Are people of moderate religious beliefs responsible for extremists?

[Wise Fool]

Accepting sole credit... yes that is dumb, But it isn't far out of field to say, hey! My people created _________. I feel proud of that. Or my people __________ poor immigrants. I feel shame for that.

Even if you're only saying "partly" responsible, that is only "partly" illogical. And therefore stupid, since you've already explained how that which is illogical is stupid.

[sologdin]

scot--

i don't know much about it, either. it may well be that some genocides have had religious schooling or religious beliefs; it's doubtful whether those beliefs were at all causal or contributory. similarly, i doubt that atheism is the cause of any of it. for uncle joe, it's hard to see it as relevant even for target selection, as he knocked off party members first, and everyone else second.

[Jon Flow]

How is it illogical? I share the same DNA as my fore-fathers.

Let's say my father was Wilbur Wright? I would feel pride.

You seem to think I am conceding the point that it is illogical at all to feel pride or shame at your family's accomplishments. In truth it is a necessity of logic, context.


I'm sure you seem pretty blameless and every argument seems illogical if you refuse to view things within context.

[sologdin]

pride in one's own genetics is one part of fascism. it's also kinda oleaginous, but oriented toward oneself, which is just gross.

[Larry of the Lawn]

pride in one's own genetics is one part of fascism. it's also kinda oleaginous, but oriented toward oneself, which is just gross.

I heard once overheard this blue-blooded aristocrat talking about how he could trace his family back to a swath of mutated flagellates in the primordial soup.

[Jon Flow]

Uhm.... You may want to reexamine the definition of Fascism because it is about a nationalistic pride rather than a hereditary one.


Oh... And another principal of Fascism is self-reliance. Does that mean that the concept of self-reliance itself is evil?

[Larry of the Lawn]

dp

[Jon Flow]

So.... Do you flier people on St. Patricks day? Telling them that by celebrating their Irish heritage they are being gross Nazis?

[Wise Fool]

How is it illogical? I share the same DNA as my fore-fathers.

Let's say my father was Wilbur Wright? I would feel pride.

You seem to think I am conceding the point that it is illogical at all to feel pride or shame at your family's accomplishments. In truth it is a necessity of logic, context.

I'm sure you seem pretty blameless and every argument seems illogical if you refuse to view things within context.

And now it's suddenly "your family." Before it was "people." Before that, and back on topic, it's "religious." Goalposts moving about rather conveniently here. But yes, I'm well aware that you're conceding no points at all... and rather doubt you have that capacity. I mean fuck, DNA now? When I mentioned "blood guilt" I was being facetious, hoping you'd maybe look at the dumb shit you're vomiting out and check yourself. But nope, you're just digging in. Just like every other self-proclaimed champion of logic who thinks everyone who disagrees is stupid.

[Jon Flow]

Who have I called stupid? No one, in truth. (I made a comment that I thought religious people were dumb, but that was kidding on the square.)

No... Take your time and read this:

The mechanism of Faith is by definition illogical. It isn't based on any kind of rational thought. My theory that I have put out for discussion is simply:

If you use this as a jumping off point for your world view, then it is a lot easier to commit atrocities because by saying, "Hey man, Mysterious ways...." You are essentially letting yourself off the hook.

Now what is wrong with that logic? And I dare you to just once write a response as if we were having an impassioned but friendly debate... When I read your last post I couldn't get the voice of a churlish five year old out of my head.




Oh and to moving goalposts: I'm sorry if I confused you.... It's just that when arguing, people often take large concepts and refine them to a specific 'made up' test case... It is called a hypothetical.

[Mladen]

This thread started from moderate religious people to extreme atheism... I am truly amused with the lack of logic behind "you should be blamed for everything"...

So I'd just like to apologize on behalf of all atrocities and wrongdoings ever committed by anyone whose beliefs, personal information, place of origin, ethnicity, race, religion, culture, gender or sexual orientation is similar to mine.

Oh, not just that... Following the logic of Jon Flow, we should be apologizing even more...

I apologize for using gas for my car since oil industry is known to lobby certain wars therefore some deaths.

I apologize for using certain medications since I have doubts knowledge that pharmaceutical industry have done something bad.

I apologize for using money because apparently there are wars regarding it.

For someone so proud of his logical thinking, I find Jon Flow's ideas truly deprived of any critical thinking. Ironic, but nonetheless true.

[Jon Flow]

Uhmmm.... Yes. We should all feel responsible for the parts we play in our world's demise.

I feel guilty for driving a fossil fuel car.

I feel guilty that my tax dollars are being used to fund the killing of civilians.

Yes... I know it is a complicated world that is difficult to live in. If you want to just turn off your brain and ignore the consequences of your actions, well I guess I can see religion's appeal.

If you disagree, tell me why you shouldn't feel partially responsible for the world's pollution if you drive a fossil fuel car?

[Wise Fool]

Who have I called stupid? No one, in truth. (I made a comment that I thought religious people were dumb, but that was kidding on the square.)

No... Take your time and read this:

The mechanism of Faith is by definition illogical. It isn't based on any kind of rational thought. My theory that I have put out for discussion is simply:

If you use this as a jumping off point for your world view, then it is a lot easier to commit atrocities because by saying, "Hey man, Mysterious ways...." You are essentially letting yourself off the hook.

Now what is wrong with that logic? And I dare you to just once write a response as if we were having an impassioned but friendly debate... When I read your last post I couldn't get the voice of a churlish five year old out of my head.

Oh and to moving goalposts: I'm sorry if I confused you.... It's just that when arguing, people often take large concepts and refine them to a specific 'made up' test case... It is called a hypothetical.

Oh, no - I'm sorry that I've confused you. Let me clarify some things for you.

First, this isn't a friendly debate. I have no friendship with you whatsoever, don't care about you, and frankly have no respect for you. I'm not going to lie and pretend otherwise.

Second, moving the goalposts didn't "confuse" me. It adequately demonstrated you have no capacity to argue rationally. That you're making these kinds of bullshit, whiny, passive-aggressive digs ("sorry if I confused you" or "churlish five year old") also supports the fact that this is neither friendly, nor a debate: it's just you blurting out stupid shit.

Third, I've already explained - and in more depth and detail than your "theory" merits - ways in which people do not need a "religious" belief in order to psychologically rationalize their own misbehavior. So when you just repeat the premises (that only you accept) and ask "what's wrong with that logic?" it's really looking like you do not read what people reply. Therefore, we are wasting time trying to argue with you, since what you don't ignore, you'll try to mock.

And fourth:

So I'd just like to apologize on behalf of all atrocities and wrongdoings ever committed by anyone whose beliefs, personal information, place of origin, ethnicity, race, religion, culture, gender or sexual orientation is similar to mine.

On the other hand, people who look, think or act even remotely like me have done some really great things for humanity. So, I take credit for that too, and, if I do say so myself, it looks like the positives outweigh the negatives.

Congrats... you are now owning your heritage. Don't worry... the cops aren't going to arrest you for the atrocities of your fore-fathers. However, now that you are aware of your own cultural bias it should make that bias easier to ignore in your day-to-day life.

Let me ask you honestly here, and I'm not being an asshole, but... do you have some sort of cognitive impairment?

[Jon Flow]

Well... If you consider empathy a cognitive impairment. I don't understand what is so stupid about taking responsibility for the actions of your community/family/nation. All I am saying is that shit doesn't occur in a vacuum.

But do me a favor... take a deep breath.... realize that we are all fans of a certain type of fiction just bullshitting on a meaningless message board. I don't know why you are so pissed off.

I think you may be projecting some kind of animosity onto what I am saying which is unfortunate. Seriously dude... I think of you as a friend. I am friendly. I have no doubt that you are a smart and capable person and that if we met in real life this would be a very civil conversation.


Lastly... You did indeed prove that faulty thinking is not exclusive to religion. You have yet to explain to me how religion is not faulty thinking.

[Mladen]

If you disagree, tell me why you shouldn't feel partially responsible for the world's pollution if you drive a fossil fuel car?

I do feel responsible for the pollution, but I most certainly don't feel responsible for other people's actions. We have brains, we all have right to decide what we want to do in our lives and I simply can't feel responsible for something I have no control over.

[DireWolfSpirit]

DWS,

Are you saying that but for Pol Pot's matriculation at that Catholic School he would not have been a genocide? That it was Catholic ideas he was espousing when Pol Pot commited genocide? If not I don't see the relevance.

The relevance is that it's an exercise in absurdity to

have these sort of whipping boys in the first place.

I dont think we can lay Hitler, Stalin or Pot on any one groups doorstep

and then claim "Seee it's those damn_____(insert blame group)."

They all have an individual responsibility for their deeds.

Pol Pot is sort of a "go to" phrase for many to beat up on atheist,

therefore it's irresistable to point out that Catholic background or to

notice Stalin had some schooling in a monastery as a child when

someone throws these names out in the association blame game.

Ultimately though,

for me at least, they earned there reps through individual

decisions and actions that would be pretty complex to pinpoint

how they became what they did.

[Jon Flow]

Mladen,

What about the hypothetical I laid out? I will repost it incase it was missed:

A father teaches his son that woman are inferior and chattle to men. The son goes to college and ends up date raping some poor girl.

Now... Are you saiying that because the father didn't rape the girl directly, that he shouldn't feel guilty?

[DireWolfSpirit]

I do feel responsible for the pollution, but I most certainly don't feel responsible for other people's actions. We have brains, we all have right to decide what we want to do in our lives and I simply can't feel responsible for something I have no control over.

Right,

I mean at what point are we having an unhealthy guilt complex?

I drive a big ass truck because winter roads are frikn treacherous without one in this area.

Smart cars are cool on a valley floor, try taking one up in a winter canyon.

Why does business/govt/military always seem to get ignored when people talk conservation?

I'm not propelling around aircraft carriers. One of those things uses more fuel in a day than any of us use in a lifetime!

[Serious Callers Only]

Did someone else just skipped all the posts in this page waiting for the Sologdin comeback post? I sure did.

[sologdin]

You may want to reexamine the definition of Fascism because it is about a nationalistic pride rather than a hereditary one.

am not feeling the need to re-examine anything. the distinction drawn supra wants a difference. feel free to point out a 'definition' at your convenience.

another principal of Fascism is self-reliance

not really, no. 'self-reliance' is a bit much liberal individualism for the pedestrian fascist.

ETA--

Telling them that by celebrating their Irish heritage they are being gross Nazis?

missed this the first time through. (best practices on this board for ten years at least is to include some manifest marker that unfailingly indicates one's interlocutor, such as a quotation or a name.)

irish blueshirts are literally fascists, incidentally. but sure: i see 'heritage' and i reach for my pistols.