Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
  
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
 RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Escribano)
|
|
|
The innocence assumed is politically correct, but commonly there rather will have been contribution, whether specifically or unaware by lack of education.
These motley ancient scripts need to be inspected under plain logical and psychological systematics as described by Erich Fromm and others. Strangely, something omitted due to false understanding of consideration.
Studying the ancient arbitrariness will reveal the primitive, jealous, coldhearted and gory spirit of minds who were passed over by their social environment and left to themselves in their sheds, where they took revenge for inferiority complex with the lowly, Draconian content they claimed in order to elevate themselves as molding and decisive figures.
In the most aggressive of the mass doctrines are clear clues and instructions as to why contemporary mentality rooted on the doctrine is being the way it is. Where there is claimed that there was "no one backing you up" other than the a holy spirit, there you grow up with a perception of no other person being really with you. Which again leaves you responsible towards no one.
And where there is claimed that you are allowed to fake goodwill / solidarity, falseness will be common. And in fact, opaqueness of intention and character is even being considered a skill.
Even if one can never really understand a mind-set that will keep any handy option of behavior for legit, in spite of received hospitality, or any other form of granted good will and support; it takes a reading up of disastrous antique briefing to see where principles of unscrupulousness and perfidy come from.
It is true that most followers have never actually read their guiding literature, and that they are instead being fed by interpreters who add their personal preference, often times making the mischief even worse. But the basics of insincerity, concealment and irresponsibility already come in with customs shaped by misleading instruction and principle. The more as the latter condemns reformation from the get go.
Instead of taking positive behavioral exceptions as grounds for evading a global discussion on infamous indoctrination, illumination of background and of fueling in the end would be the pragmatic and constructive way to go.
The culturally destructive ogres shaping needs to be addressed. Just as taking responsibility for what the French and British, especially however the US foreign policies since WWII in Middle East have committed by decidedly reanimating and activating archaic barbarism for incredibly short-sighted, lowly goals.
Doing so, is the only way of possibly reaching to education, reform and appeasement. Whereas, the given policy of false consideration and repression of empirical facts (not to mention arming of the most retard kingdoms) can only lead into future escalation which will not only effect innocent country men, but also the innocent in the archaic hemisphere, who again, even if being minority, are presented as numbers in the millions.
Similar with the pseudo tolerance for the unproved, celebrated in the debate here, in times of hazardous global ignorance, at the edge of societal and ecological collapse.
Before status quo of much too much of worldly urgency being ignored and dismissed, it is practically irrelevant whether any kind of mysticism could be bearing particle of profane value. There is too much definite and pressing homework lying idle for to cherish out of all a refuge for superstition in the third millennium.
Those, otherwise educated heads, who think it worth to ponder about inherently incongruent moving power, to my estimation have never really set down to make a consistent effort on the matter. But maybe they want Stephen Hawking´s book on it for inspiration, before they may invest their processing power into ordinary worldly questions like why the hell we are needlessly destructing a planet that could be like paradise to us and fellow species.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 24 2017 12:06:52
 |
|
Piwin
Posts: 3559
Joined: Feb. 9 2016
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
quote:
The innocence assumed is politically correct, but commonly there rather will have been contribution, whether specifically or unaware by lack of education.
Presumption of innocence has nothing to do with political correctness. It's one of the moral foundations of basically all European societies.
Outside of a legal setting, the consequence of not strictly adhering to this principle is first that we might ascribe guilt to people who are innocent and two we might go down rabbit-hole discussions that are possibly irrelevant to the specific case at hand (statistics and averages are irrelevant to a specific case). So sure, they might have contributed in some way, they might not have. We have no way of knowing right now so why even mention it? Presumption of innocence very much applies here and it has nothing to do with PC-culture
It always strikes me as odd that those who take it slow and refuse to skip over some logical steps just because wishful thinking is pushing them to do so are the ones who are then accused of not having "really set down to make a consistent effort on the matter". To me, people who have already defined in their head that the problem here is one specific religion have jumped the gun, using intuition more than reason to make up their opinion. I suspect that the fundamental issue is separation of Church and State. But this is merely intuition, although it would map on nicely to what Bill said earlier when comparing Indonesia to Pakistan. You could add Senegal or any number of countries that are majoritarily Muslim but where Church and State are mostly separated and you don't have the same problems at all (and I might add that Senegal is a true haven of peace and culture in that region). Richard mentioned the state of affairs in Texas, where Christian Dominionist are pushing an agenda to blur the line between Church and State. One of the most active organisations lobbying against this is the Secular Coalition for America, whose executive director happens to be... Christian.
