God likes me.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3966
Debatable.
So now that the Pope has come out in support of doing something about climate change, do you think anyone who used to be opposed to the idea will now be come around? From the right wing blogs and stuff I read, I have read about people calling the Pope a Marxist, complaining about liberation theology and talking about how glad they are that they gave up Catholicism before.
So now that the Pope has come out in support of doing something about climate change, do you think anyone who used to be opposed to the idea will now be come around? From the right wing blogs and stuff I read, I have read about people calling the Pope a Marxist, complaining about liberation theology and talking about how glad they are that they gave up Catholicism before.
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3966
I read an argument that said that in western countries especially the U.S. atheists don't actually exist. Their point was that Christianity is so ingrained within our culture that atheist still carry around Christian beliefs just without the God aspects.
The idea of karma as used in the west to describe the tendency of optimism and belief that everything will work out and things will get better. Or the kinda environmentalists belief that all living things are connected in some way by virtue of just being alive. There are more that I can't remember.
I am an atheist but do see the merit of the argument. I have long said that religion plays a large role in a country's perception of life and time that sets apart the west from the other great civilizations.
The idea of karma as used in the west to describe the tendency of optimism and belief that everything will work out and things will get better. Or the kinda environmentalists belief that all living things are connected in some way by virtue of just being alive. There are more that I can't remember.
I am an atheist but do see the merit of the argument. I have long said that religion plays a large role in a country's perception of life and time that sets apart the west from the other great civilizations.
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6571|Graz, Austria
A big chunk of each and every religion is just a large compendium of morale and ethical rules, philosophy and other stuff that doesn't require the belief in gods.
I bet Homo erectus already had all that, before deciding to explain the unexplainable with magic.
I bet Homo erectus already had all that, before deciding to explain the unexplainable with magic.
Christianity invented marriage, you guys.
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3966
I am sure cave men had social norms before they started to use religion to justify them.globefish23 wrote:
A big chunk of each and every religion is just a large compendium of morale and ethical rules, philosophy and other stuff that doesn't require the belief in gods.
I bet Homo erectus already had all that, before deciding to explain the unexplainable with magic.
I think the author was talking more about human perception of life in a more mystical sense rather than ethical in a "x is bad, y is good" or philosophical like "you shouldn't stab people". I think the author is talking about instances of an atheist closing their eyes during a bad time and thinking 'everything will be alright' and 'this is bad but something good will happen for it or to me' or an atheist being wronged and thinking "something bad will happen to that bad person' or 'they will eventually be punished for what they did'.
I have heard self described atheist saying variation of those all the time. You can call it blind optimism and maybe it shows up in other atheist cultures. But if you ask someone why do they think those things they would say something like 'just cause' or 'that's just how it is' while a Christian would say 'because God is good'. To the Christian's credit, on its face that is a just better explanation. The religious probably made those comforting arguments before anyone else did since there isn't any other way to explain why those thoughts would make sense.
Last edited by SuperJail Warden (2015-07-11 12:56:06)
most of that stuff is acquired behavioural tics and cultural markers/mores. they're habitual. it doesn't really say anything about a residual faith. it says a lot about how human beings learn how to act and behave by a mimetic process. things such as looking to the sky when being imploring for something. obviously no one is looking up and consciously asking a rain-god for a harvest benison anymore. but we still do it because these mannerisms are learnt by imitating our peers and elders. does that mean atheists are secretly religious? no. it's just an empty physical gesture that long ago lost its religious context and connotation. these sort of 'emptied signifiers' are everywhere in our contemporary culture. like how the Logo has now become a corporate-ident, whereas for medieval scholars the Logos was altogether different – but that meaning and concept retains a denuded aura.
It seems christian-centric to me to argue that our society is still religious because of the historical significance of the church. The norms/values/practices present in secular european society today have been mostly detached from any religious significance they held long ago. If we're talking about the influence these institutions had in the past and their enduring significance in modern day society and governance, then yes there's an argument to be had.
Now as for religiosity, I would argue that the questions that people asked and the truths that were traditionally provided by the church have now shifted towards the empirical sciences. These are forming a new religion of sorts with people like neil degrasse tyson being hailed as prophets, if anything. Most people claiming atheism are actually saying that they have a belief in science as opposed to a belief in religious truths.
Now as for religiosity, I would argue that the questions that people asked and the truths that were traditionally provided by the church have now shifted towards the empirical sciences. These are forming a new religion of sorts with people like neil degrasse tyson being hailed as prophets, if anything. Most people claiming atheism are actually saying that they have a belief in science as opposed to a belief in religious truths.
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3966
Wait, who are you?Grasmaaier wrote:
It seems christian-centric to me to argue that our society is still religious because of the historical significance of the church. The norms/values/practices present in secular european society today have been mostly detached from any religious significance they held long ago. If we're talking about the influence these institutions had in the past and their enduring significance in modern day society and governance, then yes there's an argument to be had.
Now as for religiosity, I would argue that the questions that people asked and the truths that were traditionally provided by the church have now shifted towards the empirical sciences. These are forming a new religion of sorts with people like neil degrasse tyson being hailed as prophets, if anything. Most people claiming atheism are actually saying that they have a belief in science as opposed to a belief in religious truths.
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6571|Graz, Austria
Well, that's simply because science works.Grasmaaier wrote:
Now as for religiosity, I would argue that the questions that people asked and the truths that were traditionally provided by the church have now shifted towards the empirical sciences. These are forming a new religion of sorts with people like neil degrasse tyson being hailed as prophets, if anything. Most people claiming atheism are actually saying that they have a belief in science as opposed to a belief in religious truths.
