Dont worry I dont believe in God. I agree that morality is just a preference, I can live with that. I dont buy into the idea that it is inherit in someway, morality differs from town to town, place to place, country to country, society to society, person to person etc...

I would rather say I prefer not to murder and I also prefer to hang around others who prefer not to murder that makes more sense to me. It also ties into my belief in regards to the stronger willed (good) and weaker willed (bad) those terms now have more meaning to me.

Thanks for watching the clip.

Right.

In theory.

By "on atheism" do you mean "on the assumption that no gods exist" rather than "on the position of no belief in such a god"? On the latter, it's a definite possibility, obviously. On the former, I don't see how, but I'm not going to rule it out. Does seem like a tough sell, though.

(Shrug) ask them. I never got terribly into Nietzsche.

Since you think higher value is possible, and since you aren't in the choir, why wouldn't my argument that you ought to pursue theism have a chance with you or someone in your position? I take it you don't agree that atheism entails nihilism, which is contra Nietzsche, but if you came to agree with that and then experienced angst it seems to me you would be a prime candidate - i.e., hope springs eternal.

Two quick points: Nietzsche didn't think that atheism entails nihilism (Nietzsche was not a nihilist). And second, many of the atheists on this board either have or are still continuing to "pursue" theism. Taking myself as an example, I continue to discuss religious and theological topics with theists and semi-regularly go to religious services. Doing both of these things is fully consistent with my being an atheist and continuing to believe that atheism is more intellectually robust than theism. So brass tacks and rubber roads--what is it that you are actually trying to show here?

It seems crystal clear that N. thought the death of Christianity lead to nihilism. From the Wiki:

He didn't want Europe to end up in Buddhism(nihilism) but he seems to have thought nihilism was a motivator that could bring on the superman.

You seem to still be open minded. At some point you have to make a decision - or, from another perspective, you make a decision every day. We are finite and fluid creatures, works in progress. Keep looking, keep asking, keep searching. I did this thread to help show people there are good reasons to keep looking, and good reasons to look hard at theism. And of course I disagree that atheism is intellectually robust(though many atheists are).

Atheism => nihilism would make me a nihilist, wouldn't it? So we're back at the problem of how theism can appeal to me if nothing can appeal to me.

Whereas if I'm an atheist but don't accept that atheism implies nihilism, then why would theism's boast of 'No nihilism here' appeal to me?

You need me in the sweet spot of accepting that atheism implies nihilism, being an atheist, and not wanting nihilism, or wishing that nihilism was false.

Yes, that would make you like Nietzsche. See my Wiki extract on nihilism in the other thread. N. thought atheism leads to nihilism but did not want nihilism to prevail. So what's the solution? Carve out your own meaning through sheer assertion, fiat and will.

Well yes, pretty much. But it first entails acceptance that that's all anyone has ever 'really' done, that the meaning granted by theism was always illusory and constructed, anyway, so you're losing nothing.

I don't want to get bogged down in Nietzsche interpretation (nor do I think it matters that much). The wiki is stating Nietzsche's descriptive claims. That is, he thinks that as a matter of fact the dissolution of Christianity led many people to embrace a nihilistic view of the universe. However, he thinks we should reject this nihilistic view of the universe and instead create a new set of values based on being a new kind of man. Nihilism is the rejection of all values, Nietzsche thinks we shouldn't reject all values. Hence, Nietzsche rejects nihilism.


Why is it that at some point we have to make a decision and what decision is this? I am struggling to see how this connects to your criticism of nonchristian worldviews as nihilistic.

Doesn't everyone do this anyway (theist and atheist)?

Right, that's what N. said - Christianity is a hoax, a "slave morality" perpetrated by those without power on those with power, blah, blah, blah.

If he's right(that God doesn't exist), then only finite, objective value exists, and you are free to create your own subjective value. But he could be wrong. Then infinite, objective value exists. Despair is produced because we want something higher than ourselves. The values we create for ourselves are still finite and in the larger view of things, trivial.

So I'm saying, if you have that despair, you lose nothing by pursuing theism, because pursuing atheism does nothing to cure despair, and basically, you give up nothing of any real value by pursing theism. Even if theism turns out to be false, what have you lost?

What type of values should man kind create? But first who would set them? And I doubt all of mankind would agree to them? Or that different men would come up with different values which would man kind follow or know to be right?

I think making a decision is ongoing. It isn't that at some point we have to but in the nature of the case we ARE deciding all the time - in our thought life, our daily actions, what we do with our time, etc. It will at times come to a head and be more obvious and dramatic and that's when we tend to identify something as a decision.

It depends on the brand of theism. But I'm not an anti-religious crusader anyway.

I'm not advocating any brand. No brand is perfect, few brands are completely false. My final standard for judging any human position is the Bible.

Edit: Well, I do advocate Christian theism, of course. I was thinking in terms of denominations above.