Agnosticism / Atheism: Atheism Basics: Atheism is Based on Faith?

Agnosticism / Atheism Get the latest headlines from the Agnosticism / Atheism GuideSite. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Atheism Basics: Atheism is Based on Faith? Dec 28th 2011, 15:00 Often theists will try to place atheism and theism on the same plane by arguing that while theists cannot prove that god exists, atheists also cannot prove that god does not exist. This is used as a basis for arguing that there is no objective means for determining which is preferable because neither has a logical or advantage . Thus, the only reason for going with one or the other is faith and then, presumably, the theist will argue that their faith is somehow better than the atheist's faith. Read Article: Atheism is Based on Faith? Atheism Myths: Atheists Can't Disprove God & Have Faith in God's Nonexistence

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Agnosticism / Atheism: Less God, More Democracy

Agnosticism / Atheism Get the latest headlines from the Agnosticism / Atheism GuideSite. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Less God, More Democracy Dec 28th 2011, 12:00 American Christians like to connect their god with American democracy, either simply assuming that the latter exists because of the former or even explicitly arguing that the latter depends on the former. But what do the cold, objective facts tell us? According to a study from the University of Z�rich, the less important people rate "God" as important in their lives, the more democratic their country tends to be... and vice-versa. The relationship is statistically significant, with an r-squared of 0.16 (which means that about 16% of the variation in god-belief can be 'explained' by variation in democracy - or vice-versa). ...As usual, those dastardly Scandinavian countries, with their strong social welfare programmes, liberal morals, and strong social ethics, come out on top on both scores. Just a note on the data. The religion numbers come from Waves 4 and 5 of the World Values Survey (I used Wave 5, unless a country was only represented in Wave 4). I used the "Importance of God" question because it's the only one asked consistently in both Waves. The democracy number "uses 100 empirical indicators to measure how well a country complies with the three democratic principles of freedom, equality and control as well as the nine basic functions of democracy" (Science Daily). Source: Epiphenom The findings here are completely consistent with a multitude of other studies which have found that lower rates of religion correlate strongly with lower rates of crime and corruption, more wealth, health, and happiness, better science literacy and education, less inequality, generally less social dysfunction and... even more telephones. That last one is a curious correlations, but it suggests greater social connections and greater penetration of technology and modernization in daily life (not just society and industry generally, but how people life day-to-day). It's unlikely that there is a direct connection between the two -- it's more likely that both are the products of other factors, like greater wealth, greater modernization, and lower inequality. However, it's plausible that there are some implicit connections as well. After all, it's common for religions to be authoritarian to varying degrees. Most religions we have originated from times when authoritarian systems were the norm across all of society, so that's hardly surprising. It might thus be the case that growth in real democracy and real equality weakens people's acceptance of unequal, authoritarian religious systems. The less people accept "kings" (literally or metaphorically) in politics or economics, the less they may be willing to accept any sort of king in religion -- and so long as popular religion has nothing better to offer, this would lead to the dropping of religion entirely.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Agnosticism / Atheism: Forum Discussion: Religious Christmas Presents

Agnosticism / Atheism Get the latest headlines from the Agnosticism / Atheism GuideSite. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Forum Discussion: Religious Christmas Presents Dec 28th 2011, 08:00 Because Christmas is a religious holiday for so many people, it's hardly surprising that there are a lot of religious Christmas presents given on Christmas day. When it's a religious person receiving the present, everyone is happy -- but what about atheists who receive religious presents? If you're an atheist, how have you reacted to religious presents in the past? If you haven't received any, how do you think would be the best way to react? A forum member writes: How should I react if someone gives me a religious christmas present? I not expecting one, but I want to be prepared if it happens. Most of my family doesn't know that I'm an atheist (it's never comes up). Should I say "No, thanks, I'm not a Christian" in front of everyone (or perhaps in private), or just accept the gift? Is there another way to handle it? Most of my family aren't very religious, but a couple are. This definitely isn't an easy situation. If you say something, even privately, you risk causing bad feelings (at a time when everyone is supposed to be getting closer to one another) and creating a confrontation that will be remembered for years. On the other hand, if you say nothing, you run the risk of getting such presents over and over, giving people the wrong impression about who you are. So what do you do? The ideal solution is probably to address such issues long before they become problems, but that also requires coming out of the closet about your atheism, or at the very least about religious skepticism, and that's a problem in itself. Add your thoughts to the comments here or join the ongoing discussion in the forum.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Agnosticism / Atheism: What's Hot Now: Ethics and Morality FAQ: Normative Ethics

