Dude.. I am a skeptic by nature. But if there is one thing I can say I have complete faith in, it would be my lack of true understanding.
God is not great: How religion poisons everthing
-
Liquid Len
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Home By The Sea
"Being agnostic might be fine and serves your laziness and cocooning.
It does not give answers to the reality and complexity of the universe around us."
Indeed, that's what the 'organized' abrahamic religions say to convince you to join. If you have some secret knowledge that you cannot impart here, it makes sense, even. I haven't experienced anything in life that makes me able to commit 100% to any religion, so I must consider myself agnostic. If I find out when I die that it's because I was lazy, or selfish, or arrogantly unwilling to bend to the great wisdom of some religion, so be it. I look at what religion contributes to the world, the negatives keep me agnostic, but the positives keep me agnostic as well.
Side argument : to me the bit about denying that some things are facts that we all agree on, is just evasive. (Unlike the 'just a theory' retort which is based on lack of comprehension on what a scientific theory is). I AM posting to this website. I don't say, it's 99.999999% probable that I am making this post, I AM making this post. Anyone who reads this and thinks that they are only 'statistically likely' to be reading this, in my opinion is possibly brain damaged, but more likely just kidding themselves. Science is based and limited on probabilities, but logic is not. Most of the put-downs regarding reason and logic seem to be using reasoning and logic to do so, and to me become meaningless, or at least inherent claims to elitism (which may be well founded). If you want to preface every scientific fact whatsoever with a '99.99999' disclaimer, maybe that's reasonable, but seems to be a lot of verbiage to say what every real scientist knows, theories are there to be disproven, and if you can do it, there's money and recognition in it for you. Science is based on a belief, that the world will act the same way tomorrow as today. In practical terms, we can get by with this belief more often than not.
Lemon curry?
It does not give answers to the reality and complexity of the universe around us."
Indeed, that's what the 'organized' abrahamic religions say to convince you to join. If you have some secret knowledge that you cannot impart here, it makes sense, even. I haven't experienced anything in life that makes me able to commit 100% to any religion, so I must consider myself agnostic. If I find out when I die that it's because I was lazy, or selfish, or arrogantly unwilling to bend to the great wisdom of some religion, so be it. I look at what religion contributes to the world, the negatives keep me agnostic, but the positives keep me agnostic as well.
Side argument : to me the bit about denying that some things are facts that we all agree on, is just evasive. (Unlike the 'just a theory' retort which is based on lack of comprehension on what a scientific theory is). I AM posting to this website. I don't say, it's 99.999999% probable that I am making this post, I AM making this post. Anyone who reads this and thinks that they are only 'statistically likely' to be reading this, in my opinion is possibly brain damaged, but more likely just kidding themselves. Science is based and limited on probabilities, but logic is not. Most of the put-downs regarding reason and logic seem to be using reasoning and logic to do so, and to me become meaningless, or at least inherent claims to elitism (which may be well founded). If you want to preface every scientific fact whatsoever with a '99.99999' disclaimer, maybe that's reasonable, but seems to be a lot of verbiage to say what every real scientist knows, theories are there to be disproven, and if you can do it, there's money and recognition in it for you. Science is based on a belief, that the world will act the same way tomorrow as today. In practical terms, we can get by with this belief more often than not.
Lemon curry?
-
Liquid Len
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Home By The Sea
If I don't quote directly, it's referring to whatever's been posted previously on the thread. Possibly outside the thread if I think it the context will be generally understood, but in this case just this thread, not referring to your comments in particular, unless there's some detail that I've forgotten.manfriday wrote:Hey Len,
Are you still referring to my comments from a while back? or are you speaking to/about someone else?
-
Neil B
The problem is that we atheists have shut our mouths for too long. Now we are not going to take it anymore. I don't think there is anything wrong with being anti-christian in light of their dominance and insistence that everyone else be christian too. If they would keep to themselves, and stop trying to impose their morals on everyone else, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Buddhists are happy, they smile a lot and they let me be me. I don't get this vibe from christians. The main goal of christianity, is to make everyone in the world a christian. That is why they must be stopped.
Buddhists are happy, they smile a lot and they let me be me. I don't get this vibe from christians. The main goal of christianity, is to make everyone in the world a christian. That is why they must be stopped.
Last edited by braincell on Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:48 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
Liquid Len
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Home By The Sea
Stardust :
Unconscious belief is what I've been harping on - reasoning, and what is implied by the simple fact of expressing a thought. Is perception the same thing as a thought? Not necessarily. But I don't know.
Gnostic in the formally understood sense? Maybe, in a "Voyage to Arcturus" way, not a "Hubbard" way.
Unconscious belief is what I've been harping on - reasoning, and what is implied by the simple fact of expressing a thought. Is perception the same thing as a thought? Not necessarily. But I don't know.
Gnostic in the formally understood sense? Maybe, in a "Voyage to Arcturus" way, not a "Hubbard" way.
-
Liquid Len
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Home By The Sea
I don't particularly disagree with your intent, I think we all agree more than we disagree, but (1) what you call christian is just a particular version of christian values, (2) you show your own morals, that you don't believe you have, with your aversion to intolerance and blind obedience.braincell wrote:The problem is that we atheists have shut our mouths for ......
world a christian. That is why they must be stopped.
If I help you fight dogmatic religion, will you help me fight hybrid kernels and country music?
i don't know.. 
i never have problems with christians in general. there are some groups who go door to door like jehovah's witnesses and mormons(which are not really christian groups anyway), but they.re no problem either. for the most part, these people really want to be good and helpful, so even if they are a little confused and mislead, we're really not in conflict. a few pleasant words and it's over, no big deal. christians in the street? no problemo. if they're good people we get along famously, if they have bad intent, then they must step back, just like anybody else from any other group. this includes athiest/agnostics(a group that seems so damaged by bad thoughts of religion that they lose their minds in the presence of it all). people really need to find the real enemy and focus their attentions there instead of having "he said, she said" arguments and conversations that sound like the "spam" sketch by monty python(i don't like god! there, there, dear calm down, i'll have your god i love it, i'm having god, god, god, baked beans and god!)
i never have problems with christians in general. there are some groups who go door to door like jehovah's witnesses and mormons(which are not really christian groups anyway), but they.re no problem either. for the most part, these people really want to be good and helpful, so even if they are a little confused and mislead, we're really not in conflict. a few pleasant words and it's over, no big deal. christians in the street? no problemo. if they're good people we get along famously, if they have bad intent, then they must step back, just like anybody else from any other group. this includes athiest/agnostics(a group that seems so damaged by bad thoughts of religion that they lose their minds in the presence of it all). people really need to find the real enemy and focus their attentions there instead of having "he said, she said" arguments and conversations that sound like the "spam" sketch by monty python(i don't like god! there, there, dear calm down, i'll have your god i love it, i'm having god, god, god, baked beans and god!)
-
Liquid Len
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Home By The Sea
"they may help you with one hand while trying to help you with the other?
THOSE BASTARDS!"
Well the flip side of that is people with ulterior motives trying to 'help you despite yourself'. If you're not up front about your motives there is often a negative reason. But the INTENT of those people (the followers) is rarely to deceive, they truly enough mean well, I have to admit. I probably don't take that into account enough. I'm only huuuman.
THOSE BASTARDS!"
Well the flip side of that is people with ulterior motives trying to 'help you despite yourself'. If you're not up front about your motives there is often a negative reason. But the INTENT of those people (the followers) is rarely to deceive, they truly enough mean well, I have to admit. I probably don't take that into account enough. I'm only huuuman.
Last edited by Liquid Len on Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
so don't take their help if that's the case. sheesh!
if you're a nice person, it's often hard to believe how mean and evil some can be. if you're mean and evil, it's often hard to believe that there are really just some nice people out there....
people aren't their labels(christian, aetheist, cracker, nigger, conservative, liberal, etc.). they are people. that's how i choose to meet and deal with them. i'm not interested in dealing with your label, except to identify one guy from another(the tall guy over there, not the christian guy). if you're of a good heart, come in. if you're not, back way!
if you're a nice person, it's often hard to believe how mean and evil some can be. if you're mean and evil, it's often hard to believe that there are really just some nice people out there....
people aren't their labels(christian, aetheist, cracker, nigger, conservative, liberal, etc.). they are people. that's how i choose to meet and deal with them. i'm not interested in dealing with your label, except to identify one guy from another(the tall guy over there, not the christian guy). if you're of a good heart, come in. if you're not, back way!
My only problems with religion is when it becomes politics. That's exactly what happens here. At the risk of repeating myself, i'm sure that this is where all the harsh argumentation comes from.garyb wrote:i don't know..
i never have problems with christians in general......
Believing in something is a right for every one, but pretending to condition everyone's life because of something out of a general agreement can't be accepted. This is exactly what happens with the 90% of all the historical manifestations of religions.
If a friend is in love with a woman that I find ugly but he thinks that is wonderful, not only i will NEVER tell him what I think about her, but probably will try to open my mind to see if my concept of beauty could be widened, I'll try to see some beauty where I wasn't able to until that moment....even if confirmed in my own opinion I will think that my friend is a lucky man because he loves what he likes. But if someone would push me to think that i like her and I should a b s o l u t e l y have sex with her or marry her, and that I'm an idiot because i can't see what's really good for me or, worst, I will commit a crime punished by the law if I go with someone else....at that point the urge to affirm my own point of view will be pressing and indispensable.
As far as it doesn't enter in my life with violence, I'm fine with whatever people want to believe, but if you make a deeper recognition of what's really happening in the world you can't avoid to see how much violence there is in the name of a "truth". And this violence can be spectacular and horrible, like the death for apostasy or some other talebanic delicacies, but can be also subtle and pervasive like omophoby or the shameful law we have in Italy on assisted reproduction techniques or the holy war against the "biological testament".
This is what's all about. Peaceful believers have all my sympathy and support, but this is what we have to face everyday , politics, lobbying against individual and civil rights..
it can't be ignored.
Am I entitled to be strongly against this?
You don't see atheists going door to door trying to convince people to give up god.
I'm particularly upset that because of how "helpful" they are, they don't pay property taxes. The Episcopals own a huge resort here and they hardly ever use it. It's like a ghost town. They have bible camp there.
I'm particularly upset that because of how "helpful" they are, they don't pay property taxes. The Episcopals own a huge resort here and they hardly ever use it. It's like a ghost town. They have bible camp there.
garyb wrote:so don't take their help if that's the case. sheesh!
if you're a nice person, it's often hard to believe how mean and evil some can be. if you're mean and evil, it's often hard to believe that there are really just some nice people out there....
people aren't their labels(christian, aetheist, cracker, nigger, conservative, liberal, etc.). they are people. that's how i choose to meet and deal with them. i'm not interested in dealing with your label, except to identify one guy from another(the tall guy over there, not the christian guy). if you're of a good heart, come in. if you're not, back way!
What is a hybrid kernel? It sounds like something I would like to fight. Is that a Microsoft/Linux kernel?
Liquid Len wrote:I don't particularly disagree with your intent, I think we all agree more than we disagree, but (1) what you call christian is just a particular version of christian values, (2) you show your own morals, that you don't believe you have, with your aversion to intolerance and blind obedience.braincell wrote:The problem is that we atheists have shut our mouths for ......
world a christian. That is why they must be stopped.
If I help you fight dogmatic religion, will you help me fight hybrid kernels and country music?
-
Liquid Len
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Home By The Sea
It's a Microsoft / Microsoft / Microsoft kernel. Classic kernel design with a microsoft-ism, how can you go wrong? Last year I tried to setup Linux on a desktop and couldn't get the audio (soundblaster) working, I'll try again in a few years and see if it's usable yet. Microsoft has a ways to go before they decline (if they ever do), but now that they're making sure their O.S. isn't pirated, people for the first time will be MOTIVATED to find a free alternative. But at least fixing MS problems provides me a job, so like the priest thanking the devil for giving him a job (remember flip wilson?), I thank MS.braincell wrote:What is a hybrid kernel? It sounds like something I would like to fight. Is that a Microsoft/Linux kernel?