|
So....PKC's dad made a new video (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| woscar |
Lira, I think that you raise some very good points regarding the method rationalists/skeptics should follow in order to eradicate idiocy. You surely remember that old canard that there are no atheists in foxholes. James Morrow - an atheist sci-fi writer - once retorted that "There are no atheists in foxholes is not an argument against atheism, it's an argument against foxholes". I thought that was brilliant when I read it the first time, so you and I are kinda on the same page.
It seems like a good idea, but in practice, it's very difficult. Mainly because one of the biggest obstacles in the way to making people's environment better happens to be dogma and his ugly cousin, religion. The United States is a perfect example of this. It's a vicious circle that needs more brainpower to find a way out of. I know Zuckerman has provided many valuable research about non-religious countries and how that correlates with wealth, equality and overall human prosperity, but I don't know if there's any solid and extensive research done on how those countries actually got there. I know he has an extensive two-volume academic book published on the subject but it's expensive as ($100+ on Amazon). Anyways, I agree that atheists and secularists need to focus more on acting in accordance to the data they already have than just on making people know about it. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Znack
Sorry, did i read your post completely in reverse? |
Pretty much :p
| quote: | Originally posted by Znack
In that case I'm not sure, if you meant "three letter answer, yes." in reply to pkc's sarcastic post, about problems being less with religion mixed into it - which you apparently disagreed with. That was the reason for my answer. |
Oh, but I did say we should just let religious people be, with very few exceptions, and that leaving religion into the mix makes things easier (as opposed to trying to end it prior to doing anything else). That's because if you focus on people's well-being first, the need to confront religion head-on diminishes, so much so that there's little need to actually knock religious people for their beliefs (if you must do it). If you do it the other way around, chaos ensues. |
|
|
| 6meets9 |
| quote: |
Are you a man of peace
Or man of holy war
Too many sides to you
Don't know which anymore
So many full of life
But also filled with pain
Don't know just how many
Will live to breathe again
A life that's made to breathe
Destruction or defence
A mind that's vain corruption
Bad or good intent
A wolf in sheep's clothing
Or saintly or sinner
Or some that would believe
A holy war winner
They fire off many shots
And many parting blows
Their actions beyond a reasoning
Only God would know
And as he lies in heaven
Or it could be in hell
I feel he's somewhere here
Or looking from below
But I don't know, I don't know
Please tell me now what life is
Please tell me now what love is
Well tell me now what war is
Again tell me what life is
More pain and misery in the history of mankind
Sometimes it seems more like the blind leading the blind
It brings upon us more of famine, death and war
You know religion has a lot of answer for
Please tell me now what life is
Please tell me now what love is
Well tell me now what war is
Again tell me what life is
And as they search to find the bodies in the sand
They find it's ashes that are scattered across the land
And as their spirits seem to whistle on the wind
A shot is fired somewhere another war begins
And all because of it you'd think that we would learn
But still the body count the city fires burn
Somewhere there's someone dying in a foreign land
Meanwhile the world is crying stupidity of man
Tell me why, tell me why
Please tell me now what life is
Please tell me now what love is
Well tell me now what war is
Again tell me what life is
Please tell me now what life is
Please tell me now what love is
Well tell me now what war is
Again tell me what life is
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
Please tell me now what life is
Please tell me now what love is
Well tell me now what war is
Again tell me what life is
Please tell me now what life is
Please tell me now what love is
Well tell me now what war is
Again tell me what life is
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
For the greater good of God
He gave his life for us he fell upon the cross
To die for all of those who never mourn his loss
It wasn't meant for us to feel the pain again
Tell me why, tell me why
|
|
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by woscar
"There are no atheists in foxholes is not an argument against atheism, it's an argument against foxholes". |
That's actually pretty stupid because then atheists have one less option to defilade from incoming fire.
*gets coat* |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by woscar
Lira, I think that you raise some very good points regarding the method rationalists/skeptics should follow in order to eradicate idiocy. You surely remember that old canard that there are no atheists in foxholes. James Morrow - an atheist sci-fi writer - once retorted that "There are no atheists in foxholes is not an argument against atheism, it's an argument against foxholes". I thought that was brilliant when I read it the first time, so you and I are kinda on the same page. |
Indeed, although I'm more likely to say that was a bad argument from the start: Can you imagine if religious people suddenly started saying that "There are no atheists around big breasts"? Yeah, we're likely to say "Oh My God!" and "Jesus Christ!" under such circumstances, but I'm not prepared to admit that could be an argument against big breasts :p
| quote: | Originally posted by woscar
It seems like a good idea, but in practice, it's very difficult. Mainly because one of the biggest obstacles in the way to making people's environment better happens to be dogma and his ugly cousin, religion. |
I agree with you that's very difficult, but I'm not sure that's a good reason against trying, given the lack of better options.