But of course, if I do this, and try to factor in all of the facts, then I'll be told that this a "behavioral exception" and that I'm just trying to "evade the discussion". It doesn't seem to bother anyone that if you look just at sheer numbers, than suicide bombers are also "behavioral exceptions" (last I look there were 1.5 Bn Muslims in the world, that's a lot of suicide bombers if it's not a behavioral exception...).
*sigh*
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 24 2017 13:59:13
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Piwin)
|
|
|
quote:
I suspect that the fundamental issue is separation of Church and State. But this is merely intuition, although it would map on nicely to what Bill said earlier when comparing Indonesia to Pakistan. You could add Senegal or any number of countries that are majority Muslim but where Church and State are mostly separated and you don't have the same problems at all (and I might add that Senegal is a true haven of peace and culture in that region).
I think many of the problems inherent in Islam and its discontents are due to the doctrine that fails to distinguish between the sacred and the secular realms. That, in turn, leads to other elements that I would term "religious pathologies," including death for apostasy and misogynistic elements toward women in Shari'a Law. For example, women may only inherit half of what their male siblings may inherit, and in Shari'a court it takes the testimony of two women to equal that of one male witness.
Perhaps most egregiously, under what is called "Hudud" (or "Hudood") if a woman is raped and wishes to bring charges against her rapist, she must produce four male witnesses to testify on her behalf (as if rape were a spectator sport!). If she fails to produce four male witnesses testifying on her behalf, she herself is charged with adultery.
After 50 years of studying Islam and living and working in Islamic majority countries from Pakistan to Indonesia and others, I long ago reached the conclusion that what Islam desperately needs is the equivalent of the Eighteenth Century Enlightenment. That would solve a lot of the problems inherent in Islam today by separating completely the secular and sacred realms, and by divorcing rational thought from religious dogma. Muslims like to blame the West for their problems, but by blaming the West they simply postpone any attempt to come to terms with modernity by facing up to the reality that most of their wounds are self-inflicted.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 24 2017 14:53:48
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Escribano)
|
|
|
quote:
But of course, if I do this, and try to factor in all of the facts, then I'll be told that I'm just trying to "evade the discussion".
Not by me. However, of completing emotionally, yes.
Naturally, in states form deficiencies will increase. This won´t lead to otherwise there being no "same problem at all". Only less.
My invitation to study certain culture-building texts under behavioral aspects has not been anything intuition. Neither the realizing of social and ethical aspects within mentality. They are actually immense and reflected in unusual proportions of executive and lawsuits, paralleled by secondary implications of mentality like for instance highest traffic death toll world-wide.
All based on ideological fallacy that takes no rocket-science to become aware of. (Which is why I asked for reading with psychological / behavioral / ethical aspect.)
Same goes for empirics as result, that are more than obvious. After years of (relatively moderate, yet ...) experience in corresponding quarters in German cities, and much more so in many years in Middle East I can only say to you: You would not believe how conditions are.
Even I could not and cannot fathom still, even though having been aware of philosophical issues beforehand / aware that custom would be basically different. Yet, the actual condition blew me (my hopes and belongings -though from the first there would always stay naive remains alive which in fact are about to having me loosing yet the last of possession by having trusted in decency -at least after advance, like in very most of cases- once again) away. Unfortunately, all too reliably so.
Besides: Indonesia is worsening since years, aching to catching up with the original peninsula´s whereabouts. Last introduction, just recently, has been the sentencing of a governor for blasphemy.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 24 2017 14:55:56
|
|
Piwin
Posts: 3559
Joined: Feb. 9 2016
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
quote:
Not by me.
Then perhaps I misunderstood your point. I'm sure you're aware that your grammar is sometimes difficult to understand on this foro. I would actually prefer to read your opinions in German and answer in English but that would probably exclude several foro members from the discussion unfortunately, so I guess we'll have to make do with the occasional misunderstanding.
