US Politics: the McCarthy Trials

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

So my phone just did its alert.  Anyone see any zombies?

Edited October 4, 2023 by Ser Scot A Ellison

[Kalbear]

18 minutes ago, JGP said:

 

Oh, it's a worthy discussion on it's own [to a point] but I don't know how accurate this is.

Conflating the sense of universality or whatever with a hardwired need for religion of any stripe is the mistake far too many make, imo. 

Sorry, when I said universitality I was referring to it being something common across all humans everywhere. How religions affect the brain varies depending on the religion, but every neurotypical human has as part of their brain an area that supports a desire for spirituality and awe.

And unless you're very different that need will not be met by joining a bowling league. It might be met by doing acid, however.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

So my phone just did its alert.  Anyone see any zombies?

Nope, but you live closer to Florida.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

So my phone just did its alert.  Anyone see any zombies?

All this talk about neurotypical brains is making me a little hungry.

[Tywin et al.]

40 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Socialization is part of it, but most humans have a yearning for something that is beyond the material world. Whether  supernatural phenomena is real or not is immaterial to my point. The belief and the yearning for the belief is real. 

Spirituality does not require religion.

Quote

You're right though, that many avenues that have traditionally been filled by organized religion can be and are filled by other non-religious means. It still doesn't change the fact that the overwhelming majority of human beings on this planet--and no, not just the "crazy" or authoritarian ones--are religious or spiritual. And they always have been. 

True, however, the vast majority of people who have ever lived in the past 5,000 years have had religion pounded into their heads. 

Quote

This is a politics thread

Religion is intertwined with politics, especially in the US. To separate them is to understand neither. 

30 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

I kind of agree and kind of disagree. 

I think that religion (and other ideological insitutions) instill--or try to instill--a set of ethical rules, and a sense that one should behave in a moral way. Obviously, the rules and behavior stressed by Christians may vary wildly from those stressed by Buddhists, but I don't think you're going to find that same emphasis in the average bowling league. I think human beings can benefit from that kind of structure.

Sure, they tend to do that, but the mistake is that they're necessary for it to occur. People can be ethical and moral without religion, and far too often people use their religion to justify bad behavior. 

Quote

Most people don't fly planes into buildings over bowling.

I did pick bowling for fun:

 

33 minutes ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

Don't want to derail this too much but no, this is not accurate - the human brain has been repeatedly shown to need something like religion

Now this is a derail, but the key wording is "something like." It's the same reason why cults flourish. People tend to seek something they perceive to be greater than themselves. However history tells us this mindset has backfired in great magnitudes. 

If only we could all just be the best version of Buddhists or something similar. 

[Phylum of Alexandria]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Spirituality does not require religion.

Quote

Sure, but it's equally "fictitious," right? That was why I felt no problem conflating them.

[Tywin et al.]

1 minute ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Sure, but it's equally "fictitious," right? That was why I felt no problem conflating them.

Not really. Spirituality is much broader. There's overlaps, for sure, but as an example I can go meditate in my garden and calm my mind and think about right and wrong without religion ever mattering. 

[Rippounet]

1 hour ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Socialization is part of it, but most humans have a yearning for something that is beyond the material world. .

Citation needed.

50 minutes ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

Don't want to derail this too much but no, this is not accurate - the human brain has been repeatedly shown to need something like religion that has nothing to do with group acceptance; it has more relation to the brain's desire for awe and understanding as far as universitality, and I'll note that a number of religions out there are not particularly socializing as a practice that also fill that need. A number of pharmacological effects also can replicate the spiritual feelings and other values that are similar to these religious effects. 

What is it you have in mind?

[Phylum of Alexandria]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Not really. Spirituality is much broader. There's overlaps, for sure, but as an example I can go meditate in my garden and calm my mind and think about right and wrong without religion ever mattering. 

Well, it's always important to define one's terms when having discussions like this, as words like "spirituality" can mean different things. But people who say that are spiritual tend to believe in spirits, fate, mediums, and other supernatural phenomenon. The naturalistic definition of spirituality can be addressed in what I had said about non-religious outlets for religious urges. It exists as a viable option for people, but most humans choose a more supernatural option.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

5 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Citation needed.

56 minutes ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

Here are some good ones:

Winkelman, M., & Baker, J. R. (2015). Supernatural as natural: A biocultural approach to religion. Routledge.

Wilson, D. (2002). Darwin's cathedral: Evolution, religion, and the nature of society. University of Chicago press.

Edited October 4, 2023 by Phylum of Alexandria
date wrong

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Not really. Spirituality is much broader. There's overlaps, for sure, but as an example I can go meditate in my garden and calm my mind and think about right and wrong without religion ever mattering. 

That might as well be religion. Now, what I think you're talking about is specifically organized religion - but that isn't all religions and is very much a western/abrahamic framing of what religions are. 

And again you can't just wave away a property of being human as being inconvenient. This 'mindset' exists whether you want it to or not. Just as much as the need for ingroup viewpoints and tribalism exists. You have a choice to make: you can either choose to start providing something that fills those needs for people, or you can start providing a way to make humans something other than human at a genetic level. If you make neither choice then the people will find other avenues to fill those needs and they almost certainly will not be things you want. 

Pulling it back to politics this is something that dems really need to figure out. As much as they want to not have to answer the immigration/refugee waves or say that all are welcome, the dirty thing about humans is that there will be something in everyone to some degree that fears the outsider and wants to protect their ingroup. If you don't have an answer to solve for that in some way you'll push people to go to groups which do have an answer for it. 

And those refugee crises are just going to get worse and worse. 

Again, wish it wasn't the case - but that's humans. More education won't solve it. More exposure to different people makes it better, but it still isn't perfect; what that tends to do is simply make the people you do know the 'different' ones and make them part of your tribe, instead of separate, but it still doesn't reduce that pressure. 

3 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Citation needed.

k: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_religion

3 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

What is it you have in mind?

Not sure what you're asking. Are you wanting to know what drugs to take?

[DireWolfSpirit]

Galileo-  The Bible shows the way to go to heaven, not the way the heavens go.

 

[IheartIheartTesla]

Anyway....so far the candidates officially throwing their hat into the speaker ring are Jim Jordan, Scalise, and Donald Trump (the third on account of some Texas jackass nominating him).

[Zorral]

If we should be so lucky as to live long enough, and if anything of everything to which we here in the USA have gotten used to over the years since 1860 continues, AOC is going to make one hell of a brilliant Speaker.

Edited October 4, 2023 by Zorral

[Rippounet]

2 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Here are some good ones:

Winkelman, M., & Baker, J. R. (2015). Supernatural as natural: A biocultural approach to religion. Routledge.

Wilson, D. (2002). Darwin's cathedral: Evolution, religion, and the nature of society. University of Chicago press.

Thanks.

2 hours ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

Not sure what you're asking.

Book recommendations. Always.

[Zorral]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Religion is intertwined with politics, especially in the US. To separate them is to understand neither. 

Good gods!  Is that ever true, alas.

[Larry of the Lawn]

I mean book recommendations are great but I'm also interested in the drugs.  

 

3 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Anyway....so far the candidates officially throwing their hat into the speaker ring are Jim Jordan, Scalise, and Donald Trump (the third on account of some Texas jackass nominating him). 

The fact that a right wing nut job like Steve Scalise is the most reasonable person on a list of three to be speaker... when God gives you lemons, find a new god.  

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

Book recommendations.

There are so many books concerning these matters!  So very many.  So very easy to find too -- like about a second's worth of searching.  And that's without going to university library catalogs even!

Totalitarianism and Political Religion: An Intellectual History (2012), A. James Gregor

https://www.sup.org/books/title/?

Quote

 

The totalitarian systems that arose in the twentieth century presented themselves as secular. Yet, as A. James Gregor argues in this book, they themselves functioned as religions. He presents an intellectual history of the rise of these political religions, tracing a set of ideas that include belief that a certain text contains impeccable truths; notions of infallible, charismatic leadership; and the promise of human redemption through strict obedience, selfless sacrifice, total dedication, and unremitting labor.

Gregor provides unique insight into the variants of Marxism, Fascism, and National Socialism that dominated our immediate past. He explores the seeds of totalitarianism as secular faith in the nineteenth-century ideologies of Ludwig Feuerbach, Moses Hess, Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Giuseppe Mazzini, and Richard Wagner. He follows the growth of those seeds as the twentieth century became host to Leninism and Stalinism, Italian Fascism, and German National Socialism—each a totalitarian institution and a political religion.

 

There are even bibliographies that provide "The best books to understand the historical development of the Christian Right as a political power". 

https://shepherd.com/best-books/the-christian-right-as-a-political-power
 

[Tywin et al.]

4 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Well, it's always important to define one's terms when having discussions like this, as words like "spirituality" can mean different things. But people who say that are spiritual tend to believe in spirits, fate, mediums, and other supernatural phenomenon. The naturalistic definition of spirituality can be addressed in what I had said about non-religious outlets for religious urges. It exists as a viable option for people, but most humans choose a more supernatural option.

I actually think the opposite. Spirituality is more open ended hence why people will give you wildly different definitions how they describe it for themselves.

4 hours ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

That might as well be religion. Now, what I think you're talking about is specifically organized religion - but that isn't all religions and is very much a western/abrahamic framing of what religions are. 

Obviously. Afterall we're talking about organized religion in a thread about US politics...

[ThinkerX]

Given how slender the republican house majority is, and how many republican politicians are in severe legal jeopardy, I wonder more and more if the house might not change hands through default (attrition).

Or is this where republican house members cast votes from prison cells?