Survey: Math Courses Aid Science Studies

[Ronn! Blankenship]

Survey: Math Courses Aid Science Studies

Jul 26, 2007 2:33 PM (3 days ago)
By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID, AP

WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Students who had more math courses in high 
school did better in all types of science once they got to college, 
researchers say.

On the other hand, while high school courses in biology, chemistry or 
physics improved college performance in each of the individual 
sciences, taking a high school course in one science didn't result in 
better college performance in the others.




Math is Fun-damental Maru


-- Ronn!  :)



___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[Ronn! Blankenship]

At 06:52 PM Sunday 7/29/2007, William T Goodall wrote:

>On 30 Jul 2007, at 00:23, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:
>
> > At 03:08 PM Sunday 7/29/2007, William T Goodall wrote:
> >
> >
> >> The USA is the most religious advanced country and the least healthy.
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> Very religious countries like Nigeria seem to have very poor health.
> >
> >
> >
> > Is there any other common factor between those two statistics?
> >



At 01:02 PM Wednesday 7/18/2007, Dan Minette wrote:
>Subject: Re: U.S. health care
>
>
>
>[...] Let me give you an example from one of the clearest numbers for
>which the US performs relatively poorly: infant mortality.
>
>The US's rate, about 7/5000 live births is far above the EU rate of
>5.6/1000.  This is a horrid statistic.
>
>We find, though, that the white, non-Hispanic rate is close to the EU:
>5.8/1000.  The black rate, on the other hand, is very high: 13.8.
>
>There is an obvious conclusion to be reached: this is a function of the
>disparity of income between whites and blacks causing differences in medical
>care.  However, looking at different numbers, we see that it's not this
>simple.  The Hispanic rate (5.7/1000) is below that of white, non-Hispanics
>at 5.7.  While Hispanic households average more income than black households
>(I'd guess it's because of the greater likelihood of a Hispanic household
>containing multiple adults) its far closer to the black number than the
>white, non-Hispanic.
>
>Further, one sees that even black women who completed college have a
>significantly worse rate than white women who haven't completed grade
>school. 10.6/1000 vs. 6.3/1000.  These data indicate that something besides
>income is affecting the situation.
>
>One good candidate, bemoaned by black ministers and physicians, is the
>general distrust of physicians by the black community.  They are far less
>likely to use medical services than Hispanics or non-Hispanic whites, even
>when it is available.   That problem will not be solved by switching the
>system of insurance.
>
>That's just one example of the complexity of the problem, there are a score.
>There is no flip solution to the problems with the US health care system.
>
>Dan M.




-- Ronn!  :)



___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 30 Jul 2007, at 00:23, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:

> At 03:08 PM Sunday 7/29/2007, William T Goodall wrote:
>
>
>> The USA is the most religious advanced country and the least healthy.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Very religious countries like Nigeria seem to have very poor health.
>
>
>
> Is there any other common factor between those two statistics?
>

The USA is anomalous because in every other advanced nation rising  
prosperity and rising status of women is accompanied by falling birth  
rates rising life expectancy and declining religious belief.

Other than in the USA high levels of religious belief are mostly  
found in poor countries with high birth rates lower life expectancies  
and low status for women.

It might be possible to use factor analysis or other statistical  
techniques to examine hypotheses about the detrimental effects of  
religion on national populations.

There isn't a contradiction between religious belief being relatively  
beneficial to individuals in a population but detrimental to the  
population as a whole.

Not my field Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/


"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."   --  
Ken Olson, President, Chairman and Founder of Digital Equipment  
Corp., 1977


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[Ronn! Blankenship]

At 03:08 PM Sunday 7/29/2007, William T Goodall wrote:


>The USA is the most religious advanced country and the least healthy.
>
>[...]
>
>Very religious countries like Nigeria seem to have very poor health.



Is there any other common factor between those two statistics?



Correlation Again Maru


-- Ronn!  :)



___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 30 Jul 2007, at 00:12, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:

> At 10:25 AM Sunday 7/29/2007, William T Goodall wrote:
>
>> You can't prove UFOs manned by yetis don't abduct you every night and
>> probe you Maru
>
>
> That explains why I wake up every morning with an overwhelming desire
> to get to the bathroom and smear some Preparation-H on my butt!
>
> Thanks Maru!

Oh no! I've started a new religion!

Prophet Maru

--  
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If  
so, then Microsoft would have great products." - Steve Jobs


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Religion is Destructive: Why it Must Be Discouraged

[Ronn! Blankenship]

At 02:06 PM Sunday 7/29/2007, Horn, John wrote:
> > Andrew Crystall wrote:
> >
> > And the Noahide Laws?
>
>Noahide?  Isn't that what they used to make couches and chairs out of?



:P


I have often seen them called the "Noachide" laws.  As usual, 
Wikipedia lists them:





Do You Have Any Idea How Many Vinyls Had To Die To Make That Chair Maru?


-- Ronn!  :)



___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[Ronn! Blankenship]

At 10:25 AM Sunday 7/29/2007, William T Goodall wrote:

>You can't prove UFOs manned by yetis don't abduct you every night and
>probe you Maru


That explains why I wake up every morning with an overwhelming desire 
to get to the bathroom and smear some Preparation-H on my butt!

Thanks Maru!


-- Ronn!  :)



___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: margaritaville

[Julia Thompson]

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, jon louis mann wrote:

>  > Must have been a large glass. Blended, or on the rocks, with salt?
>> Most any decent brand of Tequila Blanca will do, and Grand Marnier...
>> Ay Caramba!
>
> Rocks. Salt. I usually prefer Grand Marnier to orange liqueur, but I use
> different ratios anyway. :) (And I've experimented with different
> tequilas, and Silver Patron is the safest thing to give me.)
>
> I don't like frozen drinks, I get brain freeze from them.
>
> Julia
>
>  that explains why you dropped the glass, blended margaritas don't hit
>  you quite as suddenly, and you're less like to experience brain freeze
>  if you don't chug it...  try less tequila and more lime juice...~)

Considering that I started drinking it at halftime and it was well into 
the 4th quarter when I actually dropped the glass, I'm not sure how much 
difference buffering with cold would have made.  (Chug?  I don't chug. 
The only thing I ever "chug" besides water is Gatorade with Emergen-C, and 
I only chug that 1 time out of 6.)

And, as I said, that was Tanya's recipe, not mine.  :)  It's fairly 
effective in preventing the lightweights like myself from going back for 
seconds, I'll say that for it

Julia

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

margaritaville

[jon louis mann]

  > Must have been a large glass. Blended, or on the rocks, with salt?
> Most any decent brand of Tequila Blanca will do, and Grand Marnier...
> Ay Caramba!

Rocks. Salt. I usually prefer Grand Marnier to orange liqueur, but I use 
different ratios anyway. :) (And I've experimented with different 
tequilas, and Silver Patron is the safest thing to give me.)

I don't like frozen drinks, I get brain freeze from them.

Julia
   
  that explains why you dropped the glass, blended margaritas don't hit you 
quite as suddenly, and you're less like to experience brain freeze if you don't 
chug it...  try less tequila and more lime juice...~)

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l




Knowledge is Power
   
-
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Why Discuss Religion...

[jon louis mann]

  >> speaking as an atheist, it behooves me to engage in dialog about
>> religion so i can learn more of what i do not know...
>> jonsan

   
  There's nothing to learn.

If you're trying to persuade someone to abandon their beliefs, having some 
sort of understanding as to just what it is they believe helps

Julia
   
  i enjoy dialogue about religion and politics, but i have no expectation of 
changing anyone's belief.  i don't think it is possible to persuade someone to 
believe or not believe, that is something one comes to on their own.  even as a 
child and brainwashed in catholic school i had doubts.  conversions occur in 
both states of mind, but i believe that any person comes to either path based 
on their own predilictions.
  jonsan


Knowledge is Power
   
-
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, 
photos & more. 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 20:26, Dan Minettte wrote:

>> On Behalf Of William T Goodall

>> Correlation doesn't mean causation Dan. In a highly religious society
>> like the USA those who are not members of a religious community are
>> also likely to be outsiders in other ways which is likely to impact
>> their health and so on.
>>
>> But you knew that.
>
> The US is religious, but most people are not active members of  
> religious
> communities.  I can see how a small fraction of people being  
> outsiders could
> have a different mechanism (say atheists in the US being less  
> healthy), but
> most people are religious, but not particularly active.

Even if lying to people does make them healthier/happier it's still  
wrong. And it's not just wrong it's corrosive and destructive in the  
long run.

Lotus Eaters Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If  
so, then Microsoft would have great products." - Steve Jobs


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 20:26, Dan Minettte wrote:

>
> If you want, you could argue that healthy people tend to be  
> religious and
> people with social and behavior health issues tend to be agnostic and
> atheists, I guessbut I think the proposed mechanisms are better
> explained by the causality going in the other direction.
>

The USA is the most religious advanced country and the least healthy.

The UK is one of the least religious advanced countries and much  
healthier than the USA.

Very religious countries like Nigeria seem to have very poor health.

Trends Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"I believe OS/2 is destined to be the most important operating  
system, and possibly program, of all time." - Bill Gates, 1987


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[Richard Baker]

Dan said:

>  If we were to differ, say on the latest work in mesoscopic  
> physics, we could straightforwardly reconcile those differences by  
> reference to the literature.

Yes. And if we differed about physics beyond the current frontiers of  
knowledge we could in principle resolve those differences through  
further experiments. Actually, this is almost but not quite true  
because there are not only theories whose predictions differ only  
beyond the scope of current experiments - for example, general  
relativity and gauge gravity - but also differences in interpretation  
of theories. I don't know if we have any differences in our  
interpretations of quantum mechanics, for example, but I doubt it as  
I don't really have any strong preferences for any particular  
interpretation.

> When it comes to our philosophical viewpoints, we have no such  
> recourse.
> I'm a theist, and you are a non-theist.at least that's what I've  
> gleamed.

Yes, that's true.

> There is no experiment that either one of us can propose to falsify  
> the
> belief of one of us and confirm the belief of the other.  So, where  
> does
> this place discussions of religion?  Is there nothing empirically  
> based that
> can be said about them?
> I know that testable empirical claims can be made about religion.   
> Religion
> is an addiction, like one to cigarettes or crack, or heroin. It holds
> societies together.  It is inherently dysfunctional.  It aids the  
> lives of
> the religious, it harms them.
> These are statements that can be tested.  I see David's comment as  
> referring
> to this.

I think there are at least four classes of interesting question that  
can be asked about religions:

- Questions about direct religious experience. What are the  
neurological mechanisms underlying feelings of transcendent presences  
or oneness with the universe or grasping eternal meanings or whatever?

- Questions about the truth or otherwise of beliefs and assertions  
that are beyond empirical investigation. (However, some religious  
beliefs are clearly within the realm of empirical investigation, such  
as the beliefs of young Earth creationists.)

- Historical questions. How did religions arise? How do they change  
with time? Which factors help some prosper when others fail? How do  
ideas flow between them?

- Sociological questions, such as those about the benefits or  
otherwise to society of religions, the dynamics of religious  
communities and so forth.

Collectively, these classes of questions include plenty of aspects of  
religions that can be empirically investigated. It's only some of the  
second class that are necessarily in the realm of belief.

Rich
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[Dan Minettte]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> On Behalf Of William T Goodall
> Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 9:55 AM
> To: Killer Bs Discussion
> Subject: Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged
> 
> 
> On 29 Jul 2007, at 15:31, Dan Minettte wrote:
> > On the whole, it appears that the literature indicates that 
> > membership in a religious community has a positive effect on one's 
> > health.
> 
> Correlation doesn't mean causation Dan. In a highly religious society 
> like the USA those who are not members of a religious community are 
> also likely to be outsiders in other ways which is likely to impact 
> their health and so on.
> 
> But you knew that.