If your point is merely that ideas can have real-life consequences, and bad ideas have bad consequences, then we are agreed. However, singling out ideas as the sole source of any given behaviour, at the exclusion of all other factors, makes no sense. It's interesting that you cite your own experience as one of the grounds for your argument. Because clearly your experience could also be viewed as an experience with the cultures of a specific area in the world, which goes beyond mere religion (I'm sure that you're aware that the bulk of the Muslim population of the world lives outside the area you're in and the variety of ways Islam is practised runs the gamut from covering women from head to toe in Saudi Arabia to having female imams in China, from having ardent political aspirations to focusing more on self-realization as Sufis would tend to do, etc. etc. ). And of course to that you have to add the assumption that I am somehow not aware of these cultural differences ("you would not believe how conditions are"), at least not as much as you are, because apparently if I only had experienced it as much as you have, then I would necessarily agree with you. It's basically the "a liberal is just a conservative who's never been mugged" argument. I can only hope you see the problem with that.
Bill's perspective makes more sense to me (although I would probably ascribe a bit more "blame" to Western foreign policy than he would, at least in some specific countries). It would in part answer my point on the issue of separation of Church and State and I can see how someone could argue that this is rooted in the very origins of that religion (as their prophet was politicaly active, founding a state, etc., as opposed to some other religions where you'd find no political aspirations in the founding texts).
Regarding the situation in Indonesia, yes it does seem to be getting worse. However, by focusing on the issue of separation of Church and State and not just Islam then you avoid having this partial view of the world, i.e. you would also have noted the recent brush with the law that Stephen Fry had in Ireland.
I honestly believe that's the way forward. Whether you think it's desirable or not, you won't be getting rid of religion. Even the European Enlightenment did not do that much. But by getting believers on board and understanding the need for a secular state, then you're getting somewhere. Once you have that, I honestly don't care what people believe in the privacy of their own homes. Meanwhile I'm active in helping get out those who want to, particularly in fundamentalist settings, because that's what I know and that's where I can be useful. Each case is unique. Some families put people first. Others put religion first. Some surprise you either by reacting more strongly than you would have expected or by choosing to hold off the reins for a while when you would have thought they'd be the last to do so. I had a young Muslim lady I'd helped a few years ago tell me that her father had just come out as an agnostic as a result of her doing the same back then. Her mother seems to be having a harder time with it. And then I have another lady in the US who is well into her 40s, is living with her life partner, but still can't figure out whether she can tell her family that she's gay. So goes it, each case is unique and I never cease to be surprised by people's reactions. That's also why I said earlier that I don't identify as an atheist but as an apostate. An atheist is just someone who doesn't believe in God. An apostate is someone who has to deal with messy human reality and engage with other people on a very real level. There's a real sense of community there. Some end up hating their religious relatives, others fight to reconcile their love for them with the barriers that are now up between them. In any event, these are people who care. For many of them, having professional atheists barge in and bark about how stupid religious people are just doesn't help, quite the contrary. It's like reading about culture in the American South back in the 50s and 60s from some New Yorker who just had theoretical opinions about it all and then reading Lillian Smith's Killers of the Dream. I couldn't care less about what the New Yorker had to say, even if he was right in the abstract. The difference is evident. These are human issues that actual people are grappling with, not theoretical or abstract ones. Any argument or understanding that just says "we're right, they're wrong" without that fundamental level of empathy just doesn't help.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 24 2017 16:33:58
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Piwin)
|
|
|
The nearest example of a Muslim country separating the sacred and the secular was Turkey under Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. When Ataturk assumed power in the defeated remnant of the Ottoman Empire that we know as Turkey, he began to ruthlessly modernize Turkish society. As part of that modernization Ataturk forcibly pushed Islam out of the public square and into the mosque. He even banned the wearing of the fez by men and the veil by women. From that time forward, Turkey exhibited the attributes of a modern state, unlike its Arab neighbors in the Near East. Turkey was not a model democracy, but it was a model for modernization in the Near East.
