© Arun Nm
“Doctor, how is my brother?”
“He is not at all doing well. Now it’s up to prayers and God.”
When dealing with near and dear ones of critically ill people, I have heard many health care professionals saying this. Even some doctors/nurses who do not believe in prayers or a personal God (the one who interferes for us hearing prayers) practice it. For doing such things they have an explanation.
“Why should we extinguish all their hopes?”
Is it ethical to tell some one that prayer, which is proven to be ineffective, or a mythical concept called God can possibly help them? Does such an approach help?
It’s true that some patients recover miraculously even though chances of recovery was considered almost nil. They recover because some factor that helped them was over looked or is unknown to science. Science and its practitioners very well know this fact, and that is why we never say there is no chance of recovery. We always convey that chance of recovery is very slim; so we never extinguish all hopes.
But by saying only prayers/God can help is like giving false hopes. There is zero proof that prayers are useful. Same stands for God. So by saying prayers/God can help, you are misleading them.
Continue reading “Prayers and God’s Will”
John Figdor and Dan Fincke tackle subjective verses Objective Morality. John starts us off with why he feels subjective morality is the only way we can understand morals. Dan counters John’s point of view to discuss why Objective #morality true for most situations.
Godless Offerings are condensed clips from shows done on the Atheist Analysis network meant to bring a shortened version of our shows or to highlight important points made during the show.
Please like, share, and subscribe to our channel.
Watch the Original Show Here: http://youtu.be/B519dWROpG4
Continue reading “Godless Offering 16 Free Range Brain Farming: Is Your Morality Caged or Self Defined”
It is possible that I hold a wildly eccentric view of the Blessed Old Leather-Bound Bible. I see it as primarily a tool of manipulation hammered out and re-shaped repeatedly throughout its long and tortuous history, including its many translations, right down to those that are being published this very day. That manipulation is accomplished through the propagation of some rather dodgy ideas, which unfortunately have great staying power and have whelped an unjust, grotesque and omnicidal culture. I want to address one of those ideas in this essay.
Even though I do so regularly myself, it’s a kind of category error to refer to “the creation stories in the Book of Genesis” – by which one usually means the first two chapters – for this reason: the entire Book of Genesis is a creation story. It’s the story of the creation of the Hebrew people. The first eleven chapters are a prologue to “the call of Abraham,” upon which the (fictional) platform the Exodus story’s scaffolding is gradually erected. Genesis is a story of origins, and the import of its title extends through its final chapter.
The story of “the call of Abraham” is damned interesting. Of course it’s as fictional as all the rest of Genesis (and most of the rest of the Bible as well), but it does encapsulate a notion that has sullied the human experience and had philosophers tearing their hair for centuries. It’s the notion of free will. I want to examine that story along with related biblical passages, and pay a brief visit to the question of whether or not “free will” actually exists in any degree. Continue reading “Free Will and the Fiction of Abraham”