|
Post by david on May 14, 2006 18:29:14 GMT -5
Thanks very much for the podcast angel
There were some very good points made and also some very sloppy thinking from such learned gentleman. In a nutshell, I agree with the hypocrisies pointed out by the gentleman of religious extremists who demand their rights be respected yet at the same time trample on other people’s rights. I am for the Freedom of Speech exercised with Responsibility, since such rights were hard fought by countless others in the past such that many people of today have the privilege of utilizing it. And thus the onus of responsibility is for us to exercise such Rights with Responsibilities otherwise the very same rights would be curtailed and it would be everyone’s lost
Otherwise these are my criticisms:
-This is a discussion between two Western secularists. So we effectively have two atheists (or ‘anti-theist’ as Christopher likes to describe himself) performing mutual backslappery. Two people agreeing with each other hardly explores a subject matter satisfactorily.
-They make sense from their personal experiences which tend to make out that Religion = Christianity. And you can tell from their background, education, choice of words and quotes and choice of literature that they draw from the same Western Christian pool, even though Fry is Jewish by birth. When the talk touches on Islam, Buddhism or Sikhism, you can see it is much less personal and more abstract and armchair academic. Other religions are not even touched upon despite billions of people following them. It’s not their fault but the audience of such a dialogue needs to be appraised of that fact – hence the importance of each of the talkers explaining their background at the outset of the podcast.
-Fry assumed Reason and Logic are largely absent from the vast majority of religious people and that Western secularists, (by effectively abrogating to himself) as possessing such qualities, are implied to be in a better position to discuss such topics that may be perceived as causing ‘offence’ to religious people.
-At one point they were describing there is ‘beauty’ in the way Stephen Hawking describes cosmic phenomena on a page in a book (I don’t disagree there fro ma cerain point of view)…but as being incomparable to the beauty of the real thing?? (which I think…although subjective…is more grander and beautiful than a mere description of the same thing!).
-They praise Enlightenment and Reason and the sound use of demanding ‘evidence’ and ‘proof’ before believing in something….yet they signally fail themselves to provide ‘proof’ for the non-existence of God?? Talk about hypocrisy.
-We have them bamboozling the words ‘respect’ and ‘offensive’ as mere ‘whining’ and then literally in the very same breath whine about how that offends them when people use such words (‘satire alert’ for the uninitiated). If they are merely satirising then their point cannot be taken seriously. And if they are serious, they are then instantly being hypocritical.
-Christopher felt threatened by being hemmed in by the proposed ‘incitement to religious hatred law’ (I agree there as I can see a multitude of potential problems) and that it was time for a bit of ‘self-respect’ to get the law on ‘their’ side (that is he was referring to the Western secularists against the religious groups) – and thus instantly negated the just mentioned point about how ‘respect’ had no real meaning…..and then (I almost laughed) threatening to fight back with ‘blood’ if the ante was raised. Of course, the irony of sounding like a religious fanatic seemed to have been lost on him – a point I constantly point out to some atheists. Either that or I have a sophisticated sense of humour. In fact Fry later made the exact same criticism I constantly point out to some atheists – in fact I pointed out the exact same point to one such atheist here on this Forum earlier today.
-Equating Islam with tribalism and customs peculiar to Arabia.
When a member of the audience said that the secularists had failed in their imagination to infuse their ideas with a liturgical poetry akin to religion, Fry replied ‘Every failure of humanity was a failure of the imagination’. That was very well put and I agree totally.
He says, rightly I might add, that religion should not be perceived as being the originator or having the monopoly on beauty and morals and such like….I just hope he also is astute enough to extend the same idea that secularists also do not have a monopoly on Reason and Logic.
|
|
|
Post by mrken on May 14, 2006 20:31:30 GMT -5
I have a major problem with religion interfering with politics and science. Recently, a southern evangelist scientist- with an obnoxious holier-than-thou attitude- proclaimed the Earth is 6000 years old.
These s***kicking Southerners should leave science down to the sane and intelligent people, and go back to lynching niggers or whatever the hell it is they do.
|
|
|
Post by davidbleo on May 14, 2006 23:47:50 GMT -5
I get your idea, but I think that above our personal views there is a reality that can't be changed by what we believe... That reminds me the novel "1984" by George Orwell, where the government dictates what is real... 'cause they can, using all the media, control what people believe... and at one point there is a discussion between the main character (the rebel) and a party's member about what's reality... and in after that he ends believing that humans have just 4 fingers in each hand... it would be an endless debate about what is real and what is not, 'cause both have strong and opposing positions...
But then, if I believe I can fly... it would be true, and I might fly at will... or whatever I think would be true
And why not... for what I understand, you say that if I speak of god as if he exists then, deep into myself I believe in him... but almost everybody speak about many nonexisting things as if they exist, literary characters, tv characters, mythology and so on, and that doesn't mean that they believe in such things as real beings. And I speak about god 'cause the idea of god(s) has been important in every society through history... using the concept of god and his name, huge cathedrals have been built, wars have been fought, places have been named and so on... god is important, even if he doesn't exist. And what god may think if he exist doesn't really matter, but that's no reason not to talk about that... it's always interesting to talk about possible scenarios...
But then again hell would be only for the bad believers, and the others will "get free" or at least they'd not go to hell. 'cause what they believe is real and really applies to them.
|
|
|
Post by davidbleo on May 14, 2006 23:53:49 GMT -5
My opinion, religions were the first “Corporations.... Yes, I think more or less the same... religions were the first organizations which had the power to control and put rules/laws into a society... and they were maybe still are useful that way... ...but I can't believe that any religion holds the truth 'cause every religion is just a variant of an older one and so on, 'til it reaches the basic thoughts of every man asking if there's something more David
|
|
|
Post by shugi on May 14, 2006 23:56:03 GMT -5
I'm guilty of labeling things with godlyness or holyness or etheral factors. For example the internet router... i dont know how it works so i just give it the nickname "Jesus Box" Or anything else i dont know how it works i just label it as "Jesus Box".
You can label so many things "Jesus' Boxes" in your life. So when a time in your life you dont know what it is but u know it does something important just call it luvingly your "Jesus Box'. So when your without hope and knowing your end is coming, hug that jesus box and whisper sweet words to it in the hopes that'll it'll take you to a world that Prolongs oblivion.
ta da daaaaaa
|
|
|
Post by miaim on May 15, 2006 13:01:03 GMT -5
I get your idea, but I think that above our personal views there is a reality that can't be changed by what we believe... really? like what? if people believe a computer is generating these posts, then for them, a computer is generating these posts.... now, you & i may think it's crazy, but for them, we don't exist! it's a computer generating these posts..... That reminds me the novel "1984" by George Orwell, where the government dictates what is real... 'cause they can, using all the media, control what people believe... and at one point there is a discussion between the main character (the rebel) and a party's member about what's reality... and in after that he ends believing that humans have just 4 fingers in each hand... it would be an endless debate about what is real and what is not, 'cause both have strong and opposing positions... you see? it's all about what you believe....hypothetically, can you prove most of the stuff that you believe to be real exists without relying on government sources? do you know if i really exist? or do you assume that i exist cuz you believe there is a person behind another computer monitor, somewhere in the world? But then, if I believe I can fly... it would be true, and I might fly at will... or whatever I think would be true And why not... for what I understand, you say that if I speak of god as if he exists then, deep into myself I believe in him... but almost everybody speak about many nonexisting things as if they exist, literary characters, tv characters, mythology and so on, and that doesn't mean that they believe in such things as real beings. it depends on whether you're talking about them as if they exist... it's one thing to say Tony Soprano should have done this or that on the show....it's another thing if you're wondering how Tony Soprano may judge your behaviour, in which case you're assuming Tony Soprano really exists....& if you don't let anyone else convince you otherwise, Tony Soprano really does exist, at least in your mind..... And I speak about god 'cause the idea of god(s) has been important in every society through history... using the concept of god and his name, huge cathedrals have been built, wars have been fought, places have been named and so on... god is important, even if he doesn't exist. And what god may think if he exist doesn't really matter, but that's no reason not to talk about that... it's always interesting to talk about possible scenarios... only if you think he exists....what's the point of talking about someone who doesn't exist? not that i don't enjoy reading other people's opinions or views, including yours, of course..... But then again hell would be only for the bad believers, and the others will "get free" or at least they'd not go to hell. 'cause what they believe is real and really applies to them. i think you'll go to hell if you believe you're going to hell & you'll go to heaven if you believe you're going to heaven....you'll be reincarnated if you believe you're going to be reincarnated, etc....if you believe only the 'bad believers' will go to hell, then yes - only the 'bad believers' will go to hell.... peace
|
|
|
Post by miaim on May 15, 2006 13:19:24 GMT -5
I'm with you on this davidbleo. I don’t see the logic of; just because you believe in something it exits. Sure as a concept something like a Unicorn can exist, just like Santa Clause exist as a concept and as a character but Santa Clause does not physically exist, live at the north pole ect….. yeah but for the children that believe in Santa Clause, he really does exist....that's why we often don't tell them that he may not exist....see what i mean? as long as you believe, anything can exist! i'm just playing around & testing my belief & existence logic, that's all - nothing personal, xirz peace
|
|
|
Post by miaim on May 15, 2006 13:29:46 GMT -5
Is it more important to follow what my inner voice tells me is right (w/o lying to myself) or blindly follow this or that "religious rule"? yes....but there is also comfort in faith....happy spirituality fishing! miaim: Shugi was talking about a god more like polytheist religions would talk about gods... So that has nothing to do w/ a monotheist God. yeah, but my point is: if you don't believe in God(s), why talk about God(s) as if God(s) exist? by even talking about God(s), aren't you assuming God(s) exist? can someone explain this to me? peace
|
|
|
Post by davidbleo on May 15, 2006 19:22:40 GMT -5
really? like what? if people believe a computer is generating these posts, then for them, a computer is generating these posts.... now, you & i may think it's crazy, but for them, we don't exist! it's a computer generating these posts..... Ok, for them it's that way... but that doesn't mean that their version of reality exists outside their minds. It would be pretty egocentric to claim that your believes are real, even only for you... I think one must try to take what to you seems real, hoping it is the truth, anyway you'll never be 100% sure... you see? it's all about what you believe....hypothetically, can you prove most of the stuff that you believe to be real exists without relying on government sources? do you know if i really exist? or do you assume that i exist cuz you believe there is a person behind another computer monitor, somewhere in the world? I believe you exist, but if I didn't believe it you'll not stop existing... you'd be nonexisting just inside my mind... that's my idea about there's a reality you can't change no matter what you believe, and you can't know completely... one can just make the biggest effort... it depends on whether you're talking about them as if they exist... it's one thing to say Tony Soprano should have done this or that on the show....it's another thing if you're wondering how Tony Soprano may judge your behaviour, in which case you're assuming Tony Soprano really exists....& if you don't let anyone else convince you otherwise, Tony Soprano really does exist, at least in your mind..... The first time I mentioned that assumption was to make about a critic statement about christianity, more specifically about catholicism, and say why I don't like their views in general... Anyway, you can even talk about how a literary character would react in our world... 'cause many of them were written with such depth that they seems like a real person... you get to know them even when you know they aren't real... And there are so meny writings about god, or any deity... that you can get to know them, you can get to believe in them, or you don't even when you know them... only if you think he exists....what's the point of talking about someone who doesn't exist? not that i don't enjoy reading other people's opinions or views, including yours, of course..... As I told you before, the idea of god has been quite important through ages that you can talk about these gods and how people was affected by them (even when they don't exist, 'cause you can say they were affected by god, who only exists inside their minds or they were affected by an idea inside their minds)... So... there's a historical and cultural point, by speaking of god... wether he exists or not... But then again hell would be only for the bad believers, and the others will "get free" or at least they'd not go to hell. 'cause what they believe is real and really applies to them. i think you'll go to hell if you believe you're going to hell & you'll go to heaven if you believe you're going to heaven....you'll be reincarnated if you believe you're going to be reincarnated, etc....if you believe only the 'bad believers' will go to hell, then yes - only the 'bad believers' will go to hell.... Know inside their minds are they going to hell Or they'll create it with their beliefs and truly go to hell... I found that idea, again, quite egocentric... I was trying to get some kind of "agreement" between what you and I have said here... I hope I achieved something... David...
|
|
|
Post by miaim on May 16, 2006 8:57:45 GMT -5
Ok, for them it's that way... but that doesn't mean that their version of reality exists outside their minds. but noone's version of reality exists outside their minds..... It would be pretty egocentric to claim that your believes are real, even only for you... I think one must try to take what to you seems real, hoping it is the truth, anyway you'll never be 100% sure... i totally agree it's egocentric but this is what 'believers' - theist or atheist - often do....'God' exists!, 'no - God doesn't exist! prove it!', 'yes he does - prove that he doesn't exist!', etc..... as if anyone can prove they're right either way...... I believe you exist, but if I didn't believe it you'll not stop existing... you'd be nonexisting just inside my mind.... oh yeah? what if i am in fact a multiple ID troll? - i'm not, but for the sake of argument, let's assume i am - then do i really exist? we just don't know, do we? that's my idea about there's a reality you can't change no matter what you believe, and you can't know completely... one can just make the biggest effort... i say whatever rocks your boat/brings you peace.....you can never know everything, anyway.... Know inside their minds are they going to hell Or they'll create it with their beliefs and truly go to hell... I found that idea, again, quite egocentric... indeed, i agree it is: which is why i think spirituality should be kept private.... it's one thing to believe one is going to heaven or that anyone one doesn't like will fry in hell for all eternity.....it's another thing to say it in public....it just says more about what one believes than anything else....but that's just my opinion..... I was trying to get some kind of "agreement" between what you and I have said here... I hope I achieved something... . there's no need to agree if we can disagree respectfully! peace
|
|
|
Post by davidbleo on May 20, 2006 23:16:21 GMT -5
I know that anyone's beliefs exist only inside their minds... but if you recognize that, you're not being selfish... Anyway... I think that some unquestionable reality exists and we'll never be able to understand it totally... the laws of physics being a good example... but if what we see is real I think, that part of what I was saying... then a real world that exists beyond our beliefs exists... Otherwise, it would not matter if only I exist and create a whole world inside my mind...
And I cannot proove you're not an ID troll, but with all the "security" in these forums I bet you are a real person... anyway, I cannot proove it, unless I see you writing any message here =P But, if I see you... do you exist, or can you be a creation of my mind... ? with this we can argue for an eternity =P
|
|