Unfortunately, ever since Erdogan assumed power, he has been "Islamicizing" Turkey more and more, dispensing with its secular institutions in favor of ever more Islamic institutions. It is sad to see what was once a beacon of enlightenment (at least for the Near East) backslide into the miasma of religious authority. That this is occurring lends further credence to my contention that what Islam desperately needs is the equivalent of the Eighteenth Century European Enlightenment. That Ataturk accomplished the secularization of the public square was due to a "forced march," so to speak. It did not result in a reform or enlightenment of Islam itself. Had Islam experienced an Enlightenment that separated secular and rational thought from sacred and religious authority, we wouldn't be witnessing the dismantling of a secular Turkey today.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 24 2017 17:18:54
|
|
Piwin
Posts: 3559
Joined: Feb. 9 2016
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
quote:
Unfortunately, ever since Erdogan assumed power, he has been "Islamicizing" Turkey more and more
This is somewhat similar to what has been going on in Senegal since president Wade took office. The country is almost invisible on the geopolitical map of most Western countries but it was a good example of a Muslim country where Church and State were separated. In colonial times, the Muslim marabouts had a considerable amount of influence as leaders of the opposition against the colonial powers. This disappeared after their independance and the advent of democracy. The marabouts were then deprived of any direct influence on the democratic process. They retained some influence simply because they could sway public opinion, in a similar way to what some US preachers do nowadays. Under president Wade, the marabouts have been gaining almost unprecedented influence and there is a looming risk that it could slide into a religious state, although they're still pretty far from what is happening in Turkey.
Of course, Islam never really replaced the indigenous belief systems in Senegal, nor anywhere else really. Even in the Berber regions of Morroco and Algeria, the indigenous populations still hold to their traditional beliefs, which they have in some ways fused together with Islam. The same occurs with Christianity, which of course makes many missionaries frustrated since even when the people convert, they still don't do things the way the missionaries want them to. It makes you wonder if any religion can survive in a culture other than its culture of origin, without substantial changes to it.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 24 2017 17:54:50
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Piwin)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Piwin
Thanks for your thorough reply. This has given me food for thought.
I suspect that the sentence "But my world, like the religious person's is founded on faith" would be rather unsettling to quite a few people today.
To clarify: I have no faith in supernatural entities. I am a thoroughgoing materialist.
But I have faith in the concepts and processes of mathematics (though they can lead to some bizarre conclusions, in some cases). Mathematicians realized long ago that you can only prove everything in mathematics if you don't try to define everything. My faith consists in the idea that mathematics deals with valid concepts which can be applied to reality, though a few of those concepts may remain mathematically undefined.
I have faith, but a little less, in the scientific theories I have studied. The theories I can apply to a useful extent are highly mathematical. It is by now a cliche that one essential rule of science, is that any theory may need to be modified, refined or elaborated when valid experimental data requires it.
I have faith that most of the English speaking people who read this will understand some of what I write. But I can't define all the words or rules of grammar without lapsing into circularity. I believe you will understand some of this because you learned the language the way everybody does, either as a child, or by mapping English into your native language, and learning where this may fail. And I believe you will understand some of it because I believe your mind is like mine in crucial respects, thanks to eons of evolution as a social creature.
I have faith in a handful of people I feel I can trust. But I am aware that I must be careful what I rely upon them for, not to ask too much of them. I can't be too unreasonable and maintain their faith in me.
I have faith that the store will accept my debit card in payment, as long as there is enough money in the bank (though I can't prove it, there might be a computer glitch, or...)----and so on, to lesser and lesser levels of faith.
But I say "faith" because I don't think you can prove everything, and some very important things I believe are un-provable..
Sorry to belabor this, but I don't want someone to misconstrue an intentionally provocative sentence. Nor do I want someone to think that I place our everyday assumptions on the same level as religious faith. I'm a pretty skeptical person.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 25 2017 7:33:26
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Escribano)
|
|
|
quote:
If your point is merely that ideas can have real-life consequences, and bad ideas have bad consequences, then we are agreed.
That it is, but not "merely". For ideas being practically too relevant for humans and their species as intellectual being. Which again is why there are to be found definite characteristics in cultures, with some, due to inhumane ideas, displaying corresponding custom.
The denial of such differences is not constructive. Because of denial presenting protection which again postpones awareness, debate and change.
