“Damien, you are a strong atheist. I am wondering do you see yourself as better than theists?”

“Damien, you are a strong atheist. I am wondering do you see yourself as better than theists?”   Well it would depend on what you mean by “better than,” as both are equal as humans. But to more fully address the question I would say that to me an informed atheist compared to an uninformed/misinformed theist shows that the atheist is thinking/forming beliefs more accurately to non-supernatural reality so in such a way yes, they are better in not having superstition errors in their conceptions of naturalistic only reality. But other than that, you would need to know more about people individually as atheist and theist is only about issues of belief inaccuracy on the theist part, as atheism is not life stances that for the atheist will likely tend to be aligned with political liberalism and also are more prawn to progressivism. Not to mention atheists in America have no hate groups, which the religious seem to favor, thus to me atheists often are better people than some like to suggest. Atheists overwhelmingly favor same-sex marriage (92%) and legal abortion (87%). In addition, three-quarters (74%) say that government aid to the poor does more good than harm. About two-thirds of atheists (69%) identify as Democrats (or lean in that direction), and a majority (56%) call themselves political liberals (compared with just one-in-ten who say they are conservatives). Atheism unlike religion is not out to oppress or hate others that would be believers in gods and religions.   If you don’t believe me Look at the hate groups in America not one is atheist but more than half are...

The Bible shows a racist character of jESUS who was not god but was a bigot “if real”

“Even if people killed in the name of Jesus throughout history, that dont means that Jesus wasn’t a peaceful person” – Challenger   My responce, just a bigoted racist that upon race alone was going to refuse healing a child leis not forget. Matthew 15:21-28 “Proves the bible stories character jESUS who was not god but was a bigot” 21 Leaving that place, jESUS withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “lord,(yahweh) son of david, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.” 23 jESUS did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.” 24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” 25 The woman came and knelt before him. “lord, help me!” she said. 26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” 27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.” 28 Then jESUS said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment. Ps. elohim occurs frequently as well as the later creation name yahweh, both are used throughout the Torah to mean gOD. *My Commentary Matthew 15:21-28 jESUS all good? Some try to say this is a bad example. Read the next few passages. She pleads more and he then heals the girl. Wrong, this is a great example he...

Rape, Sexism and Religion?

Here is a comment from my Axiological Atheist page: “Cmon rape sucks I’m sure. But let’s not make it something it’s not. Religion however is a scourge on our society and needs to be eliminated.“ – Challenger “Oh yeah…rape is a piece of cake. No big deal. Don’t even know why it’s illegal….said no rape victim ever.” – A female page member “I’ve never heard a male rape victim claim it “ruined his whole life” 😄😄- Challenger My response, rape is a big deal. Rape often destroys one’s long-term internal well being and is a violation of one’s dignity at a core level disrupting one’s sense of body integrity commonly producing possible lifelong PTSD symptoms and emotional hijacking responses in even some loving relationships. So, it is a very big deal. “Rape trauma syndrome (RTS) is the psychological trauma experienced by a rape victim that includes disruptions to normal physical, emotional, cognitive, and interpersonal behavior. The theory was first described by psychiatrist Ann Wolbert Burgess and sociologist Lynda Lytle Holmstrom in 1974. RTS is a cluster of psychological and physical signs, symptoms and reactions common to most rape victims immediately following and for months or years after a rape. While most research into RTS has focused on female victims, sexually abused males (whether by male or female perpetrators) also exhibit RTS symptoms. RTS paved the way for consideration of complex post-traumatic stress disorder, which can more accurately describe the consequences of serious, protracted trauma than posttraumatic stress disorder alone. The symptoms of RTS and post-traumatic stress syndrome overlap. As might be expected, a person who has been raped will generally...

Humanistic Economics?

I value all people as equal human beings regardless of class or social standing. I always see the worth of the person. I am very against classism and all such prejudice or discrimination basis on social class. This includes individual attitudes and behaviors, systems of policies and practices that are set up to benefit the upper classes at the expense of the lower classes including people without means such as vagrants or homeless. The current system, sadly, works on the premise in which the less you have, the less you get. And to me as an axiologist this current system is not an ethical just way to apply humanity. Religion and gods are archetypal classism and all such prejudice or discrimination basis on social class. A benefit of application axiology is to present a clearer view of value not something which we do without thinking but under positive intentionality. Intentionality of axiology view of value or what lacks value is the power of minds to be about, to represent, or to stand for, things, properties and states of affairs valueizing/value judgments are utilized or needed. Intentionality of axiology new view of value is presented for the sake of positive benefit establishing a future ethical humanistic persuasion in society. I hold an axiology goal that our future society is a secular humanistic society that will be built by people of ethical humanistic persuasion, whose intellect, emotion, and will are centered on a Heart of equality, liberty, ethical care and justice. I hold an axiology goal that the faculties of intellect, emotion, and will motivate us to seek the values of...

“I don’t always know, but must choose what works best.”

“I don’t always know, but must choose what works best.”   Such as, how reason extracted from an understanding of the real world can assist in choices that are more accurate in their answers or conclusions. Reason is more reliable than, faith extracted from beliefs that do not connected to the understanding of the real world, like faith in prayer for healing over medical treatment or faith in some fable about the origin of everything, that doesn’t match the existing knowledge about the origin of everything.   This analysis of which to choose can be navigated with choosing that which is the most reliable.   Reliabilism: a general theory of knowledge.   Reliabilism strives to ascertain whether the general belief-forming process by which method the belief was formed and how reliable it is to produce a high ratio of true beliefs. Reliable standards for true beliefs commonly rely heavily on asking good questions and bing skeptical or reserved before establishing an answer.   How can know whether a process of true belief is reliable in general or not? Justificational status of a belief must somehow depend on the way the belief is caused.   Wishful thinking, gut feelings confused reasoning, hasty generalization or guessing are not proper ways of justification if they nether hold or require evidence. Their common feature is unreliability: they tend to produce false beliefs in a large proportion of the cases.   Critical thinking, logic, or good inductive/deductive reasoning are proper ways of justification if they relate to evidence. Their common feature is reliability: they tend to produce true beliefs in a large proportion of...

Pragmatic theory of truth, Coherence theory of truth, and Correspondence theory of truth

Pragmatic theory of truth, Coherence theory of truth, and Correspondence theory of truth To me, there are three main approaches to truth (ontology of truth) from the very subjective (Pragmatic theory of truth), subjective (Coherence theory of truth), or to the objective (Correspondence theory of truth).   *Pragmatic theory of truth: very subjective   “our ideas are true if they work to solve problems, are useful”   A common feature is a reliance on the pragmatic maxim as a means of clarifying the meanings of difficult concepts such as truth; and an emphasis on the fact that belief, certainty, knowledge, or truth is the result of an inquiry. The pragmatic maxim is a normative recommendation or a regulative principle in the normative science of logic, its function is to guide the conduct of thought toward the achievement of its purpose, advising on an optimal way of “attaining clearness of apprehension”. Ref Ref    *Coherence theory of truth: subjective/objective   “our ideas are true if they are internally consistent not contradictory”   A common thinking is to regard truth as coherence within some specified set of sentences, propositions or beliefs. There is no single set of such “logical universes”, but rather an assortment of perspectives that are commonly discussed under this title. A positive tenet is the idea that truth is a property of whole systems of propositions and can be ascribed to individual propositions only derivatively according to their coherence with the whole. While modern coherence theorists hold that there are many possible systems to which the determination of truth may be based upon coherence, others, particularly those with strong religious beliefs hold...