All posts by Wintery Knight

https://winteryknight.com/
News

Andy Bannister and Michael Ruse discuss how atheists find meaning in life

4 Comments
Two horses fight it out, may the best horse win!
Two horses fight it out, and may the best horse win!

I’m summarizing a recent episode of the Unbelievable show.

Details:

Atheist philosopher Michael Ruse joins Justin as we spend a second week looking at Andy Bannister’s new book ‘The atheist who didn’t exist’.

Its amusingly titled chapters include ‘The Peculiar Case of the Postmodern Penguin (or: Why Life without God is Meaningless). Michael and Andy debate whether it’s a problem that atheists can’t have meaning with a ‘capital M’.

Here is a summary of the discussion between Ruse and Bannister, and my comments below the summary.

The MP3 file is here.

Summary:

  • Ruse: ultimate questions are serious questions, and some religions are attempting to provide serious answers to those questions
  • Ruse: there is a psychological element to belief in God but it’s not a complete explanation, but it can apply to non-belief as well
  • Bannister: there are psychological reasons why people would prefer unbelief (quotes Thomas Nagel and Aldous Huxley)
  • Bannister: (to Ruse) what do you think would follow next if you got new information that caused you to believe in God?
  • Ruse: I’d feel scared, I’d think of all the reasons that God would dislike me, rather than any reasons why God would save me
  • Bannister: according to the Bible, God is not so much interested in mere belief, but in active trust in him
  • Ruse: without being smug, I just completed 50 years as a college professor of philosophy, and I have a sense of worth from that
  • Ruse: if God turns up, and says that 50 years of being a professor is not good enough, well, I don’t know God, I’m sorry, I did my best
  • Brierley: Andy, explain to us this story of how a penguin explained to you how he invented a subjective meaning in life for himself?
  • Brierley: (reads the story)
  • Bannister: when it comes to reading a book, the real meaning is the meaning the author intended the book to have
  • Bannister: readers can inject their own meaning into the book that has nothing to do with it, but the author gives the real meaning
  • Bannister: meaning in life is like reading a book – you can make up your own meaning, but the author’s meaning is the real meaning
  • Brierley: (to Ruse) on atheism, is there any objective meaning?
  • Ruse: “obviously, someone like myself cannot have meaning with a capital M in that sense”
  • Ruse: the real question is and atheist can find a sense of self-worth, “I find that I’m happier within myself, I can find meaning”
  • Bannister: what would you say to someone who drinks away the family inheritance and gets the same sense of happiness you have?
  • Bannister: what would you say to all the people who are unable to get “a sense of self-worth” from their career, because of where they are born, sickness, etc.
  • Ruse: I have nothing to offer them, some people are born into such awful situations that they are bound to be bad people
  • Ruse: these unfair accidents of birth, etc.,  fits with atheism better
  • Ruse: what we should do is change society so that more people can build a sense of self-worth through achievements
  • Ruse: that way, they can say to God “I used my talents” so they can create feelings of self-worth and happiness (apart from God)
  • Bannister: meaning in life cannot be answered without answering questions related to identity, value, which are rooted in the overall worldview
  • Bannister: on the Christian worldview, you have an infinite worth, your value isn’t determined by circumstances, earnings, friends, etc.
  • Bannister: your value comes from what Jesus was willing to pay to save you, namely, giving his own life for you
  • Bannister: when I travel to meet other Christians in other parts of the world, they have a happiness that should not be there if they are getting happiness from wealth, fame, achievements, etc.
  • Bannister: but when you come to the West, many people who have wealth, fame, achievement, etc. are unhappy
  • Ruse: well maybe who look after a flock of sheep every day may get a sense of self-worth from that, or from other jobs
  • Ruse: I do take Christianity very seriously, it is a grown-up proposal to answer grown-up questions – it works if it is true
  • Ruse: we don’t have to follow Nietzche’s statement that if there is no God, there is no meaning in life – we can find a middle way, we can achieve meaning in life by using our talents to achieve things
  • Bannister: I disagree with Michael, I don’t think that the meaning you invent for yourself is authentic meaning
  • Bannister: distracting yourself with amusing things and happiness is not an answer to the problem
  • Brierley: (to Ruse) are you saying that you have searched for ultimate meaning, and you are settling for subjective meaning?
  • Ruse: my subjective meaning is not second class to objective meaning, “I feel a real deep sense of achievement, of meaning, of self-worth, of having used my talents properly, and I don’t feel in any sense a sense of regret” (what matters to him is how he feels)
  • Bannister: notice how Michael keeps bringing in value judgments. e.g. – “use my talents well”, that implies that there is a right way and a wrong to use your talents, which assumes an objective scale of right and wrong, which makes no sense in atheism
  • Bannister: an atheist can sit in a sun room and enjoy the feelings of happiness generated by the light and heat of the Sun, without asking whether there is a Sun out there
  • Bannister: ultimately, at the end of the day, my concern is not whether something makes me happy or makes me feel fulfilled
  • Bannister: ultimately, at the end of the day, I think there is only one real reason to wrestle with these questions of meaning, and that is to find truth
  • Ruse: sometimes we reach a point where we cannot get to true answers to some questions, sometimes we look for truth, but then give up and confess “I cannot find it” and then move on from there

