Atheist seems to be a common answer when netizens are asked about their religion.
For me, atheism is basically nihilism.
For me, the existence of reality itself is a wonder, and proof of a kind of meta-level.
And I think God is a good name for the meta-level.
So I think I'm an agnostic. And I hope that all the people that answer atheist mean agnostic, and just don't know the different definitions.
Because what would it mean to be atheist? We believes in nothing?
There's even an old philosophical school that defends that thesis, and simply declares atheism stupid (but I forgot its name). I feel vindicated.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Elsewhere
Feeds
Archive
-
▼
2010
(82)
-
▼
August
(11)
- Wave is Dead
- Does it get uncooler?
- Paul Graham on trends for the future
- Facebook lol
- F-35 helmet"Painting's washed up. Who'll do anyt...
- Clients are a Lose, Right?
- WikiLeaks and the Afghan War:The image we have is ...
- The Collateral Damage of "Journalism"
- Apple’s App Store Director Sells His Own Fart Apps
- Marijuana Legalization in California, Policy Persp...
- The atheistic intertubes
-
▼
August
(11)
8 comments:
"Because what would it mean to be atheist? We believes in nothing?"
nope, that's nihilism for you.
what it means to be an atheist? not believing in supernatural mumbo-jumbo. simple.
Is this a troll post?
Considering what has been done in the name of God(s) I doubt you want the meta-level associated with it.
No, it's emphatically not a troll post.
> God is a good name for the meta-level
Like some kind of Smalltalk thing?
Software people are intellectually rooted in the early 20th century, the 1920s and 1930s: Turing, Church, the Vienna Circle, ... so one should perhaps expect a sense of 'what we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence'.
You don't need god or religion to commit sins against humanity.
Some philosophers have argued all you need is some idea of moral clarity. They are argue very rarely are people out to do evil, instead they seek to do good and with their version of morality their good turns evil.
In Canada no one wanted to produce a system of schools that raped aboriginal children, yet it happened. Why? Because they thought it was moral to "westernize" the children to give them a better future. They didn't plan to rape all those children, but they did.
Being sure that you're right can make you do terrible things or produce terrible systems where terrible things are prone to happen.
@Harrison In Smalltalk, the meta-level is reified in level 0, and I don't think that's possible ITRW ;) It's a faith thing, so writing about it is hard.
And militant athiesm is the purest and most strident kind of moral clarity — they're at least as emphatic about gaining converts as any religion.
Agnosticism is a disbelief that any such clarity is real or good.
Don't ever expect to get clear terminology in this area!
Personally, I don't think of your philosophy as agnosticism (but then see my previous sentence). Judging from what you wrote on this page, I think you're religious, only not mainstream Western religious.
What you are has a lot in common with some Eastern religions, and with some forms of "liberal" Christianity. You'd probably like the book "Honest to God" by John Robinson.
Post a Comment