Clarification/Apology for "What good is atheism?"

[John Eric Tiessen]

The point I was trying to make was that both self-professed theists and atheists have done some serious killing in recorded history. I said that in retaliation to constantly getting bashed about the crusades even though I am protestant and do not claim any owner-ship in the Catholic church. Needless to say comments like those really irked me.

However! I would like to thank both theists and atheists who weighed in on the discussion responsibly (i.e. weren't belligerent with their opinions) for pointing out that it isn't just a question of philosophy but of a much deeper problem with people. For some reason we just really love killing each other. Then we try and justify it. Where does this blood lust come from? Is it learned or is it genetic? I think this is a worthy topic of discussion, and a whole lot less loaded than the previous one.

[Abreo]

I don't know, the will to power? Husbands beat their wives when they feel out of control, armies fight for control, assassinations happen in response to what an individual feels in an abuse of power (aka they feel out of control) or for some other reason related to them taking control. If you're about to die you take control of the helpless situation by eating your friend. Granted the doctors nor the police can figure out how eating your friend was supposed to cure your diabetes but they took your gummy bears away so what were you supposed to do? You could have just followed their orders by not eating anymore junk food and letting them take your foot but they can't argue with results now can they?

In essence almost all of what humans do is them asserting control over themselves or others. Controlling yourself is fine, but trying to control others makes you a dick. Thats why the government is the worst thing ever. We should plunge ourselves into a world of ANARCHY! FUCK THE POLICE! FUCK THE GOVERNMENT! FUCK THE SYSTEM! OVERTHROW EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!!

Before you ask... yes, yes that was absolutely necessary.

On a side note one of my favorite Monty Python quotes is something like "After all a murderer is only an extroverted suicide". Its a bit nonsensical but it makes me laugh.

[Michael Lee]

Nature: survival of the fittest.

[Tòmachan ~blogs admin ~]

Lack of empathy.
The need factor that creates the:
" Us and them. "
thought process.

And some more psychological silly stuff.

For example.
Back a thousand years ago, the ability to kill without question, to crush a people would be a plus.
You'd rise in the army and the likes.

Bring yourself to the present time, these people are noted as psychopaths and sociopaths.

What was once a plus, is a now a negative; because the race has evolved this sense of shared grief. 
We've started to look beyond the:
" Us and them. "
Bullsh*te that helped our ancestors stay alive.

But - to get back to the question asked - I'd say it's both genetic and learned.
Genetic in the sense that people of today still carry themselves without empathy - which could be a family trait -.

Learned in the sense that you can be desensitised to suffering and the likes, which lessens the empathy you have for your fellow Humans - For example, kings/queens -.

[Kyle Madigan]

Well, humans only survived because we learned to work together in close-knit groups. And as this was being coded into our genes, as the small societies we formed became more successful, the idea of a "them" was coded, also. Different became dangerous, not just to you individually, but to the society you were born into. This fear of the them was inherited and learned, and the hatred of the them was inherited and learned. And being humans, are natural reaction to a "them" is to try and exterminate it as quickly as possible unless its existence benefits us more than the fact that it exists hurts us. So it's a mix of both, but basically, humans became rulers of the world by being really good at killing living things, and we're trying to figure out a way to rise above thousands of years of human history.

[Roma]

This is an interesting question, that we were discussing in my a level literature class while studying the situation in Afghanistan. Some suggestion was made that it is in our moral conscious to right something that is wrong, the only way seeing fit by attacking, conquering etc but the most problematic reason for the continual killing etc was our natural inability to stop.

Take for example Afghanistan, one of the strongest arguments for not leaving seems to be that by leaving all those who have died have died for nothing. On the surface this seems like an honourable statement, however this kind of view generally leads to more deaths. 

I don't know if it's true that humans have a inherent 'blood lust' in the same way an animal might perhaps, but i do think that the general sense of protectiveness, whether of opinions, family, country, religious views etc, and a stubbornness to not give in to that has and continues to lead to more death than necessary and for the most part unwanted by even those who are doing it.

[Jason Noë]

I saw a video in my psychology class once where a man studied the brains of serial killers. He found that in the brain, there were certain parts that did not show as much activity in the brains of serial killers as they did in normal people. The parts were associated with controlling impulses(at least I think). But then they found out that there are some normal people who have the same patterns as the serial killers but have never killed anyone. So it's a very interesting question because it does have some to do with genetics and how your brain develops but at the same time, there have to be other reasons that make people feel the need to kill or go to war too.

[Hutch Hogan]

However! I would like to thank both theists and atheists who weighed in on the discussion responsibly (i.e. weren't belligerent with their opinions) for pointing out that it isn't just a question of philosophy but of a much deeper problem with people. For some reason we just really love killing each other. Then we try and justify it. Where does this blood lust come from? Is it learned or is it genetic? I think this is a worthy topic of discussion, and a whole lot less loaded than the previous one.

I'd like to generally make two points.  Firstly, Christopher Hitchens usually enjoys making this point: "Good people will do good things, bad people bad things, but to make good people do bad things takes religion."  

I would include politics as well. 

Basically divisions between people that separate them into groups of Us and Them often results in a dehumanization of the other group.

More over, there cannot be an intrinsic desire for murder. I haven't killed anyone.  Nor has anyone that I've known.  Where I live the murder rate is also low.  So I think that murder must arise from two different things.  One is some type of cognitive disease, as has been said, serial killers appear to have weakened parts of the brain. 

Another thing to turn people into murderers is legitimization from authority.  People who endorse violence, giving people (who obviously are not philosophers) the motivation to commit murder. 

The only other cases I can think of result of compulsion which does not represent a choice. 

[Vertigo_One [Ops Mod]]

"Good people will do good things, bad people bad things, but to make good people do bad things takes religion." 

What he forgets is that religion has also made bad people do good things too.

[Hutch Hogan]

Like who?

[Tyler]

And it has also made good people do bad things, what's your point?

[Vertigo_One [Ops Mod]]

That the argument that religion is a necessarily negative force isn't accurate.

[Josh Weeden]

This ones pretty simple.....Christianity...2000 years old, Hinduism approx 10k years old,Islam 1.5k years old, Judaism 3.8k years old..........humanity 500,000 years old.....where your gods for the previous 490,000 years