mymistake Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 This one contains the challenge at the end: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 End, you don't get a pass on this. In #11 you wrote, "What about the evil done in the name of humanism." Your response presupposes that there IS evil done in the name of humanism. It's incumbent on you to enumerate evil/evils that are "done in the name of humanism." Evils done by people who happen to be humanists, by the way, but that are not enjoined by humanism as an ideology are not that. You're missing my point F. Let's not specify humanism. Let's say any non-believe "belief". It's my opinion that in order to violate "good" there must be a defined "good". I think it is easy to point at a historic ideal such as Christianity and say, "hey, look at all the crap done via that set of beliefs" vs. "hey, our meandering intuition doesn't ever violate squat and consequently we don't ever do evil". I think it's a copout by Mr. H. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbit Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 End, you don't get a pass on this. In #11 you wrote, "What about the evil done in the name of humanism." Your response presupposes that there IS evil done in the name of humanism. It's incumbent on you to enumerate evil/evils that are "done in the name of humanism." Evils done by people who happen to be humanists, by the way, but that are not enjoined by humanism as an ideology are not that. You're missing my point F. Let's not specify humanism. Let's say any non-believe "belief". It's my opinion that in order to violate "good" there must be a defined "good". I think it is easy to point at a historic ideal such as Christianity and say, "hey, look at all the crap done via that set of beliefs" vs. "hey, our meandering intuition doesn't ever violate squat and consequently we don't ever do evil". I think it's a copout by Mr. H. I'll make this simple. Good means not killing people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 End, you don't get a pass on this. In #11 you wrote, "What about the evil done in the name of humanism." Your response presupposes that there IS evil done in the name of humanism. It's incumbent on you to enumerate evil/evils that are "done in the name of humanism." Evils done by people who happen to be humanists, by the way, but that are not enjoined by humanism as an ideology are not that. You're missing my point F. ... You have made no point. You've simply put forth your standard nonsense. Answer the OP, Mr. "I'm Passive-Aggressive Because That's All I Know". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 End, you don't get a pass on this. In #11 you wrote, "What about the evil done in the name of humanism." Your response presupposes that there IS evil done in the name of humanism. It's incumbent on you to enumerate evil/evils that are "done in the name of humanism." Evils done by people who happen to be humanists, by the way, but that are not enjoined by humanism as an ideology are not that. You're missing my point F. Let's not specify humanism. Let's say any non-believe "belief". It's my opinion that in order to violate "good" there must be a defined "good". I think it is easy to point at a historic ideal such as Christianity and say, "hey, look at all the crap done via that set of beliefs" vs. "hey, our meandering intuition doesn't ever violate squat and consequently we don't ever do evil". I think it's a copout by Mr. H. End, you talked about "the evil done in the name of humanism." Name some evil actions done in the name of humanism. Orbit has already disposed of the "we don't ever violate squat and consequently don't ever do evil" straw man you just created. So far the copout is yours. Who, for example, has been put to death "in the name of humanism?" I.e. killed by humanists because he/she is not a humanist? Or there may be other examples of evil in the name of humanism. If you have none to cite, you should withdraw your #11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted September 22, 2014 Author Share Posted September 22, 2014 Human, Hitchens posed this challenge so many times that there is no specific context for it. If I owned a copy of god Is Not Great I'd look up where it is mentioned to see what context he placed around it there. I believe he posed the challenge as a sort of conversation starter, similar to my reason for copying it here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted September 22, 2014 Super Moderator Share Posted September 22, 2014 End, you don't get a pass on this. In #11 you wrote, "What about the evil done in the name of humanism." Your response presupposes that there IS evil done in the name of humanism. It's incumbent on you to enumerate evil/evils that are "done in the name of humanism." Evils done by people who happen to be humanists, by the way, but that are not enjoined by humanism as an ideology are not that. You're missing my point F. Let's not specify humanism. Let's say any non-believe "belief". It's my opinion that in order to violate "good" there must be a defined "good". I think it is easy to point at a historic ideal such as Christianity and say, "hey, look at all the crap done via that set of beliefs" vs. "hey, our meandering intuition doesn't ever violate squat and consequently we don't ever do evil". I think it's a copout by Mr. H. NO! Not until you answer to the charge you made concerning evil done in the name of humanism. Stop dodging the very issue you raised, End3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 NO! Not until you answer to the charge you made concerning evil done in the name of humanism. Stop dodging the very issue you raised, End3. You're going to give credibility to "angry atheists" if you're not careful. I am sure there has been a humanist that has intentionally said something hurtful to someone else. Of course there are no rules in meandering intuition.