along the way, he confronts the views of numerous philosophers among them Anselm, Aquinas, Plantinga, Hick, and Swinburne and refutes both classical and contemporary arguments that have been advanced through the history of this debate.In his conclusion, Martin considers what would and would not follow if his main arguments were widely accepted, and he defines and distinguishes atheism from other 'isms' and movements. Building on the work of religious skeptics and atheists of the past and present, he justifies his reconstruction of this philosophical dispute by citing some of the most interesting and important arguments for atheism and criticisms of arguments for the existence of God that have appeared in recent journal articles and have yet to be systematically addressed. Author note: Michael Martin is Professor of Philosophy at Boston University and author of several books, including "The Legal Philosophy of H.L.A. Hart: A Critical Appraisal" and "The Case Against Christianity" (both from Temple).

 

[UssU]

所谓迷信，大约就是一个人的所思、所言、所做，都和别人（这个别人包括思想、理论、经验、行为等等，乃至物质世界）有关，唯独和自己（这个自己指本源，而不是已经被知识、认识浸泡过的所谓自己）没关系。

用一种迷信和另一种迷信争论，这件事本身就是个迷信，没意义。

 

[joanna777]

迷信就是盲目的相信一件没有经过验证的事情，包括别人推理出来的理论，或者别人的经验。关于耶稣基督的事情，对某些人来讲是迷信，对于另外一些人来讲不是。对于每天可以和神对话的人来讲，就不是迷信，因为已经听到了神所说的，也亲自验证过了上帝的指示是否正确无误。因此，只要是亲自验证过并证实了再相信的，就不是迷信。好像磁场学说，如果实验结果于理论完全吻合，就证明了不是迷信，而是真实存在的。空气理论也是这样。虽然空气和磁场都看不见。

 

[joanna777]

对于没有开灵耳的人，还不认识谁是真神的人，如何证明耶稣基督是人类的君王呢？
很简单。按照耶稣所教训的去生活，生活就充满了平安和喜乐；不按照耶稣基督所教训的去生活，就被罪恶囚禁被苦难缠绕。很容易验证。

又或者
开口向上帝求问，说，上帝啊，我不知道你是谁，也不认识你，如果你真是上帝，就求你向我显现，如果耶稣是你儿子，就让我明白。感谢上帝告诉我真相，免得我不明不白下到地狱。上帝是信实的，你问了，他必定回答你的问题。

 

[karma111]

The word of“迷信”is very interesting, I think. Do you know why? Because we can understand it in different ways.:blowzy:



I mean buddhists are superstitious, because they create something from nothing.(That is my understanding of 迷信，as a Christian.)



On the 26th floor, you said“我想所有宗教都有迷信的人”。Are you attacking people, not only buddhists?:blowzy:

You didn't quote my full sentence. I said 迷信=太过沉迷而失去了理智.

As joanna777 said, 迷信means different things for different people.

By the book,迷信 means belief in supernatural being/phenomenon. By that definition almost all religions are迷信, so I do not want to say that.
I defined it as the lost of rationality becase of religion, the lost of ability for reason and logic when reality stacks against them.
Rationality is what distingushes animal and human. Withouth that, human are pretty much like animal. (I have scientific evidence for that).

I truely believe most religous people are still rational that's why not every muslim is suicide bomber.

Is it not a fact at least small percentage of people lost their rationality because of their religion? Can you deny this statement? If not, it's not attacking.

If I say, all religous people are irrational, then it's without merits or common sense. It's considered personal attack.

 

[Happy Angel]

You didn't quote my full sentence. I said 迷信=太过沉迷而失去了理智.

As joanna777 said, 迷信means different things for different people.

By the book,迷信 means belief in supernatural being/phenomenon. By that definition almost all religions are迷信, so I do not want to say that.
I defined it as the lost of rationality becase of religion, the lost of ability for reason and logic when reality stacks against them.
Rationality is what distingushes animal and human. Withouth that, human are pretty much like animal. (I have scientific evidence for that).

I truely believe most religous people are still rational that's why not every muslim is suicide bomber.

Is it not a fact at least small percentage of people lost their rationality because of their religion? Can you deny this statement? If not, it's not attacking.

If I say, all religous people are irrational, then it's without merits or common sense. It's considered personal attack.

迷信=太过沉迷而失去了理智=陷入迷信而不能自拔

When you would like to know if 斑竹 means some or all, on the 26th floor, the first question and the last sentence are a little rude.

 

[joanna777]

As joanna777 said, 迷信means different things for different people.

