Atheism 2.0 possess the characterizations of empowerment, tolerance, and optimism. Atheism 2.0 gives off a more uplifting and positive vibe rather than the tone previously given by New Atheism. Atheism 2.0 does make some arguments but does not outright argue against religion. In a video by The Human Project, they state their disapproval of religion by stating "A 1,000 years ago, we were all God 's creation, except the guys next door were heathens." The Human Project is pointing out their discontentment with the doctrine of religion and the hypocrisy they see in it.
Professor Girard claims that Emerson is not transcendentalist and he brings some reasons to admit this idea. He says that because Emerson had no system who was more poet than philosopher. He asserts that due to Emerson rationalism, he did not allow reason to come up and many more reasons. This animosity shows itself when Emerson in one of his interview mentioned �they are not good citizen�� Girard believes that transcendentalism has religious aspects but he cannot deny that transcendentalism has philosophical aspects as well. He says England has two distinct phase in which first one is up to 1835 and then the second phase started.
Freud’s perspective is people projecting father figure on the “God”. Obviously his theory seems constructed specifically to account for those theistic religion, the nontheistic religion does not suitable for
His argument at this point is based on the teaching of three specific religions. Not only is Colson referring to religion, which is already an area that is entirely open for interpretation, but he is also arguing that a legal change should not be made on the grounds that these three religions state otherwise. In a democratic country where church and state have been separated, this argument becomes invalid. The teachings of the church hold no power in the government. Although this choice of persuasive technique may have helped Colson to convince his Muslim, Jewish, and Christian readers, it has overall done more harm than good in developing his argument.
In his fourth point, Dawkins explains that religion teaches us to not question our faith and this prevents us from justifying our actions as long as it is in the name of God. He argues that having a faith justifies terrible acts because it allows us to avoid reasoning. Thus this explains the irrational act that was done in the history of mankind. He also promote skepticism because it encourage us do not believe in anything without looking for evidence. His fifth point states that religion is not the source of our morality.
In Hermann Hesse’s novel Siddhartha, Siddhartha goes through a spiritual journey, going through many challenges, making many mistakes, and eventually reaches enlightenment. Knowing what he learned on his journey, Siddhartha would disagree with atheism and thus the “Good without a god” campaign because he does not agree with atheism and believes making mistakes and doing bad things is a necessary part of life. Siddhartha would not agree with a secular point of view because his beliefs mostly resemble pantheistic beliefs, or someone who believes god is everything. Humanists beliefs say there is no god, creator, or supernatural being of any kind, but that we should all be good people. Darwin the Dog, from the “Kids without god” website says he, a humanist,”Doesn 't believe in any of the gods” (Kids Without God, Darwin the Dog).
Argument from Design The argument from design builds its foundation on the following premise. There is evidence of design, or purpose, in the natural world. Therefore, a creator created the natural world. Despite its nature that has lead this type of logic to be a default in several cultures, this argument is unsuccessful in proving a creator—which is its goal. Many of Hume’s objections to the argument may be brushed off by those who are blindly religious and take offense, but many, from the same pool of objections, are simply logical and commonsensical, while some are too rigid.
Marquesas Thesis The early Marquesans did many things that are outrageous and extreme. Their views and takes on their environment and their existence seemed natural and common to them as their societal norm. What they believed in played a heavy role in their culture because they didn 't have much knowledge of their world. They needed to have faith in things such as religion. The ancient Marquesans believed the gods controlled everything and were a part of people 's daily lives, dead people became spirits, and even minor spiritual things were important.
So we look at the animal world a realistic view of its importance in the life and usefulness of the human person, and to cooperate with him in the architecture of the universe and the continuation of life. Thus, Islam was denied torture the animal, as well as Islam forbids the imprisonment of the animal or crush it, and ordered it to use in what created it, and not overwork, or can not afford loaded from weightlifting. Quran states to honor the animal, and the statement of its position and its importance, and to locate the human side, he says Almighty: (And cattle He has created for you (men): from them ye derive warmth, and numerous benefits, and of their (meat) ye eat. (5)And ye have a sense of pride and beauty in them as ye drive them home in the evening, and as ye lead them forth to pasture in the morning. (6)And they carry your heavy loads to lands that ye could not (otherwise) reach except with souls distressed: for your Lord is indeed Most Kind, Most Merciful,(7)And (He has created) horses, mules, and donkeys, for you to ride and use for show; and He has created (other) things of which ye have no knowledge.
He claims to be defining religion as distinct from science, politics, entertainment or any other human endeavour. Nonetheless, because Tylor’s animism is reputed to have arisen from the first thought-mistake of a religious kind, its foundational nature contributed to a debate about what kind of religion was the earliest. The Victorian contest between prevalent styles of Christianity and nascent forms of evolutionary theory are visible in the replacement of the theory that religion derives from (monotheistic) divine revelation but has degenerated into diversity, sometimes and in some places at least, by the theory that “primitive” spirit-belief religion slowly progressed towards its own replacement by
• The laws of the land must apply to everyone because it can allow peace and have exclusive control of the territories. Religious Studies and Public Policy Questions: 1) Why does the U.S government decide not to define the word religion in the constitution? 2) How come some religious followers still continue to break certain laws? Shouldn’t they be educated about the laws of the land they live
The basic principles of metaphysical naturalism are very different than that of naturalism. Metaphysical naturalism has a more meaningful religious interpretation in that human beings may not be able to entirely comprehend the ultimate purpose of the universe and its parts. This brings us to the scientific thought that the laws of physics and chemistry are of hierarchical organizational patterns and exceed the limits of religious concepts and theory. Scientific naturalist sees science as the only sensible way of understanding nature. In this regard if there is something more than naturalism in this world, science alone may be considered an inaccurate means of recognizing and comprehending these concepts.
They operated in the transcendence, not with holding the truth. This history was not only important for them but the now generation which could learn from the mistakes that was made. The history also show how God interact with humanity whereas the pagan god’s history did not show
This language can’t be faked or changed as it fits the human. this language eliminates the need for the missionaries, because all humans have it where every they go.” (Paine, 1794, P.100-101) Andrew took to this a little kindlier, however, he responded with, “So if the bible is false how can Job and Psalms 19 be right. They have no proof, and a human copied them from revelation from God. How can they be correct?” Thomas responded with, “You are one of these heathens? You believe that they are correct?
The origin of this anthropocentric way of thinking is difficult to pin down, but many ecologists believe religious beliefs were a main driver. As White put it “…we shall continue to have a worsening ecological crisis until we reject the Christian axiom that nature has no reason for existence save to serve man” (White p. 69). It is not hard to understand that thinking the land was only as important as what it could give to humans was extremely detrimental to resources. It also gave Europeans the idea that if the land was not being used for what they though was important, then it was not being used at all. This led them to take land from the natives as their own, because they were going to cultivate it unlike the Indians had done.