/lit/ - Literature

>MY FAVOURITE, A RELGION THREAD

>>13322442
thanks for the bump

>>13322432
nothing inferior can generate something superior by itself, this is the proof of the Logos

a summary for you niggers

The Argument Against Atheistic Meaning and Significance[1]
1. If atheism is true, then there is no God and there is no immortality.
2. If there is no God and there is no immortality, then life lacks adequate meaning and significance.
-------------------------------------------------------
3. Therefore, if atheism is true, then life lacks adequate meaning and significance.

The Argument Against Atheistic Moral Motivation[2]
1. If there is no God, then one’s ultimate destiny is unrelated to one’s behavior.
2. If one’s ultimate destiny is unrelated to one’s behavior, then one has no good reason to be moral.
---------------------------------------------------
3. Therefore, if there is no God, then one has no good reason to be moral.

The Argument Against Atheistic Morality[3]
1. If there is no God, then moral values are just expressions of personal taste or the product of evolution and conditioning.
2. If moral values are just expressions of personal taste or the product of evolution and conditioning, then objective moral values do not exist.
--------------------------------------------------------
3. Therefore, if there is no God, then objective moral values do not exist.

The Argument Against Atheistic Purpose[4]
1. If there is no God, then our lives (and the universe) will end and we’re an accident of nature.
2. If our lives (and the universe) will end and we’re an accident of nature, then life has no ultimate purpose.
----------------------------------
3. Therefore, if there is no God, then life has no ultimate purpose.

>>13322585
>Therefore, if atheism is true, then life lacks adequate meaning and significance.
>Therefore, if there is no God, then one has no good reason to be moral.
>Therefore, if there is no God, then objective moral values do not exist.
>Therefore, if there is no God, then life has no ultimate purpose.

ding ding ding!

>>13322585
Ad 1. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/life-meaning/#Nat
Ad 2. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/#CatHypImp
Ad 3. Craig should really drop this argument, the first premise is embarrassing.
Ad 4. Is that really distinct enough from 1?

Life is absurd even with god. The very notion that god would create us to live, suffer and die for his amusement or inscrutable purposes is absurd. Read the Myth of Sisyphus.

>>13322658
>Craig should really drop this argument, the first premise is embarrassing.

what's your refutation?

>>13322675
maybe we just can't understand the big picture

>>13322717
muhsterious ways :)

>>13322658
>https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/life-meaning/#Nat
>https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/#CatHypImp

not buying it lad, put it in your words maybe

>>13322432
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=M1c_GlAjvy4

thank u, next

>>13322788
cool fedora

>>13322788
>literally fedora

>>13322688
That you should read an introductory meta-ethics textbook.

>>13322772
I know you don't, it's fine.

>>13322834
>NO NO NO YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DEBATING ME

>>13322585
What hell is the point of this lecture? He brought nothing new to the table.

>>13322730
yup

>>13322658
>Implying Kantian ethics isn't just an attempt to remake Christian ethics without God
embarrassing, lad. You proved OP's pdf file to be true.