Re: Toward the Next Crusade
At 10:04 pm 18/07/2005 -0500, you wrote: Re: Toward the Next Crusade Evil is the root cause of despair. Richard It certainly is, Richard. Unfortunately we live in a world which has lost its belief in the existence of evil in spite of all the evidence provided, not only by the evils of the last century (nazism, communism, etc.) but also by the evils of this, one of which (African barbarism) you described. Frank Grimer
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
Title: Re: Toward the Next Crusade So ends your foray into cultural studies. Harry RC Macaulay wrote: Evil is the root cause of despair. Richard - Original Message - From: Harry Veeder mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 9:37 PM Subject: Re: Toward the Next Crusade A culture of despair has displaced a culture of hope. Despair tends to foster a belief in fatalism. Now ask yourself what is the cause of despair. Harry RC Macaulay wrote: Richard wrote.. This simple analogy is the essence of the two cultures. One fatalistic and one hopeful. One based on evil and one on good. Ed and Jed are correct stating this group should focus on science. Cultural studies are a science. Allow me to correct my wording to.. One rooted in evil and one rooted in good. The subject is the difference in cultures and my opinion the two cultures differ because of religious doctrine. The analogy I drew regarding truck drivers came from a report by a medical team from Texas Medical Center Houston returning from a summer in Uganda Africa. They were overwhelmed by the suffering of the people and their medical needs. The soldiers of dictator Ida Amin had raped and infected a large segment of the women with AIDS, adding to an already medical nightmare. One of the medical team overheard a native use the analogy to explain the difference in the two cultures. I thought it profound in its simplistic view. I will not make an apology for expressing my views on cultures. Let facts be submitted to a candid world ! Richard
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
RC Macaulay wrote: The analogy I drew regarding truck drivers came from a report by a medical team from Texas Medical Center Houston returning from a summer in Uganda Africa. Was that an analogy or a statement of fact? As an analogy it may be valid, albeit overblown, but I very much doubt that actual truck drivers anywhere in the world behave this way. If you are asserting they do, you should present some evidence. It should not be hard to find: third world automotive accidents and fatalities have been extensively researched by the WHO and many other organizations. This reminds me of a statement in the Atlanta Journal Constitution op-ed page today. A State Representative wrote about the problems of immigrants in the U.K. who do not join European society. Then he described the U.S.: Immigration today has a different twist than when many of our ancestors came to America in the early 20th century. Today's newcomers whether legal or illegal often resist assimilation. They prefer living in separate communities . . . Okay, that is plausible. It might be true. But the writer presents no evidence for it, so as far as we can tell it is mere opinion. He should have said something like: according to a study from XYX or based on high school test records from the last 50 years or -- at least -- it is my impression having toured these communities that . . . If he does not have any evidence, he should not say it. If cold fusion has taught us anything, it is that the world has suffered long enough from people who spout the first thing that pops into their heads and jump to conclusions about subjects they know nothing about. Furthermore, how does this guy know what immigrant communities were like in the early 20th century? Does he know insular they were, how often immigrants returned to the mother country, or how often adult immigrants learned English? I have read enough books and personal accounts of that era to know that many commonly accepted notions about 20th century immigrant society are stereotypes, and reality was complicated. Furthermore, whatever happens to adults in today's communities, the outcome and attitudes of their children is likely to be different. The U.S. is not Europe. That is the key difference between academic science and ordinary life: unsupported opinions do not count. You have to have quantitative facts and valid reasoning. Of course facts may be incorrect, especially in a fuzzy area like social science. But you have to make an effort to marshal facts. One of the medical team overheard a native use the analogy to explain the difference in the two cultures. I thought it profound in its simplistic view. Okay, we agree it is simplistic. Let me point out that people can be racist fools bigoted against their own societies. I have heard Japanese people describe their own culture as imitative more times than I care to remember. There is a grain of truth to that, but it ain't profound. Having said that, I certainly agree with the many experts who say Moslem society is in crisis because they reject modernity and science. Experts agree that irrationality and fatalism are a problem. We suffer from the same syndrome in the U.S., but they are worse off. My point yesterday was that their belief system once supported a vibrant, progressive scientific culture, and there is no reason to think they cannot return to that tradition. I will not make an apology for expressing my views on cultures. Let facts be submitted to a candid world ! What facts? Your views plus 60 cents will get you a Hershey bar in the candy vending machine downstairs. - Jed
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
Grimer wrote.. It seems to me that the Crusader Particle would be a good name for the materon/epo since like crusaders of yore it carries a cross (the plus sign) and a sword, the negative sign.Not a politically correct suggestion, I know, butin the week following the London bombings I amgetting the feeling that a showdown between the christian west and the muhammadan east is onlya matter of time. Cultures eminate from religious doctrines. The showdown began in 600 AD with the beginning of the doctrine of " fatalism" expounded by Muhammed. An analogy can be drawn by the story of the Muslin truck driver. Should the truck break down just over the hill on a dark road, the Muslim would leave the truck in the middle of the road. Anyone killed by crashing into the truck would be the will of Allah. However, a Christian truck driver would think.. better push the truck off to the side to avoid anyone running into the truck and killing themselves. This simple analogy is the essence of the two cultures. One fatalistic and one hopeful. One based on evil and one on good.Richard
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
RC Macaulay wrote: Grimer wrote.. It seems to me that the Crusader Particle would be a good name for the materon/epo since like crusaders of yore it carries a cross (the plus sign) and a sword, the negative sign. Not a politically correct suggestion, I know, but in the week following the London bombings I am getting the feeling that a showdown between the christian west and the muhammadan east is only a matter of time. Cultures eminate from religious doctrines. The showdown began in 600 AD with the beginning of the doctrine of fatalism expounded by Muhammed. An analogy can be drawn by the story of the Muslin truck driver. Should the truck break down just over the hill on a dark road, the Muslim would leave the truck in the middle of the road. Anyone killed by crashing into the truck would be the will of Allah. However, a Christian truck driver would think.. better push the truck off to the side to avoid anyone running into the truck and killing themselves. Although these comments are off topic, I can not let such an observation go by without challenge. If Richard were the only one holding these beliefs, I would not bother. However, they seem to be widely shared and are increasingly driving US government policy. So that you do not mistake the source of my observations, I'm not Muslim, Liberal, or Conservative. I'm a realist who looks at the world and asks what it wants to show me. In contrast, the Liberal and Conservative look at the world and interpret what is observed to fit a particular model. In the case of Richard's comments, he looks at the action of a few fanatical Muslims and interprets this as being a war between Islam and Christianity. The same mental defect is shared by some skeptics of cold fusion, ZPE and all the other new ideas. They are blinded about what is actually real by their model of how they think nature and people behave. When taken to extreme, this characteristic is called insanity. One universal characteristic of insanity is that the insane do not believe they have this problem and attribute their problems to society in general or to someone else who is out to get them. In this case, it is the Muslims or, in a few cases, the Liberals. The facts are that the West, but especially the US government, by many actions over the years has angered many people, but especially in countries that happen to be Muslim. Just as any objective person world expect, this anger is now being focused on the world using acts of terror, the only method available to such people. Of the various countries suffering terrorism, only the US has expanded the problem by waging war on Iraq and, as Richard has done, implicating the entire Muslim religion. Not only is this approach alien to basic Christian beliefs, but it is a very poor policy from a practical view point. For example, how would we expect to find and neutralize terrorist cells without help of the general Muslim population? What is the point of making 25% of the world's population your enemy and a potential source of more terrorists? From a practical viewpoint, it will be impossible to stop the terrorists without their help. So Richard, please think a little rather than reacting to the fanatical Christian viewpoint. Regards, Ed This simple analogy is the essence of the two cultures. One fatalistic and one hopeful. One based on evil and one on good. Richard
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
RC Macaulay wrote: An analogy can be drawn by the story of the Muslin truck driver. Should the truck break down just over the hill on a dark road, the Muslim would leave the truck in the middle of the road. Anyone killed by crashing into the truck would be the will of Allah. However, a Christian truck driver would think.. I do not think much of religion, but this kind of story is grotesque, bigoted crap. No truck drivers anywhere in the world do such stupid things. They would not survive! People everywhere know how to do their jobs. (On rare occasions a crazy or drunk truck driver might do this sort of thing -- but it can happen in any society.) Frankly, I think this kind of comment is unacceptable in a forum devoted to objective, realistic, informed scientific discussions. I do not mind off-topic comments, but bigotry -- and gross ignorance of other peoples' cultures -- violates the scientific ethic. I should add that ancient Moslem society contributed enormously to the preservation and expansion of science, especially during the European dark ages. Moslem researchers made enormous contributions to mathematics, chemistry, astronomy and many other fields. The al in al Qaeda came into English many times in history under happier circumstances, in words such as algebra, alcohol, alkali and alchemy (which later morphed into chemistry). See also zero and our numbering system. It is one of histories greatest tragedies that over the last 600 years, many Moslems have turned their backs on science. But based on their previous history and contributions, there is absolutely no reason to think that rationality and science are somehow incompatible with their culture. On the contrary, looking at the big picture over the last 2000 years, and the continuing rabid opposition to things like evolution by some Christian sects, you might conclude that Christianity has a bigger problem. - Jed
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
I wrote: The al in al Qaeda came into English many times in history under happier circumstances, in words such as algebra, alcohol, alkali and alchemy (which later morphed into chemistry). See also zero . . . Also algorism and algorithm (from Muhammad ibn Khwarizmi-Musa), cipher, average and zenith. And coffee, without which scientific thinking would be impossible. Let there be no doubt: all God's children got algorithms. - Jed
