ISIS!

[LimpyLoo]

i suppose my response probably falls somewhat into the "so what?" category. like, why isolate these kind of incidents in particular? sure, they're despicable and disgusting and quite obviously religious beliefs have often brought out exactly such revolting and violent shit from people throughout history...but is this really our most dangerous threat? stoning people? i don't think so.

 

imo we should probably be way more concerned with the state powers that inflict violence upon innocents to incomparably greater degrees. yeah crazy religious people are fucked up. but i'm rather more concerned with civilized violence atm.

 

well i was simply challenging JE's thesis that:

 

 

 

Imagine if people stopped believing that violence would get you this big juicy supernatural reward?

in all truth it probably wouldn't change a goddam thing, you really think religion is the reason why human commit insane atrocities on eachother? think again

 

 

 

my point wasn't specifically about stoning

but rather religious beliefs being a reason why humans "commit insane atrocities on each other"

for instance,

1000 pakistani women are killed annually in honor killings

 

i think simply that fact is enough to disprove JE's challenge

but of course that's just a drop in the bucket

[LimpyLoo]

one last thing...your theory lacks explanatory power altogether imo. so beliefs are..what? they emerge independently in human individuals, untouched by other factors? the only thing that matters is the "logic" of beliefs? it just doesn't work, sorry

 

by that logic

nothing ever has explanatory power

except theories that incorporate causality stretching back to the big bang

 

any factor you look at

has prior causes

i'm sorry but that's not helpful

 

if you instead try to explain it with socio-economics

then do you have to explain how the socio-economics came about?

of course not

science would be impossible if that were the case

what actually causes religious beliefs is a separate conversation that i'm happy to have

[Alcofribas]

well then all you're really saying is that religion, along with other factors, has a causal factor. i completely agree with this. but again so what?

 

furthermore, the reason your proposition lacks explanatory power is not the result of the relativity of non-big bang explanations, it's simply bc you haven't proposed any explanation.

 

i'm def not saying you're like on the far fringes of reason or anything but i just think these kind of sam harris-esque comments about the middle east and the war on terror are terribly naive.

[awepittance]

i mean dude, your theory of beliefs suggests way more serious consequences in so far as those beliefs align themselves with the forces of western governments, no? if i believe that dropping bombs all over arabs will make the world a better place...

it will bro, ISIS are fuckint nuts (and supes dangerous, you saw those beheading videos they filmed from thousands of miles away right?)

 

 

 

 

Imagine if people stopped believing that violence would get you this big juicy supernatural reward?

in all truth it probably wouldn't change a goddam thing, you really think religion is the reason why human commit insane atrocities on eachother? think again

it is one reason among many

 

i mean, ISIS certainly isn't a reaction to US foreign policy

 

i mean, if you belong to a cult

who worships a holy book

that says all non-believers should die

and you kill a non-believer or two

it's probably not a coincidence

 

if the book says adulterers should die

and you publicly execute adulterers

that's not a coincidence

and it's certainly not a reaction to US Policy

Lol hi limpy.

 

wait lol, you don't think that ISIS exists in Iraq and Syria because of anything having to do with our foreign policy, are you fucking serious? im sorry, i just cant believe you think this way sometimes, its quite confusing

well then all you're really saying is that religion, along with other factors, has a causal factor. i completely agree with this. but again so what?

and the war on terror are terribly naive.

alco, you're tamping down his Sam Harris bone, thats why so what. not cool

 

all hail rational atheism, the kind that ignores our western imperialism and only tells you how dangerous muslims are (those other religions are totes dangerous too but christians and jews got all their craziness out of the way 1000 years ago bro!)

[Tricone RC]

I tend to just think there's a subset of people who just enjoy carnage and destruction the way normal people enjoy fucking and driving fast. If they can't do it in the name of religion, they'll do it in the name of politics or race or tribe or______. I think.... *shrugs*.

I reckon a lot of these ISIS fellas are doing it more for race/ethnic/tribe/clan/sectarian reasons than pure religious ones. Iraq's central govt is mainly Shia, and Assad's junta in Damascus are mainly Alawite, and both are perceived as vaguely anti-Sunni (regardless of whether they actually are or not). Religion is intimately tied in with clan rivalries in that part of the world, like in Northern Ireland. I bet that's the reason for a lot of ISIS support

 

My Palestinian relatives basically blame the West for the whole ISIS thing, the idea being that if Saddam was still around and Assad wasn't weakened by Western support of the FSA, then ISIS would never have got big. I guess that line of thought has its merits, Saddam might have been a twat but he was distinctly less disposed towards beheading civilians...

 

 

PS, lol that a super-Sunni militia names itself after an ancient Egyptian god

[LimpyLoo]

JE, check your ad hominem emotional bullshit at the front page

[LimpyLoo]

and your anti-Enlightenment values are depressing

 

any time someone disagrees with you

you start attacking them

[LimpyLoo]

JE, I countered your thesis

so that ball's in your court

but instead you get angry and petty and vindictive

and all this shit about Sam Harris

 

just present your argument

jesus fuck

[Alcofribas]

JE challenged your notion that religion is the singular factor that motivates human atrocities. you have not countered this at all. you've simply generalized from your initial whimsical statement so that religion is one of a variety of factors. so present your argument dude.