Is it possible to dispense with God’s advice on your decision-making and achieve something that affects a lot of people, or makes people like you, or makes you famous, etc., and then have that please God? “Look, God, I did something I liked that affected a lot of people, and made them feel happy as they were on their way to Hell because they rejected you”. I think a lot of celebrities, athletes and musicians have feelings that they have achieved something, but having feelings of achievement because you entertain people doesn’t mean anything to God.

So what is the standard? How you imitate Jesus – self-control, self-denial and self-sacrifice to honor God – that is the standard. If I had to choose between giving up two hours of my life to summarize this discussion for my readers, and all the fame and fortune that people who make godless TV shows, movies and music have, I would choose to make this debate summary. My goal in life is not to have fun, thrills, travel and feel happy in this world. I have a Boss. Performing actions that respect the Boss is objectively meaningful. It’s may not seem like much compared to what James Bond does in million-dollar movies, but at least I am wearing the right uniform, and playing for the right team.

I’m starting to notice that a lot of younger Christians are more interested in feeling good, having fun, being liked by others than they are in being able to know what’s true or show what’s true. Christians are no exception to this problem of finding meaning in life. A lot of us are just taking in entertainment and trying hard not to think at all.

News

Conservative black man explains why “Women Today Are No Longer Marriageable”

5 Comments

I had so many household chores to do this weekend. I had to pull weeds! I had to change air filters! I had to mow the lawns! I had to do laundry! And I had to run 2 sprinklers and move them all around! Anyway, five chores done means I got to watch 5 videos, for 5 breaks. The first one was from “The Roommates” channel. It’s 2 cool black guys teaching men and women how to be better.

In this video, (H/T Randy G.), one of the hosts explains to women why men don’t want to marry them. Now, he has lots and lots of funny videos about the problems with men, and you can look on his channel for those. These guys are fair and balanced. But I liked this video, and it’s one of his most popular videos, so I’m sharing it with y’all.

His outline was:

  • men and women both need to improve themselves
  • women have standards that some men don’t meet
  • but women don’t realize that men also have standards
And here are his 6 arguments:
#1: too many single mothers
  • most important thing for women is that man be employed
  • most important thing for men is not to raise other man’s kids
  • in the black community there is 72% out of wedlock birth rate
  • not talking about widows
  • women don’t care what men want, that’s why the rate is going up
  • response from single mothers has been to shame men for not marrying substandard women
#2: too many women are overweight
  • black women have the highest rate of obesity in America
  • response from overweight women is to shame men for not loving them as they are
#3: women don’t have role models
  • men need to be shown good husbands and fathers as role models
  • women think that they will be great wives and mothers just because they are women
  • women think that they don’t need to be taught anything to perform their roles
  • increasing numbers of women grow up fatherless, so they don’t see mothers being good wives
  • more and more women don’t know how to communicate with men and support them
  • women who grow up fatherless, without an example of a loving wife, need to find role models
#4: women today are too masculine
  • women want to be in charge, and they want to be independent of leadership by good men
  • men want women who led them lead, and give them respect for solving problems and getting results
#5: women have too much baggage
  • men prefer women who have less baggage
  • too much promiscuity, and it’s very obvious to men when women have been promiscuous
  • women get exposed to the wrong kinds of men, and then don’t trust or respect the good kind of men
  • lots of women on OnlyFans and Instagram are getting money for undressing, sex work, etc.
#6: women cannot accept criticism
  • women don’t want to hear what’s wrong with them
  • women attack anyone who gives them constructive criticism

