Hello there fellow Atheists

Hello there fellow Atheists.
Now that we know that Evolution is real and religion is a lie, what easy to digest basis for morality should we propose to subhumans? They need to believe in something or else they will go apeshit.
Nagural law itself isn't good enough for low IQ people. They need a structure to control their entire lives.

sciencealert.com/darwin-s-finches-evolve-into-new-species-in-real-time-two-generations-galapagos

nationalvanguard.org/books/Thus-Spoke-Zarathustra-by-F.-Nietzsche.pdf

just let the low iq belive in a religion( a good one). that would make it easier for them.

Christianity, but with its medieval edge.

Based statue, where is it located?

But they will indoctrinate their potentially high IQ children into jo9ning their religion thus taking away resources from science.

You think that Jesus is a Lie than O J Simpson will fist your heretic Ass in Hell, FUCK YOU

Yield to the void of kaos and kosmos.

Eris is the true goddess of Chaos.
Kek is a false prophet.

I've come to the weird conclusion that an atheist culture is unfit in Darwinian terms. Humans are just meant to be superstitious. Being anti-religion is being anti-human. If you stop being superstitious, your culture will be taken over by an even worse religion like Islam.

What's right doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is birthrates and social fabric. Atheism encourages individualism, so there's no order, no social fabric. The closest it's gotten so far is the "green movement" and environment worship. The dark enlightenment and Yudkowsky's larpers are another strain that I expect to run out of steam.

Really, if the natural world is the only source of truth, and evolution itself ultimately yields religious society, who are you to go against that? It's like denying the imaginary numbers.

How about making Evolution or Science itself a religion?

You don’t want to do that, thats how we ended up with fedora tippers giving us a bad name.

Won't fedora tippers eventually die out thanks to natural selection?

Yes, but there’ll always be more falling for it unfortunately.

I'd rather tell beta fedora tippers to get off my lawn than building anti truck barriers.

As would I, luckily here in aus our police are doing a pretty good job at stopping plots and what not but a truck of peace is only a matter of when.

Nietzsche is pretty garbage-tier. Not sure what the other link is supposed to be about.

But defending ethical systems without a religious apology isn't difficult. It is and always was about selfish goals. Be shitty to other people and you create a world in which more shitty people exist. Meaning you will be more likely to encounter shitty people. Who will be shitty to you.

That wasn't so hard, was it?

>making Evolution or Science itself a religion
I'll ignore the fact that this sounds like reddit garbage.

How do you do that? What sacraments, creeds, and doctrines present themselves naturally? Natural law is not unique to atheism so you need to be more specific than that. Is there an "atheist pope"? That's impossible because atheists value free thinking above authority. Free thinking is individualism. There's no ability to shame people into doing things outside of the domain of natural law. Any sacraments and replacement for worship have to be individual whim. You can't get people to worship science. They'll only end up worshiping themselves because they're enlightened by their own intelligence.

Even more importantly, there's no fear of an absolute truth other than the fear of death, and even the fear of death is muted by nihilism.

Most importantly, religion lengthens a man's (or a civilization's) planning horizon in a way that atheism can't. You brought up natural law, so you might be familiar with the notion of time preference. The time preference of religious people is (with rare exceptions) lower than it is for atheists. The society that weighs the downsides of present actions against eternal consequences will advance much faster than the society that only considers consequences for the next 50 years.

(This last point is a little different for the atheist movements which emphasize cryonics.)

If the alt-right attempts to adopt discordianism, I will throw such a fit that it will cause a tsunami in some Southeast-Asian country. Fuck off: we're full. Discordianism is ultra-liberal and always was.

Except you have no objective basis to claim what you perceive as shitty is more correct than what anyone else does.

If I disagree with what you think is good or bad, you have no meaningful ways to say I'm wrong

Of course I don't have any objective basis. But I don't need one. I have a chemical basis.

Pain, suffering, sorrow and hurt are shitty because humans are hard-wired to experience those things in a way that is pretty-well summed-up as "shitty."

I don't need an objective reality to communicate shittiness to you, and more than you need an objective reality to agree that "being in pain kinda sucks."

There is no objective basis. And if there were people in our community who disagreed? It would be a really big problem that my contention of "being in pain sucks" wasn't agreed to. But it is agreed to. So the hypothetical problem with my contention remains purely hypothetical, and wholly irrelevant to the assertion that "being in pain sucks."

Why do you allways look for ways to control.
You use religion then when that fails you turn to Sup Forums and ask use for help.
Srsly, go die .
We will not forget.
You and your additude are the problem.

atheist here too. but Christianity or Buddhism is still what id recommend. atheists dont have the same bong with eachother as religious ppl do so atheists get cucked .. sorry u need religion for a society

I don't have a bong with anyone. I have a job.

*bond

>That's impossible because atheists value free thinking above authority.
How about doing everything to spread genes of your tribe?

Just shoot the ones that act out of line.

>I don't need an objective reality to communicate shittiness to you
Saw your mouth shut , break your hands and gouge out your eyes and then try to communicate. Dead people are objectively not able to communicate. That's reality for you.

>Why do you allways look for ways to control.
Because that's why other people outside of my family exist for?

You are correct, user: what I'm proposing has no objective basis. I'm not arguing otherwise. In fact, if you go read the post you're replying to? I'm specifically arguing for exactly the same point.

Dead people don't participate in our society. People who find pain desirable are extraordinarily rare.

The golden rule is not a logically valid conclusion. It is a premise from which to build because it happens, by circumstance, to apply to such a vast majority of us that the argument based on it is sound. But it is not a valid argument. Just a sound one.

That's perfectly ok. Most of our society is based on sound, rather than valid, assumptions. If I jump? I fall. There is a logically valid argument to be made about why gravity exists and what will necessarily cause me to fall.

But I'm not well-enough educated in physics to make that valid argument. Neither are you. In fact? Actually not a single person has ever managed to create a logically valid argument that demonstrates that necessity. But it's a sound argument, so no one gives a fuck.

>People who find pain desirable are extraordinarily rare.
Isn't getting punished for your sins like the main point of Christianity, the cult of death?

>Doesn't understand the difference between reality and theory.
>Doesn't understand the definition of "lie".
>Thinks it's intelligent enough to construct a new morality out of whole cloth.
OP is sub nigger-tier "intellectual".

>felow atheists
It sadens me of what atheist comunity has turned into, i was once atheist but now i dont whant to asociate with those people, its not about resoning and facts anymore, its just about bashing christians......

>its just about bashing christians......
*religious people who inorically believe in sky dad

*non-ironically

>Pain, suffering, sorrow and hurt are shitty because humans are hard-wired to experience those things in a way that is pretty-well summed-up as "shitty."
So why not end people's lives en masse? Given your guidelines that sounds pretty moral, and if anybody disagrees they're wrong according to you anyway. Oh wait, Stalin thought like this and did exactly that.