I don't get atheism

Materialism reduces man to a soulless automaton and constitutes him merely an arithmetical symbol finding a helpless place in the mathematical formula of an unromantic and mechanistic universe. But whence comes all this vast universe of mathematics without a Master Mathematician? Science may expatiate on the conservation of matter, but religion validates the conservation of men's souls—it concerns their experience with spiritual realities and eternal values.

To say that mind "emerged" from matter explains nothing. If the universe were merely a mechanism and mind were unapart from matter, we would never have two differing interpretations of any observed phenomenon. The concepts of truth, beauty, and goodness are not inherent in either physics or chemistry. A machine cannot know, much less know truth, hunger for righteousness, and cherish goodness.

>unromantic
lmao faggot

Reminder that Objectivism is the literal only not shit form of atheism.

If men were only machines, they would react more or less uniformly to a material universe. Individuality, much less personality, would be nonexistent.

Reminder the objectivism is literally shit form of philosophy

So the left desperately asserts lest people finally intellectually weaponize themselves with Marxism's bar-none greatest threat.

Fool, we have only just begun. Soon entire galaxies will be our backyards.

Yep, you don't get atheism at all.
You don't even know its definition.

Nice try Satan.

>Satan: 0
>Athiestism: 1

I don't get how someone can't comprehend why people bother trying to do anything, let anything good, simply because they won't be rewarded for it when they die. This life you know for sure is real, but there's no way of knowing the afterlife is. Even if the afterlife is real, why would it not also be an intermediary to another afterlife? Which is an intermediary to another afterlife? Which is an intermediary to another afterlife? This idea of finality simply doesn't compute for me. The idea that living forever is inherently a good thing doesn't compute for me, either. The idea that some people existed a thousand years ago, died and went on to live another immortal life, but I'm only living now, will die and then live an immortal life, also doesn't make sense to me. If this life is just a test for a future afterlife of immortal peace, why can't we all just live at the same time? Why can't we all just take the same test? Why even exist in one another's worlds, at all? Even if you can reconcile these issues, why would these things exist? Is it not entirely contrary to everything you know about life and our universe? It also doesn't make sense as a test. Why learn humility when you won't need it in paradise? Why learn sacrifice? Pain? Diligence? Why even bother to create a better world? Does God ask us to create antibiotics?

I also don't understand why you think truth, beauty, goodness and righteousness exist outside the realm of science. They do not. Even if you argue they are subjective, which is amusing to me, what does that matter? Your brain exists in the realm of science and it's your brain who adjudicates these things.

Finally, there's no need for video game characters to postulate the existence of video game developers. That's not their world. It's meaningless.

You don't get atheism because most of the time it's done wrong.

Atheism is supposed to be based around the first principles

1. Principle of noncontradiction
2. Principle of consistency
3. Burden of proof
4. force is active so those advocating Force have the burden of proof
5. The initiation of force cannot be defended
6.Self ownership
7.Private property
8.Taking of legitimately owned property cannot be defended.

The first principles are the most basic arguments you can make in an intellectual conversation and the smaller ones eventually become more complex and comprise the bigger ones so if I violate number 6 that I violate principles 1 through 6 as well the first principles are supposed to replace the religious aspects that create morality in an individual but of course most easiest are actually very hedonistic that's why most of them are Mindless sheep who can easily be brainwashed into believing something they have no basis to actually go off of they have no standards

Why so people here just make up words?

TO THE unbelieving materialist, man is simply an evolutionary accident. His hopes of survival are strung on a figment of mortal imagination; his fears, loves, longings, and beliefs are but the reaction of the incidental juxtaposition of certain lifeless atoms of matter. No display of energy nor expression of trust can carry him beyond the grave. The devotional labors and inspirational genius of the best of men are doomed to be extinguished by death, the long and lonely night of eternal oblivion and soul extinction. Nameless despair is man's only reward for living and toiling under the temporal sun of mortal existence. Each day of life slowly and surely tightens the grasp of a pitiless doom which a hostile and relentless universe of matter has decreed shall be the crowning insult to everything in human desire which is beautiful, noble, lofty, and good.

>Europe is Great under the roman empire
>Christianity begins to rise and contributes to its downfall
>Europe becomes a complete shithole
>Europe begins to rise again after Renaissance, an idealistic movement that brought back Christian ideas.

Dumb ass christian fag

most atheists are too normie to even associate with any of these people

why do you hate jim jones? he convinced mostly a bunch of an anti-white commie niggers to kill themselves. are you arguing that they should have lived?

>muh christianity thread
>666
nice try

most christians today have more in common with ayn rand than with jesus(who was a commie, he was a proto-commie who hated the rich and told his followers to give up their possessions). the worship of mammon is a sin in christianity but capitalist christians act like it's a virtue

There's also an example of pro-communism in the book of acts where god kills two people for being greedy capitalists and for not giving their money to the church(so it could be held in common)

proto-communism*

Stale pasta

Atheists are atheists because they don't believe in a man-made god. I mean, why would they? How is it logical that a god would flood the whole earth and have everyone saved through an ark that is smaller than the Titanic?
there's not enough evidence. They cannot explain why they have feelings and are not automatons, but they are certain that a god didn't create them.

Not believing in a god doesn't mean not believing in a greater power. We could be created by some greater power, but it's probably not a god. It could be just some fatass alien neckbeard who created humans for fun

>But whence comes all this vast universe of mathematics without a Master Mathematician

I mean, I think you know why this argument is fallacious insofar as its central question can be asked in perpetuity

>To say that mind "emerged" from matter explains nothing

but it explains literally everything, you're essentially saying

>my unfounded, quixotic notions of why materialism is wrong is right

at least materialists can provide mechanisms for how things happen, which is a step further than other dogma

But I want you to clarify what you're saying: Are you positing that materialists are wrong or that living under the auspices of a meteralist's mindset is wrong?

Because I'll be the first to acknowledge that materialists are myopic and often times dogmatic with regards to the benefits conferred by religion, spirituality, community, etc. I loathe atheist types for whom their identity is centered around being a "free thinker" while falling neatly into lefty/white/childless/morally aligned demographical categories. In other words, no other group of so-called free thinkers have ever thought exactly the same things in such large quantities, and to me, that is a nauseating Western phenomenon. I also think people should exist as if they have free will, and society (mostly law) should for the most part comport with this notion. What engenders impetus in purpose in most humans is not stark materialism, but some form, any form really, of spiritualism, community, faith, transcendentalism, etc. ad nauseam.

But that doesn't make materialism objectively incorrect. So let's separate the objective teleological truth (insofar as it is possible to reach) and how we ought to behave knowing this truth. Materialism isn't wrong, but the way in which it tends to ordain a lifestyle is.