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted September 22, 2014 Super Moderator Share Posted September 22, 2014 NO! Not until you answer to the charge you made concerning evil done in the name of humanism. Stop dodging the very issue you raised, End3. You're going to give credibility to "angry atheists" if you're not careful. I am sure there has been a humanist that has intentionally said something hurtful to someone else. Of course there are no rules in meandering intuition.... Okay, we admit it, somewhere out there some humanist said something mean; we're not perfect. Now, can we discuss the evil that has been done in the name of religion, by religious people, for religious purposes? Or will you continue to dodge the issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 NO! Not until you answer to the charge you made concerning evil done in the name of humanism. Stop dodging the very issue you raised, End3. You're going to give credibility to "angry atheists" if you're not careful. I am sure there has been a humanist that has intentionally said something hurtful to someone else. Of course there are no rules in meandering intuition.... Okay, we admit it, somewhere out there some humanist said something mean; we're not perfect. Now, can we discuss the evil that has been done in the name of religion, by religious people, for religious purposes? Or will you continue to dodge the issue? Obviously there is sin within Christianity. Do you need a list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 NO! Not until you answer to the charge you made concerning evil done in the name of humanism. Stop dodging the very issue you raised, End3. You're going to give credibility to "angry atheists" if you're not careful. I am sure there has been a humanist that has intentionally said something hurtful to someone else. Of course there are no rules in meandering intuition.... So hurtful words is the worst thing you can think of? Christianity kills people. You can't use condoms because condoms offend God. So people in Africa get AIDS and die. Good thing our imaginary friend isn't offended by millions of Africans dying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted September 22, 2014 Super Moderator Share Posted September 22, 2014 NO! Not until you answer to the charge you made concerning evil done in the name of humanism. Stop dodging the very issue you raised, End3. You're going to give credibility to "angry atheists" if you're not careful. I am sure there has been a humanist that has intentionally said something hurtful to someone else. Of course there are no rules in meandering intuition.... Okay, we admit it, somewhere out there some humanist said something mean; we're not perfect. Now, can we discuss the evil that has been done in the name of religion, by religious people, for religious purposes? Or will you continue to dodge the issue? Obviously there is sin within Christianity. Do you need a list? We're not discussing sin, here, End3. We are discussing (or at least trying to discuss) atrocities committed in the name of religion. You've attempted to side-step the issue by making the claim that atrocities have been committed by humanist, which claim you were unable to support. So, no, I do not need a list of "sins"; nor would you need to provide me with a list of the atrocities committed in the name of christianity. My memory serves me well enough to know that just last week, you, yourself, were calling for mass genocide against muslims. Do you really not see the depths of your own depravity and that of your religion? Now, since it has been established that you would willingly commit atrocities in the name of christianity, are you willing to admit that such atrocities have occurred? This is a simple "yes or no" question. Answer accordingly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 You're going to give credibility to "angry atheists" if you're not careful. I am sure there has been a humanist that has intentionally said something hurtful to someone else. Of course there are no rules in meandering intuition.... End, this is another fail. Your example is precisely NOT a case of evil's being done "in the name of humanism," as your #11 entails that it is. To support your #11 you have to show cases where the ideology has required or demanded its adherents to perform actions that are evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Please don't forget that my belief system is essentially pass/fail. One sin is no greater or less than another.....hence categorizing something as good or evil. If we are rating good and evil, I assume we would have to look at the origin of "humanist" and evaluate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Please don't forget that my belief system is essentially pass/fail. One sin is no greater or less than another.....hence categorizing something as good or evil. You may want to reevaluate that belief system because it does not match reality. But then again you will never find real answers by looking in the Bible. Good comes from a much older source. Humans by nature work together to survive. So ethics and morality come from this survival strategy. When you help others survive you have done good. When you harm others your hurt the tribe and that is evil. Most acts can be sorted by harm vs. good done to others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbit Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Please don't forget that my belief system is essentially pass/fail. One sin is no greater or less than another.....hence categorizing something as good or evil. If we are rating good and evil, I assume we would have to look at the origin of "humanist" and evaluate. End! What part of "name an atrocity done in the name of Christianity" don't you get? Can you not bring yourself to type the words? Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Please don't forget that my belief system is essentially pass/fail. One sin is no greater or less than another.....hence categorizing something as good or evil. If we are rating good and evil, I assume we would have to look at the origin of "humanist" and evaluate. End! What part of "name an atrocity done in the name of Christianity" don't you get? Can you not bring yourself to type the words? Why? Why does this seem to be a control issue with y'all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Please don't forget that my belief system is essentially pass/fail. One sin is no greater or less than another.....hence categorizing something as good or evil. If we are rating good and evil, I assume we would have to look at the origin of "humanist" and evaluate. End! What part of "name an atrocity done in the name of Christianity" don't you get? Can you not bring yourself to type the words? Why? Why does this seem to be a control issue with y'all? It doesn't seem that way; not at all. You are the one with the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbit Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Please don't forget that my belief system is essentially pass/fail. One sin is no greater or less than another.....hence categorizing something as good or evil. If we are rating good and evil, I assume we would have to look at the origin of "humanist" and evaluate. End! What part of "name an atrocity done in the name of Christianity" don't you get? Can you not bring yourself to type the words? Why? Why does this seem to be a control issue with y'all? It's not a control issue, it's a why won't End answer a simple question issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted September 22, 2014 Super Moderator Share Posted September 22, 2014 Now, since it has been established that you would willingly commit atrocities in the name of christianity, are you willing to admit that such atrocities have occurred? Yes or no, End3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Now, since it has been established that you would willingly commit atrocities in the name of christianity, are you willing to admit that such atrocities have occurred?Yes or no, End3? Hold on there partner. My willingness to shoot some douchebag who beheads people is against what I believe as a Christian. I really wouldn't have the knowledge to know if my actions were just if I chose that option. Two, give me an atrocity to choose from and I will form an relative opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted September 22, 2014 Super Moderator Share Posted September 22, 2014 Now, since it has been established that you would willingly commit atrocities in the name of christianity, are you willing to admit that such atrocities have occurred?Yes or no, End3? Hold on there partner. My willingness to shoot some douchebag who beheads people is against what I believe as a Christian. I really wouldn't have the knowledge to know if my actions were just if I chose that option. Two, give me an atrocity to choose from and I will form an relative opinion. Are you willing to admit that atrocities have been committed in the name of christianity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted September 22, 2014 Author Share Posted September 22, 2014 Now, since it has been established that you would willingly commit atrocities in the name of christianity, are you willing to admit that such atrocities have occurred?Yes or no, End3? Hold on there partner. My willingness to shoot some douchebag who beheads people is against what I believe as a Christian. I really wouldn't have the knowledge to know if my actions were just if I chose that option. Two, give me an atrocity to choose from and I will form an relative opinion. Wow. Your problems go deeper than obfuscating on an internet forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Are you willing to admit that atrocities have been committed in the name of christianity?Yes in a sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest end3 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Now, since it has been established that you would willingly commit atrocities in the name of christianity, are you willing to admit that such atrocities have occurred?Yes or no, End3? Hold on there partner. My willingness to shoot some douchebag who beheads people is against what I believe as a Christian. I really wouldn't have the knowledge to know if my actions were just if I chose that option. Two, give me an atrocity to choose from and I will form an relative opinion. Wow. Your problems go deeper than obfuscating on an internet forum. No, I'm sure this discussion is a philosophical one that has been previously contemplated. My take at the moment is that it's a matter of scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts