Mouthy Buddha: Why I'm Not an Atheist Anymore

youtube.com/watch?v=RxBl_mPOsk0

Is he right in his conception of God and Agnosticism Sup Forums? And will the collective redemption of the West be a return to religion?

"More than half a century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of older people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.

Since then I have spent well-nigh fifty years working on the history of our Revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous Revolution that swallowed up some sixty million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened." - Alexandr Solzhenitsyn

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=q8e1sSNsf44
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Basically God is the unknown and this is an argument for conservatism I.e. Not radically altering society

>will the collective redemption of the West be a return to religion?
No
Religion is the cancer that got us here in the first place
Only sandniggers and Jews think they need a god in order to feel a sense of sanity out in space
The quicker we accept the truth the more likely it will be that we will destroy the shitskins like they need to be.
A combination of nihilism and "pagan" spiritualism is truly what we must strive for but I'm not so sure it will ever come to pass. More likely that it will eventually turn into some form that resembles the church of the eternal fire
Fanaticism always wins out over more sound arguments

your ID speaks volumes

>A combination of nihilism and "pagan" spiritualism
kys yourself

good luck

Venerate your father and find your golden ball, roughly speaking, rats are afraid of cats, and that's no joke.

No Tyrone you're fucking wrong, which society would objectify women more? The one you have now or Christian America/Europe?

Which society would allow rampant drug use? The one you have now or Christian America/Europe?


Which society would allow be OK with racemixing? The one you have now or Christian America/Europe?

Dumb burger.

>argues against religion
>uses spiritualism
Oh man.
Your fucking utopian ideal will never be achieved because you refuse to acknowledge the fact that not everyone is "le strong alpha male" and has hard time controlling himself without supervision of higher being, also, man will start to worship anything if there is no God that fills this void.
You DO want everyone to contribute to society, right? Then make them believe.

All nihilists should kill themselves, it's the only logically sound thing to do. If you really were one you would.

That's funny, because the more secular the US and Europe become the worse it becomes.

The height of Europe and the US was when it was Christian.

fuck off, you don't have any fucking "truth" you nihilistic cunt. quit being edgy and just accept the fact that religion, while bullshit to some, is extremely important to their designated cultures. (except Islam, fuck Islam)

I'm a bit spooked guys

>Jordan means "one who descends"
>Peterson also means "descends from Peter"
>Peter is usually depicted as the spokesperson of god

reminds me of

???

Your father is located in a belly of the whale, level 4.
Are you bad enough dude to save him?

and THAT'S THAT

Practising Christian here. I attend church.
I believe in God for many reasons.
I've had direct experience of God when I almost lost my life from a blood disease - septicemia. I was in a terrible state. One of my flatmates called an ambulance as I'd passed out and banged my head. The experience was peaceful - It's hard to describe. But I'll try:
It was a sense of losing my body and losing sensation from sight, hearing etc. Also a separation from the world. The medics sorted me out.

My wife died in a car crash in 2012. And our daughter was 13 at the time. She's 18 now.
As I lowered my wife's coffin into the Earth, I remember it clearly. There were people from the funeral service who helped.
It was a formal ceremony.
When I look at life, and how it sustains us, and its complexity, I can't not believe in God.
We all must die, but what we do with our lives is permanent.

Prayer nourishes our souls.

what did jordie's dad mean by this

Yes he is right only he doesn't get the first commandment. The most important thing is that Christ is the ONLY way, there is no God but Christ. Without this concept society loses focus, the collective unconscious stops working toward a common goal and dissolves into self serving interest groups. We can learn and grow from the Buddha, Ásatrú and all that but the concept of God is reserved for Christ.

He gave him double digits at birth, the descender that descends

So your belief in the Christian God hinges entirely on your fear of death
Nice "faith" you have there.

Take for granted that you are god. Look around you, and imagine a single person controlling everything.

You split into multiple people because, as god, you lose yourself in each body. Inside each, you lose awareness of how it feels to be any other being. I am the liberal, I am Trump, I am all the pedos and trannies. I beat myself and lust over myself.

And when you look at yourself from the outside in, often you see a feeble loser - if you see an atheist SJW, the shame is painful. How many video games or movies included someone like yourself? Not many, and if they were included, it was as a joke or a tragedy.

We are disaster victims. Every one of us is a diseased, cancerous wreak. Only by walking in the footsteps of that person inside you - god - can you even begin to imagine that things ar getting better.

Jordan Peterson is the new Jesus and will get crucified.

if digits no crucifixion

>Peterson confirmed as prophet of Kek.

Go forth and rescue you're father, user.

phew

GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

His hypocrisy is glaringly obvious unfortunately. Peterson rightly hates social and moral relativism and talks a lot about "truth" but when he's pushed on how to define truth, suddenly truth is subjective and we need to keep our ideologies flexible...

I feel really bad because as the moral fabric of society comes apart, Peterson's sanity seems to come apart with it. He's a man who desperately needs to find peace with God on a personal level, but he can't read the Bible without reading it through the lens of a psychoanalyst.

>tfw I just rescued my dead father

>if digits no crucifixion
>tfw I just rescued my dead father
You didn't rescue him you fool! You hammed the nails into his cross

>not everyone is "le strong alpha male" and has hard time controlling himself without supervision of higher being

ah the old "people are too stupid to have freedom" argument. I bet you've got some views on eugenics too huh ?

I'm 4 minutes into this shit nature documentary. When does he make an argument?

nice

Yes most are.
(((Freedom))) is cancer anyway, look where it lead us today.

Wouldn't expect much from a poster with that flag anyway.

Because he will be hanged

the guy in your video cant articulate his thoughts and all it did was annoy me

All that being an atheist tells me is that someone is very confident in their ignorance

Amen brother. Three years ago I had a near-death experience. As I lay dying, God was revealed to me. I prayed an arrogant prayer and God watched. Then I thought about it and prayed a truly humble prayer. God then filled me with pure, distilled, intense love, after which I stood up completely fine. The whole experience lasted maybe 10 seconds. My free will still leads me astray though, and I still have hateful thoughts (Sup Forums doesn't help). I pray and work hard every day to keep my heart filled with love (this doesn't mean being a passive pussy, of course).

>faG3FsNi
>fag

Even kek thinks you're gay

whats the music?

It's very hard to communicate this kind of stuff understandably, all the terms are so loaded. I think approaching it from the subjective side works best on modern "intellectuals".

SORT

YOURSELF

Kek

OUT

Anyone who believes atheism is diametrically opposed to agnosticism needs to be put down.

The funny part is that there are an innumerable amount of christians who believe the bible is 100% literal, even those who don't think it's literal are just trying to save a text with very little in terms of novel philosophy. Most people who say they get their morals from the bible are actually getting their morals from a secular source, the bible is filled with heinous morality, absence of morality, and moral contradictions.

trips of truth

we need another reformation

Having only watched most of 2 of Peterson's MoM lectures, looks like he thinks the underlying metaphysics which justifies the morality is factually incorrect however the system that's been created from them is useful incredibly pragmatic/useful/generative.

Sounds like Peterson's problem is that when you attack the underlying metaphysics, like scientific materialism does, you automatically chip away at the moral and philosophical system that the metaphysics & evolution has produced and instead are inclined instead to construct a moral system based on the enlightenment principles which has led to the industrialization of the world, i.e. build a system build from the top down (like how you would develop a physics/mathematics/chemistry theory) rather than from the bottom up (like what comes about by evolution by natural selection).

Because psychology and culture are such complicated and not so well understood, the moral systems you can construct from enlightenment axioms, such as Marxism, have the potential to have devastating unintended consequences when combined with the complexity of the human psyche and all the other various pressures that inform how people act.

That's how I interpretted
>Since then I have spent well-nigh fifty years working on the history of our Revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous Revolution that swallowed up some sixty million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened." - Alexandr Solzhenitsyn
The Marxism of the USSR was a product of having thrown away the old religious values (by killing the underlying metaphysics) and reconstructing ethics through the enlightenment lens.

Jordan and Eva Bartlett changed my mind about leaves and made me to re-read the Bible.

youtube.com/watch?v=q8e1sSNsf44

Marxism was a purely rational, even scientific endeavor. It killed 100s of millions of people.

He proposes that there are different parts of truth and that we can't know the whole truth. Truth seems to be that which is common to all human nature - this heroic myth, the human falling from order into chaos and getting back up. And that's the moral fabric basically.

what subspecies of numale is this?

Good post straya.

redemptive numale

Meant for

That's BLOODy brilliant, like WOW man, step into that elevator of the game of culture,

so says Nietzsche

>when you attack the underlying metaphysics, like scientific materialism does, you automatically chip away at the moral and philosophical system that the metaphysics & evolution has produced and instead are inclined instead to construct a moral system based on the enlightenment principles which has led to the industrialization of the world
a philosopher shouldn't be concerned with such nonsense tbqh

How fucked are we as a civilization if we can't find reasons to be good without the permission of sky daddy?

Why should you be good if all actions are meaningless? Because it makes you feel better? If it does make you feel better, why is it so if all actions are devoid of meaning? How can you even talk about good and evil in a nihilistic context? In that case, what you define as good is nothing more than materialistic pragmatism or utilitarianism, not good. Good inherently has transcendental value.

Oh look, a retard who uses the sky daddy strawman. Good job showing off how retarded you are.

The fact that it was even able to become secular in the first place shows an inherent weakness in the process you're proposing.
Sure, it may be a case of "it's the best we've got right now, so we might as well try" but to think that it is a long term solution that will not crumble the same way it already has is delusional from my perspective.
How do we convince people to believe in this crap?

>implying humans have not been spiraling into control through a history of bloody wars and natural disasters

>Why should you be good if all actions are meaningless?
Meaning is an interaction between what you have and what you want to have. You don't need to believe in a higher power or even anything outside of yourself to find meaning in life.
>How can you even talk about good and evil in a nihilistic context?
Atheistic =/= Nihilistic
>In that case, what you define as good is nothing more than materialistic pragmatism or utilitarianism, not good
>What you define as good is not good according to what I define as good
Word games
>Good inherently has transcendental value
But not necessarily religious

...

Following your reasoning, we can say that since human nature is so flawed, we can't form stable civilizations so we should just stop trying.

One thing is certain: civilizations without common morals, beliefs, ideals and culture cannot survive. They crumble because of disunity.

>You don't need to believe in a higher power or even anything outside of yourself to find meaning in life.
No, but you're fooling yourself. And actions are still by their objective definition meaningless, even if they are meaningful to you subjectively.

>Atheistic =/= Nihilistic
Oh come on now. If you die and go to nothing, nothing you do in life necessarily doesn't have an objective meaning.

>Word games
Not an argument brah.

>But not necessarily religious
Certainly not atheistic or rationalistic or material.

>christian nihilist projects his inner nihilism on atheist
Every time, without fail.

Again, is this supposed to be an argument? I asked simple logical questions.

It only takes one redditor to devolve the conversation to the level of 12 year olds. This also happens in the conversation of the collective unconscious, axioms need to be established so the conversation is fruitful and Christ's divinity is the most fruitful axiom.

Lot's of people are now in the phase of "Christianity works but it isn't true" but that misses the point. The claim of Christ's divinity is that He is the Logos incarnate. Meaning Christ's life and teachings are representative of how to best interact with the fundamental nature of reality. If Christianity works that means it's true.

I'm simply pointing out the fact that every time theists want to make the case that atheism leads to nihilism and depression, they simply assume the nihilist worldview without doing any of the philosophically heavy lifting. It almost surprises them when I ask why is it that life is meaningless without God, for them it goes without saying, and in saying so they expose their inner nihilism.

>tldr
>CRAAWWLIING INNNNN MY SKINNN

>>ah the old "people are too stupid to have freedom" argument.

They are though.

I'm surprised this is even a controversial opinion at this point.

Fedoras? In MY Sup Forums?

>You don't need to believe in a higher power or even anything outside of yourself to find meaning in life.
>No, but you're fooling yourself. And actions are still by their objective definition meaningless, even if they are meaningful to you subjectively.
If it's only subjective to say that a movie is meaningful even though it ended then everything in life is only subjectively meaningful, making the question of whether it's subjective or objective totally irrelevant, uninteresting and actually even tautological. Whether it's subjective or objective doesn't actually matter given your apparently pervasive definition of those words. In fact that's a view that you should have had fleshed out in first year metaphysics in any standard college philosophy course.
>Atheistic =/= Nihilistic
>Oh come on now. If you die and go to nothing, nothing you do in life necessarily doesn't have an objective meaning.
So this conversation has no "objective" meaning because it will end? So your relationship with friends has no "objective" meaning because they will end? You've pointed out the biggest problem with western/Judaeo-Christian morality, that if you try to apply scientific materialism to its metaphysical axioms you come up with ridiculous these tautologies you're saying that should take 5 seconds to debunk with a little imagination of how inconsistent they are with how you live your life.
>Word games
>Not an argument brah.
My point is that you're getting tangled up in definitions as if words have some divine value, your original argument that was in response to:
>In that case, what you define as good is nothing more than materialistic pragmatism or utilitarianism, not good
is simply not worth responding to considering how oxymoronic it is.
>Certainly not atheistic or rationalistic or material.
Actually it can be any of those. It's not up to you to decide for other people what they value or why and your inability to see why they could is just your lack of imagination.

Man let me tell you, I was reading Carl Jung about this sort of thing, go ahead, you can read about it. IT'S REAL.

You can easily turn that around and say that the fact that some atheist thinks that meaning without God goes without saying reveals their implicit faith.

Solzhenitsyn is smarter than anyone on this board.

The truth is hard.

Scoff if you will, but this man spoke wisdom.

