>There is something infantile in the presumption that somebody else has a responsibility to give your life meaning and point… The truly adult view, by contrast, is that our life is as meaningful, as full and as wonderful as we choose to make it.
>We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.
Is this philosophy?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
rationalwiki.org
twitter.com
>There is something infantile in the presumption that somebody else has a responsibility to give your life meaning and point… The truly adult view, by contrast, is that our life is as meaningful, as full and as wonderful as we choose to make it.
What did he mean by this?
He has a toddler's understanding of the teenage philosophy known as existentialism, and doesn't know what 'atheism' means.
There's a reason why deists are not technically atheists.
Are you a deist, user?
And if so, what convinced you of the deistic position?
>Some of us
>us
Speak for yourself goddamnit.
No, just an example.
I'd even argue that Pastafarians aren't even atheists.
One cannot be an atheist if they even hold an ironic perception of a god.
I'm not acquainted with Richard Dawkins's books, but this is not philosophy at all.
>There is something infantile in the presumption that somebody else has a responsibility to give your life meaning and poin
Loaded statement.
Also concludes that a God does not exist. How did he arrive to this conclusion?
>The truly adult view, by contrast, is that our life is as meaningful, as full and as wonderful as we choose to make it.
It ignores the debate between individualism and collectivism
It assumes that free will exists without providing arguments that support this statement. It is his responsibility to robustly support this claim since the burden of proof is on him.
It assumes that, in the case that free will exists, it guarantees a "wonderful life".
Does not define what makes a life "wonderful".
Does not take into account that people with religious beliefs can have a "wonderful" life.
>I'd even argue that Pastafarians aren't even atheists.
>One cannot be an atheist if they even hold an ironic perception of a god.
Failure to reason.
>Also concludes that a God does not exist. How did he arrive to this conclusion?
Occam's razor and the complete lack of evidence for the God hypothesis.
The fact that religion can make people behave better, or religious people can be x or y or z is not an argument for the existence that the deity of said religious person believes in.
>It assumes that free will exists
But free will doesn't exist, user.
le reason xDDDDDDDDDDDDDD i dont like this post for extremely ambiguous reasons and post pictures from reddit
>Occam's razor
Invalid; only the archaic-minded scum known as empiricists take this seriously.
>But free will doesn't exist, user.