Dealing With China in the Coming Years

kuanteen

Dilution? I'd say the Reformation was a purification, not dilution. But hey, its damned if you do damned if you don't isn't it unless its nothing short of abolition. So much for a reasonable, open minded person who is not a "bigoted bastard".

Somehow, I don't think you're very open minded yourself. You say religious nuts get humanity into trouble with its hatred for other religions, but what about the man who is angry at all religions?

Let me say your atheism is no better than any religion in that it is filled with its own dogma, its own intolerance, its own anger and hatred, its own evangelists, and its own ignorant members. Similarly, a religion will also have its own reasonable, self-critical, rational members who are not instantaneously "bigoted bastards". In my opinion, your sentence doesn't fit the crime. Religion has had its nuts, but there are always two sides to the story.

EDIT: By the way, perhaps we should have a spin-off thread (and yet another debate about religion). But maybe the caf is a place that doesn't mind.

ThatOldRedMagic

One has to be careful in these matters, and the caf is probably not the place. I've said too much for some already I fear.

ThatOldRedMagic

By dilution (a very hastily-chosen word) I meant to convey the practical effect that catholic dogma was, to an extent at least (please don't think I mean totally) relaxed; in the new protestant countries there were no more inquisitions and burnings; it was possible to postulate what are today accepted scientific facts without risking your life (Copernicus and the heliocentric universe for example) and bibles in vernacular languages were not prohibited.

Now, let us be clear about atheism and dogma; I've heard this accusation many times, and to refute it is simple. There is nothing dogmatic in refuting that which is itself dogmatic. That which offers no evidence for its postulation (the existance of a god in this case) requires none for its refutation. What I AM angry about is intolerance and repression in all forms, but especially so when its rationale is nothing more than discredited mediaeval scripture. When religious people invoke this to show that 'god wants this' or 'god hates that' what they actually mean is that individuals, usually with very specific and tediously parochial agendas, back in the year dot BCE or dash CE, managed to convince their rather sad, ignorant followers that their god had revealed as much to them.

If there is no cosmic, sentient and omnipotent agency governing the world, then all of these people - prophets, messiahs, what you like - were charlatans. Dangerous charlatans what is more. Cosmic agencies and my intellect, I'm afraid I have to admit, just don't rub along.

We are still in the infancy of our species. In the fullness of time we'll ditch this primitive god-security blanket and come to our senses.

I'm not really angry, by the way, just terribly saddened that so many have their lives blighted by religion.

BTW - read this book;

http://www.samharris.org/site/book_end_of_faith/

kuanteen

My understanding of the Reformation is that it is a return to the original faith rather than a dilution of that faith. But you are right, it is a dilution of the Catholic faith.

But is that atheism? No, sometimes (and I think this is a key word) atheists are as dogmatic as some theists. Must theism be necessarily dogmatic?

That quote brings us back to square one. So you think no one should offer any evidence? I'm sure you don't mean this (and will begin to cite scientific discoveries that go against religious books), but has science actually produced evidence for or against a God of any sort? Or are you just a-Judeo-Christian-theist?

So you're intolerant of intolerance, especially when it is justified by "discredited" scripture? What about other kinds of intolerance, like those justified by pseudo-science? Or intolerance justified by the rule of law?

Again, I think charlatan is a strong word. People who vied for brotherly love and justice and peace? They're all charlatans...?

Here's why I sense the same bias that the other extreme also has. Is there a chance that some of these "prophets" might actually be good people who were mistaken?

I'm afraid this statement doesn't offer any proof for what you believe. Rather, its looking down on what others believe simply because it doesn't "rub along" with your intellect. If anything, I don't think it actually paints you as much of a tolerant soul.

I also hope we can clear up whether you don't believe in just the Judeo-Christian and Islamic "God" or whether no supernatural being exists beyond our comprehension at all.

nickm

Yeah. I think we can accept that science has, to any rational person, disproved the notion that Thor causes the weather.

ThatOldRedMagic

Right, Kuanteen; let me state my philosophy. I do not believe in any supernatural being, or agency or entity of any kind. I believe that the world is full of mysteries, largely predicated upon the fact that many of our discoveries have been so recent and so extraordinary that we are still reeling from their implications. What is clear, however, is that the religions of the book have traditionally claimed a monopoly on knowledge, (including scientific knowledge,) and that not content with merely stating their case as deriving knowledge (about, for example, the origins of the world) from the scriptures, they actively sought to suppress any contrary opinion.

