submitted 2 weeks ago by Ulrich_the_Old@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Until there is verifiable proof of the existence of god religion should have no place in society. It should not be taught in schools and should not form the basis of any laws. In fact even if you do show up with proof that god exists I still hold the right to ignore god and religion. I claim the right to live without god.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] kibiz0r@midwest.social 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

That’s unethical, but even it it wasn’t…
There’s no way to satsifactorily define religion in the way I think you’re going for, but even if you could…
People would worship their gods anyway, but even if they didn’t…
They would worship something else instead (see the ongoing AI cult for live evidence!), but even if they didn’t…
It wouldn’t suddenly make everyone empathetic, non-tribal, morally consistent, rational physicalists, but even if it did…
Physicalism is for edgy teenagers who haven’t taken the p-zombie question seriously (source: was edgy teenage physicalist)

[-] a_gee_dizzle@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Just want to note that physicalism =/= atheism. There are theistic physicalists (eg Thomas Hobbes) and non-physicalist atheists (eg David Chalmers). Atheism is the belief that there is no God. Physicalism is the belief that reality is made up of entirely physical stuff. The two viewpoints are not necessarily related.

[-] kibiz0r@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

True. I’m just reading between the lines here, because of the phrase “until there is verifiable proof”. If it applies to god, then it applies to privacy of conscious experience, in which case… well, we have done pretty horrific things in the past because there was no verifiable proof of someone’s conscious experience, like performing surgery on infants without anesthesia.