Store up for yourselves treasures in Heaven
where moth and rust cannot destroy and thieves cannot break in and steal

Thursday, May 9, 2013

Not Guilty By Reason of Atheism

Most people in North America have heard on the News, the account of three young women escaping 10 years of captivity and rape. A man is in custody. He has yet to enter a plea. However, I think that we have arrived at a place in history where atheism should either put up or shut up.

Yes, as things currently stand, the man is guilty of committing a civil crime. However, based upon the “logical” flow of thought put forward by atheism, can we seriously believe that the law is fair? Being that our laws are based upon a Christian understanding of human nature, which all atheists recognize as being deeply flawed, should there even be laws? On atheism, do we have any right to sit in judgement of someone in such as way as to give the impression that this alleged kidnapper is a bad man? For as one atheist, Anna, says, We're all good people. Or at least she knows that she's a good person and she's far from alone on that count. 


Judged from a scientific and logical perspective, the belief that we stand outside the causal web in any respect is an absurdity, the height of human egoism and exceptionalism.”
Tom Clark at

Absolutely! On atheism, determinism rules. Firing neurons and biochemical exchanges drive our behaviours, especially those that compel us to pro create in order to preserve our genes. We men are genetically predisposed to grab her by the hair and drag her back to the cave. And if we're born that way, then it can't be wrong.
Before we can talk of being responsible for our decisions, we need an account of why those decisions belong to us. But the trouble is, on a naturalistic view, there is no entity that can plausibly own any mental states, there is simply a plurality of parallel, impersonal processes in the brain.”
Dr. Angus Menuge,

1 comment:

  1. You never cease to amaze/amuse me.
    So this time it's that Atheists don't have laws, because laws can only be given by an upmost law giver. That's a strange pre-French-Revolution concept. I looked it up, you're Canadian, so I won't pester you with the US constitution, which is entirely based on the will of the people, and not on divine law. It is the basis of democracy that people can govern themselves, give themselves just laws, and have to follow those laws or face litigation an criminal procedures. No god involved, nor one of the by god's grace kings. It works pretty well, I must say, and it seems the criminal processes in secular countries are a lot more transparent and fairer than, say, the glorious Spanish inquisition, which was solely based on Christian scripture, or today's religious Sharia courts, ditto.

    As for Dr. Angus Menuge, whatever he may have misunderstood about biology or brain research, both not his fields of activity - he teaches philosophy for missionaries at a Christian university - he fails to make himself understood.
    If you want to dive into the real problems of responsibilities for one's actions, bragging about firing neurons and mental processes won't help a bit. Reading some Grayling or Dennett might enable you to see where the real discussion is.