Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - UBC study finds believers distrust atheists as much as rapists

Red Slinger · 02-09-2012, 09:10 PM

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?
—Nietzsche, The Gay Science

There are a lot of really interesting and well thought-out comments in this thread. As I read them I keep coming back to the same question: why do we need God? Society has a morality, usually expressed in laws but not exclusively, that guides our behavior. That larger morality may be refined within the individual to the point where they have their own unique morality within the framework of the larger one. But nonetheless, that morality is there and more often than not, as pointed out by Textcritic, the societal morality and individual sub-sets are more relevant and applicable than those handed down by God.

In the quote above Nietzsche is not making a case for a literal birth, existence and death of God. Instead he is saying that the Judeo-Christian God (and I'll add others also) are no longer required or even relevant as a viable source of absolute moral principles.

As Textcritic does above, Nietzsche also concludes that the universe is a struggle between chaos and order (aka good and evil). With the 'death' of God people will reject absolute values themselves by rejecting any sort of objective, universal moral laws. This, according to Nietzsche, results in humanity having to re-evaluate the foundations of our value systems. This in turn, would result in a deeper, more effective and relevant morality than the absolute morality passed down by God.

Ultimately, this is the conversation that began this thread: are aetheists immoral or less moral than believers? Are they to be trusted? If you allow yourself to follow the logic it could be argued that aetheists are more trustworthy.

02-09-2012, 09:10 PM	#758
Red Slinger First Line Centre Join Date: Feb 2006 Exp:	God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? —Nietzsche, The Gay Science There are a lot of really interesting and well thought-out comments in this thread. As I read them I keep coming back to the same question: why do we need God? Society has a morality, usually expressed in laws but not exclusively, that guides our behavior. That larger morality may be refined within the individual to the point where they have their own unique morality within the framework of the larger one. But nonetheless, that morality is there and more often than not, as pointed out by Textcritic, the societal morality and individual sub-sets are more relevant and applicable than those handed down by God. In the quote above Nietzsche is not making a case for a literal birth, existence and death of God. Instead he is saying that the Judeo-Christian God (and I'll add others also) are no longer required or even relevant as a viable source of absolute moral principles. As Textcritic does above, Nietzsche also concludes that the universe is a struggle between chaos and order (aka good and evil). With the 'death' of God people will reject absolute values themselves by rejecting any sort of objective, universal moral laws. This, according to Nietzsche, results in humanity having to re-evaluate the foundations of our value systems. This in turn, would result in a deeper, more effective and relevant morality than the absolute morality passed down by God. Ultimately, this is the conversation that began this thread: are aetheists immoral or less moral than believers? Are they to be trusted? If you allow yourself to follow the logic it could be argued that aetheists are more trustworthy. __________________ The of and to a in is I that it for you was with on as have but be they Last edited by Red Slinger; 02-09-2012 at 09:12 PM.