Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am aware of the case made for the need for religion, true or not. There may be something in that. We won't know until it is tried, but overall, I'd say that secularization doesn't make this noticeably so much worse that it justifies teaching people to base their social codes on mythology.
Where I live everyone is keeping their clothes on, I'm seeing no sex in the streets between humans much less between humans and animals, people are still getting married, the churches are open for business, children are being enrolled in Bible vacation school and kids wave when you drive past. I've yet to be given the bird, or mooned, by some 6-year old lacking a moral compass.
cha·os *(ks)
n.
1. A condition or place of great disorder or confusion.
2. A disorderly mass; a jumble
Would links or a list help ? ( I have no idea why your mind is completely on sex with respects to chaos.
Second there is evidence that this is incorrect. What is in play now with zero morals and zero authentic good living family values....a mess.
So...we now know what happens when religiosity and its family unit in encouragement disappears .
Nothingness, just like now, no progress and all the full fault of the social push on this so called prize of secularism...oh well, reality is what it is. . secular days are all about chaos, and were in it right now.
I am curious what you view as the "mess"? Don't get me wrong, I certainly think there are still things that are wrong in the world, but I don't see that same mess you see.
On a per capita basis, any human being on the planet is less likely to die a violent death than during any other era in human history.
Democracy, the governed having a voice in their own destiny had increased dramatically, and tremendously better than even 50 years ago
Religions, in general, have tended to become less bloody and violent. No longer do we sacrifice animals and people, religious conflicts are fewer and smaller than in the past, particularly in the western world.
Individual rights, human dignity, and egalitarian principles have become much more fundamental principles worldwide.
Slavery, while it still exists, is condemned as morally wrong across most nations and cultures.
Equality under the law, regardless of race, creed, national origin, gender, age, and sexual orientation is at least a widespread ideal, even if imperfectly implemented.
All things considered this is a really good time to be alive, and I certainly think the case can be made that the influence of secular humanistic philosophies have played a big role. I don't really see the "chaos" that you insinuate secularism and humanistic values are creating.
I am curious what you view as the "mess"? Don't get me wrong, I certainly think there are still things that are wrong in the world, but I don't see that same mess you see.
On a per capita basis, any human being on the planet is less likely to die a violent death than during any other era in human history.
Democracy, the governed having a voice in their own destiny had increased dramatically, and tremendously better than even 50 years ago
Religions, in general, have tended to become less bloody and violent. No longer do we sacrifice animals and people, religious conflicts are fewer and smaller than in the past, particularly in the western world.
Individual rights, human dignity, and egalitarian principles have become much more fundamental principles worldwide.
Slavery, while it still exists, is condemned as morally wrong across most nations and cultures.
Equality under the law, regardless of race, creed, national origin, gender, age, and sexual orientation is at least a widespread ideal, even if imperfectly implemented.
All things considered this is a really good time to be alive, and I certainly think the case can be made that the influence of secular humanistic philosophies have played a big role. I don't really see the "chaos" that you insinuate secularism and humanistic values are creating.
-NoCapo
Start with this to get some insight into what you are talking about. No morals.
You wish.....Now what about some empirical evidence for god - claims? If you haven't any, why not go watch some TV?
I don't "wish" along those lines AREQUIPA...I just call it as I see it.
I have given empirical proof of "God"...as I define God, of course...and there is empirical evidence of that.
The "God" in the OP...not so much.
Then again, I could be wrong...but I don't believe I am. Same as everyone else.
Essentially what you are saying is that since Newtonian mechanics has historically been a good enough approximation, and still informs the thinking of almost everyone (very few folks appear capable of intuitively understanding motion in terms of QM or string theory.) that the fact that it isn't actually true doesn't matter? That we should not spend time and energy investigating relativistic and probabilistic phenomena, because Newtonian mechanics 'rule'?
Just because it is a cognitively satisfying and generally practical approximation doesn't make it inherently true. It is often good enough, but if schools started trying to teach that it was a factual and complete representation of the universe, based solely on its popularity and understandability, wouldn't you have a problem with that? To just throw away knowledge and understanding because what we have is "good enough"?
As far as the "influence" issue, I would recommend for you "A Brief History of Doubt" by Jennifer Michel Hecht. It is a fascinating read about doubt, skepticism, free-thought, and atheism. I think the case can be made that much of the status quo of Western religious thought (including your deistic outlook) are due to men and women who refused to accept your argument that popularity is more important than truth. It is through the influence of those you castigate that philosophy itself was developed, that Catholicism was shaped by those Greek thinkers, and that the individualistic, egalitarian character of modern Christianity came to be.
The influence of those questioning religious dogma in favor of reason and rational thought is not in overthrowing religion, but in changing it into what we see now. In fact I tend to think that, save the enlightenment thinkers who rejected the thought that 'ruled' in their day, most of the Western world would look a lot more like the middle east, full of fractured nations, bathed in the blood of endless ethnic and religious wars. I would posit that the prosperity of the western world is based not on religion, but on the embrace of a common set of secular principles based not in a god, but it our own humanity.
-NoCapo
I'm not a "back-slapping", reputation tendering kinda guy...I rather give props in open forum for what I view as exceptionally good stuff...and IMO your offering here certainly qualifies NoCapo. Excellent "food" for my thought...Thanx.
Essentially what you are saying is that since Newtonian mechanics has historically been a good enough approximation, and still informs the thinking of almost everyone (very few folks appear capable of intuitively understanding motion in terms of QM or string theory.) that the fact that it isn't actually true doesn't matter? That we should not spend time and energy investigating relativistic and probabilistic phenomena, because Newtonian mechanics 'rule'?
Just because it is a cognitively satisfying and generally practical approximation doesn't make it inherently true. It is often good enough, but if schools started trying to teach that it was a factual and complete representation of the universe, based solely on its popularity and understandability, wouldn't you have a problem with that? To just throw away knowledge and understanding because what we have is "good enough"?
As far as the "influence" issue, I would recommend for you "A Brief History of Doubt" by Jennifer Michel Hecht. It is a fascinating read about doubt, skepticism, free-thought, and atheism. I think the case can be made that much of the status quo of Western religious thought (including your deistic outlook) are due to men and women who refused to accept your argument that popularity is more important than truth. It is through the influence of those you castigate that philosophy itself was developed, that Catholicism was shaped by those Greek thinkers, and that the individualistic, egalitarian character of modern Christianity came to be.
The influence of those questioning religious dogma in favor of reason and rational thought is not in overthrowing religion, but in changing it into what we see now. In fact I tend to think that, save the enlightenment thinkers who rejected the thought that 'ruled' in their day, most of the Western world would look a lot more like the middle east, full of fractured nations, bathed in the blood of endless ethnic and religious wars.
I would posit that the prosperity of the western world is based not on religion, but on the embrace of a common set of secular principles based not in a god, but it our own humanity.
-NoCapo
You make reasonably good reason throughout and then sneak in this last little bit of unsubstantiated BS at the end, verify with history and it better be good because thats your sell point. ( arriving conclusion.
Or it goes into the bin. Fair is fair.
Last edited by stargazzer; 06-13-2013 at 10:33 PM..
And now, here to show us all how to live AND believe...
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargazzer
First and as usual some of the atheists are avoiding my solid answer.
Second Christianity is all about the root needs in human flourish.
To say it is posited that secular efforts are responcible for progress assumes that there is evidence that religion and many members genuinely motivated by these root objectives, were not inspired to go the extra mile in circumstance's, tolerance, justice etc.
Second there is evidence that this is incorrect. What is in play now with zero morals and zero authentic good living family values....a mess.
So...we now know what happens when religiosity and its family unit in encouragement disappears .
Nothingness, just like now, no progress and all the full fault of the social push on this so called prize of secularism...oh well, reality is what it is. . secular days are all about chaos, and were in it right now.
Oh WOW! FurShur! Yup! (But oh btw: what does "the root needs in human flourish" mean pray tell? What an oddball phrase!)
Things sure are a lot worse since mandated disciplinary religion has faded and been replaced with good old scientific progress and common sense. No more of those inspiring public floggings, burning witches at the stake, banishment from a person's local church, and so on. It was so much better when we denied actual medical science, preferring instead such practices as bleedings, leeches, and incantations.
Sure have lost a lot with the demise and departure of priest-mandated Old-Tyme Religion, huh, stargazzer!
(PS: I get more than enough of that mindless strangulation of honest morals every Sunday, if I so choose, by tuning in such luminaries as: (WARNING: take a very deep breath folks...): the ever-vigilant but tearfully regretful Jimmy Swaggert, Jim & Tammy Faye Baker, Oral Roberts, the ever-entertaining Harold Camping, little Kenny Copeland, Creflo Dollar (aptly named...), Jerry Falwell, John Hagee ('scuse me while I barf over that toadie...), Benny "The Hooligan Cheater" Hinn, Joel Osteen, Pat "The Prez" Robertson, James Robison, and the Schullers.. Not to mention all the other bean-headed idiot-crew of money-grubbing morally bankrupt TV evangelists.
Imagine how wunnerphul it'd be if we all were required to live as they have! Oh yeah-azz brothers and sisters!)
So you're now making the leap to suggest that the universe is eternal? Is that it?
Not what I said at all. I am suggesting that concepts such as "eternal" might be meaningless in many contexts given that such concepts require "time" and time is only an aspect of our universe in the form it is in now.
Strange that you play up the "majority believes in god" nonsense and at the same time believe in a version of it only shared by a small minority of believers. I guess the whole numbers argument doesn't mean as much to you as you're claiming.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You wish.....Now what about some empirical evidence for god - claims? If you haven't any, why not go watch some TV?
And now, here to show us all how to live AND believe...