The US is religious, but most people are not active members of religious
communities.  I can see how a small fraction of people being outsiders could
have a different mechanism (say atheists in the US being less healthy), but
most people are religious, but not particularly active.

One truism with any social study is that the arrow of causality is extremely
difficult, at best, to establish.  Thus, Communism has not been falsified in
the same sense that the aether has.  As a result, language such as "the
evidence indicates" is usedbecause it reflects the state of studies such
as these.

If you want, you could argue that healthy people tend to be religious and
people with social and behavior health issues tend to be agnostic and
atheists, I guessbut I think the proposed mechanisms are better
explained by the causality going in the other direction. 

Still, if your point is that social sciences aren't...that's valid.  But, at
the same time, studies do provide indications better than random chance.

Dan M.

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Religion is Destructive: Why it Must Be Discouraged

[Horn, John]

> Andrew Crystall wrote:
> 
> And the Noahide Laws?

Noahide?  Isn't that what they used to make couches and chairs out of?

  - jmh

No Real Content Maru


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for 
the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and 
privileged information or otherwise protected by law. Any unauthorized review, 
use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended 
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of 
the original message.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 15:31, Dan Minettte wrote:

> There is no experiment that either one of us can propose to falsify  
> the
> belief of one of us and confirm the belief of the other.  So, where  
> does
> this place discussions of religion?  Is there nothing empirically  
> based that
> can be said about them?

This whole "you can't prove a negative' defence of religious belief  
is spurious and ridiculous. Nobody who puts forward this argument  
actually applies it any area of their life other than the defence of  
their otherwise indefensible religious belief since the consequences  
would be bizarre and unwelcome.

You can't prove UFOs manned by yetis don't abduct you every night and  
probe you Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day. Set a man on fire  
and he will be warm for the rest of his life" - Terry Pratchett


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 15:31, Dan Minettte wrote:
> On the whole, it appears that the literature indicates that  
> membership in a
> religious community has a positive effect on one's health.

Correlation doesn't mean causation Dan. In a highly religious society  
like the USA those who are not members of a religious community are  
also likely to be outsiders in other ways which is likely to impact  
their health and so on.

But you knew that.

> For example,
> there are studies that indicate that people who are prayed for tend  
> to do
> better in recovering from surgery/illnesses.  I am not claiming a  
> miraculous
> nature for this, since the prayer support is known to the  
> individual and
> there are clear possibilities for very mundane explanations for this.

It would be wise not to claim anything miraculous since the last  
experiment I saw about this didn't tell the patients that they were  
being prayed for and found they didn't get any better than the ones  
who weren't being prayed for.

But you knew that.

Knows there is no God too Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"You are coming to a sad realization. Cancel or Allow?"


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[Dan Minettte]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Richard Baker
> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 5:00 AM
> To: Killer Bs Discussion
> Subject: Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged
> 
> Dave said:
> 
> > The point being that religion -- whether you consider it the core of
> > your being or a mental illness, is beneficial to humankind.
> 
> So is your position that religions are useful rather than true?


The question of the truth of religious views vs. the usefulness of them is a
worthwhile one.  In order to address this, I'd like to look at they way you
(Rich) and I agree and disagree on various matters.  Over the years, when it
comes to the nature and the findings of science, we tend to either agree
initially, or one of us can straightforwardly convince the other through the
the liuse of data so that we can come to an agreement.  (From my memory at
least) both of us see science as being comprised of models of observation,
not statements about reality.  I know of no fundamental scientific
disagreements between us.  If we were to differ, say on the latest work in
mesoscopic physics, we could straightforwardly reconcile those differences
by reference to the literature.
When it comes to our philosophical viewpoints, we have no such recourse.
I'm a theist, and you are a non-theist.at least that's what I've gleamed.
There is no experiment that either one of us can propose to falsify the
belief of one of us and confirm the belief of the other.  So, where does
this place discussions of religion?  Is there nothing empirically based that
can be said about them?
I know that testable empirical claims can be made about religion.  Religion
is an addiction, like one to cigarettes or crack, or heroin. It holds
societies together.  It is inherently dysfunctional.  It aids the lives of
the religious, it harms them.
These are statements that can be tested.  I see David's comment as referring
to this.

On the whole, it appears that the literature indicates that membership in a
religious community has a positive effect on one's health.  For example,
there are studies that indicate that people who are prayed for tend to do
better in recovering from surgery/illnesses.  I am not claiming a miraculous
nature for this, since the prayer support is known to the individual and
there are clear possibilities for very mundane explanations for this.
Again, there are indications of a anti-correlation between an active
membership in a church and self-destructive behavior.  

It is not surprising that religious belief is also correlated with social
behavior (defining it as the opposite of anti-social behavior).  Our church
has a larger number of volunteers helping others, as well as significant
monetary contributions.  Virtually every church I know of has youth groups,
staffed with volunteers who work with, listen to, and counsel the youth.
Community support for adolescents is extremely beneficial, and churches, in
the US, are the main mechanism by which a true community supports its youth.

Does this prove that religions are true and that God exists?  Absolutely
not.  Truth is not subject to empirical verification. What it does is
falsify the idea that religion is akin mental illness.  

To see this, lets look at how homosexuality moved away from a classification
as a mental illness/abnormal behavior into simply a difference.  If we look
at DSM-4 classifications we find a commonality in the behaviors that are
dysfunctional: they interfere with the person's normal life.  Whether it is
an addiction, OCD, or panic attacks, mental and behavioral health problems
cause other problems. 

Homosexuality did not demonstrate this.  It's true that there were anxieties
correlated with homosexuality, but they can be attributed to the disapproval
of parents, etc.and they did not spring from the direct interference with a
normal life.  Thus, there was no empirical base for this classification, and
it was removed.  

So, when we look at the positive correlation between active involvement in a
church (religious community) and both health and social behavior, we can
say.on an empirical basis, that being religious is, in general, good for
one's own health as well as beneficial to the local community.

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Julia Thompson
> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 7:25 PM
> To: Killer Bs Discussion
> Subject: Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged
> 
> (And some people are closer to being wired to respond only to facts than
> others.)


I know that there are folks who claim to respond just to facts, but I've
noticed that they really don't just deal with facts.  One problem that we
have in this is that a lot of things that aren't facts are labeled as such
in order to give them greater credibility in the minds of those who make the
claims.  Facts are repeatable empirical observations.  Even gravity is not a
fact, 

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 14:37, PAT MATHEWS wrote:

>
> I am deleting, unread, all posts with this title because nobody is  
> saying
> anything new. Everybody has their minds made up and all the force  
> of their
> deepest values behind it.
>

  It's those blinkered and irrational advocates of religion that have  
their minds made up and nothing new to say. I'm always ready to enter  
a rational discussion and point out where they're wrong.

Reasonable Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"Two years from now, spam will be solved." - Bill Gates, 2004


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[PAT MATHEWS]

I am deleting, unread, all posts with this title because nobody is saying 
anything new. Everybody has their minds made up and all the force of their 
deepest values behind it.


http://idiotgrrl.livejournal.com/

__
"The community stagnates without the impulse of the individual.The impulse 
dies away without the sympathy of the community."--William James





>From: William T Goodall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion 
>To: Killer Bs Discussion 
>Subject: Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged
>Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 14:32:57 +0100
>
>
>On 29 Jul 2007, at 13:55, Richard Baker wrote:
>
> > William said:
> >
> >> It has a supernatural God that makes the world, a supernatural Jesus,
> >> it has Jesus coming back from death, it has heaven and it has
> >> resurrection and blah blah blah. If you don't believe all of this
> >> tosh you are not a Christian.
> >
> > I think it's possible to disbelieve some aspects of it while
> > believing other things of a similar character and still be a
> > Christian.  For example, the Nicene Creed was a formal rejection of
> > Arianism(*) - that's what the "eternally begotten of the Father...
> > begotten, not made" part is about - but I don't think anyone could
> > sensibly argue that Arians aren't Christians, and the First Council
> > of Nicaea certainly didn't stamp out what was afterwards the "Arian
> > heresy".
>
>Which cults are or are not really Christian is one of those religious
>questions...
>
>The Latter Day Saints and Jehovah's Witnesses represent themselves as
>Christian but reject the Nicene Creed. Some Protestant churches claim
>Catholics aren't really Christians and the Pope has recently
>reaffirmed that the Catholic church is the One True Christian church.
>
>Zealots Maru
>
>--
>William T Goodall
>Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
>Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/
>
>'The true sausage buff will sooner or later want his own meat
>grinder.' -- Jack Schmidling
>
>
>___
>http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 13:55, Richard Baker wrote:

