Lies

Apparently theists do not look kindly upon liars but some don’t understand why atheists feel the same. A commenter on this site writes:

Most [atheists] appear to despise lies, falsehoods, and misrepresentations as much as any theist. I’m just a bit fuzzy on why.

So I thought I’d look to their leader for support for this. And it seems to me theists are happy to lie when it suits their agenda:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

“The traditional teaching of the church has proven to be the only failsafe way to prevent the spread of HIV/Aids.”

That is from the head theist at the time, Pope Benedict XVI.

And that is quite simply a lie. Condoms are how you prevent sexually transmitted diseases. I’m sure the objections will be that he really meant that monogamy and marriage are the only way to prevent HIV/Aids but that does not mean that it’s not a lie. It just means that marriage and condoms both work. Therefore it’s a lie to suggest that only marriage does (or whatever is meant by the traditional teaching of the church).

So when the boss theist that many theists look up to for guidance is happy to lie, what am I to make of the argument that theists appear to despise lies, falsehoods, and misrepresentations?

They despise them only when it suits them, I’d suggest.

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”

And yet Adam and Eve are argued to be our ‘parents’. Odd how they could do that being dead.

88 thoughts on “Lies

  1. It just means that marriage and condoms both work. Therefore it’s a lie to suggest that only marriage does (or whatever is meant by the traditional teaching of the church).

    You have missed one detail:

    “The traditional teaching of the church has proven to be the only failsafe way to prevent the spread of HIV/Aids.”

    Condom has a rate of fail also if it is used correctly (see Planned Parenthood site), so it is not a lie.

  2. Blas: “The traditional teaching of the church has proven to be the only failsafe way to prevent the spread of HIV/Aids.”

    Condom has a rate of fail also if it is used correctly (see Planned Parenthood site), so it is not a lie.

    Technically you can get HIV virus from other forms of contact than sex. It’s very unlikely, but still possible. So no, even the church’s teachings aren’t actually failsafe.

    Unless you want to insist the church teaches to completely isolate yourself from ever coming near or having contact with other human beings.

    The Hazmat-suit wearing, nuclear-bunker-dwelling denomination of christianity must be relatively new.

  3. Blas: “The traditional teaching of the church has proven to be the only failsafe way to prevent the spread of HIV/Aids.”

    Though celibacy does not appear to have prevented more than a few priests from succumbing to HIV? Practice what you preach, I guess.

  4. dazz: I would guess most people, both theists and atheists, don’t know whether they are determinists or believe in libertarian free will, or compatibilsm. And they have no idea what those things mean at all.

    Agreed. The study suggests that if people are told that determinism is true, then they are more likely to cheat. But I’d guess that’s mostly because of a background belief that free will is both required for moral responsibility and incompatible with determinism. I doubt you’d get the same result with people who didn’t share that background belief.

    My own view, what little it’s worth, is that
    (1) free will is incompatible with determinism, so the only coherent concept of free will is libertarian freedom;
    (2) determinism is false;
    (3) we do not have libertarian freedom;
    (4) libertarian freedom is not required for moral responsibility.

    I think (2) because determinism requires both (a) everything is reducible to physics and (b) physics is deterministic. But (a) is false, on the most philosophically rigorous construals of “reducibility”, and (b) is false, not just because of quantum mechanics but because of the physics of complex systems that are sensitive to chaos.

    I think that (3) is false because libertarian freedom only makes sense on some overly strong version of Cartesian dualism, which runs afoul of the incoherence of causal interaction between “mind” and “brain”.

    And I think that (4) is false mostly for the reasons given by Strawson, Frankfurt, and by Dennett: moral responsibility is a matter of having the right pro-social attitudes, not a matter of having the right metaphysical doctrines.

  5. Rumraket: Technically you can get HIV virus from other forms of contact than sex. It’s very unlikely, but still possible. So no, even the church’s teachings aren’t actually failsafe.

    If you want to search so deep for a lie in way that every sentences would be Ok:

    You are right you can technically get HIV virus by other forms than sexual contact but that is not the way that HIV spreads at least at the time BVXI said that sentence.

  6. Alan Fox: Though celibacy does not appear to have prevented more than a few priests from succumbing to HIV? Practice what you preach, I guess.

    All that followed the Church teachings that are not celibacy but bstinence and faithfullness are free from HIV. I they know that without a test.

  7. Blas: All that followed the Church teachings that are not celibacy but bstinence and faithfullness are free from HIV. I they know that without a test.

    But “failsafe” means “foolproof”, no? Not 1 or 2 priests. Several hundred and suggestions of under-reporting.

  8. (b) physics is deterministic. (b) is false, not just because of quantum mechanics but because of the physics of complex systems that are sensitive to chaos.

    How do you define chaos? When you say physics is not deterministic Do you mean that given the same initial status the final status are not always the same?

    And I think that (4) is false mostly for the reasons given by Strawson, Frankfurt, and by Dennett: moral responsibility is a matter of having the right pro-social attitudes, not a matter of having the right metaphysical doctrines.

    Can you define pro-social attitudes?

  9. Blas: When you say physics is not deterministic Do you mean that given the same initial status the final status are not always the same?

    Yes. A simple example, whilst the half-life of radioactive elements is precisely measurable, there is no way to predict which nuclei will decay or at what moment.

  10. Alan Fox: Yes. A simple example, whilst the half-life of radioactive elements is precisely measurable, there is no way to predict which nuclei will decay or at what moment.

    There two possibilities you can´t predict wich atom will decay when because you do not have the information of the state of each atom and the laws that led to the decay of an atom in a given state or because given the same state one atom will decay and the other now. Both cases would explain the observation. You are choosing the second? Why?