With the examples that you name, I doubt the people to reveal to you the ethical abyss within their surroundings. Lesser so in a western sphere where the degree of perceived shame will be much higher. (In fact I think to have seen shame exclusively in a sense of prudery.)
I have been hearing of unbound recklessness even within families since years. Last time that a new acquaintance was telling me how he was severally set back by first trusting his brother and then even his father, has been only few days ago.
You may be wanting to make a point, by saying that bad custom will depend on intensity of spread bad ideas, but it won´t change a thing on the fact that ideas are highly relevant to a thinking species.
Even if we had ideas already pragmatically and deconstructivist perfected, we would still be erring enough. And erring almost always means injustice to thirds. That is why any specific deviation from sobriety presents ethical matter and is not a peccadillo at all.
As Hamia mentioned already, we are facing a solid discrepancy between our special knowledge / physical effects on environment and our state of awareness. Being way too immature for the power gained. Just the more reason for to make away with arbitrary and disproportionate, way outdated doctrines.
Could you care less if folks bowed to Hitler´s "Mein Kampf" in privacy? Would it not affect anyone (including themselves)? So, why make light of any other fascism?
I don´t agree with your conclusion that past centuries hadn´t changed much in the (European) christian world. Developing philosophy of about 2300 years in the end forced this abrahamian branch into concession. Pulled lots of its teeth and had it even admit to evolution some 7 years or so ago. Philosophy as base of mentality pushed back superstition in the western world a lot. A sphere with considerably less belief than before and elsewhere. With societal accepted aims of pragmatism, humanism, liberty and equal rights. (Even if actual plutocracy and corruption counter the idea fundamentally.)
Yields of philosophy also turned around the premise of "old wisdom", which tainted the Middle Age as dark, even though it wasn´t really that dark. In fact the MA was a period of a lot of scientifical progress, only that new findings used to be deemed as secondary and inappropriate before ancient nonsense. In the way it still is in the Orient.
-
Formal establishment of target, even if marginally, tends to produce in practice too. Thus in the aftermath of Kemalism Turkish clerics have released a number of humanitarian inspired fatwas, like abolishing the persecution of apostate, or banning the mistreatment / torturing of animals.
-
quote:
The Jews were banned from normal jobs in Europe in the Middle Ages and became money lenders (some of them at least). This required skill and introduces a powerful evolutionary selection criterion. If you are good at it and make money then you will likely have more children.
And you can finance higher education for them, which should present a reason for why among academics and thinkers there were a lot of Jews.
I wouldn´t connect that fact to the religion per se though. Also, many of the Jews had no way to constructively escape the discrimination and remained in poverty.
quote:
A similar cultural selection criterion was at work in China over a long period. For one thing mastering written Chinese is a tough intellectual challenge and then the labyrinthine civil service upped the ante. This probably explains why there are a lot of very clever Chinese, and perhaps why a good proportion of them are sociopaths. The welfare state is an inverted version of this - just watch a few episodes of Britain on Benefits on YouTube.
One of the many homeworks on hold for me has been to check out one day why there is so much of emotional indifference (and outright sadism, partially manifest with some provincial, unspeakable custom of animal torturing even yet on restaurant tables) in Far East. What you say sounds quite like a clue.
Contrasting above examples are cultures like of the Bishnoi in India who treat and guard fellow creature like gold. Or the people in Shani Shignapur who live without doors. It´s all a matter of idea.
Who agrees on us being responsible for our actions, should also agree in that we are responsible for the ideas we create and follow. They must not be regarded as any desired. The civil right on opinion will not equal any and all of idea as acceptable.
Ideas that promote hard-hearted irrationality, discrimination, ingratitude, deceitfulness, cover, insincerity, sheming ... in a short, what we call inhumane behaviour ... should not be considered fair choice.
I was raised with firm belief in equality, and as a teen wished all borders would be torn down for everyone to move around to liking.
Today I think to see that humanity hasn´t reached to such precondition yet. And I strongly oppose the idea of given cultural and behavioral equality before the facts.
True is that there seem to exist items in many if not all cultures that need changing. And some cultures are being unsocial as a whole. Not doing good in states form nor in private.
The British, though far from being choirboys themselves, in last century ordered an expertise. Therein it was stated that it is unclear how people of a certain culture manage to get along with each other at all. And after own experience I wonder the exact same.
I find that neither arbitrary jurisdiction (for example legitimizing defendants´ lying as means of defence, etc.pp.) nor private surrounding (no outlawing of crime) suit for educating.
And even if there was a trial under given horizon, there would not be a position to, where difference between method and system, between moral and ethics is unknown. It lacks the philosophical background and education.
To my understanding there are two ways towards ethical standard.
Environmental pressure on indigene culture, which tends to produce association, empathy, solidarity and sincerity among group members.
Whereas for grand civilizations there is no way other than paths grounded on philosophical insight.
Without it, all you get is lost humanity with a host of all struggling, hypocritical and cheating individuals.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 25 2017 10:13:45
|
|
Ricardo
Posts: 14799
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
quote:
concert. I hope we all remember that the parents you spoke of who fled Libya are good people
you couldn't possibly know this...same deal with Korean parents you mentioned. Nobody is perfect, and for sure no parent good or bad wants a child to get on the news for evil deeds, but when my kids do something iffy I know it is OUR fault as parents somehow (meaning probably my wife's fault not mine  ), but try to learn from this and correct whatever went wrong. It is easy to become hypocritical as a parent, I am not saying it's easy, but if young people are blowing themselves up and killing others, something is very wrong at home, sorry to say.
About what Islam "needs", I think the best option for them is a very large and violently aggressive force of GOOD Christians to basically wipe them out completely, or reduce them to manageable numbers at least, then, after the smoke clears, if they all could evolve back to what Christian/Jews are more like today which is fairly peaceful athiests in denial.
_____________________________
CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 25 2017 12:11:39
|
|
Piwin
Posts: 3559
Joined: Feb. 9 2016
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
quote:
With the examples that you name, I doubt the people to reveal to you the ethical abyss within their surroundings. Lesser so in a western sphere
I'm puzzled at why you assume they must be hiding something. These are people who contact me to talk privately about coming out. If there was any risk of misrepresenting reality, it would be the other way around: overstating the facts out of anger, frustration, fear, etc. But when I say people always surprise me, I mean it. If I wagered what would happen with each new case, I would be wrong more probably 50% of the time. The whole issue of whether you can "trust" your family after coming out is a very difficult one. I've said here that I had rebuilt my notion of family on something that is not based on blood and genes. You can read between the lines, I'm sure. And yet I'm not completely estranged, unlike many end up having to be. In many cases, cutting ties completely is the only choice. There's no objective dividing line though that determines whether you should do that or not. It took me over a decade to get back "on speaking terms" with my own family. It takes a lot of time for these kind of things to settle.
quote:
Could you care less if folks bowed to Hitler´s "Mein Kampf" in privacy?
Yes I couldn't care less. You could bow to the flying black dildo queen that I still wouldn't give a rat's ass. People have the right to believe whatever the hell they want. And if I have to choose between someone who's crazy and completely wrong about everything and the thought police, I'll choose the crazy one. Now, you can care in the sense that you can hope to talk someone out of strange things or rightfully be distrustful of them. I wouldn't let your nazi friend babysit my children, for sure. But when everything's said and done, if you're going back to the whole thought police thing, then it's really no better than any of the religions of the Book who convict you for what you think and not for what you do. Atheists are loathe to mention this example, but if you look into it, you can consider the treatment of religious minorities in China. If you're in favor of that, then we aren't at all on the same side of this issue. I don't care what people think, I care what they do. And I only care about what they think in that it can be incidental to what they do. But rarely can you draw a straight line between people's behavior and their ideas. Fact of the matter is, there's always a connection, yes, but you can rarely draw a straight line. Reality is messy and complexe. And I'm living proof that you can't draw that straight line. I'm a former fundamentalist. Do you think I changed my mind overnight? Obviously not, and there was a rather long period of time where what I did was in clear disconnect with what I still believed. So yeah, if the guy who's bowing down to Mein Kampf at night is overall a nice and caring neighbor, let him worship whatever he wants.
quote:
I don´t agree with your conclusion that past centuries hadn´t changed much in the (European) christian world
I came to no such conclusion. I said the European Enlightenment had not gotten rid of religion, that is all. The point being that the endgame isn't to get rid of religion. The endgame is basically what we have in Europe: indifference to religion.
@Richard Jernigan
Understood. I think I had understood where you were going with that statement but you're right that it's best to dot the i's in this kind of discussion. The word "faith" is in itself problematic because of the variety of meanings it carries. The study of its evolution over time is rather interesting actually. There was a time where it seems it was used mainly as an intransitive verbal group. You had faith. You didn't have faith in something. You just had faith. Now the common usage is that you have faith "in something" and it seems to mean that you believe a proposition is true despite having no proof for it. This would seem to be related to our own history and how Christianity itself has evolved. Nowadays a Christian, or someone that would be recognised as Christian by other Christians, is someone who intellectually accepts the validity of certain propositions (i.e. Jesus existed, he was the son of God, he died for us, etc.). This intellectual overlay to the meaning of the word seems to be a fairly recent development. Now it seems to run the gamut from intellectual certainty to a general feeling of hope with everything in between.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 25 2017 14:43:59
|
|
Ricardo
Posts: 14799
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to jshelton5040)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jshelton5040
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ricardo
The only folks miss interpreting the scientific literature are politicians, laymen bloggers, and those with a personal agenda to miss direct the public.
Ricardo, may I suggest that it is possible for polite people to disagree without casting epithets.
Are you admitting to be one who you described as "skeptical of global warming"?
I have not intent of offending anyone, the individuals I refer to in the quote box above are not the majority of folks that are skeptical of global warming, they are the ones that have kept the confusion of the problem alive and well despite the overwhelming evidence. By "miss interpreting scientific literature", I meant that those few individuals have caused a large problem by citing sources, mainly scientific papers and articles, but have made, most often, errors in interpreting the facts. In some very very few cases, it seems, certain individuals have done this deliberately.
Other wise intelligent people have come across this information are not to be faulted for their opinion on the issue, of course. That is why I simply pointed out a link to some very well made videos on the subject for any of these intelligent good hearted skeptic friends and family of yours that you must have referred to.
Cheers,
Ricardo
_____________________________
CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 22 2017 0:03:40
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Black Hole eats sun (in reply to Escribano)
|
|
|
John,
If you go to the header and click on 'About' use the drop down menu, go to 'Team' - Read the information on the writers of the website and their intentions and fields of study.
You see one common thread among the writers, both the pros and non pros, they are on the side of climate change is happening, the debate is is about to what extent climate is anthropogenic, in other words human created. The main intention of the site is to verify consensus among scientists publishing in peer review journals. The other intention is to parse out political motivation in the way information from climate science is used. That means calling out any political motivation liberal or conservative that is in conflict with facts or data sets.
And this is one website in a world of science researchers. There are 20 people writing part time, this is in itself is not a consensus. Also interesting to note more than half of them don't work in climate science directly and are not direct researchers, they are readers of peer review work. A third of them have current professional connections or are employed my corporations which could potentially benefit from one type of climate change debate or another. Some of them don't have any scientific credentials at all.
I remain skeptical of the full credibility of the skeptic website.
And I was a little surprised to see that one of the writers is someone I know and he is not at all an anthropogenic denier. I think one of the main ideas here is to parse out what parts of climate change occurring are part of natural processes, and which parts are contributions by humans that are accelerating natural processes.
The reason there are California seals up in Oregon stinking up the docks is because they usually live in seal rookeries on the Channel Islands off Southern CA. - but it's getting too hot there. Too bad you can't shoot them, but it's against the Federal Marine Mammal Protection Act. There they go again taking away everyones freedom to kill seals!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ok here is the meat a potatoes of that website, The Consensus Project, they are trying to gather data which indicates that consensus is robust and talk about what consensus means.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/tcp.php?t=home
Not all the writers are direct researchers, but if you look at the credentials and backing of those who are hardcore deniers, and compare, I'm betting the writers are less versed in hard science. The harder core the denier the less hard science is on their side.
I'll have to drill down more into this website and contact my friend who contributes and ask him more questions about it. I personally don't do a lot of thinking on how to refute deniers so I never ran across this site.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Aug. 22 2017 3:57:08
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.15625 secs.
|
Printable Version