> William said:
>
>> It has a supernatural God that makes the world, a supernatural Jesus,
>> it has Jesus coming back from death, it has heaven and it has
>> resurrection and blah blah blah. If you don't believe all of this
>> tosh you are not a Christian.
>
> I think it's possible to disbelieve some aspects of it while
> believing other things of a similar character and still be a
> Christian.  For example, the Nicene Creed was a formal rejection of
> Arianism(*) - that's what the "eternally begotten of the Father...
> begotten, not made" part is about - but I don't think anyone could
> sensibly argue that Arians aren't Christians, and the First Council
> of Nicaea certainly didn't stamp out what was afterwards the "Arian
> heresy".

Which cults are or are not really Christian is one of those religious  
questions...

The Latter Day Saints and Jehovah's Witnesses represent themselves as  
Christian but reject the Nicene Creed. Some Protestant churches claim  
Catholics aren't really Christians and the Pope has recently  
reaffirmed that the Catholic church is the One True Christian church.

Zealots Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

'The true sausage buff will sooner or later want his own meat
grinder.' -- Jack Schmidling


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[Richard Baker]

William said:

> It has a supernatural God that makes the world, a supernatural Jesus,
> it has Jesus coming back from death, it has heaven and it has
> resurrection and blah blah blah. If you don't believe all of this
> tosh you are not a Christian.

I think it's possible to disbelieve some aspects of it while  
believing other things of a similar character and still be a  
Christian.  For example, the Nicene Creed was a formal rejection of  
Arianism(*) - that's what the "eternally begotten of the Father...  
begotten, not made" part is about - but I don't think anyone could  
sensibly argue that Arians aren't Christians, and the First Council  
of Nicaea certainly didn't stamp out what was afterwards the "Arian  
heresy".

Rich
GCU "Truth" Versus Truth

(*) Arius and his followers believed that Jesus was created by God  
the Father at some point in time rather than having existed  
eternally. I'm not entirely sure how "eternally begotten" is any  
different to "created", but then I'm not a theologian.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 13:33, Ritu wrote:

> William T Goodall wrote:
>
>> All religions contain irrational defining beliefs (supernatural or
>> otherwise) else they wouldn't be religions. Accepting some piece[s]
>> of nonsense on faith is part of adopting a religious belief.
>
> That is a wonderful non-answer to what I said...

It completely answers what you said.

>
>> Clearly steaming with supernatural bullshit.
>
> Not bullshit, please. It really *is* a wonderful story - great  
> political
> drama, lovely dialogues, great sex, heart-stopping pathos Vyasa
> acquitted himself very well indeed.
>
>> If you just treat it as a nice story then you are rejecting it as
>> religion.
>
> I never accepted it as religion, for I have never accepted religion.
> Stories, though, are easier to believe in as they are far less  
> intrusive. :)
>
>> Enjoying the stories of Greek mythology isn't the same as believing
>> the ancient Greek religion.
>
> Very true. And disbelieving in religion isn't the same as believing  
> all
> religion is evil.

a) Promoting falsehoods as true is Evil.
b) Religion promotes falsehoods as true.
a),b) -> Therefore religion is Evil.

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant  
market share. No chance" - Steve Ballmer


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 02:45, Nick Arnett wrote:

>
> Many religions have creeds -- short statements of faith that one  
> chooses to
> accept as true if one is to profess that faith.  Creeds exists  
> specifically
> to identify the key truths in one's faith.  There would be no need  
> for them
> if everybody believed everything is literally true.

