On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:21 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > On 7/11/2013 7:40 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:23 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: >>> >>> On 7/10/2013 2:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 09 Jul 2013, at 20:37, John Clark wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: >>> >>>>> "atheism" is different in America and in Europa, although I have >>>>> realized now that some atheists in America might be similar, but not >>>>> Hitchens. Many people confuse agnosticism and atheism. >>> >>> >>> 1) A atheist is someone who dismisses the idea of God, although some >>> don't >>> have the courage to also dismiss the word G-O-D. >>> >>> >>> Atheists differ on this. Some indeed dismiss the idea of God, and dismiss >>> as >>> much Hindhuism and Christianism, Aristotle Gods and Platonic Gods. >>> But then they believ in Matter, the "thrid God" of Aristotle. But they >>> want >>> you to believe it is not a God, and seems unable to understand that IF >>> everything comes from primitive matter, it does play the role usually >>> attributed to God. No one has ever seen primitive matter, nor explain how >>> it >>> proceeds, etc. Primitive matter is an etraoplation of the SENSES to >>> number >>> relations inferred from experiences. >>> >>> >>> That's just your rhetoric, Bruno. Neither you nor anyone else thinks >>> that >>> primitive matter plays the role usually attributed to the theist God. No >>> one suggests we worship matter or look to matter for ethical rules. >>> There >>> are no churches collecting donations for matter. There are no dogmas of >>> matter written on stone tablets. >> >> Ecologists / Global warming >> Vegetarianism / Veganism >> Biological foods >> Recycling >> Work hard / employment is good >> Democracy >> >> These are all common dogmatic beliefs amongst a certain class of >> people who reject traditional religion. > > > It ain't dogmatic if you go with the preponderance of the evidence.
It is if your level of belief is 100%. >> I'm not judging: they might >> all be true and reasonable. > > > And the people that hold those views might be quite willing to change them > given different evidence - which is not the case for religious people who > make a virtue of faith. Some might, some not. The ones that are not (and I'm certain they exist) belong to a new, emergent, religion. Maybe without knowing. > >> Traditional religion is most certainly not >> true nor reasonable. What I am saying is that, you known and I know >> that evidence against any of these things would not change the opinion >> of most of their proponents. > > > I don't know that. Go to realclimate.org and see if you think Gavin Schmidt > holds his opinions on faith. So you're arguing that most people are like Gavin Schmidt? > >> These are dogma attached to organisations >> that collect donations and label people who oppose them as heretics. > > > Sure, there are Libertarians and Wiccans and Racists - but they don't > worship matter. No but some people do. An example of this is the bias against solving global warming by geo-engineering: engineering nature is seen as morally wrong. It's not that different from desert religions' objections against stem cell research. Again, I might even agree that engineering nature is morally wrong, but I can't agree with this and at the same time pretend not to be religious about something. > >> >> They _want_ these things to be true. They derive a moral code from >> them. There are purification rituals: eat a certain type of food (stay >> pure), look down on those who eat at McDonald's or drive a big truck. >> They are worshipping matter. > > > Really? Have you asked them? I'll bet you that they'll say they are > spiritual and not materialists. They would just repeat fashionable clichés. I don't think they ponder on the meaning of those words. But that's my highly subjective opinion, of course. An interesting thing here is that it's very hard to spot the biases of the status quo. Looking back in History, this has always been the case. Everyone always thinks they are living in an era very close to ultimate enlightenment. >> >> It's materialistic puritanism. > > > That's just pejorative rhetoric. The above sentence is recursive. Telmo. > Brent > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