That's not turning it around, it's a whole different argument, and a poor one in my opinion. Why does meaning implicate a deity?

>nihilism is what we need
wew lad, nice bait tho

go easy, he's only 14

>And will the collective redemption of the West be a return to religion?

I would be extremely disappointed if a return to the religious was necessary for us in order to be able to realize our objectives, which is, in part, to expel these people with whom we have no desire to share a political space.

Perhaps some people do need their stories, religious or secular, but I do believe our collective failure to shape our own destiny at the moment is in large part the result of processes the type of which most people on this board would not suspect. Namely, certain attitude with regard to nutrition, mental hygiene, discipline, certain psychological dispositions, and our related inability to formulate objectives so as to guide policy decision.

Religious interpretation of our problem are interesting when formulated by the likes of Peterson, but when evoked on Sup Forums are about as relevant as those which were used to talk about the plague or events such as earthquakes. Did God punish Europe by sending them the plague? Or was it rather and "simple" health and sanitary concern?

>A combination of nihilism
>nihilism

kys

>getting triggered by a word
What's wrong with it? :^)

That's my point, neither arguments are actually robust. It will all break down into epistemological and ontological bickering. Your particular invocation of 'deity' leads me to believe that this can't actually go anywhere right now via our current methods anyways.

What's wrong with epistemological and ontological bickering m8? That's the best part of this whole shitshow of a debate.

Yes God punished people for living in filth and rewarded the seeking of truth until we became spoiled by His love, taking it for granted and turning our back on Him.

>Namely, certain attitudes
Attitudes are in practice only changed by narratives and to have a common focus to guide us cooperatively we need a common narrative. Christianity is by far the most successful narrative, the early Christians understood this very well in part because it happened in a time of insanely scattered ideas with hundreds of "saviours" emerging.

I'm on mobile between sets at the gym tho.

Are you the same Iceland that told me God finds my suffering and struggle aesthetically pleasing?

>Religion is the cancer that got us here in the first place
show me a successful atheistic society, dumbo
and no, mere decades of survival dont count

nice strawman, typical athiest
that's not what he said, that's just what you made up

As a yid you should know that if a man could describe God he would be god. That's maimonides or some rabbi I believe. We can only hazily circumscribe his ever formless metaphysical domain.

Yes in the dumb context of the "problem of evil". The results of righteous struggle are aesthetically pleasing. Without struggle to fuel it evolution would have stopped at self replicating soup. The world that emerged from that is aesthetically pleasing.

So it's only the results and not the suffering itself that God appreciates?

I know this is bait but whatever.
How can anyone possibly reconcile the complete absence of belief into anything or truths with something else? How can you possibly function thinking "oh well life has no purpose but I guess I still should honor the old gods"? It's complete retardation.
The only reason nihilism is a meme is because of teenage faggots who read the wiki of Nietzsche and didn't even understand that he was an anti-nihilist, not an advocate of it.

Really boils my blood

When you suffer for a greater good like in your existential angst that eventually brings you knowledge God appreciates your sacrifice, it "smells good" to Him and the knowledge is a form of His love in return. Cain suffered just as much tilling the land as Abel breeding stock but still Abel received more of God's love which made Cain insanely jealous.

why do you troll every peterson thread

I like peterson m8.

KEK is with you.

>Attitudes are in practice only changed by narratives and to have a common focus to guide us cooperatively we need a common narrative.

Let's suppose that, for propaganda purposes, it is correct to presume that stories are superior to abstract formulation. (This is a view with which I'm rather sympathetic.) We should then try to make the case as to why Christianity is the ideal story for us to adopt. It certainly seem as though it is recommended to us by certain historical circumstances. But, for exactly the same reason, it does not seem to be so recommended, for the scientific vision of the world has previously powerfully entered in conflict with it, as well as a series of previous liberation NARRATIVE, namely women liberation narrative and sexual minority liberation narrative. These narratives, coupled with free reign capitalism and the materialist attitude to life, have done much to undermine Christianity as a compelling metaphysical story now form more than 200 years. This is the historical circumstances in which we find ourselves, and short of some sort of existentialist Christianity of the kind Peterson seems to advocate, one which strives to accomplish a sort of synthesis with science, I fail to see how we should reintroduce in our society even the possibility of a return of Christ, say much less the mechanism through which religion is supposed to be instantiated. (For instance, would people go to Church and confess their sins to a priest or receive communion? Why? Because they ACTUALLY believe in the divinity of Christ? Not under some Jungian archetypal view.)

Furthermore, the Christian story, from an epistemological perspective, seriously fail to capture the interest of people like me, who are completely refractory to the idea of a religion and of a divine realm, simply because we have no way of ascertaining the truth about these types of entities.