The Ecumenical Nicene creed of the majority of the world's Christians.

"We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of Life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen."

It has a supernatural God that makes the world, a supernatural Jesus,  
it has Jesus coming back from death, it has heaven and it has  
resurrection and blah blah blah. If you don't believe all of this  
tosh you are not a Christian.

If you say you believe all of it but not that it's literally true  
then you are using the word 'believe' incorrectly and are deluding  
yourself.


Christians believe that Jesus rose from the dead Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"I believe OS/2 is destined to be the most important operating  
system, and possibly program, of all time." - Bill Gates, 1987


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[Ritu]

William T Goodall wrote:

> All religions contain irrational defining beliefs (supernatural or  
> otherwise) else they wouldn't be religions. Accepting some piece[s]   
> of nonsense on faith is part of adopting a religious belief.

That is a wonderful non-answer to what I said...

> Clearly steaming with supernatural bullshit.

Not bullshit, please. It really *is* a wonderful story - great political
drama, lovely dialogues, great sex, heart-stopping pathos Vyasa
acquitted himself very well indeed.

> If you just treat it as a nice story then you are rejecting it as  
> religion.

I never accepted it as religion, for I have never accepted religion.
Stories, though, are easier to believe in as they are far less intrusive. :)

> Enjoying the stories of Greek mythology isn't the same as believing  
> the ancient Greek religion.

Very true. And disbelieving in religion isn't the same as believing all
religion is evil.

Ritu


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.23/924 - Release Date: 7/28/2007
3:50 PM
 


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 12:33, Ritu wrote:

> William T Goodall wrote:
>
>> Atheist religions have different defining irrational beliefs. Nazism
>> had 'Aryan supremacy', the Greens have 'Nuclear Power is Evil' and so
>> on.
>
> I am sure they do, but I really was talking about the religion I  
> grew up
> with, and if you wish to place it in this classification, then I'd  
> like to
> hear what irrational defining beliefs you find therein.

All religions contain irrational defining beliefs (supernatural or  
otherwise) else they wouldn't be religions. Accepting some piece[s]   
of nonsense on faith is part of adopting a religious belief.

>
>> Most of the argument on this list is about the supernatural
>> religions however and those are what I was addressing.
>
> Oh, but you clearly mentioned the Gita, and by implication the story
> surrounding its origin [my favourite story in the world after all,  
> and I do
> love the fact that the book originated as nothing than an  
> exhortation for a
> man to stop being soft, and to kill in battle], and that tradition has
> enough supernatural to satisfy any fan of SFF. So if you are placing
> Hinduism here, then how do you square that with the other traditions I
> mentioned earlier, and your statement that all religions peddle  
> lies as
> truths?
>


 From Wikipedia

"The content of the text is a conversation between Krishna and Arjuna  
taking place on the battlefield of Kurukshetra just prior to the  
start of a climactic war. Responding to Arjuna's confusion and moral  
dilemma, Krishna explains to Arjuna his duties as a warrior and  
Prince and elaborates on a number of different Yogic and Vedantic  
philosophies, with examples and analogies. This has led to the Gita  
often being described as a concise guide to Hindu philosophy and also  
as a practical, self-contained guide to life. During the discourse,  
Krishna reveals his identity as the Supreme Being Himself (Bhagavan),  
blessing Arjuna with an awe-inspiring glimpse of His divine absolute  
form."

Clearly steaming with supernatural bullshit.

If you just treat it as a nice story then you are rejecting it as  
religion.

Enjoying the stories of Greek mythology isn't the same as believing  
the ancient Greek religion.

Belief Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/


"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."   --  
Ken Olson, President, Chairman and Founder of Digital Equipment  
Corp., 1977


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[Ritu]

William T Goodall wrote:

> Atheist religions have different defining irrational beliefs. Nazism  
> had 'Aryan supremacy', the Greens have 'Nuclear Power is Evil' and so  
> on. 