As for religion and dogma stifling progress, it's most definitely true under some circumstances, but not always. For example, the Catholic Church helped bring down the already crumbling communism of some Eastern European countries and did try to save as many Jews as it could (although this is certainly a thorny issue), and despite its inefficiency and amateurism compared to proper governmental bodies, churches can do quite a lot for communities, from looking after its poorest members to giving opportunities to those in need.
| quote: | Originally posted by woscar
The United States is a perfect example of this. It's a vicious circle that needs more brainpower to find a way out of. |
Actually, it seems to me the United States is the exception rather than the rule.
There's quite some overlap between the interests of Christians and Socialists, for example, and there are loads of "Socialist Christian" parties around the world to strengthen this claim - except in the US, where the pious abhor anything that might remind them of Europe, the former USSR, or both.
I'm truly in no position to make a deep analysis of what makes the American right tick, and I do believe there's a historical component that may be at play (from the focus on self-reliance of the Transcendentalist movement to the Cold War) but here in Brazil (a very religious country, much to my astonishment), this hardcore Christian madness is restricted to a few die-hard evangelicals. And we're developing, both economically and socially, quite well. All regardless of noisy religious minorities (which are just 5% larger than the overall number of atheists/people without religion anyway).
| quote: | Originally posted by woscar
I know Zuckerman has provided many valuable research about non-religious countries and how that correlates with wealth, equality and overall human prosperity, but I don't know if there's any solid and extensive research done on how those countries actually got there. I know he has an extensive two-volume academic book published on the subject but it's expensive as ($100+ on Amazon). Anyways, I agree that atheists and secularists need to focus more on acting in accordance to the data they already have than just on making people know about it. |
Actually, his cheaper books (which I need to read more systematically, I've only read bits and pieces of them due to lack of time) are also worth reading. |
|
|
| 6meets9 |
| quote: | Originally posted by woscar
:stongue: |
LOL thank you! I'm glad somebody got the joke. |
|
|
| Redd |
| quote: | Originally posted by 6meets9
LOL thank you! I'm glad somebody got the joke. |
he laughed at Eddies post, not yours, sry |
|
|
| de+ |
| quote: | Originally posted by Znack
You can't really call him a demagogue. He's irish and critizises christianity as much as islam |
In the last 2 years, 95% of his videos have been about Islam.
And he supports a Christian party that wants to remove secularism.
"I'll be voting UKIP" is quoted directly from his website.
He also says it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krybvOx-8Dk
And here is the proof that UKIP wants to remove secularism:
http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-po...ion-ukip-policy
Fully support the monarchy, oppose disestablishment of the Church of England.. |
|
|
| Znack |
| quote: | | Originally posted by de+ |
Pat Condell, not on the Christmas card list this year. Gotcha. |
|
|
| tanta |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
I wish we lived in a world as simple as the one this guy portrays. Oh, how awesome would a world without religion/Islam be! We'd only have to worry about nationalism, hooliganism, political clashes, economic inequality, whether there are more naked pics of Scarlett Johansson on the web, and other trifling sources of conflict. |
You don't find atheists anywhere who say that religion is the sole problem to the world's problems.
You just posted a textbook example of a worthless strawman argument.
Rational atheists are small in number, so they are the few out there who are in a position to fight the problem of religion based on a logic, evidence, reason, etc...That's why it seems a particular focus for them.
Many atheists rightly believe religion is both a HUGE and totally unnecessary problem because of just how detrimental it is to core logic and reasoning in those infected by it, and how anti-civilization the dogma is in its most popular varieties.
Certainly without religion Earth would still have to deal with fascism/totalitarianism...because that's the most religious-like secular version of similar theocracies. In addition to the countless other problems us apes cause for ourselves (and ones that mother nature inflicts on us as well). |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by tanta
You don't find atheists anywhere who say that religion is the sole problem to the world's problems. |
But you find atheists who believe it's among the world's greatest problems. That's, I believe, rubbish.
| quote: | Originally posted by tanta
You just posted a textbook example of a worthless strawman argument. |
Yeah, right. The people I'm talking about don't exist, never mind the books I read penned by them.
| quote: | Originally posted by tanta
Rational atheists are small in number, so they are the few out there who are in a position to fight the problem of religion based on a logic, evidence, reason, etc...That's why it seems a particular focus for them. |
Are you saying that guy is a rational atheist?!
| quote: | Originally posted by tanta
Many atheists rightly believe religion is both a HUGE and totally unnecessary problem because of just how detrimental it is to core logic and reasoning in those infected by it, and how anti-civilization the dogma is in its most popular varieties. |
I like how you don't cite a single name so I know where you're coming from.
And, no, religion isn't a huge unnecessary problem. It's huge, I give you that, but in isolation it's neither unnecessary nor exactly a problem. Feel free trying to come up with an example that (i) include religious people in general and (ii) that leads to an unnecessary problem.
| quote: | Originally posted by tanta
Certainly without religion Earth would still have to deal with fascism/totalitarianism...because that's the most religious-like secular version of similar theocracies. In addition to the countless other problems us apes cause for ourselves (and ones that mother nature inflicts on us as well). |
Precisely why it makes much more sense to tackle the cause of these problems, not just the overt symptoms. |
|
|
|
|
