Montreal, Quebec, Canada
New Atheism
StoreTags: new, atheism, god, religion, science
Author: nagrom on January 04 2007
Viewed 11367 times. 12 people liked this blog. You can rate it below if you haven't already.
--> link
Interview with Sam Harris, author of "The End of Faith".
Basically a very rational argument for questioning, not religious freedom, but the acceptance of religion in society.

Also, if you scroll down a bit, there's an article about the origins of public school, which I implore everybody to read before sending your kids off to be hammered into cubes.

Anybody who was intrigued by the public school blurb, you may be interested in this book on the subject by John Gatto: link (it's free online)
Read nagrom's other blogs.nagrom's Recent Blogs
Comments

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15
sorry, if the masses are used and abused by the corporations of government by cynically manipulating peoples faith - thats the fault of religion? i disagree.

religion isn't necessary for anti-social behavior, it can help maneuver opinion (look at america) it also gives another group something to blame, but it's just a means to an end.

everyone that's ever wronged me in my life; religion was never the force behind it, it was greed. i've been mugged a few times in my life, couple of times at knifepoint and once someone stuck a hypo stuck in my arm just for kicks; all godless scallies (which is besides the point).

i just don't buy into the ideal of an atheistic world where everyone is well adjusted and lives with a perma-smile wandering happily to their death. people know there's no god, this makes them scared and think 'it doesn't matter what i do, there's no consequence, i'm going to get what i can while i can'. people who pontificate about atheism sound just as brainwashed as the religions they're fighting against.

cbit said: "Most 'rounding up' in the world so far has been either directly motivated, or facilitated through religious belief.. that's why i think bsr's scenario is unlikely."


except for china, russia, and cambodia in the 20th century. russia takes the cake. pure atheism at work.

Stalin used the church when it suited his needs.

china is more purist when it comes to atheism, i think. much stricter than russia.

i hate that Marx quote ... too many people took it completely the wrong way.

sure, the point is not statistics, but a better reading of history. religion, when available, is abused. but so is every other hierarchical organization. and not all christianity is hierarchical.

bsr said: "sorry, if the masses are used and abused by the corporations of government by cynically manipulating peoples faith - thats the fault of religion? i disagree."

i think this is the heart of it; i take your point. i'm going to think some more about my reaction to it..
i just don't buy into the ideal of an atheistic world where everyone is well adjusted and lives with a perma-smile wandering happily to their death.

straw man.

bsr said: "people know there's no god, this makes them scared and think 'it doesn't matter what i do, there's no consequence, i'm going to get what i can while i can'."

Are you aware that most of the countries with the lowest crime rates tend to be the ones with highest degree of atheism? The evidence contradicts what you're suggesting (awkwardly i can't find references to support this at the moment lol).

astroid said: "except for china, russia, and cambodia in the 20th century. russia takes the cake. pure atheism at work."

sure, some terrible stuff has happened with no connection to religion.

or the middle passage of slaves.

and it could sure be argued that the age of discovery was as much feuled by greed and nationalism, as by religion.

in fact, the main cause of slaughters and war in history is sometimes said to be mass migration. pure and simple.

or the rwandan massacres of the 90's. that was a pure class distinction, started by the british.

cbit: re: straw man - i get the impression from this and other threads that you feel humanity would be so wonderful if we just got rid of religion and sorted out education - then everything would fall into place. that's the impression i get; it's not a straw man argument, i didn't just say it to score points. i feel humans are dirty smelly lumps of fat and mucus who shit and cheat and kill - that most of us manage to live a decent life and be nice to each other is incredible.

(sorry for being an argumentative cunt by the way, it seems i've fallen into the position of being an apologist for religion. they all have massive faults and i'm 99.999% sure there's nothing outside of our reality, there's that little bit inside me that doesn't see any reason at all why existence itself couldn't be sat running in some computer somewhere - this text explains it somewhat: link - i can't be sure that or something like it isn't the case; to me thats equally as likely as there being 'something' just because there can be. existence itself is massively improbable, why is there 'something' instead of 'nothing'? - i can't be 100% sure that there isn't some underlying 'plenum' so i can never call myself an atheist.

either there's something 'extra' or there isn't, it's binary - and i don't know which is true so i wouldn't be honest calling myself atheist )

i just don't buy into the ideal of an atheistic world where everyone is well adjusted and lives with a perma-smile wandering happily to their death.

this is a straw man because afaik no atheist is proposing that this would be how a world without religion would look, you made this up yourself, and then said you don't buy into it

bsr said: "either there's something 'extra' or there isn't, it's binary - and i don't know which is true so i wouldn't be honest calling myself atheist "

this was my position too. Theres a very interesting chapter in the god delusion that changed my mind about this. I'm not going to try to paraphrase it incase you end up reading it (i'll ruin the impact).

also: i appreciate it that you are an argumentative cunt, don't go changing!
I sometimes feel the same way, BSR. I'm sure religion has it's uses even in todays society- like comfort in rough times, etcetera. What bothers me, however, is that that .001 % uncertainty manage to play a far to big role in my everyday life. I really believe in freedom of religion, but I think it should be a two-way street, i.e i should be able to enjoy freedom from religion too. What goes on in your mind is none of my business, but your thoughts should not dictate my life. Our new government is a constellation of more or less right-winged parties, including the christian democrats. They are responsible for a change in the swedish school law, so it now says that the swedish education system should be built on christian values ("en kristen värdegrund"). It doesn't, however, specify what christian values are, so they have opened up for nutjobs like Åke Green. The struggle for gay marriage is also getting back.

I'd like to believe there is some kind of god. I just don't like people who makes decisions regarding how I should live my life based on the assumption that I won't get to heaven otherwise. None of their business.
Recent blogs: electribe s pitch chart  

i love debates like this!
especially when you start getting into the nature of reality, questioning what reality actually is, quantum physics .... and all that kind of thing.
very very interesting.
unfortunately the internet is RUBBISH for debates.

i like these kind of debates.

i tend to play devil's advocate because of college. listening to people preach to the choir bugs me a bit.

noam chomsky is good at not doing that. like when he said he's in favor of reinstating the draft. don't think people were ready for that one.

link

bsr said: "sorry, if the masses are used and abused by the corporations of government by cynically manipulating peoples faith - thats the fault of religion? i disagree."

You're deciding which single factor should be singled out for blame, this doesn't make sense to me because there are many factors that all need to be acting to cause a certain situation. So there are two main factors here (cynical greed of one agent and the faith of the 'people') in the hypothetical situation.

A cynical greedy leader appeals to a nations faith in order to rouse support for the idea that the neighboring country should be invaded: Religion facilitates the invasion (as does greed).

astroid: re. preaching to the choir. as similar as the outlooks here are, i'd say that there are still important differences that are (hopefully) useful to talk about.

but that's not 'fault' is it? that reasoning seems as manipulative as someone who'd use religion for their own ends!

bsr said: "but that's not 'fault' is it? "

i don't follow.

well, cbit, another sad fact of modern representative democracy is that points of view are chosen like horses in a race. politicians are "soft" on this issue and "hard" on that. they stir it together like an omlette under the guidance of uncaring political consultants who believe in almost nothing except for winning at the polls.

i think blaming religion or capitalism is aiming way too shallow. if we really want to stop war, we have to look at root causes, not the facilitations-those will shift with the wind.

things such as overpopulation, for instance.

personally, i think that western "civilization" is in a huge spiral, caused by it's own "success" in propogation. there will be no halting our "progress," only damage control. hopefully we won't create one of the doomsday scenarios before we contract significantly.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15

Register / login
You must be a member to reply or post. signup or login