  11. Blas: There two possibilities you can´t predict wich atom will decay when because you do not have the information of the state of each atom and the laws that led to the decay of an atom in a given state or because given the same state one atom will decay and the other now.

    There’s nothing about the state of a particular radioactive nucleus that indicates when decay will occur. Of course, there’s also no way to tell one nucleus from another.

    Both cases would explain the observation. You are choosing the second? Why?

    I’m not attempting to explain why radioactive nuclei decay at a precisely measurable rate. In my opinion, science is not equipped to explain why things happen; only how they happen.

  12. Alan Fox: There’s nothing about the state of a particular radioactive nucleus that indicates when decay will occur.

    May be I wasn´t able to explain myself.
    You mean two atoms in the same state, the same initial conditions one will decay and the other no?

  13. Blas: You mean two atoms in the same state, the same initial conditions one will decay and the other no?

    Not exactly. The half-life accurately predicts the number of decaying nuclei in any sample. There is, however, no way to predict which nuclei will decay at any one moment, only how many of them.

  14. Richardthughes:
    Robert Byers,

    Yeah.. Tree of knowledge?

    No. I don’t think the tree is it. Hmmm.
    Anyways however its clearly said, can’t quote but, in verses the moral law is written on mans heart.
    Otherwise he couldn’t be found guilty. Few ever got scripture information.
    so indeed nobody isn’t able, or able to fail, the moral code.
    atheists have no excuse or can be accused of being likely worse then others.
    Only on a very high curve would everyone except evangelical christians fail due to better insight.

  15. OMagain: What evidence is there for that then?

    evangelical/born again Christians are new creations and so must have higher sense of what is righteous.
    It trumps the normal sense of right and wrong.The bible says so.

  16. Way off topic, but has anyone noticed a thread about trees over at UD ?
    It just … disappeared. Possibly because Barry made a big blunder.

  17. Mung: Yes, but the temptation is hard to resist. The unrelenting claims to moral superiority (particularly from BA). And most of us are banned at UD anyway.

  18. graham2:
    Mung: Yes, but the temptation is hard to resist. The unrelenting claims to moral superiority (particularly from BA).And most of us are banned at UD anyway.

    The rules are relaxed in the Noyau thread. You’re welcome to start a join the discussion there.

    ETA I see Neil already linked to it.

  19. Blas: Condom has a rate of fail also if it is used correctly (see Planned Parenthood site), so it is not a lie.

    And yet research showed 21.5% of the 600,000 members on an extra-marital dating site were Catholic.

    So it absolutely is a lie.

  20. Robert Byers: evangelical/born again Christians are new creations and so must have higher sense of what is righteous.
    It trumps the normal sense of right and wrong.The bible says so.

    And yet the facts state otherwise. As already noted, there is not a major difference between theists and atheists regarding the telling of lies. Even ffm uses that as “evidence” there is an objective moral law, but you are saying the opposite. You can’t even agree on the basics, you theists!

  21. Alan Fox: Not exactly. The half-life accurately predicts the number of decaying nuclei in any sample. There is, however, no way to predict which nuclei will decay at any one moment, only how many of them.

    Ok then what make that one atom dacaey and the other no?

  22. OMagain: And yet research showed 21.5% of the 600,000 members on an extra-marital dating site were Catholic.

    So it absolutely is a lie.

    You are comparing apple and oranges, comdom fails also if it is correctly used (Planned Parenthood). If you do not decide to use a condom it is not a failure of the preventive method is your failure as if you decide of not to be faithfull is not a failure of the method is your failure.
    Still not a lie.

  23. Blas: You are comparing apple and oranges, comdom fails also if it is correctly used (Planned Parenthood).

    I’m comparing apples and oranges? Yet when the pope compares marriage to condoms that’s not?

    Blas: If you do not decide to use a condom it is not a failure of the preventive method is your failure as if you decide of not to be faithfull is not a failure of the method is your failure.

    Whatever that world salad was supposed to mean I’m not getting it. If you are saying that deciding to be unfaithful is not a failure of marriage in the same say that condom failing is, well, I’d say you were comparing apples to oranges.

    Blas: Still not a lie.

    It absolutly is a lie. 2003 statistics from the World Factbook shows Burundi at 62% Catholic with 6% AIDS infection rate. Angola’s population is 38% Roman Catholic and has 3.9% AIDS rate. Ghana is 63% Christian, with in some regions as much as 33% Catholic and has 3.1% AIDS rate.

    If only they’d used condoms!

  24. OMagain: And yet the facts state otherwise. As already noted, there is not a major difference between theists and atheists regarding the telling of lies. Even ffm uses that as “evidence” there is an objective moral law, but you are saying the opposite. You can’t even agree on the basics, you theists!

    It doesn’t matter what thesists say. iTs what the bible says.
    The bible is more reasonable and settles matters.

  25. fifthmonarchyman: It’s almost as if there is some sort of objective moral law that holds regardless of our religious belief.

    Imagine that

    peace

    Of course, only religions allow human sacrifice.

  26. Mung:
    Human sacrifices to lack of belief in god or gods. Say it isn’t so.

    I only sacrifice people to feed my family, nothing to do with my beliefs.
    What the flying fuck are you talking about?

  27. Mung: This:

    It’s either false, or atheism is a religion.

    Well, I must admit that using the wp-admin comments page makes me lose track of what’s being discussed in individual threads.
    Poor excuse in this case considering llanitedave’s response was just a few posts above.

    My bad.

Leave a Reply