I didn't say that. I said, for different people, 迷信's contents are different....I said, 迷信just means to believe in something without any evidence or proof。具体来讲，很多人都迷信没有神，因为他们没有办法来证明神的存在。但是神是否存在呢？有的人说存在，是因为经过验证了的；有的人也说存在，是盲从；更多人说没有神，也是盲从。这三种人，后面两种都是迷信。还有一类人，认为自己没有办法证明上帝是否存在，所以认为不知道上帝是否存在。这种人是诚实的，不是迷信。

 

[joanna777]

迷信的定义不是相信超自然的力量，也不是失去不失去理智，而是盲目相信一个自己没有办法验证的理论。说到底，一个人盲目的相信一套理论（进化论），本身就是失去理智的行为。所以说上帝是理性的，认识神的人通常可以理性的去思维，因为这也是神的意志。但是，神的存在不以人的理性为条件。人无论是否理性，都有可能认识神。

 

[joanna777]

迷信的定义不是相信超自然的力量，也不是失去不失去理智，而是盲目相信一个自己没有办法验证的理论。说到底，一个人盲目的相信一套理论（进化论），本身就是失去理智的行为。所以说上帝是理性的，认识神的人通常可以理性的去思维，因为这也是神的意志。但是，神的存在不以人的理性为条件。人无论是否理性，都有可能认识神。

 

[ForwardRetreat]

WE ARE ALL ATHEISTS MORE OR LESS

 

[joanna777]

分析从楼上的广告语，作者对God这个概念有三种理解，第一个理解，God有很多（复数most gods）；第二个理解，作者不能肯定God是否存在（用语气词probably）; 第三个理解，最后一句话，这是重点，对God的存在产生负面心理（worrying）。从作者和God的关系来看，God的存在会让作者感到Worrying,我们要提问，worry什么？文章中没有提，但是常识告诉我们，如果作者所思所想全部都是帮助关怀和照顾他人，就不需要worry；worry的是干了坏事怕受到管制。类比正常人类不会担心世界上有警察，只有想做某些事情的人worry警察的存在。
再看Worry的具体内容（enjoy your life）就是说，作者认为上帝的存在使他不能够enjoy your life，那么，什么样的life使我们不能enjoy的呢，上帝的存在对什么的life造成影响？作者假设上帝的存在会妨碍到他享受生活。
所以有必要对上帝进行一些研究，来看什么样的生活会受到限制：
圣经中有说：你们不能拜偶像，不能奸淫，不能偷盗，不能做假见证陷害人，不能贪恋别人的妻子牛羊房屋。等等。
很显然，从上面的分析可以看出来作者在过一种什么样的生活方式，并且他不仅自己在这样生活，并且发了广告，希望别人都和他一样。
他为什么要推行自己的生活方式呢？因为，按照法不泽众的原则，他认为如果上帝刑罚恶人，那么如果人人都贪行不义，那样就可以显得自己不是很恶劣，因此，就可以稍微减少自己接受刑罚的恐惧感。
分析到这里，说明作者不愿意接受上帝和推行无神论主张的主要原因，是害怕上帝刑罚恶人，并且不愿意改变自己的恶行。

 

[focus on today]

说得太对了。有些人就是惧怕上帝，因为上帝的存在使人不能为所欲为。世上没有上帝，他们就可以不具后果。人啊，可悲！

 

[Happy Angel]

分析从楼上的广告语，作者对God这个概念有三种理解，第一个理解，God有很多（复数most gods）；第二个理解，作者不能肯定God是否存在（用语气词probably）; 第三个理解，最后一句话，这是重点，对God的存在产生负面心理（worrying）。从作者和God的关系来看，God的存在会让作者感到Worrying,我们要提问，worry什么？文章中没有提，但是常识告诉我们，如果作者所思所想全部都是帮助关怀和照顾他人，就不需要worry；worry的是干了坏事怕受到管制。类比正常人类不会担心世界上有警察，只有想做某些事情的人worry警察的存在。
再看Worry的具体内容（enjoy your life）就是说，作者认为上帝的存在使他不能够enjoy your life，那么，什么样的life使我们不能enjoy的呢，上帝的存在对什么的life造成影响？作者假设上帝的存在会妨碍到他享受生活。
所以有必要对上帝进行一些研究，来看什么样的生活会受到限制：
圣经中有说：你们不能拜偶像，不能奸淫，不能偷盗，不能做假见证陷害人，不能贪恋别人的妻子牛羊房屋。等等。
很显然，从上面的分析可以看出来作者在过一种什么样的生活方式，并且他不仅自己在这样生活，并且发了广告，希望别人都和他一样。
他为什么要推行自己的生活方式呢？因为，按照法不泽众的原则，他认为如果上帝刑罚恶人，那么如果人人都贪行不义，那样就可以显得自己不是很恶劣，因此，就可以稍微减少自己接受刑罚的恐惧感。
分析到这里，说明作者不愿意接受上帝和推行无神论主张的主要原因，是害怕上帝刑罚恶人，并且不愿意改变自己的恶行。

作者以为有most gods?

以赛亚书46章9-10节：你们要追念上古的事，因为我是神，并无别神；我是神，再没有能比我的。我从起初指明末后的事，从古时严明未成的事，说：我的筹算必立定，凡我所喜悦的，我必成就。

 

[Happy Angel]

说得太对了。有些人就是惧怕上帝，因为上帝的存在使人不能为所欲为。世上没有上帝，他们就可以不具后果。人啊，可悲！

说得太对了。

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzE2MjYwMDAw.html

 

[UssU]

基督教在CFC上给搞成这样，真可悲