Christianity, Judaism, Islam: And the message is?

[Dillinger4]

I find them informative.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

try and look at it from a information catagrisation point of view

edwardian beef is particularly unlikly to be used again i think

 

[Citizen66]

And the spelling of 'agrguing' out to be revised.

 

[adc069975]

They're all the same. It's all about the drugs, the moneys, and the women.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Depends what you're disliking doesn't it? I'm happy to say that any religion that makes claims to transcendental knowledge is wrong. This comes from examining the nature of the limits of knowledge rather than the content of any one of the transcendental systems.

I respect your endeavors, but I hope you don't mind if we don't accept you as the final word on the subject.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

My experience of aldebaran is that if you ask too many awkward questions he just goes silent..

That's true.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

are you or are you not a pedantic twat?

'Pedantic' is the new omnibus insult, just one step down from troll. Or maybe one step up.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

In this context, there's no important difference, except a judgement if you like that I make, which is that belief in the absence of knowledge, even incomplete knowledge, is nonsensical.

I was actually thinking about this yesterday, about knowledge vs belief vs faith.

The way it came about, was that we were out for dinner at a restaurant. They were having a special Christmas dinner buffet. Amongst the diners, were a man in a wheelchair: looked like the grandfather at the table, although probably only in his sixties. There were also two tables with mentally handicapped people at them. One of those two people was an elderly man, and it made me think that it's somewhat rare to see a white-haired mentally handicapped person. It seems that perhaps they often don't live that long.

He was with family members, and appeared to be profoundly handicapped, perhaps also with vision difficulties, but his family helped him through the buffet process, etc.

So the thought was this: how do such people fit into a world of facts only: a world without belief or faith? Do such people have value in that sort of world?

Based on the facts, it's hard to see a reason to keep them around, or bring them out in public. We also must wonder, if the processing of information/facts is the mark of the human being, the highest function of what we are and do, then are such people, incapable to varying degrees of doing that, fully human, or human at all? They have the same shape as us, but does whatever is going on inside, pass muster?

 

[DotCommunist]

Funny line for a conman?

If religion is not the attempt by a few to excercise control via spiritual shenanigans then I don't know what it can be. The essentially parasitic transfer of power may not be entirely unwanted, but then there were ever some happy to feed their leeches

 

[FridgeMagnet]

So the thought was this: how do such people fit into a world of facts only: a world without belief or faith? Do such people have value in that sort of world?

What the fuck's wrong with you? Why would you think that people who aren't religious don't care about people in wheelchairs? Bloody hell.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

What the fuck's wrong with you? Why would you think that people who aren't religious don't care about people in wheelchairs? Bloody hell.

I wasn't talking to you. It goes to a point in a discussion that you apparently haven't been privy to

 

[FridgeMagnet]

"No, I said that stupid thing to somebody else."

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

"No, I said that stupid thing to somebody else."

It's about the existence of ideas, of values, that fall outside of empiricism.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

"I said that stupid thing in the context of long words which you I assume you wouldn't understand"

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

"I said that stupid thing in the context of long words which you I assume you wouldn't understand"

I'm assuming some modicum of intelligence on your part.

If I've been mistaken, and there's some part of something I've said that you'd like me to dumb down for you, point it out, and I'll have a whack at it.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

"I said that stupid thing in the context of long words which you I assume you wouldn't understand"

For you:

em⋅pir⋅i⋅cism
   /ɛmˈpɪrəˌsɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [em-pir-uh-siz-uhm] Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. empirical method or practice.
2. Philosophy. the doctrine that all knowledge is derived from sense experience. Compare rationalism (def. 2).
3. undue reliance upon experience, as in medicine; quackery.
4. an empirical conclusion.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/empiricism

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Don't be any more of a dick than you absolutely can't help JC. Polite request like ...

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Don't be any more of a dick than you absolutely can't help JC. Polite request like ...

I posted something to do with what LBJ had said, and Fridge pipes in with a drunken insult.

Maybe direct your polite request in his direction.

 

[DotCommunist]

And the spelling of 'agrguing' out to be revised.

not my mistake, I assure you

 

[Bernie Gunther]

<snip>

So the thought was this: how do such people fit into a world of facts only: a world without belief or faith? Do such people have value in that sort of world?

Based on the facts, it's hard to see a reason to keep them around, or bring them out in public. We also must wonder, if the processing of information/facts is the mark of the human being, the highest function of what we are and do, then are such people, incapable to varying degrees of doing that, fully human, or human at all? They have the same shape as us, but does whatever is going on inside, pass muster?

The implication was that rational people have no motivation to be humane, because they aren't infected with religion. Like people who believe in sky fairies have a monopoly on compassion or something. Fuck that and fuck you.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The implication was that rational people have no motivation to be humane, because they aren't infected with religion. Like people who believe in sky fairies have a monopoly on compassion or something. Fuck that and fuck you.

Merry Christmas to you too, Bernie.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

And on a more serious note, you're making the erroneous assumption that all belief or faith must be associated with a religion.

For instance, what about a person who maintains faith in human nature, in spite of evidence to the contrary?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Social darwinism is not the only possible alternative to sky fairies.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Social darwinism is not the only possible alternative to sky fairies.

I guess you posted this before reading the post I made directly above it.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Your strawman.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Your strawman.

Bowie song, innit?

 

[Demosthenes]

Well Bernie, if someone comes along and says, look, human life and human civilisation is just a gigantic and unhappy accident, - apparently you're going to agree, and if they then go on to say, well why should I believe that humans can organise things any better than they currently do, ? why should I believe that it isn't just the way things are that the strong enslave the weak, and that it's our destiny, genetic predisposition, and inevitable fate that we do so, what are you going to say, ?

"Fuck that and fuck you" is an answer that would be fair enough for that person maybe, but, if you accept his starting point, it seems like it's all your left with because you can't find a more rational argument to change his mind, so you're left with just emotion.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

so you're left with just emotion.

...and pretty tepid emotion, at that.

 

[Demosthenes]

Confronted with the suggestion that mainly humanity is no good, and that there's no hope for us, there never was, and the best anyone can do is look after themselves and anyone they care about, and that's all that can reasonably be expected of anyone, someone might find their emotional reaction to this to be quite strong, and want to deny it fiercely, -- I mean maybe Bernie's reaction is more than tepid... how would I know. ?

But all the same, myself, I reckon, if it were true that the situation we're in has always been nothing but an unfortunate accident, then as unfortunate accidents go, humanity quite possibly outranks all other unfortunate accidents by a quite cosmic factor, and I wouldn't really see any reason for disagreeing with the suggestion.

 

[Demosthenes]

I suppose someone could try and take an optimistic view and call it an immensely fortunate accident..

But the way it looks at the moment to me is as if the main result of the accident if it were an accident is loads and loads of purposeless suffering, and false hope.
If that's unduly negative, sorry, but I don't see how you can spin it any other way.

It's not the way I see things of course.