Pierre Bayle said that good atheists will not go to hell.
- Imagine a man and his husband (yes, we are very progressive at this blog!).
- The man goes away on a long dramatic journey, and doesn't come back for months.
- He comes back!
- The husband gives him food, water, love and so on.
- The husband come back, and reviles the other one as an imposter.
Can we really punish the Husband here? No, because he took the man in in good faith.
Take the same with a God, or even a Humanist viewpoint.
(Note I do not believe this, but I did it merely as food for thought.)
Although I'm an atheist, I believe in the Flat Earth Theory.
This is not a joke.
See that? That's the elites showing you that the earth is flat from a reliable source: Family Guy. How foolish all the you science worshipers are, not to believe a cartoon.
I can imagine the foolish science worshipers saying, 'Well, what about gravity! This is Primary School science!'. Haha! A thing attracted to another thing is too complicated. Instead we need a simple theory overturning all modern science, even though the horizon is clearly not straight.
Do you now see what fools the atheist community has been?
You can watch the lecture here:
Here is a small list of the secular YouTubers I like:
A great channel in skepticdom, and it seemed to start a more intellectual, less humorous (although of course it does have humor too) trend. Did that sound pretentious? Yeah, it really does. Sorry. Anyway, he make really good, well-thought our arguments against religion.
Probably my favorite YouTuber, Holy Koolaid uses fun animated videos to debunk concepts in religon, using his passion for science as a fuel. He uploads once a week, but his videos are very rewatchable.
I pick and choose on this channel, but they have good videos on people you love. Also see ScienceNET and IqSquared.
Great, well edited videos debunking religious concepts. I really like how he sets his arguments out formally, using logical syllogisms.
He is also good in his aesthetic: his talent in graphic designs helps make his videos pop.
He is another debate channel, debunking pseudoscience. Good, solid arguments: he is definitely worth a watch.
Similar in concept to Hiith, except a little less (*ahem*) polite.
A debunking channel with a lean towards Jehovah's Witnesses - and it also has some beautiful art to give you some eye candy.
A great introduction to philosophy: it helps me learn about modern philosophy to stop me getting bogged down with the like of Hume. Fun, well-edited: give it a watch.
A really smart dude who makes fairly long videos supporting science: they take concentration to watch (you can't listen, whilst, say, playing a video game), but they are really well set out and worth a watch.
A philosophy channel summarizing concepts - I personally find this more useful than Philosophy Tube in discovering philosophy, but it doesn't go as deep into its concepts.
A common argument against evolutionists is: 'Why are there no positive mutations?'. Which I replied with:
Recently I attended a lecture by the Shropshire Humanist Society, which was on the topic, of, well, Humanism! It was presented by the Professor of Neurology Simon Nightingale. To summarize, Humanism is based on the following tenets:
- Humanists use naturalism, and find truth from Discovery and Axioms, not Revealed truth.
- We find meaning from being good and finding our own meaning - this is not supernatural in any way.
- The holy experiences we have, although meaningful, are made purely from the mind.
- Our goodness is made from nature. (A funny thing I found in his speech was when he said 'Our nature makes us not murder, but of course God does that in the Bible.'.)
He also debunked the common accusation that 'Humanism is just another religion!', by stating, to paraphrase:
Religion is categorized by dogmatic belief in the supernatural - on the other hand, Humanism is not dogmatic and anti-supernatural.
However, I appreciate his respect for religion - in fact, a vicar attended his speech!
I asked him his thoughts on a lack of Free Will, and it's relation to Humanism and Moral Responsibility, and he stated that since we are so complex, we can pretty much act as if we have Free Will - he referenced the Compatablist Daniel Dennett (who I must read!) here.
This post was quite controversial.
One comment said that Free Will was the ability to 'choose', but in my opinion, that concept of 'choosing' doesn't really make sense: nothing can really be self-caused.
Also, there is evidence of experiments predicting people's actions, such as the flick of the wrist, such as Libet's experiment.
Deism is, in my opinion, pretty rational.
Why is the universe so fine-tuned - but obviously you have the anthropic principle to disprove it, so let's dig deeper.
What about by the fundamental constants by Martin Reeves - without our forces being as strong as they?
This stumps me.
Let's look at the possibilities:
- We are made by a God (but who made God - being more complex, wouldn't he, too, require a designer?)
- This is the only way the constants could be (seems like a coincidence that it could be that we exist, and it has no evidence - however, wouldn't it be arrogant to believe that because of our existence there must be God?).
- We are in multiverse (this seems fine, but there is no evidence, and it could be unfalsifiable).
I'm an agnostic atheist because I'm willing to say I don't know.
A Wopism production.
Welcome to the Tea-Drinking Atheist, my blog where I talk about all things atheism and philosophy! I try to make my posts short enough to read whilst draining a nice cuppa!
See my more academic writing on my website, Wopism; follow me on Twitter @KilledByAGhost and on Instagram at 'hegelz'.
Check out my atheist memes and promotion of rationality as a whole!