Atheists...

@avatar6v7,

Avatar6v7, Smile

When Islam stops threaten death to get its way, and wishing it to be law that they cannot be criticized, then I might think one could reason with such people. So far Islam has managed to turn a great many people off. I personally do not consider them civilized, the Koran seems to be a lobotomy of the intellect and a threat like Christianity, to a rational way of life. Ain't multiculturalism great!!

1 Reply

@boagie,

boagie wrote:

Avatar6v7,

When Islam stops threaten death to get its way, and wishing it to be law that they cannot be criticized, then I might think one could reason with such people. So far Islam has managed to turn a great many people off. I personally do not consider them civilized, the Koran seems to be a lobotomy of the intellect and a threat like Christianity, to a rational way of life. Ain't multiculturalism great!!

I agree with most of what your saying- but I don't think that returning like with like is going to get us anywhere, at least not at this stage. Take the example of the IRA in northen ireland- uncivillised, ignoring Christs teachings violent and intolerant. Yet entering into discussions with them has brought peace. I don't know how far that will carry us with a faith that has violance and fanatacism written into its fundamental texts, but it would be foolish not to try- somthing the western governments have refused to do. It may be that it will come to war, but pointless provocation will get us nowhere- Iraq has served no usefull purpose.

2 Replies

@avatar6v7,

avatar6v7 wrote:

I agree with most of what your saying- but I don't think that returning like with like is going to get us anywhere, at least not at this stage. Take the example of the IRA in northen ireland- uncivillised, ignoring Christs teachings violent and intolerant. Yet entering into discussions with them has brought peace. I don't know how far that will carry us with a faith that has violance and fanatacism written into its fundamental texts, but it would be foolish not to try- somthing the western governments have refused to do. It may be that it will come to war, but pointless provocation will get us nowhere- Iraq has served no usefull purpose.

So you would turn the clock back now when iraq is on its journrey to democracy? have sadam back with all his threats to stability in the region.We where extremely ignorant of shia annd sunni hatred for each other and that was our biggest mistake.Muslim in the me cant always live together let alone live with non belivers.

0 Replies

@avatar6v7,

Avatar,

I understand your thinking, and I do not disagree with it, hatered returned in kind just builds further hatred, it is a vicious cycle. I guess as an unbeliever, the irrational nature of Islam and religion in general makes me think that reasoning with people who have embraced this irrationality are more hopeless to deal with than people more grounded in reality. The religious are scary people, when it comes to rational thinking, interpreting the events and motivations in the world through these ancient fantasy texts of the bible or the Koran, from a rationalist point of view, it is insane.:brickwall:

REMOVED EMAIL

2 Replies

@boagie,

A little food for thought.

Quotes by Joseph Campbell
[INDENT]A hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than oneself.

Computers are like old testament gods; lots of rules and no mercy.

Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble.

Find a place inside where there's joy, and the joy will burn out the pain.

Follow your bliss and the universe will open doors where there were only walls.

God is a metaphor for that which trancends all levels of intellectual thought. It's as simple as that.

I don't believe people are looking for the meaning of life as much as they are looking for the experience of being alive.

I don't have to have faith, I have experience.

I think the person who takes a job in order to live - that is to say, for the money - has turned himself into a slave.

Is the system going to flatten you out and deny you your humanity, or are you going to be able to make use of the system to the attainment of human purposes?

It is by going down into the abyss that we recover the treasures of life. Where you stumble, there lies your treasure.

Life is without meaning. You bring the meaning to it. The meaning of life is whatever you ascribe it to be. Being alive is the meaning.

Love is a friendship set to music.

Myths are public dreams, dreams are private myths.

One way or another, we all have to find what best fosters the flowering of our humanity in this contemporary life, and dedicate ourselves to that.

Opportunities to find deeper powers within ourselves come when life seems most challenging.

Participate joyfully in the sorrows of the world. We cannot cure the world of sorrows, but we can choose to live in joy.

The big question is whether you are going to be able to say a hearty yes to your adventure.

The goal of life is to make your heartbeat match the beat of the universe, to match your nature with Nature.

The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are.

We must let go of the life we have planned, so as to accept the one that is waiting for us.

We're so engaged in doing things to achieve purposes of outer value that we forget the inner value, the rapture that is associated with being alive, is what it is all about.

What each must seek in his life never was on land or sea. It is something out of his own unique potentiality for experience, something that never has been and never could have been experienced by anyone else.

When people get married because they think it's a long-time love affair, they'll be divorced very soon, because all love affairs end in disappointment. But marriage is a recognition of a spiritual identity.

When we quit thinking primarily about ourselves and our own self-preservation, we undergo a truly heroic transformation of consciousness.

When you make the sacrifice in marriage, you're sacrificing not to each other but to the unity of the relationship.

Your life is the fruit of your own doing. You have no one to blame but yourself.

Your sacred space is where you can find yourself again and again.
[/INDENT]

1 Reply

@boagie,

99% on target not bad...

0 Replies

@SantaMonica1369,

Sharia law in Islam is very similar to Talmudic law in Judaism, including the laws of Kashrut (kosher practices). I know more about Judaism than Islam, but in BOTH traditions the degree to which these laws are taken literally is highly variable. Many Orthodox Jews not only take the Talmudic law as an absolute obligation, but they have a generally negative view of modernity including culture and laws. Conservative Jews also take Talmudic law as an obligation, but they have a generally positive view of modernity that allows for some interpretation. Reform Jews see Talmudic law as in some cases optional and symbolic.

The same is true for Sharia. Sharia becomes notorious in the public mind when you look at its strict application in places like the Hausa states of Nigeria or in Saudi Arabia. But the fact of the matter is that many Muslims don't take it as an absolute obligation.

Sharia law is what it is. It's not Sharia that needs reform. The problem is corruption among clerics who take advantage of disaffection, poverty, and anger among their people and use Sharia as a power tool. That's exactly what the Taliban did, and that's exactly what has happened in northern Nigeria.

1 Reply

@Aedes,

boagie wrote:

Thomas

Sharia law in Canada, almost | News | guardian.co.uk

Here is your side of the argument in a nut shell. The only problem with allowing sharia law in Canada is you have a portion of the population subjected and indanger, those are female Muslims. It is true they cannot really deny what is already a reality for the Catholics and the Jews, the greater the shame. Allah is great!!!:eek:

Now you are just making things up, Boagie. Female Muslims are not "subjected" nor "endangered" given that appealing to the Sharia court is optional rather than obligatory. Both parties have to agree to take their claim to the Sharia court.

0 Replies

@boagie,

boagie;47226 wrote:

from a rationalist point of view, it is insane.

Boagie, I'm a bit of an atheist myself, but it's just as insane for anyone to claim to be a true rationalist. The day the puzzle starts falling apart is the day you think you understand it all -- and it doesn't matter whether the puzzle is a picture of Jesus or a picture of the Big Bang.

1 Reply

@Aedes,

Aedes,

Your point is well taken, yes I guess I do come across like that. I do not believe however that one has any duty to respect claims that have no foundation, no crediability. Believers bring there theologies here and are offended when there silliest aspects are laughed at. Jesus stated ones faith is not for public demonstration, when you pray go into your closet. I know they classify theology as an aspect of philosophy but I think that should be corrected. At anyrate in future I am going to try to not get hooked into anymore god discussions, hard to do at this site, this is a most unusual philosophy site, so much religious content, so many believers. Good to hear from you Aedes!!! Smile

Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble.
Joseph Campbell

"Literalism kills." Joe Campbell

1 Reply

@boagie,

boagie;47524 wrote:

Good to hear from you Aedes!!!

Good to see you too, Boagie.

Boagie wrote:

I do not believe however that one has any duty to respect claims that have no foundation, no crediability.

One has the duty to respect other people. And you respect other people by avoiding outright disrespect of things that are personally meaningful to them.

The ultimate truth or falsehood of Christianity or Islam is not a matter of concern to you if you're not a Christian or Muslim. If someone believes it, then who cares? All that matters is how we act.

Boagie wrote:

Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble.

Doesn't really matter. People have different intellectual needs. I say that people should be exposed to all sorts of ideas, people should have a good education, and people should be free to believe whatever they want without ridicule, even if it seems ridiculous.

1 Reply

@Aedes,

Aedes.

Aedes wrote:

One has the duty to respect other people. And you respect other people by avoiding outright disrespect of things that are personally meaningful to them.

No you have that very wrong, if someone has beliefs that are harmful to me or to anyone else, I have no duty to respect those ideas, and if they do not wish to have them challenged it is quite silly to present them in a medium such as this.

Aedes wrote:

The ultimate truth or falsehood of Christianity or Islam is not a matter of concern to you if you're not a Christian or Muslim. If someone believes it, then who cares? All that matters is how we act.

Wrong again, the beliefs of our fellow citizens effect the culture we live in, god or the concept thereof is not the soul property of these people, if their beliefs in these things aborts their reason, that could have far reaching consequences.

Aedes wrote:

Doesn't really matter. People have different intellectual needs. I say that people should be exposed to all sorts of ideas, people should have a good education, and people should be free to believe whatever they want without ridicule, even if it seems ridiculous.

Strike three--Of course people can believe whatever they like, how could it be otherwise, if these people do not want there views, there ideas challenged what the hell do they bring them here for. As jesus said, take it to the closest. Is this a philosophy site or an extension of some church? Let them discuss these matters with their imaginary friends in the appropriate place, if they cannot tolerate disagreement.

Aedes, I just read recently your advice to someone about presenting their truth here, you recommend that if they did not want it challenged it might be a good idea not to present it here----------a little inconsistent Aedes.

Aedes, I suppose you would agree with the new development in Holland, it is apparently illegal now to criticize Islam there, death threats are very effective it would seem. As a Jew you should realize how dangerous unchallenged ideas can be.

MOD EDIT: Fixed quotes - Please quote properly!

2 Replies

@boagie,

In Britian, and in some other European countries, it is ridiculous the extent to which Islam is tip-toed around- criticising Islam may not be illeigal in Britian, but the liberal media would blitz you. Whereas that same media sees no contradiction in virulent criticism of Christianity. This hypocisy is born more of fear and prejuduce than reason. God knows the conservative press is as bad and sometimes worse, but at least it tends to have more internal consistency. Somehow we justify attacking Iraq, but are afraid to confront the problems Islam raises in our own country.

1 Reply

@avatar6v7,

I watched a programme about Iran it concentrated on the individual Iranian and how they cope with the excesses of islam. It ignored the Islamic government excesses. We tread too carefully about criticising islam, frightened we may offend .

0 Replies

@SantaMonica1369,

I think aedes and boagie are both right when you apply their views to two different aspects of religion: the personal and the organised. We should respect not the personal beliefs of others but their individuality (and our own fallibility) and, by extension, their freedom to believe what they wish without others 'getting in their faces'. Many people of faith are neither political nor missionaries, these being more closely tied to organised religion. This latter is a constructed entity and, as such, has a fixed purpose. Whether we should respect it or not is rather dependent on how that purpose manifests itself. A large problem with nations with a dominant religion is the inability of these organisations to limit their jurisdiction to its own members. The Catholic church, for instance, has authority over its members to forbid, say, abortion. However, this is never enough: the church is further driven to extend this authority over members of other religions and atheists also. These actions directly effect everyone, and I'm struggling to think of an instance where such actions had positive consequences for non-members. When organised religions try to exceed their jurisdiction and claim authority over non-members, it is perfectly correct to fight the issue on the grounds of the irrationality of their beliefs. This will always appear disrespectful, but it is disrespect reciprocated. Any faith-motivated political act is, by default, directed towards persons outside of that faith, since organisations with their own laws and (in their belief) a pre-existing judicial system already exist to enforce the ethical requirements of their members. The only reasonable arena in which politics and religion coincide is when the state law and religious creed contradict one another. For the most part, the state tries to respect the religious beliefs of its people by ensuring that the law does not undermine those beliefs. Sometimes it is the beliefs or the manifestations thereof that are deliberately criminalised: for instance 'hate crimes' in the UK extend to inciting religious hatred and acts of violence (e.g. jihadism), a problem at home we clearly weren't afraid to tackle.

Yes, there is a lot of panic about offending Islamic people in the UK, but it is a fairly new organised religion to these shores and so it is best to err on the side of caution when determining how to integrate it within society. Special rights for Islamic people have to be catered for, so long as these rights are not to the detriment of those of others. Further, British people are notoriously racist and religiously intolerant so it serves to nip in the bud any rising kneejerk phobic behaviour. Christianity has been here for a long time and, as such, its position in society is much more stable.

0 Replies

@boagie,

boagie;47528 wrote:

No you have that very wrong, if someone has beliefs that are harmful to me or to anyone else, I have no duty to respect those ideas, and if they do not wish to have them challenged it is quite silly to present them in a medium such as this.

If someone believes that the world was created out of pixie dust, then that is NOT harmful to you or anyone else. Live and let live. If someone wants to debate it then fine, but it seems quite paranoid to synonymize an idea you find ridiculous with one you find harmful. And it's destructive to go out on a crusade to smack down ideas you find baseless when people didn't ask your opinion on the matter.

The idea of a philosophy forum is to find common ground -- not to convert people.

Boagie wrote:

the beliefs of our fellow citizens effect the culture we live in

Yes, and intolerance of others has wrought far more destruction and suffering than has any ridiculous idea.

1 Reply

@Aedes,

Aedes wrote:

If someone believes that the world was created out of pixie dust, then that is NOT harmful to you or anyone else. Live and let live. If someone wants to debate it then fine, but it seems quite paranoid to synonymize an idea you find ridiculous with one you find harmful.

Yes, and intolerance of others has wrought far more destruction and suffering than has any ridiculous idea.

Aedes,

It is comforting that you and others here will make the evaluations for me. Is it not a foregone conclusion, that if you present a idea/s here that you do so with expectation that someone has the right to disagree? If the gathering storm of authority around here is of the same mind, contact me privately and I shall leave----it will be our little secret. Aedes, This is the ATHEIST THREAD!! signed Mr Milk toast

"God is a metaphor for that which trancends all levels of intellectual thought. It's as simple as that." Joseph Campbell

0 Replies

@SantaMonica1369,

This is the Young Philosophers' Forum, first and foremost.

Secondly, you can't do harm by being silent about your disdain but open about your mutual respect. I mean I can disagree with the tenets of someone's belief system, but I'm not going to use pejorative language out in the open. But you CAN do harm by alienating people through unchecked bluntness.

Give people the opportunity to speak without having to face accusations that what they believe is ridiculous. You may achieve the opposite of what you want if you're antagonistic about it -- I mean do you think you're likely to win anyone over with hostility? Cultural change is evolutionary -- it happens slowly. If you respect people's beliefs and find common ground where it exists, then they may over time creep towards your beliefs more because they're in turn open to listening. A wall of hostility ain't going to accomplish this, though.

1 Reply

@Aedes,

Aedes,

"This is the Young Philosophers' Forum, first and foremost." quote

Why do you address this to me, almost everyone taking part in this discussion fails to qualify as a young philsopher.

"Secondly, you can't do harm by being silent about your disdain but open about your mutual respect. I mean I can disagree with the tenets of someone's belief system, but I'm not going to use pejorative language out in the open. But you CAN do harm by alienating people through unchecked bluntness" quote

Again, this is the atheist thread, since when is bluntness a crime, do you wish to stop me from laughing out loud about the talking snake---lol!!! The fact is I do not respect a good many to these beliefs, and I do not care if people are offended by my disrespect.

"Give people the opportunity to speak without having to face accusations that what they believe is ridiculous. You may achieve the opposite of what you want if you're antagonistic about it -- I mean do you think you're likely to win anyone over with hostility? Cultural change is evolutionary -- it happens slowly. If you respect people's beliefs and find common ground where it exists, then they may over time creep towards your beliefs more because they're in turn open to listening. A wall of hostility ain't going to accomplish this, though.[/quote]

If what they believe is ridiculous, I am not to point that out. There is entirely to much control desired here. Actually I have no illusions about using reasoning with believers, reason is not how they got there. " Reason is the enemy of faith." Martin Luther Again, I DO NOT RESPECT A GREAT MANY OF THESE IDEAS, AND I DO NOT CARE IF THEY ARE OFFENED BY MY DISRESPECT. That may cause some acid indigestion, but that is what tums are for. If authority here insists that I respect these ideas, then state it clearly and in the open, because it is not a requirement I will abide by, plan and simple. If I must leave, then so be it. Funny before all this hostility arose, I was entertaining the thought of staying away from all the god discussions here, I use tums too. So, you guys get your heads together and decide if my non-compliance in respecting the absurd warrants getting rid of me.

0 Replies

@SantaMonica1369,

Again, Boagie, I implore you to make a distinction between respect for ideas and respect for people. This is what the phrase "respectful disagreement" implies. Be sure not to blur the boundaries between the two.

Oh, and I am only in this forum in my capacity as a moderator. I'm not making a case for or against atheism. I'm just trying to make sure the discussion has an appropriate tone. People who are above the age designated for this forum should not be participating -- that's what it's for.

2 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know