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
Jed and Ed I am in complete agreement No need to write more Regards JohnH - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 12:38 AM Subject: Re: Toward the Next Crusade RC Macaulay wrote: An analogy can be drawn by the story of the Muslin truck driver. Should the truck break down just over the hill on a dark road, the Muslim would leave the truck in the middle of the road. Anyone killed by crashing into the truck would be the will of Allah. However, a Christian truck driver would think.. I do not think much of religion, but this kind of story is grotesque, bigoted crap. No truck drivers anywhere in the world do such stupid things. They would not survive! People everywhere know how to do their jobs. (On rare occasions a crazy or drunk truck driver might do this sort of thing -- but it can happen in any society.) Frankly, I think this kind of comment is unacceptable in a forum devoted to objective, realistic, informed scientific discussions. I do not mind off-topic comments, but bigotry -- and gross ignorance of other peoples' cultures -- violates the scientific ethic. I should add that ancient Moslem society contributed enormously to the preservation and expansion of science, especially during the European dark ages. Moslem researchers made enormous contributions to mathematics, chemistry, astronomy and many other fields. The al in al Qaeda came into English many times in history under happier circumstances, in words such as algebra, alcohol, alkali and alchemy (which later morphed into chemistry). See also zero and our numbering system. It is one of histories greatest tragedies that over the last 600 years, many Moslems have turned their backs on science. But based on their previous history and contributions, there is absolutely no reason to think that rationality and science are somehow incompatible with their culture. On the contrary, looking at the big picture over the last 2000 years, and the continuing rabid opposition to things like evolution by some Christian sects, you might conclude that Christianity has a bigger problem. - Jed
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
Richard wrote.. This simple analogy is the essence of the two cultures. One fatalistic and one hopeful. One based on evil and one on good. Ed and Jed are correct stating this group should focus on science. Cultural studies are a science. Allow me to correct my wording to.. One "rooted" in evil and one "rooted" in good. The subject is the difference in cultures and my opinion the two cultures differbecause ofreligious doctrine. The analogy I drew regarding truck drivers came from a report by a medical team from Texas Medical Center Houston returning from a summer in Uganda Africa. They were overwhelmed by the suffering of the people and their medical needs. The soldiers of dictator Ida Amin had raped and infected a large segment of the women with AIDS, adding to an already medical nightmare. One of the medical team overheard a native use the analogy to explain the difference in the two cultures. I thought it profound in its simplistic view. I will not make an apology for expressing my views on cultures. Let facts be submitted to a candid world ! Richard
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
Title: Re: Toward the Next Crusade A culture of despair has displaced a culture of hope. Despair tends to foster a belief in fatalism. Now ask yourself what is the cause of despair. Harry RC Macaulay wrote: Richard wrote.. This simple analogy is the essence of the two cultures. One fatalistic and one hopeful. One based on evil and one on good. Ed and Jed are correct stating this group should focus on science. Cultural studies are a science. Allow me to correct my wording to.. One rooted in evil and one rooted in good. The subject is the difference in cultures and my opinion the two cultures differ because of religious doctrine. The analogy I drew regarding truck drivers came from a report by a medical team from Texas Medical Center Houston returning from a summer in Uganda Africa. They were overwhelmed by the suffering of the people and their medical needs. The soldiers of dictator Ida Amin had raped and infected a large segment of the women with AIDS, adding to an already medical nightmare. One of the medical team overheard a native use the analogy to explain the difference in the two cultures. I thought it profound in its simplistic view. I will not make an apology for expressing my views on cultures. Let facts be submitted to a candid world ! Richard
Re: Toward the Next Crusade
Title: Re: Toward the Next Crusade Evil is the root cause of despair. Richard - Original Message - From: Harry Veeder To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 9:37 PM Subject: Re: Toward the Next Crusade A culture of despair has displaced a culture of hope.Despair tends to foster a belief in fatalism.Now ask yourself what is the cause of despair. HarryRC Macaulay wrote: Richard wrote..This simple analogy is the essence of the two cultures. One fatalistic and one hopeful. One based on evil and one on good.Ed and Jed are correct stating this group should focus on science. Cultural studies are a science.Allow me to correct my wording to.. One "rooted" in evil and one "rooted" in good.The subject is the difference in cultures and my opinion the two cultures differ because of religious doctrine.The analogy I drew regarding truck drivers came from a report by a medical team from Texas Medical Center Houston returning from a summer in Uganda Africa. They were overwhelmed by the suffering of the people and their medical needs. The soldiers of dictator Ida Amin had raped and infected a large segment of the women with AIDS, adding to an already medical nightmare.One of the medical team overheard a native use the analogy to explain the difference in the two cultures. I thought it profound in its simplistic view.I will not make an apology for expressing my views on cultures. Let facts be submitted to a candid world !Richard
