| Parts of my problems are others problems, that is not mutually exclusive. Actually, one could argue that at the end of the day, any action is egoist at some level, even charity (my experience is that this argument leads to interesting discussions were people try to define things). Also, I know that religion is linked to charity, but I don't see why would one need religion to help other people. I'm doing it pretty often actually, at my level. Why should I need faith in anything to help someone? How an atheist would be unable to help anybody? So, > I don't see where you can pull that out of atheism. I would say that beliefs (atheism is a form of belief, for some definition of atheism) and helping people are orthogonal notions. As an agnostic, linking those things feel absurd (in the mathematical definition of absurd, not in the definition of "stupid"). P.S.: I don't feel I said anything stupid. Let's use real arguments. If you think I said something wrong, feel free to argue about it. I'll be glad to recognize that I was wrong or to further argue. Edit: I would say that one acts according to what drives their life. This can be faith. Or something else. Or a mix of things. |
It's hard for me to reply to this because I just have a hard time understanding what you are talking about. What is the mathematical definition of absurd? What is an "egoist" action.
All I was able to really understand was that you don't see why you need religion to help people. You don't. But every religious person can be reprimainded for not helping people because it is a religious tenet of nearly every major faith to help others as they are your equals under God. Every atheist cannot be taught to help others in this way.
In essence, an atheist can be good if they choose to be. A religious person is specifically being told to be good.