This is a matter of fact, not opinion. Further more, this situation still, to a very large extent, prevails within islam. I listened with sadness to a muslim scholar taking part in a radio 4 'Beyond Belief' programme just a few weeks ago. He lamented the fact that at the once-prestigious University of Islamabad, there were four mosques on campus, but not one single bookshop. This, he explained, was because unfettered access to all books would include material that was contrary to the will of allah as revealed by his prophet mohammed. He further gave the example that chemistry lecturers were obliged to teach that, for example, when oxygen and hydrogen came together in a heated reaction the result - if it was the will of allah - would be the production of water! Make of this what you will, but it is little better within christianity. Stem cell research could deliver the most wonderful relief from terrible diseases. Fundamental (and indeed not-so-fundamental) christians, including George W Bush, oppose it largely because the Catholic church tells them that at the moment of conception the zygote - this tiny aglomeration of about 150 cells - receives a soul (it doesn't try to even address what happens in the case of identical twins, where this same zygote later splits into two people - the catholic church's teaching is, as always, infallible.)

The religious sensibilities of a large swath of humanity is thus aimed at a non-existent future state, at the expense of suffering in the only experiential state any of us actually has; which is our little life.

I'm sorry, I have to get off the copmputer as my kids are trying to do their homework.

Will return later or tomorrow.

(by the way - I really am not trying to be unpleasant or whatever here, in spite of the way in ehich I state my cases. I just have total confidence in it - I'll explain why one day (used to be a christain, attende the famous, or infamous alpha couse etc,)

VidaRed

why do you take a example of one muslim spastic and believe that that spastic represents the whole community ??

a few twats are doing insane things and thats taken as they represent islam which they do not and moreover the west expects other muslims to condemn them. why should a person who doesn't even know the spaz come and condemn him ? no one expects people in the west to come out and condemn when someone does a crime take the example of that austrian guy who raped his daughter for god knows how many years...i didnt see any Christian come out and condemn it and nor would i expect them too.

ThatOldRedMagic

And Vida, your comments merely serve to underline the very problem I am trying to point out; it's all just tribalism. If you had been born into a christian family you would be scorning the koran and celebrating easter. If into a hindu family you'd believe there were 2,000 deities. But no, you were born into a muslim family etc etc. Also - one muslim spastic eh? Oh dear oh dear. A professor at a Pakistani university has the temerity to lament the absence of books on his campus and you label him a spastic.

Actually, now I think about your comments, I 've decided that I'll reply to Kuanteen, but I'm wasting my time with the likes of you. Bigotry combined with ignorance is an extremely toxic mixture.

How very sad for humankind that such benighted bile is constantly recycled by cultural tribalism of the kind you are clearly a victim of. (It won't even occur to you, I daresay, to turn your eyes inwards and see what ought to be obvious.)

VidaRed

that doesn't answer the question.

VidaRed

and you're not going to let you're children follow any religion and you will brainwash them to think how you perceive the world should be.

the irony

ThatOldRedMagic

Vida - do you feel persecuted? I mean to think that the big, bad christian world is somehow complicit in the unspeakably shocking case of Josef Fritzl is pretty bizarre! Is that how you are brought up? To believe (as many jews do) that the world, and especially christendom, is against them? The jews, of course, would add islam. And you would add Judaism. Just try to see for goodness' sake; it's no different from us slagging the dippers or city. But for crying out loud, let humanity allow our innate tribal prejudices to find a safe way of escape - through football in our case.

Just try it, why don't you? In fact, I DARE you to read Sam Harris' book (link posted earlier in this thead I think; if not it's on another and I'll post it here.)

Do that Vida, and then come back and tell me you remain unchanged. I mean you could equally read Schopenhauer or Gibbon; it's just that Harris is both readable and contemporary.

Give it a try; remember I was a practicing christian once, but have now seen religion - ALL religion - for what it is.

VidaRed

i respect Christianity and Judaism and i dont think the world is against Islam its only people like you who generalize the community on the actions of few.

Im also not religious...i just go about my day like you would and try to be a good human being and celebrate religious events couple of times in a year.

p.s look at the google ad beneath you're post

-----

nickm

Spain translates in one year the number of books that have been translated into Arabic in the past 1,000 years.

Seems to be some kind of an issue there.