Agnosticism / Atheism: What's Hot Now These articles that had the largest increase in popularity over the last week // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Ethics and Morality FAQ: Normative Ethics Dec 28th 2011, 11:01 Normative Ethics What moral standards should we use? Exploring: Philosophy > Ethics & Morality • Ethics & Morality • Intro to Ethics & Morality • How to Think About Ethics • Normative Ethical Systems • Ethical Dilemmas & Problems • Philosophy • Introduction to Philosophy • Biographies of Philosophers • Schools of Philosophy • Branches of Philosophy --> • Site Resources • Main Site Index • What is Atheism? • Religion & Theism • Skepticism & Logic • Arguments for / against Gods • Evolution vs. Creationism • Religious Timelines • Hate Mail • Glossary • Book Reviews --> • Chat Room Join others in the Agnosticism/Atheism chat! • Discussion Forum Do you have an opinion about this page? Make it known on the Discussion Forum! The category of normative ethics is also relatively easy to understand - it involves creating or evaluating moral standards. Thus, it is an attempt to figure out what people should do or whether their current moral behavior is reasonable. Traditionally, most of the field of moral philosophy has involved normative ethics - there are few philosophers out there who haven't tried their hand at explaining what they think people should do and why. This process involves examining the moral standards people currently use in order to determine if they are justifiable, as well as attempting to construct new moral standards which might be better. In either case, the philosopher is critically investigating the nature and grounds of moral standards, moral principles, moral rules, and moral conduct. The category of normative ethics also includes the entire field of Applied Ethics. This field is the attempt to take insights from the work of philosophers and theologians and apply them to real-world situations. For example, bioethics is an important and growing aspect of applied ethics which involves people working out the most moral decisions regarding issues like organ transplants, genetic engineering, cloning, etc. An issue falls under the category of applied ethics whenever: 1. There is general disagreement about the correct course of action. 2. The choice involved is a specifically moral choice. The first characteristic means that there must be some actual debate in which different groups take opposing positions for what they consider good reasons. Thus, abortion is a question of applied ethics in which people can analyze the facts and values involved and arrive at some sort of conclusion backed by arguments. On the other hand, deliberately placing a poison in the water supply is not a question of applied ethics because there is no general debate over whether or not such an action is wrong. The second characteristic requires, obviously, that applied ethics only be involved when we are facing moral choices. Not every controversial issue is also a moral issue - for example, traffic laws and zoning codes may be the basis for heated debate, but they rarely turn on questions of fundamental moral values. The ultimate goal of all of this is to show how it might be possible to develop a consistent and reasonable system of moral rules which are valid for all "moral agents." Philosophers often speak of "moral agents": a moral agent is any being capable of understanding and acting upon some moral rule. Thus, it isn't simply enough to answer a moral question, like "Is abortion wrong?" - instead, normative ethics is involved with demonstrating that this and other questions can be answered with consistency and in the context of some general moral principles or rules. In short, normative ethics addresses questions like the following: What should be our moral obligations? What is Right and what is Wrong? What should be our moral values? What is Good and what is Evil? Here are some examples of statements from Normative Ethics: 1. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. (Golden Rule) 2. Act as if the maxim of your action was to become through your will a universal law of nature. (Kant's Categorical Imperative) 3. That which God wills is the Good. -->

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Agnosticism / Atheism: What's Hot Now: Popes of the 3rd Century

