Atheism

What Thomas misses there is that Setanta can choose whatever aspects of tradition, revelation, and intuition he fancies going with and will be easily able to find reasons and logic to justify his choices.

Setanta thus gets bespoke religion which is, of course, the ultimate heresy.

In case you hadn't noticed, or are pretending to not have, you have all been asked this question--



And one of your number has said that people who won't answer questions are not entitled to post on a thread. (He has refused to answer two questions today already and this one makes a third.)

First show us the relationship between the two.

I'm always sorry to disappoint you, but the main difference between us is one on which reasonable people can disagree.

You don't care if any deities exist. That's fair enough, but I do. I think there's a radical difference between a universe that was deliberately designed and created by a superhuman intelligence, and one that self-organized naturally without one. If I was wrong on the issue---if the universe did, indeed, have a conscious creator---I would find this supremely interesting. And at least in principle, I think it's within the realm of science to investigate the merits of these competing hypotheses.

Because I sincerely hold these convictions, it feels dishonest for me to join in certain convivial conventions about religion. For example, I cannot sincerely act as if science and religion could peacefully coexist. Sure, I would very much like to believe that they can: Segregating religion from science helps people like farmerman and Steven J. Gould fight the good fight, join forces with moderate believers, and protect science education in schools. But it would be insincere of me to advocate such a separation of science and religion. If the two do overlap in important questions they deal with, and do fundamentally disagree on the valid reasons for believing suggested answers, then conflict is inevitable; we cannot avoid slugging it out. And we'll be lucky if the slugging works itself out through arguments, not insults or even guns.

If you can stay out of it because you don't really care about the subject---good for you! But I can't.

These ideas interest me, too--but more in the sense of reading a well-written novel. Intellectually stimulating, but nothing which impinges on my life.

Oh yeah? For example, if certain Christian creeds were right, Armageddon was just around the corner, and only the faithful could hope to be saved, that wouldn't impact your life? I find that hard to believe. You may pretend otherwise on A2K, but in reality the only reason these teachings don't affect your life is that you're sure they're bullshit. If you weren't so sure, you would care about them very much indeed.

Your response is a non sequitur. I've already stiputalted that the subject only interests me as an exercise in fiction.

Okay.

I don't mean to be churlish . . . i do appreciate your sincere effort to get a good argument going.

I, on the other hand, am sure it's utter bullshit but they affect my life..

That's a major theme of this thread--how religion affects our lives despite our attitudes toward it.

Same here; "utter" and "ultimate" pretty much covers it.

First, show me how "logical scientific positivism" has triumphed in N Korea.
Then you could illustrate how the people of S Korea benefit from "illogical scientific negativism"

For the better or for the worse?

spendi, Think for yourself; has religion made our world any better?

I didn't say lsp had "triumphed". I asked how could lsp not end up in that situation anywhere. farmerman had admitted of dreaming of "moving people from place to place" in a hurry.

I don't know that S, Korea is traditionally much different but in the north religious practices are " discouraged" if the worship of a non-divine human being is not thought of as religious.

Immeasurably. Beyond the wildest dreams of an Arabian night's fantasy. I can't imagine that Plato would not have gladly swapped places with a Yank on, say, $40 grand a year. Think of the lingerie for a start.

You're thinking with your crotch.

I'd better do that, instead of doing so with my heart, I'd be less disappointed..

For sure I am. And thinking of all the crotches from the knowledge I have of them which is substantial.

I asked earlier--



What's your answer for those questions assuming you can distinguish the economic categories of apparel and dress.