There's hardly anyone one, who can say that praying to a rain god caused a good harvest.
But millions of people carry the latest iPhone in their pockets.
Works to a certain extent, yes. Pretty much any and every refutation of religious works in the past few decades is based on what we gleaned from the empirical sciences. While I won't question that it's 'better', IMO this idea that we can truly understand/decipher nature and the world around us through empirical science and attain some sort of epistemological truth (which most people believe in) is.... well, just not true. I align with rorty here in stating that there's not much to be said about truth in that sense really, just like there's not much to be said about god.globefish23 wrote:
Well, that's simply because science works.Grasmaaier wrote:
Now as for religiosity, I would argue that the questions that people asked and the truths that were traditionally provided by the church have now shifted towards the empirical sciences. These are forming a new religion of sorts with people like neil degrasse tyson being hailed as prophets, if anything. Most people claiming atheism are actually saying that they have a belief in science as opposed to a belief in religious truths.
There's hardly anyone one, who can say that praying to a rain god caused a good harvest.
But millions of people carry the latest iPhone in their pockets.
If you believe in creationism then sure, customs stem from judeo-Christian culture as handed down by god. If, on the other hand, you believe that civilization predates judeo-Christian culture, you'll realize that most of the customs and beliefs are far more ancient. I'm not a pseudo-Christian just because I grew up in a society with a bunch of rules Christianity co-opted and told people were their own. Throw the book out.SuperJail Warden wrote:
I am sure cave men had social norms before they started to use religion to justify them.globefish23 wrote:
A big chunk of each and every religion is just a large compendium of morale and ethical rules, philosophy and other stuff that doesn't require the belief in gods.
I bet Homo erectus already had all that, before deciding to explain the unexplainable with magic.
I think the author was talking more about human perception of life in a more mystical sense rather than ethical in a "x is bad, y is good" or philosophical like "you shouldn't stab people". I think the author is talking about instances of an atheist closing their eyes during a bad time and thinking 'everything will be alright' and 'this is bad but something good will happen for it or to me' or an atheist being wronged and thinking "something bad will happen to that bad person' or 'they will eventually be punished for what they did'.
I have heard self described atheist saying variation of those all the time. You can call it blind optimism and maybe it shows up in other atheist cultures. But if you ask someone why do they think those things they would say something like 'just cause' or 'that's just how it is' while a Christian would say 'because God is good'. To the Christian's credit, on its face that is a just better explanation. The religious probably made those comforting arguments before anyone else did since there isn't any other way to explain why those thoughts would make sense.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
sara nailin palin says the worlt is six thousand years old. i believe her, because her saggy titties are that old.Jay wrote:
If, on the other hand, you believe that civilization predates judeo-Christian culture, you'll realize that most of the customs and beliefs are far more ancient.
this gaming forum, where idiots post political and religious views, needs to be shut down. sure Chuyskywalker encouraged discussion and free exchange of views was a noble idea, but then there were moderators that acted on thier own beliefs. even the ones that believed marrying multiple people was sanctioned by the sky god.
burnzz those chips on your shoulder are beginning to look like quarries
you are one miserable old fucker
you are one miserable old fucker
Question for anybody: If we (the US) were to immediately pull all support out of Israel, do you think Islamic tensions would ease considerably, slightly, or none at all?
none.
If you stab someone in the heart, and pull the knife out, will everything be instantly OK?
It would make no difference.
It would make no difference.
Fuck Israel
Generally to fix a hole in an area where there shouldn't be a hole, one must remove the thing causing the hole.Dilbert_X wrote:
If you stab someone in the heart, and pull the knife out, will everything be instantly OK?
It would make no difference.
i.e. that is one god-awful analogy
If Israel were removed it would take centuries to get back to the normal low-level squabbling which characterises the middle east.
That and the sunni muslims need to go through their own dark ages.
That and the sunni muslims need to go through their own dark ages.
Fuck Israel
Wait what? If Israel were removed? I'm asking if the US withdrew all support (financially and military contracts specifically) would radical Islam recognize this as a major step toward being 'less infadels' and attack the US less
Last edited by pirana6 (2015-07-17 23:55:32)
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3966
No.
They would still be upset about our military bases in the middle east. They would still be upset that we trade and support the leaders and upper classes of their countries. They will complain about Muslims being mistreated in western countries. And even if we did everything to placate them, there is no guarantee the average illiterate Muslim would know about it.
They would still be upset about our military bases in the middle east. They would still be upset that we trade and support the leaders and upper classes of their countries. They will complain about Muslims being mistreated in western countries. And even if we did everything to placate them, there is no guarantee the average illiterate Muslim would know about it.
I was listening to some Christian radio show thing while driving yesterday and just became more grateful that I had pretty much no interaction with literalists or evangelicals before going to college. The priest guy was evidently talking about Revelations and his train of thought was that the EU is the start of some one-world government that the Anti-Christ will lead. It seems as well the reason those Christians are so fond of bending over to Israel is that they need Israel to exist for their end-times story to work. But if they're so sure that all this is ordained to happen, why should they even bother trying to "help"? If their god is going to make it happen, surely the actions of world leaders wouldn't do shit.
Why would you even attempt to rationalise what is going on in their heads?
Fuck Israel
Because I am some sort of masochist. I also read internet comment sections regularly.