›
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE

"He did something wrong in the name of religion, ergo, the religion is wrong."

2»

Comments

  • ForzareForzare
    edited 2011-05-26 01:11:08
    Till shade is gone, till water is gone, into the Shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath, to spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the last Day.
    ^^^^Funny how people can be not religious and also be decent people, then.
  • NovaNova
    If you must eat a phoenix, boil it, do not roast it. This only encourages their mischievous habits.
    So, the same way society does? Or anything else?
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    I don't think that's his point...and if it is...then, I beg to differ.
  • NovaNova
    If you must eat a phoenix, boil it, do not roast it. This only encourages their mischievous habits.
    I'm honestly curious.
  • BobBob
    Ah. Okay then.
  • RottweilerRottweiler
    Inside, too dark to read
    @Cygan: Please explain how religion makes a person virtuous.

    By controlling their innate selfishness. Given the chance, people will torture animals from birth til slaughter to produce their meat more efficiently. Religion can convince them that it's a great crime to kill a cow.

    People, left to themselves, are vicious egotists. The only decency they're innately programmed to show is toward kin, as if you can help a sibling without risking your own life, it's 50% as good as helping yourself due to the degree of genetic relatedness. So if we value empathy, we should praise social control mechanisms to the degree they make people love others.

    @Forzare: Funny how people can be not religious and also be decent people, then.

    Define "decent." If you just mean conforming to social norms, that's merely egotism channeled: people who know how to be socially successful will be more successful finding mates. Any evil their society tolerates, humans will tend to do.
  • BobBob
    I'm thinking that by "decent" he means moral and generally good.
  • NovaNova
    If you must eat a phoenix, boil it, do not roast it. This only encourages their mischievous habits.
    -sigh-
  • Tnu1138Tnu1138
    Oh god your one of them. one of those types of statists who think the government needs to put religion in to law.
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    ...

    I...I have nothing.

    Let's agree to disagree, Rotty.
  • ForzareForzare
    Till shade is gone, till water is gone, into the Shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath, to spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the last Day.
    If you just mean conforming to social norms, that's merely egotism
    channeled: people who know how to be socially successful will be more
    successful finding mates. Any evil their society tolerates, humans will
    tend to do.

    I don't agree with this.

    At all.

    People aren't inherently bastards.  Not everyone needs religion to tell them to be a good person.
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    People aren't inherently anything, really. People are born as blank slates. It's whatever comes next that defines them (YEs, I know, I could have said Tabula Rasa, but fuck that shit)
  • Tnu1138Tnu1138
    This seems to be a dilemma of whether Hobbs Was Right or

    Rousseau Was Right I happen to hold that neither are right and people are born neutral and blank.
  • RottweilerRottweiler
    Inside, too dark to read
    @Forzare: People aren't inherently bastards.  Not everyone needs religion to tell them to be a good person.

    Just how low are your standards for a good person?

    Again, most people participate in the lifelong torture of vast numbers of sentient beings.

    @Juan: People aren't inherently anything, really. People are born as blank slates.

    I really don't buy that human brains have no inborn qualities whatsoever. Every human universal speaks against that hypothesis.
  • Tnu1138Tnu1138
    SO humans are inherently evil and need some authoritairan power ot make them be good?
  • NovaNova
    If you must eat a phoenix, boil it, do not roast it. This only encourages their mischievous habits.
    Again, most people participate in the lifelong torture of vast numbers of sentient beings.

    So do most religious people.
  • ForzareForzare
    Till shade is gone, till water is gone, into the Shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath, to spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the last Day.
    I'm not religious. I don't believe in God.

    I also try my best not to hurt other people. I make an effort to be honest, even when I would benefit more from lying. I give a dollar to the homeless guy with a guitar.

    I could kick that dog on the side of the road For The Evulz. Nobody's watching, right? I could get away with it. But I don't. Being pointlessly cruel isn't me. It isn't most people, either.

    I'm not perfect, but who the fuck is? I try to do good in my life and be a good person, but it's not because I'm afraid of hell or because God told me that this is how I should be. I don't do it because I'm trying to impress people or to "be more successful at finding mates." I try to be a good person because I have empathy for my fellow human beings. I try to be a good person because I think it's the right thing to do.

    So no. I don't think that you need God to be a decent person. God can help, sure. But religion isn't the end-all-be-all of human goodness.
  • Tnu1138Tnu1138
    ok Rott you sound scary like Jim Demint scary.
  • InsanityAddictInsanityAddict
    Diet NEET
    I'm sure the Lord would be pretty pleased as punch if you reduced His Love to a social control mechanism.
  • notwithstandingnotwithstanding
    DUMBER
    Just how low are your standards for a good person?

    Doesn't assume that he's a beacon of light in an evil world would be a bare minimum.
  • BeholderessBeholderess
    Well, this one cannot define any particular standard for a good person, but has some for a bare minimum of decency. Which would be - do not harm a sapient being without their consent, unless the sapient being in question violates this simple rule first. If they do, they are fair game. Religion quite often causes people to do so.

    Anyway, it is true that people are pre-disposed towards selfishness, and that norms of behaviour need to be learned. However, quite a lot of despicable behaviour is also learned. So no, this one is not claiming that humans are born good - but they are not born quite as evil as they turn out to be either. Some bad qualities are overcome by society, but just as many are induced by it. It is an even trade-off, in the end.

    Heh, only society - and especially religion/ideology - can teach selfless evil. That is not something people normally do.
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    I really don't buy that human brains have no inborn qualities whatsoever. Every human universal speaks against that hypothesis.

    They have qualitis, but they are not of the moral kind. Nobody is born into this world a wise man nor a dumb man, except those who suffer from genetical diseases. 

    But those who don't...they are born into this world naked from knowledge, morality and being. It's the world, their experiences, the people around them and how they react that defines them.
  • LouieWLouieW
    edited 2011-05-26 11:44:22
    Loser
    Rottweiler,
    People, left to themselves, are vicious egotists. The only
    decency they're innately programmed to show is toward kin, as if you can
    help a sibling without risking your own life, it's 50% as good as
    helping yourself due to the degree of genetic relatedness. So if we
    value empathy, we should praise social control mechanisms to the degree
    they make people love others.

    I think that is kind of open to interpretation. I do not know that we can look into a crystal ball and know what life would be like in the so-called "state of nature" or whatever. For example, I think empathy is a natural thing so I do not necessarily agree with what you say about people being "vicious egotists" and such. However, that does not mean that I think everyone is perfect or that people without rules, laws, or moral standards would tend to act in a good way all of the time. I also think that Forzare made a good point earlier about this.

     Define "decent." If you just mean conforming to social norms, that's
    merely egotism channeled: people who know how to be socially successful
    will be more successful finding mates. Any evil their society tolerates,
    humans will tend to do.

    Well, I can agree that a good point of religion can be encouraging at least a baseline of ethical behavior, but I do wonder why you believe that such is exclusive to religion and cannot be found in something like a secular system of ethics. Again, this is not to say I dislike or like religion or that I am religious or not religious. I am just curious about this stuff.

    Beholderess,
    Well, this one cannot define any particular standard for a good person,
    but has some for a bare minimum of decency. Which would be - do not harm
    a sapient being without their consent, unless the sapient being in
    question violates this simple rule first. If they do, they are fair
    game. Religion quite often causes people to do so.

    I think that is an interesting perspective (and I certainly agree with the at least basic decently that you describe) and I would like to hear some examples of religion often causing people to harm others. I guess that kind of goes back to what we were talking about earlier though about whether it is the religion, a common interpretation of the religion, or one's own attitudes applied to the religion that causes violence.

    This may be a bit off point, but what I mentioned earlier about people telling me that violent people who practice a religion are the one who cause violence rather than the religion itself links back to another point I have heard theists make. Generally, I have heard that secularization is a great evil in society from such persons and that a loss of faith is one of the biggest problems today. Whether or not I agree with that is not really important, but I do think that I have rarely heard much of a strong argument to support such a statement from the people who make it.
  • BobBob
    @Rott: Torture?
Sign In or Register to comment.