The atheist motive for converting others

[Nelvan]

Let me clarify what I mean by social engineering versus the individual.  I have met some social justice warriors that are very politically correct.  They say racism is wrong and point out every instance of racism.  That's fine but some of these same social justice warriors, raised in upper middle class suburbs don't have any black friends and have never been to a black neighborhood.  And so you have to question their sincerity.

Likewise, I have met conservatives who I believe are racists yet they give me, a Mexican American, the time of day.  Some are friendlier, more polite, more attentive than some of the social justice warriors that seem cold, distant, and self righteous. 

In both examples, there is a disconnect between the social justice warrior and the conservative.  When it comes to the social justice warrior, it is a preference for society over the individual.  When it comes to the conservative, it is a perference for the individual over society.  I argue you need a harmony between both and that both are essential. 

Actually what got me thinking this way is oddly enough a Three Dog Night song:  Easy to be Hard.
The lyrics go as following:

How can people be so heartless
How can people be so cruel
Easy to be hard
Easy to be cold

How can people have no feelings
How can they ignore their friends
Easy to be proud
Easy to say no

Especially people who care about strangers
Who care about evil and social injustice
Do you only care about the bleeding crowd
How about a needy friend
I need a friend

[Prommie]

The statement that under atheism there is no meaning and that naturalists/materialists don't care about the individual are very debatable not to say utter nonsense, to state them as fact is just raising a straw man.
And Nelvan your story in your last post doesn't tell me anything. There are nice people and not so nice people, there are people who you can get along with very well and those you just don't get along with. People might be cold towards you just because they don't like you and it might have nothing to do with your ethnicity or their preconceptions.

[Nelvan]

Prommie,

Saying that some "people are nice and others are not so nice" tells me nothing.  You have accused me of a strawman argument without specifics. 

You said, " People might be cold towards you just because they don't like you and it might have nothing to do with your ethnicity or their preconceptions."  That is not the point at all.  I am giving examples.  Most people I know are neither liberal or conservative.  Most people I know are apolitical.  That is simply an example to try to explain the OP but it seems to be counterproductive at least in your case.

[Prommie]

The first part of my post was about the straw man, the second part about your story. I might have misunderstood that part and if I did I apologize. I did quite specifically point out that claiming atheism/naturalism/materialism doesn't care about the individual is a straw man because it is a highly debatable statement that many people don't agree with.

[Randy Carson]

Here is a sort of thought experiment:

Let us say there is a secret prison bunker in an unmarked, uninhabited island far from a main continent.  There are two prisoners in a cell:  one a militant atheist and one a very devout fundamentalist Christian.  They do have something in common though:  they are both absolutely convinced, without doubt, that they will never be found, and that they will die in the cell.  Let us also assume that they have food, water, and medical all provided for.

This is my argument: 

It is the Christian's duty, from above, to convert the atheist to theism in order to save his soul so that the atheist can experience eternal paradise.  The atheist, on the other hand, does not have such duty. 

The reason the atheist does not have such duty is because the Christian is simply an individual, and under materialism/naturalism, the individual does not matter.  The only reason the atheist converts an individual to atheism is so that the individual will in turn convert other individuals to atheism and so on.

Conclusion:  what matters to the atheist then is not the individual but affecting society so that society is more fit to the liking of the atheist.  Therefore, the atheist is using the individual as a means to an end while under theism, the individual is primarily and foremost the end.     

To be fair, I once read a passage in the Introduction or forward of an apologetics book which specifically stated that one reasonable motivation for doing apologetics was to slow the decay of the society around us.

After all, we still have to live with these folks, and it would be better for all concerned if they were believers.

Unfortunately, I cannot remember the title of the book, but I'm still searching my shelves from time to time.

[Lion IRC]

Hurry up and find that book Randy

Oh yeah and welcome to RFF.

[Nelvan]

Prommie,

Why would people disagree with it?  I have provided my reasons. 

Randy,

That may be one reason to be interested in apologetics.  Is that the sole reason a person is Christian though?  Aren't there other ways to improve society without religion?