Re: Re: My limited support for the atheists
Hi Stathis, You say : My primary problem with religion is the poverty or non validity of argument, notably based on text or per authority, instead of personal inquiry. You could say the same thing about Da Vinci's Mona Lisa. Or values in general. Science can only deal with fact. Values are nonphysical so can't be measured. Many facts are physical so can be measured. Let science be science and religion be religion. They belong to entirely different spheres of being. Non-overlapping circles in a Venn diagram. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/11/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-10, 13:38:07 Subject: Re: My limited support for the atheists On 10 Sep 2012, at 19:22, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Stathis Papaioannou I believe that the real reason that atheists attack religion is that they fear its possible political power to condemn you and order your obedience. I think they have a somewhat reasonable case, so I advocate legal separation of church and state, although I don't personally see any harm in thanking God for anything or putting up a christmas display. My church is totally opposed to such strict separation, so we agree. A more dangerous case that I would support the athests in is against Sharia Law. Of course most muslims are not militants or terrorists, but those that are are dangerous and violent enemies of freeedom and democracy. Why ? I heard one fundamentalist muslim terrorist in interview say that Islam cannot survive without state support. So I welcome all atheist opoosition at least to Sharia. Smoking causes cancer. Smoking tobacco. Yes. Evidences are strong. Smokers may not like this, but it doesn't mean it's not true. God wants you to fly planes into building in his name. You may not like this, but it doesn't mean it's not true. My primary problem with religion is that it is not true. Whether a matter of fact is true or not is independent of whether I like it. My primary problem with religion is the poverty or non validity of argument, notably based on text or per authority, instead of personal inquiry. But this concerns only the naive fairy tales approaches. Like saying that Jesus is the literal son of God because I know a man who knows a man who knows a man ... a man who said that he saw him walking on water. Given the many evidences that humans can be deluded, or can misunderstand other humans, sticking on such argument, is bad for the teaching of being skeptical and rational, and if someone can really be convinced by such arguments, he can also be convinced on any inconsistencies, and this can lead to shoa, rwanda and prohibition, that is a lot of unnecessary suffering. We cannot know the truth, at least in any public way, but we can judge the argument. In the human science, I think rigor is a moral duty, but today no one want to hear that, as it makes the manipulations and the selling of crap more difficult. Bruno -- Stathis Papaioannou -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
My limited support for the atheists
Hi Stathis Papaioannou I believe that the real reason that atheists attack religion is that they fear its possible political power to condemn you and order your obedience. I think they have a somewhat reasonable case, so I advocate legal separation of church and state, although I don't personally see any harm in thanking God for anything or putting up a christmas display. My church is totally opposed to such strict separation, so we agree. A more dangerous case that I would support the athests in is against Sharia Law. Of course most muslims are not militants or terrorists, but those that are are dangerous and violent enemies of freeedom and democracy. Why ? I heard one fundamentalist muslim terrorist in interview say that Islam cannot survive without state support. So I welcome all atheist opoosition at least to Sharia. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/10/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Stathis Papaioannou Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-10, 01:14:16 Subject: Re: victims of faith On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 5:50 AM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com wrote: So you have a very strong belief: That almost all but a few enlightened people like you in the History of humanity are a bunch of silly idiots. Actually, almost everyone in the history of humanity has thought that 99.99% of all religions are silly, and that they were fortuitously born into the 0.01% that wasn't. Atheists take it a bit further and think that 100% of all religions are silly. Agnostics, if they are consistent, say that it is possible that the archangel gabriel dictated the Quran to Muhammad just as it is possible that Santa Claus and his helpers construct toys for the world's children at the North Pole. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: My limited support for the atheists
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Stathis Papaioannou I believe that the real reason that atheists attack religion is that they fear its possible political power to condemn you and order your obedience. I think they have a somewhat reasonable case, so I advocate legal separation of church and state, although I don't personally see any harm in thanking God for anything or putting up a christmas display. My church is totally opposed to such strict separation, so we agree. A more dangerous case that I would support the athests in is against Sharia Law. Of course most muslims are not militants or terrorists, but those that are are dangerous and violent enemies of freeedom and democracy. Why ? I heard one fundamentalist muslim terrorist in interview say that Islam cannot survive without state support. So I welcome all atheist opoosition at least to Sharia. Smoking causes cancer. Smokers may not like this, but it doesn't mean it's not true. God wants you to fly planes into building in his name. You may not like this, but it doesn't mean it's not true. My primary problem with religion is that it is not true. Whether a matter of fact is true or not is independent of whether I like it. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: My limited support for the atheists
On 10 Sep 2012, at 19:22, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Roger Clough rclo...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Stathis Papaioannou I believe that the real reason that atheists attack religion is that they fear its possible political power to condemn you and order your obedience. I think they have a somewhat reasonable case, so I advocate legal separation of church and state, although I don't personally see any harm in thanking God for anything or putting up a christmas display. My church is totally opposed to such strict separation, so we agree. A more dangerous case that I would support the athests in is against Sharia Law. Of course most muslims are not militants or terrorists, but those that are are dangerous and violent enemies of freeedom and democracy. Why ? I heard one fundamentalist muslim terrorist in interview say that Islam cannot survive without state support. So I welcome all atheist opoosition at least to Sharia. Smoking causes cancer. Smoking tobacco. Yes. Evidences are strong. Smokers may not like this, but it doesn't mean it's not true. God wants you to fly planes into building in his name. You may not like this, but it doesn't mean it's not true. My primary problem with religion is that it is not true. Whether a matter of fact is true or not is independent of whether I like it. My primary problem with religion is the poverty or non validity of argument, notably based on text or per authority, instead of personal inquiry. But this concerns only the naive fairy tales approaches. Like saying that Jesus is the literal son of God because I know a man who knows a man who knows a man ... a man who said that he saw him walking on water. Given the many evidences that humans can be deluded, or can misunderstand other humans, sticking on such argument, is bad for the teaching of being skeptical and rational, and if someone can really be convinced by such arguments, he can also be convinced on any inconsistencies, and this can lead to shoa, rwanda and prohibition, that is a lot of unnecessary suffering. We cannot know the truth, at least in any public way, but we can judge the argument. In the human science, I think rigor is a moral duty, but today no one want to hear that, as it makes the manipulations and the selling of crap more difficult. Bruno -- Stathis Papaioannou -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en . http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
