Barry Goldwater And The Preachers

[KitemanSA]

Religion is to explaining conscientiousness as alchemy is to explaining biophysical processes.

[Diogenes]

Religion is to explaining conscientiousness as alchemy is to explaining biophysical processes.

Religion is the transcription of past sociological mistakes.

[Teahive]

It is easier to learn that there is no Santa than to learn that there is no God. Destroying the illusion destroys the beneficial effect.

Did it do that to you? If so, I'm sorry. Ceasing to believe in God did not destroy my sense of right and wrong.

Until they realize that it's all bullshit, as more and more people do. You better hope they have internalized the lesson by then.

What piece of evidence induces you to believe such a thing is possible?

Experience. Many people I know no longer believe in God as they come to realize it's all made up. I doubt this trend is going to revert in the short term. If that's what's happening, maybe a method of teaching morals that relies on continued belief in God isn't the best approach for society.

I argue that a strictly atheist society, separated completely from Christian influence, will not be able to pass down a form of morality similar to that resulting from Christian teachings and principles.

You're missing the point. I'm not against "Christian teachings and principles", I'm against continually treating everyone as a child and pretending that it's all truly and literally the word of God.

If we had more complete records of history the reasons would be easier to follow. Certainly changes in moral notions in recent centuries are much easier to pin down as we not only have the rules but a large amount of historic records to go with them.

Then you should have no trouble finding an example of an Atheist society that is thriving.

Non-sequitur.

The treatise on the topic is still necessary, but teaching ignorance and calling such discussion blasphemy hinders the development of rational, grown-up discourse.

Does it? What part of the world Developed Modern Technology? (That the other societies copied after the fact.)

Discourse about the rules.
Besides, various cultures have been ahead in the technology race at different times in history. Then the other societies copied. There's nothing special about "Modern Technology" in that regard.

This isn't about evolution of humanity, but about change in human environment and technology, which is quite different from that of thousands of years ago.

Technology is not going to re-write human behavior. It is what it is, and it is what it has always been. Christianity has tamed some of the worst aspects of it.

Technology doesn't need to re-write human behavior, it only needs to re-write the outcome of such behavior. If something which used to be dangerous becomes safe, the rules governing it should change accordingly. But apparently some people would rather hold on to the old rules because it's God's Will (tm), and no discussion please.

[MSimon]

Religion is to explaining conscientiousness as alchemy is to explaining biophysical processes.

Religion is the transcription of past sociological mistakes.

And the enforcing of current ones.

You do realize that denying medicine to the ill for political reasons is a crime against humanity. CB1 CB2

The moralists you espouse are morally bankrupt.

This will come out and the religion you feel is needed to keep people in line will be discredited.

[MSimon]

Then you should have no trouble finding an example of an Atheist society that is thriving.

Buddhists seem to do all right without God. And the Islamics seem to do particularly poorly with one.

[MSimon]

Christianity is the pin in the grenade. You'd be better off not losing that pin.

Christianity has developed the universal solvent to dissolve itself.

The denial of medicine to the ill. And it is not just the Protestant Churches. The Catholic Church is in on it as well.

The Church is committing a crime against humanity and is in violation of the precepts of God - "heal the sick".

I know of a woman (not a user) whose parents are wasting away who would love to give them cannabis to improve their appetite. She can't because your moralists work hard against legalization. Even for medical use. And FYI cannabinoids are found in mothers milk. It makes babies hungry. Which is good for them.

As Prohibition ends the churches will have a LOT to answer for.

CB1 CB2

The fight used to be against godless Communism. The coming fight will be against godless churches.

[Stubby]

Then you should have no trouble finding an example of an Atheist society that is thriving.

Buddhists seem to do all right without God. And the Islamics seem to do particularly poorly with one.

I would not single out muslims as doing particularly poorly.

[MSimon]

I would not single out muslims as doing particularly poorly.

I pointed them out because they claim the same God as the Christians and Jews.

I have no objection to your adding to the list.

[ladajo]

One could make the same statement about Christians and the Jews.
Why just the muslim group?

Why not say 'monothesists'?

For that matter, 'any thesists, be they mono or poly'?

[MSimon]

One could make the same statement about Christians and the Jews.
Why just the muslim group?

Why not say 'monothesists'?

For that matter, 'any thesists, be they mono or poly'?

Well I look at the world. The Israelis are doing well. America is pretty good - until recently. And Islam is a shit hole.

A libertarian who gets it:

http://reason.com/archives/2013/02/06/c ... ical-islam

[Diogenes]

It is easier to learn that there is no Santa than to learn that there is no God. Destroying the illusion destroys the beneficial effect.

Did it do that to you? If so, I'm sorry. Ceasing to believe in God did not destroy my sense of right and wrong.

You might be surprised to learn it's not all about you. I believe the ability to sense what others are feeling is called "Empathy."


On a second point, you have just admitted that you were influenced by religious teachings, which is tantamount to admitting your current attitude about morals/ethics has been contaminated with the doctrine which you seem to think civil society can exist without.

How can you say you don't need it, when you are the product of it?

What piece of evidence induces you to believe such a thing is possible?

Experience. Many people I know no longer believe in God as they come to realize it's all made up. I doubt this trend is going to revert in the short term. If that's what's happening, maybe a method of teaching morals that relies on continued belief in God isn't the best approach for society.

It is the only approach which would work in our more primitive past. Had we not used it, we would still be stuck in our primitive past. I do not dispute that belief in a Deity is on the wane, but the assumption that some sort of moral secularism is going to successfully take it's place is folly.

Your experience is on a time scale far too short to be thinking it will apply to generations. Again, YOU are the product of a mostly Christian society. (Assuming you are an American) You can hardly predict society will continue exhibiting principles which were Christian Doctrine when the source of them is absent.

I argue that a strictly atheist society, separated completely from Christian influence, will not be able to pass down a form of morality similar to that resulting from Christian teachings and principles.

You're missing the point. I'm not against "Christian teachings and principles", I'm against continually treating everyone as a child and pretending that it's all truly and literally the word of God.

Ah, so some of the zealots are annoying, and therefore we have to stop it even though the consequences might be very very bad. I figured it was something like that. People care more that their dog died than that a typhoon killed a thousand people on the other side of the world. Your immediate annoyance is of more interest to you than is any theoretical bad consequences later.


And the nation is experiencing this times many millions.

If we had more complete records of history the reasons would be easier to follow. Certainly changes in moral notions in recent centuries are much easier to pin down as we not only have the rules but a large amount of historic records to go with them.

Then you should have no trouble finding an example of an Atheist society that is thriving.

Non-sequitur.

No, it is not a non-sequitur, it is arguing that if such a society is superior it should naturally have evolved from previous societies, and the fact that we know of no such society is suggesting that such a thing is in fact, not superior, or even the equal of religious society. It's not that such a society has not been tried (USSR) it's that it doesn't seem to be very durable.

Does it? What part of the world Developed Modern Technology? (That the other societies copied after the fact.)

Discourse about the rules. Besides, various cultures have been ahead in the technology race at different times in history. Then the other societies copied. There's nothing special about "Modern Technology" in that regard.

I'll have to just pass this over because it would start another entire thread on this topic alone just pointing out all the distinctions. China's society is several thousand years old, and it has been mostly stagnant technologically since the beginning. It's greatest technological advances have occurred after the Western powers showed up with them.

This isn't about evolution of humanity, but about change in human environment and technology, which is quite different from that of thousands of years ago.

Technology is not going to re-write human behavior. It is what it is, and it is what it has always been. Christianity has tamed some of the worst aspects of it.

Technology doesn't need to re-write human behavior, it only needs to re-write the outcome of such behavior. If something which used to be dangerous becomes safe, the rules governing it should change accordingly. But apparently some people would rather hold on to the old rules because it's God's Will (tm), and no discussion please.

That's one theory. An alternate theory is that Humanity is old, and still operating by the same passions it had millennia ago. Before tearing up one bridge, perhaps we should make sure it's replacement will hold the weight.


The Anti-Biotics which made reckless sex less dangerous are now loosing their effectivenes, while the methodology of religion still works in preventing infection.


Another unintended consequence of Modernity is various permutations of this.

http://www.creators.com/conservative/mi ... grams.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... ation.html


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7084749.stm



Evolution always wins in the end, even against technology.



Maybe we can try vat grown slaves to make up the population shortage?

[ladajo]

One could make the same statement about Christians and the Jews.
Why just the muslim group?

Why not say 'monothesists'?

For that matter, 'any thesists, be they mono or poly'?

Well I look at the world. The Israelis are doing well. America is pretty good - until recently. And Islam is a shit hole.

A libertarian who gets it:

http://reason.com/archives/2013/02/06/c ... ical-islam

Again, the same can be said about Christians and Jews.

I think you are incapable of seeing that just like Christian and Jewish faiths, Islam has good folks and bad. You want to brand all muslims as living in a shithole. Really? So much for your principles of God.
You are a very small man to say and think such things.
You just lost a lot of points in my mind. I am also guessing you don't care so much.

[Diogenes]

Religion is to explaining conscientiousness as alchemy is to explaining biophysical processes.

Religion is the transcription of past sociological mistakes.

And the enforcing of current ones.

You do realize that denying medicine to the ill for political reasons is a crime against humanity. CB1 CB2

Simon, You don't get to decide what is medicine. Doctors do that. (Current bullsh*t game playing in California excepted of course.)

The moralists you espouse are morally bankrupt.

This will come out and the religion you feel is needed to keep people in line will be discredited.

We are in the process of testing this theory. So far i'm not seeing any discrediting yet.

[Diogenes]

Then you should have no trouble finding an example of an Atheist society that is thriving.

Buddhists seem to do all right without God. And the Islamics seem to do particularly poorly with one.

Karma is their non-anthropomorphized version of God. It is the force in their religion that decides whether you are reborn as a higher being, or a cockroach.


It is the "Santa Claus" Effect presented in a different way.

[Teahive]

[...]

Since you love your straw men so much I'll let you play with them some more.

Maybe we can try vat grown slaves to make up the population shortage?

Population shortage? Another day, another topic for the doom-sayers.