"ask an atheist" thread

[alexey]

In case there are things you always wanted to ask but never got the chance... Going to start this off with some common topics that usually come up.


What is an "atheist"?

At a minimum, atheist is a person who, when asked "Do you believe that God exists?", answers "No I do not have that belief". Atheists may go further and have positive beliefs about nonexistence of gods, but that is not necessary.



Does being an atheist mean that I am making an affirmative claim that no Gods exist?

No, I am not making any claims. I simply do not accept claims that God/Gods exist. I am doing that without making any claims of my own. Some atheists do have an affirmative belief that no Gods exist, but one can be an atheist without that.



Who banged the Big Bang, why does the Universe exist, how did life emerge from non-life?

Some questions are meaningless (what is the purpose of mountains?), other questions can be answered with a simple "we do not yet know that". It is OK to say that we do not know something. As a matter of fact, it is preferable to say that, rather than make things up.




Where do I get my morality?

Evolution has no problem explaining emergence of morality in social animals. However, this should not be viewed as a blanket endorsement of our natural inclinations. What is natural is not necessarily what is good.




What about evidence of design in the natural world?

Indeed the natural world shows evidence of design. However, it does not show evidence of a designer. This can be counter-intuitive. There is a split between some atheists about whether it is more appropriate to call it merely "apparent design" (Richard Dawkins) or actual "design without a designer" (Daniel Dennett).



What about people who say that religion fulfills a particular and necessary purpose?

Consolation, social support, inspiration, charity, etc - these are all important and necessary things. It would be a difficult situation if religion were indeed the only way to get those.




What about Stalin/Mao/Hitler/etc?

While some of those those were self-professed atheists, they did not do bad things in the name of atheism. Hopefully we can all agree that any form of dogmatism is bad, including dogmatic atheism. Atheism is sometimes slandered as being inherently dogmatic; that is not the case.



What do atheists believe about death, souls, etc?

I suppose different atheists can have different opinions on that... but most atheists would probably say that your person-hood is entirely contained within your brain, and it faces annihilation when your brain dies.

[DjTj]

Where do I get my morality?

Evolution has no problem explaining emergence of morality in social animals. However, this should not be viewed as a blanket endorsement of our natural inclinations. What is natural is not necessarily what is good.

What is good?

[alexey]

What is good?

There are many different ways to answer that question. Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. Justice. General welfare. Well being and flourishing of conscious creatures. Reduction of suffering. Empathy.

[SonOfWashington]

Gas or charcoal?

[alexey]

Gas or charcoal?

Gas for convenience, charcoal for flavor. Haven't tried gas with a smoker box, but it sounds great.

[DjTj]

Well being and flourishing of conscious creatures.

Is it good to raise animals for food? Is it better if you barbecue them?

[alexey]

Is it good to raise animals for food? Is it better if you barbecue them?

My view is that morality/goodness of eating animals depends on other options and those animals' ability to experience suffering.

For example, I understand that cow's ability to experience suffering is more advanced than that of a chicken, and chicken's is in turn more advanced than shrimp's. From that perspective, I think that easting shrimp is more moral than eating chicken, and eating chicken is more moral than eating beef.


If one eats chicken, I think it is more moral to eat chickens that were raised in a "cage free" environment, etc.


Also, note that meat may be a necessary part of some people's nutritional needs. Meat eating, therefore, is more moral for those people over people who may go without it.


Personally, I still eat meat even though I consider it to be somewhat immoral... although I am open to reducing or eliminating my meat intake down the road, as I become a more advanced moral agent.

[d0ublestr0ker0ll]

Gas or charcoal?

Charcoal. George Foreman grill sometimes.

[Corcaigh]

Is it good to raise animals for food?

Yes. I have a recipe for dodo bird braised in lager that would have encouraged responsible farming of the species, and its survival.

Is it better if you barbecue them?

When in doubt, ask yourself, WWJD?

[DjTj]

My view is that morality/goodness of eating animals depends on other options and those animals' ability to experience suffering.

For example, I understand that cow's ability to experience suffering is more advanced than that of a chicken, and chicken's is in turn more advanced than shrimp's. From that perspective, I think that easting shrimp is more moral than eating chicken, and eating chicken is more moral than eating beef.

By "more advanced" you mean more human-like? Does more complexity necessarily imply a more advanced ability to experience suffering? Or are we limited by our ability to understand a shrimp's suffering?

If one eats chicken, I think it is more moral to eat chickens that were raised in a "cage free" environment, etc.

I'm not really sure whether it's better for the chicken to give it a taste of sweet sweet freedom before slaughtering it, or if ignorance is bliss for chickens raised in a factory environment. I'm pretty sure that free range chickens taste better though because they get more exercise and variety in their diet.

Also, note that meat may be a necessary part of some people's nutritional needs. Meat eating, therefore, is more moral for those people over people who may go without it.

Personally, I still eat meat even though I consider it to be somewhat immoral... although I am open to reducing or eliminating my meat intake down the road, as I become a more advanced moral agent.

Your (lack of) religion seems to have a complicated sliding scale...

When in doubt, ask yourself, WWJD?

When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their presence.

He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

NIV Luke 24:40-44

[PleaseBlitz]

Beer, wine, or liquor?

[Corcaigh]

They gave him a piece of broiled fish

Of course, "That piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIaORknS1Dk

[PleaseBlitz]

I'm not really sure whether it's better for the chicken to give it a taste of sweet sweet freedom before slaughtering it, or if ignorance is bliss for chickens raised in a factory environment. I'm pretty sure that free range chickens taste better though because they get more exercise and variety in their diet.

Depends how you cook it. Connective tissues are DELICIOUS if you slow cook the bird and that stuff turns into reticulin. If you are just grilling up skinless boneless, then it's just more expensive and has a bit more gristle (and will be smaller).

[Prosperity]

Do you think there are different degrees of being an atheist. If so rate yourself from 1-10, then rate Corcaigh.

[Corcaigh]

Do you think there are different degrees of being an atheist. If so rate yourself from 1-10, then rate Corcaigh.

I'm so ready for the swimsuit portion of the contest.