Agnosticism / Atheism: What's Hot Now These articles that had the largest increase in popularity over the last week // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Popes of the 3rd Century Dec 28th 2011, 11:01 Below is a list of all of the popes who reigned during the third century. The first number is which pope they were. This is followed by their chosen name, the starting and ending dates of their reigns, and finally the number of years they were pope. Follow the links to read short biographies of each pope and learn about what they did, what they believed, and what impact they had on the course of the Roman Catholic Church. 15. St. Zephyrinus: 199 - 217 (18 years) Although his predecessor, Victor I, became known as an early example of a strong pope, Zephyrinus was almost the complete opposite. He was accused of a wide variety of errors and faults, but everything seemed to come back to his inability to act in defense of orthodoxy and his willingness to allow heresy to continue unchallenged. 16. St. Callistus I: 217 - 222 (5 years) Pope Callistus I (whose name means "very handsome" in Greek) seems to be something of a contradiction. On the one hand, his name is recorded as the very first martyred pope (after Peter) in the oldest record of church martyrs, Depositio Martyrum (c. 354). 17. St. Urban I: 222 - 230 (8 years) Almost nothing is known about Pope Urban I. His pontificate fell during the imperial reign of Alexander Severus, so he didn't have to deal with harsh persecutions of Christians. 18. St. Pontain: July 21, 230 - September 28, 235 (5 years) The reign of Pope Pontian started out easily enough, but once emperor Alexander Severus was succeeded by Maximus Thrax, everything changed for him and the Christian communities. 19. St. Anterus: November 21, 235 - January 3, 236 (1 month) Just about the only thing that can be said about Pope Anterus is that he was Greek. 20. St. Fabian: January 10, 236 - January 20, 250 (14 years) Not very much is known about Pope Fabian. He is reported to have founded a number of churches and to have taken steps to improve the organizational structure of the growing church. 21. St. Cornelius: March, 251 - June, 253 (2 years) Cornelius became pope at a very difficult time for the Catholic Church. His predecessor, Fabian, had died more than a year before. The long delay was due the bitter persecutions being suffered under the reign of emperor Decius. 22. St. Lucius I: June 25, 253 - March 5, 254 (8 months) Not very much is known about Pope Lucius I, but he was caught in the persecutions of Christians under Emperor Trebonianus Gallus and exiled from Rome for a time just after his election. 23. St. Stephen I: May 12, 254 - August 2, 257 (3 years) Not a great deal is known about Pope Stephen I and much of what we do have comes from the writings of Novatus, condemned as a heretic. He is perhaps best known for his involvement in the controversy over what to do with the Lapsed Christians who renounced their faith under the persecutions of Roman Emperor Decius. 24. St. Sixtus II: August 21, 257 - August 6, 258 (about 1 year) Sixtus II was martyred in Rome under the persecutions instituted by emperor Valerian. Not too longer before Sixtus was elected pope Valerian had decreed that all Christians were required to participate in ceremonies honoring the Roman gods. 25. St. Dionysius: July 22, 260 - December 26, 268 (8 years) Pope Dionysius had a difficult papacy due to the ongoing persecution of the Christian Church. In fact, he couldn't even be elected until news had reached Rome that Emperor Valerian I had died abroad. 26. St. Felix I: July 22, 260 - December 30, 269 (8 years) Not very much is known about Pope Felix I, but he is believed to have given official approval to the practice of saying prayers over the graves of martyrs and other deceased Christians. 27. St. Eutychian: January 4, 275 - December 7, 283 (8 years, 11 months) Not a great deal is known about Pope Eutychian - even the dates of his reign are rather uncertain. 28. St. Caius (Gaius): December 17, 283 - April 22, 296 (12 years) Very little is known about Pope Gaius and what has been found is suspect. All in all, however, it appears that his papacy was relatively quiet and peaceful. 29. St. Marcellinus: June 30, 296 - ? When Marcellinus became pope Diocletian was already emperor but he had no yet begun his infamous persecutions of Christians. Gradually, however, the tolerance turned to intolerance. « Second Century Popes | Fourth Century Popes »

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Agnosticism / Atheism: Book Reviews: Books on Christmas, Christmas Holidays, Christmas History, and Christmas Controversies

Agnosticism / Atheism Get the latest headlines from the Agnosticism / Atheism GuideSite. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Book Reviews: Books on Christmas, Christmas Holidays, Christmas History, and Christmas Controversies Dec 27th 2011, 15:00 Most people in America have had some connection with Christmas celebrations; indeed, most have probably been celebrating Christmas in one way or another all their lives. That does not mean, however, that people know much about the symbols, traditions or origins of what they do. Books reviewed here not only discuss the history of Christmas as a holiday but also as a cultural symbol - something particularly important given the legal and political conflicts the Christian Right has been generating. Read More: Books on Christmas, Christmas Holidays, Christmas History, and Christmas Controversies

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

Agnosticism / Atheism: Parents Have Designated Church Thug Beat Their Son

Agnosticism / Atheism Get the latest headlines from the Agnosticism / Atheism GuideSite. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Parents Have Designated Church Thug Beat Their Son Dec 27th 2011, 12:00 What sort of church has a person designated for the beating of children of families in the church congregation? A church like the one in La Habra, California, where parents got Paul Kim to beat their son because they suspected he was smoking. Paul Kim is an employee or possibly a senior church official who, according to the police, has been regularly used by church parents as an "enforcer." Based on his methods, Paul Kim sounds more like a mob enforcer than a church enforcer. Or maybe there isn't really a difference? The teenager, who was feared to be smoking after being caught smoking, was allegedly hit about a dozen times by 'enforcer' Paul Kim. The 39-year-old, who works at a Lutheran church in La Habra, California, is relied upon by members to violently discipline children, authorities said. Investigators believe Kim has been used in this way by other families in the congregation, and asked for victims and witnesses to come forward. The name of the church was not released but Bachman said it was located in La Habra. But it is believed to be called the Emmanuel Lutheran church. Source: Sacramento Bee I'm honestly not surprised to hear about an incident like this. Some might be, but I suspect that anyone who is surprised has probably bought into the lie that Christianity and Christian churches are necessarily all about peace. The truth is, though, that Christianity has always been as much involved with force as any other powerful ideology and Christian churches have used as much force as any other set of powerful human institutions. This is particularly true when it comes to using force against those who are relatively less powerful and weaker.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions