Live data from Hacker News

Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

3-16am.co.uk

151–154 of 154 posts

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#151
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't be serious. Actual religions have sets of ideas (rules, creation-myths, alternative epistemologies, etc.), whereas atheism has none. The term literally means "without god(s)" (which was a defining feature of religions by those who coined the term). It is an absence of belief (at least in the way the term is commonly used; There are "atheistic religions" in the sense that they don't have a deity). Atheism is…

The charitable interpretation is that most people -- even atheists -- will have a belief system that is functionally equivalent to a religion. > Atheism is to religion as being silent is to speaking – and you're essentially claiming it's just another way of speaking. Another way of saying it is that religions (as we know them) are answers to questions, you can get rid of those answers, disagree with them, etc. but th…

You're just redefining "religion" so that the claim is a tautology. You could do this with anything:

"Everyone has a God (where 'God' means 'favourite thing')"

"Everyone believes in the existence of Hell (where 'hell' means 'being unhappy')"

"Everyone believes in the possibility of "salvation" (where 'salvation' means 'self-improvement')"

Redefining words so that the original sentence is correct is a tad too "charitable", particularly when the new definition is completely at odds with how everyone uses the word.

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#152
post #99
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> many atheists also seem to proselytize with a religious fervor as well Could that be availability bias? You don't hear from the many that don't proselytise. > even something like atheism is a religion That's nonsense, a rhetorical subterfuge to defend religion ("oh, but you too have a religion.") maybe. Atheism has none of the things you claim (origin story and eschatology, prescriptions on how to live). Some (athe…

As has been said elsewhere, atheism is a religion the same way not playing baseball is a sport.

The difference being there aren’t conferences for people that don’t play baseball :)

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#153
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who would deny having a religion, can you clarify what you mean by that?

My personal, perhaps cynical perspective: religious people expanding definition of "religion" into meaninglessness. In most languages, "religion" will imply an ordered belief in a supernatural entity and set of accompanying practices. It is NOT a synonym for all belief, philosophy, ethical framework, world paradigms, etc. If it does become a synonym, then we'll simply need a NEW word to distinguish between "belief in…

Interestingly free will is one such supernatural entity.

If you don’t believe we are zombies you hold a supernatural belief.

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#154
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even this charitable interpretation doesn't make much sense: The only thing "atheists" have in common is that they have a lack of belief – we have no idea what they actually DO believe (people come with various philosophical persuasions, after all). The other way you propose of defining religions is so general and vague that it borders on meaningless, and doesn't deal with the fact that different people have differen…

I think it makes sense: even the utmost atheist needs to have beliefs; both in the ‘individual facts’ way (you can’t be rational about everything all the time), and in the ‘cosmovision’ way (ideas about what to do with one’s life, etc.). The OP was just being a little bit provocative while calling those beliefs a religion, which I think can be allowed; at least for the fact that there are a bunch of people that are r…

> I think it makes sense: even the utmost atheist needs to have beliefs

Only if you equivocate on the definition of "belief" as you seem to be.

> both in the ‘individual facts’ way (you can’t be rational about everything all the time)

Of course you can.

Post reply on HN