I am sure they do, but I really was talking about the religion I grew up
with, and if you wish to place it in this classification, then I'd like to
hear what irrational defining beliefs you find therein.

> Most of the argument on this list is about the supernatural  
> religions however and those are what I was addressing.

Oh, but you clearly mentioned the Gita, and by implication the story
surrounding its origin [my favourite story in the world after all, and I do
love the fact that the book originated as nothing than an exhortation for a
man to stop being soft, and to kill in battle], and that tradition has
enough supernatural to satisfy any fan of SFF. So if you are placing
Hinduism here, then how do you square that with the other traditions I
mentioned earlier, and your statement that all religions peddle lies as
truths?

Ritu


-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"Mac OS X is a rock-solid system that's beautifully designed. I much  
prefer it to Linux." - Bill Joy.


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.23/924 - Release Date: 7/28/2007
3:50 PM
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.23/924 - Release Date: 7/28/2007
3:50 PM
 


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 04:59, Ritu wrote:

> William T Goodall wrote:
>
>> Religions don't present their stories as being literally true? They
>> don't claim that supernatural entities meddle in human affairs? They
>> don't claim that miraculous events actually happen? They don't claim
>> that divinely inspired prophets said things we must pay special heed
>> to because despite appearances they aren't the ravings of charlatans
>> or the mentally ill?
>
> Depends on the religion, I guess, and on the branch you are perched  
> on.
> Hinduism, fr'ex, definitely has a Bhakti strand where the virtues  
> of faith
> and love are extolled. But then there is the atheistic branch, and  
> it's
> accompanying holy texts, which scoff at the notion of God and blind  
> belief.
> Charaka's philosophy is a mix of atheism and agnosticism. And the  
> Vedanta
> has always maintained that the only thing one is required to  
> believe in is
> what one has seen and experienced for oneself - that all else ought  
> to be
> dismissed as the babbling of fools...

Atheist religions have different defining irrational beliefs. Nazism  
had 'Aryan supremacy', the Greens have 'Nuclear Power is Evil' and so  
on. Most of the argument on this list is about the supernatural  
religions however and those are what I was addressing.


-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

"Mac OS X is a rock-solid system that's beautifully designed. I much  
prefer it to Linux." - Bill Joy.


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Religion is Valuable: Why it Must Be Encouraged

[William T Goodall]

On 29 Jul 2007, at 02:45, Nick Arnett wrote:

> On 7/28/07, William T Goodall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28 Jul 2007, at 20:16, Nick Arnett wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/27/07, William T Goodall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



 I'm not arguing with that. I'm arguing with the fact that religions
 present their stories as being actually true
>>>
>>>
>>> That is patently untrue.
>>
>> Religions don't present their stories as being literally true?
>
>
> No, they don't.  Some people choose to take all of them literally,  
> but the
> vast majority do not take every religious story literally.  Surely  
> you knew
> that.  Perhaps you are confusing the stereotypes of fundamentalism  
> with
> reality?

The vast majority take many of them literally. A minority take all of  
them literally (including the ones that are obviously intended as  
parables and not to be taken literally) and a minority take none of  
them literally (including the ones that need to be taken literally  
for the religion to have any point.)

>
> Many religions have creeds -- short statements of faith that one  
> chooses to
> accept as true if one is to profess that faith.  Creeds exists  
> specifically
> to identify the key truths in one's faith.  There would be no need  
> for them
> if everybody believed everything is literally true.
>
> My religion's creed says that Jesus died, was buried, descended  
> into Hell
> and rose again after three days.  I believe that's true, but I  
> don't know if
> it is literally true.

You mean it might be true, it might just be a story you like and it  
doesn't matter to you either way? Because most people think it makes  
it quite a bit of difference if Jesus came alive again or just stayed  
dead like everybody else. The difference between Jesus being just  
another guy who said some stuff, take it or leave it, and Jesus being  
the Son of God whose Utterances are of Great Significance to all  
Mankind.

That Difference Maru

-- 
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/

I ate the profiteroles, but I did not eat the tiramisu


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l