My thoughts

As a West Indian black myself, I think I know which group of women he’s talking about. It’s almost impossible for a black guy to find a black girl who is suitable for marriage. I’m surprised that dueling hasn’t come back where black guys fight to the death over the last few remaining black conservative women. I know in other countries, the black women are way more conservative – because I mentored a Nigerian girl through her BS and MS and now she works for a big IT firm. She’s actually my replacement, because she donates all her money to Ratio Christi for on-campus apologetics. So I know women like that exist, but American black women are almost all unsuitable for marriage.

The main take-away from this post, I think, is for women to understand that they are not qualified for marriage and motherhood just by being women. Men expect a lot more than that from their wives. We expect a lot more than that from the mother of our children. And like everything else in life, the way to get better is to study, practice and prepare for challenges.
News

Canada proposes bill to punish offensive speech with fines and jail time

7 Comments

The important thing to understand about Canada’s laws is that they are NEVER applied fairly. The laws are almost always used to punish Christians and conservatives. So, Christian pastors are punished for having “illegal” house churches during COVID, but Muslims or LGBTs can meet or march. The newest bill criminalizes speech that makes people feel “pain and suffering”.

Breitbart reports:

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s  government proposed legislation on Wednesday, Bill C-36, that is aimed at combating “hate speech” and “hate propaganda.”

The bill’s summary includes a proposed legal definition of “hatred” to be included in Canada’s Criminal Code.

[…]The bill’s text does not specify if or how non-verbal messages such as images or videos would be regulated to control “hate.”

Under a section titled “Fear of hate propaganda offence of hate crime,” Bill C-36 would allow provincial court judges to impose restrictions on those accused by an “informant” of a likely future commission of an offence “on reasonable grounds.” In other words, a judge would be able to issue restrictions against accused parties if the judge believes the accused is likely to commit an offense related to “hate.”

[…]If a complaint against an accused person is “substantiated,” the defendant may be ordered to pay up to $70,000 in penalties divided into two components. The first component would be a payment of “compensation” of up to $20,000 (CAD) “for any pain and suffering that the victim experienced” as a function of “hate propaganda” or “hate speech.” The second component is a fine, up to $50,000 (CAD), paid to the federal government.

Failure to comply with the “recognizance” could result in imprisonment of up to 12 months.

CP24 reported that Bill C-36 would “amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to reinstate an amended version of a controversial section [Section 13] that was repealed in 2013 amid widespread criticism that it violated freedom of speech rights.”

So now you have complaints about speech as a basis for fining people or putting them IN JAIL. Would you like to pay taxes to police, lawyers, judges, politicians, social workers, teachers, etc. in order for them to do this to you? Remember, Canada already jails parents who disagree with the LGBT agenda. And they throw Christian pastors into jail for holding church services.

Here is a Canadian pastor being arrested in front of his wife and children:

I don’t think it’s a good idea for anyone to travel to Canada, as the country is not safe. You might go there and merely express your opinion that marriage is for one man and one woman, or that children under 12 should not be given puberty blockers, and find yourself arrested and imprisoned if someone takes offense. You might do this in a private setting, to someone who agrees with you, but it sounds like they are taking complaints now from anyone who might overhear you. Why take chances? Look at them as a fascist country that opposes human rights like free speech, and don’t travel there. You wouldn’t vacation in North Korea. Why go to Canada?