Are atheist Christian traditionalists more unethical than Christians or atheists by themselves? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally by activity where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.


In this Debate








Are atheist Christian traditionalists more unethical than Christians or atheists by themselves?

Debate Information

A new trend among western traditionalists is to totally drop the argument over whether God exists or not, and instead concede that point right from the start. But they will still argue for an adherence to western Euro-centric Christian values. Many of them cite Nietzsche as the inspiration for being atheist while dually calling for an adherence to western Christian values. That's a strange person to draw inspiration from since Nietzsche would have wholeheartedly rejected such a notion. Nietzsche believed that it was unethical to stick to outdated Christian values if you are not actually a believer of the Christian God. He believed our society could never progress if we cling to Christian values. 

The question here is, are these atheistic Euro-centric western Christian idealists actually more unethical than any fundamental Christian who does believe, or progressive atheists who supposedly reject Christian values as outdated? Or are these western traditionalists just indicative of the fact that all of western society still sees the world through Christian glasses? 

If you ask me, nationalist values, and socialist values are all outdated western values that most western atheists adhere to in some manner. As far as I'm concerned, most western atheists embrace Christian values in some manner and are sickened by the illness that Nietzsche described. They are mostly just pseudo-Christians in some manner. Instead of arguing for actual progressive policies, they all argue for  institutionalised Christian values. 

Unless we reject outdated Christian values, we may as well just go back to being a Christian based society.            



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
67%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4064 Pts   -   edited October 10
    As I see it, any system of views that is consciously separated from reality is fundamentally unethical. Some Christians or atheists/agnostics who promote Christianity for its values (Jordan Peterson is the most prominent example) claim that, regardless of whether god exists or not, Christian beliefs and stories have some practical utility, thus must be preserved. Conversely, many atheists claim that, regardless of whether god exists or not, it is better to believe that it does not exist for practical reasons.

    To me, however, whether something is true or not is what it is all about. I could not care less about "practical utility" of something that just is not true. If something has practical utility, then it necessarily contains a grain of truth, and that grain should be separated from garbage and framed logically. I am willing to admit that some points in Christianity make sense; for instance, the idea of treating others the way you want to be treated yourself has something to it. But following this idea because of some alleged "divine commandment" is wrong; instead, one should understand why this idea makes sense objectively and incorporate whatever rightness there is in it into their overall system of values. No "god" or "holy book" is needed for that - in fact, "gods" and "holy books" compromise the wiseness of the idea and envelop it into a web of lies past which the idea itself cannot be clearly seen.

    People should stop arguing over whether an ancient system of beliefs is "useful" or not. They should instead consider each idea on its own merit. Instead of following religions and ideologies, they should go with logic and rationality. If a good idea is associated with a bad ideology, it is still a good idea; if a bad idea is associated with a good ideology, it is still a bad idea. That is what the whole Enlightenment thing was about, no? Doing away with arguments from authority and tradition, and embracing arguments from logic and reason.

    Christianity in particular has one terrible central idea that makes progress extremely difficult, and living truly fulfilling life - virtually impossible. It is the idea that suffering is good. Just think about this idea for a moment... Suffering is virtuous, while pleasure is sinful. How much more backwards can an idea be? If you take reasonable conceptions of "good" and "bad" and flip them upside down, you will not get anywhere good.
    And this idea manifests itself in virtually all ideologies, even those that their proponents believe are contrary to Christianity. Again, socialists believe that no one should be "too rich" - which to me sounds as ridiculous as "too happy". Imagine telling someone that they should not be "too happy", but only mildly happy - is this in any way a sensible statement?
    There is no bound on the desirable level of happiness, wealth, satisfaction, public acknowledgement, et cetera. The more, the merrier. As soon as you start talking about things being "too good" and "better than you deserve", you have entered an intellectually bankrupt territory that, to at least some extent, comes down to the desire to bring everyone to the lowest common denominator.

    The better is the better, and the worse is the worse. Such a basic and obvious idea, and yet so alien to virtually everyone...
    Swolliw
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch