Darren New wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> That is not ethics, that is culture. You learn ethics by finding out 
>> why the universe exist and what it's ultimate goal is. ... At least 
>> that is how I did it 
> 
> Wow. Fill me in. How did you figure out the purpose of the entire 
> universe and its ultimate goal?
> 
> Seriously. I want to know. I'm not mocking you.
> 
You forgot the last part '(granted, I still have to fill in some minor 
details)'. This is one of those minor details. ;)

Of course there is slightly more to it. Some historical background: once 
(~25 years ago) I decided to find out if I could take the nonexistence 
of God as an axiom and see if you could still get a decent ethics system 
from that. To my surprise I could do that, the logic may not convince 
anybody else but it was OK for me at that time. Later I noticed that I 
started behaving 'ethical', following my own rules. That was a bit 
surprising too, because that really meant a change of behaviour. I was 
e.g. extremely introvert, I am still not exactly extrovert, but I came a 
long way. I am also much more friendly, laid back and tolerant for other 
peoples behaviour than I was. Other changes are more subtle and not so 
much noticeable for others. Over the years my views have changed 
slightly but not the basic ones. In particular I kept the axiom of the 
non-existence of God. Everything that I do or think somewhere rests on 
that axiom. Just as much as other people may found their behaviour on 
God's existence. In contrast to the atheist that Patrick seems to know I 
am totally not evangelistic. If you believe in God, that's fine by me. 
That does not mean that I as a person am not a convinced (read: 
'axiomatic') atheist.
The logic may be a bit different than usual, but I knew that I really 
struck gold when I discovered that my behaviour towards other people 
with the same believe as mine would become undefined. So the other 
reason that I am not evangelic is that I prefer not to enter that moral 
minefield. (I know that that last bit is probably incomprehensible if 
you don't fully understand my (twisted) logic, but I am afraid I can not 
explain it for the same reason :) ).
Having solved this puzzle, I got back for an attempt to find an idea 
that would answer the ultimate answer and could serve as a basis for the 
no-God axiom. I found a couple and the one that is most likely to me has 
the peculiar side effect that I now fully believe in predestination and 
as a philosophical point of view I don't believe that time exists (yes, 
I struck gold again). Reason number three for not being evangelistic: 
  you'd think I am completely nuts. I might be, but I am perfectly happy 
as it is.
Note to Patrick: you might think that if I tell you I am an atheist that 
you know what I think and how I should behave. Believe me, you haven't 
got a clue.

Post a reply to this message