[LimpyLoo]

JE challenged your notion that religion is the singular factor that motivates human atrocities. you have not countered this at all. you've simply generalized from your initial whimsical statement so that religion is one of a variety of factors. so present your argument dude.

 

i never ever said that religion was the singular factor that motivates human atrocities

in fact, i immediately said "one of many"

 

 

Imagine if people stopped believing that violence would get you this big juicy supernatural reward?

in all truth it probably wouldn't change a goddam thing, you really think religion is the reason why human commit insane atrocities on eachother? think again

 

 

it is one reason among many

 

[Alcofribas]

it's one thing to emphasize that it's one reason among many, in that case it hardly emerges to the level of an assertion.

 

but in the greater context you seem to have favored that reason in particular on the forum which is why i personally thought you were headed in that direction.

 

if not, sorry, you were just stating the obvious.

[awepittance]

 

just present your argument

jesus fuck

i don't care to spend actual time or energy making an argument to people who hype up the 'threat' of ISIS (as you can probably already tell). I'm genuinely sorry but i don't give a fuck. If my 'attacks' are too harsh, ill make them a little less harsh. Im just over shit shit seriously, but I will post continuously as long as you can handle that.

[LimpyLoo]

it's one thing to emphasize that it's one reason among many, in that case it hardly emerges to the level of an assertion.

 

but in the greater context you seem to have favored that reason in particular on the forum which is why i personally thought you were headed in that direction.

 

if not, sorry, you were just stating the obvious.

 

well i think it's actually noteworthy

because many people do doubt that religious beliefs do drive the sorts of examples i'm citing

there is this weird, paradoxical streak of apologism for anti-liberal values among the left

(opposing the drawing of Muhammad being a good example)

that really does just fly in the face of basic Enlightenment values

[awepittance]

JE, check your ad hominem emotional bullshit at the front page

absolutely not, ive spent years making my arguments in rational ways outside of this forum and this forum remains a place where I can vent about how fucking stupid people are who hype up the threat of islamic terrorism (unless the people who mod the forum think that angry reactions to stupidity are unacceptable)

[LimpyLoo]

 

 

just present your argument

jesus fuck

i don't care to spend actual time or energy making an argument to people who hype up the 'threat' of ISIS (as you can probably already tell). I'm genuinely sorry but i don't give a fuck. If my 'attacks' are too harsh, ill make them a little less harsh. Im just over shit shit seriously, but I will post continuously as long as you can handle that.

 

 

i just wanna get the ideas flowing

i am generally curious what your point-by-point response would be

(not because i don't think you have one,

but because i genuinely want to hear what you--and others here--think on the matter)

[LimpyLoo]

 

JE, check your ad hominem emotional bullshit at the front page

absolutely not, ive spent years making my arguments in rational ways outside of this forum and this forum remains a place where I can vent about how fucking stupid people are who hype up the threat of islamic terrorism (unless the people who mod the forum think that angry reactions to stupidity are unacceptable)

 

 

well look i'll happily concede that terrorism is generally boogeyman-ed

i don't even think that we need to personally worry about terrorism directly affecting the US

but i do think these issues--whatever their actual magnitude--should bother us secular humanists

 

so, for instance,

to the extent that one death is bad

and religious beliefs caused that death

then that is a bad thing that should be considered

as we try to understand (and fix) the world

[Alcofribas]

if the extent to which death is bad motivates your ethics then you've completely picked the wrong bug bear lol

[Alcofribas]

btw this is exactly where chomsky took advantage of sam harris in the latter's publicity stunt. the massive death toll of western actions hardly rises to the level of notability.

[LimpyLoo]

if the extent to which death is bad motivates your ethics then you've completely picked the wrong bug bear lol

 

what i'm trying to convey

(and failing, admittedly)

is that

many people think that small problems are non-problems

and they will never even admit they are problems

btw this is exactly where chomsky took advantage of sam harris in the latter's publicity stunt. the massive death toll of western actions hardly rises to the level of notability.

 

you won't ever in a million years find me defending US foreign policy

 

i think since I talk about Sam Harris occasionally

it is somehow assumed that i agree with him on everything

[Rubin Farr]

[Alcofribas]

 

if the extent to which death is bad motivates your ethics then you've completely picked the wrong bug bear lol

 

what i'm trying to convey

(and failing, admittedly)

is that

many people think that small problems are non-problems

and they will never even admit they are problems

btw this is exactly where chomsky took advantage of sam harris in the latter's publicity stunt. the massive death toll of western actions hardly rises to the level of notability.

 

you won't ever in a million years find me defending US foreign policy

 

 

i guess the way i see it is this: the idea that "many people" won't acknowledge the threat of religious violence is just out of touch with how the world really seems to be working. sure, bill maher has some arguments with democrats and hollywood liberals but this is not a reflection of anything but popular, celebrity-based discourse. both side of the mainstream american political spectrum are totally dedicated to pummeling the shit out of the middle east. we came. we saw. he died. fuck them.

 

it's super convenient to have this cartoon of beliefs to get all pissed off about. it's much more fucked up to consider that state torture is now perfectly legal and an acceptable position of "enlightened" liberal american intellectuals. when they come for you, they will NOT be in berkas.

[LimpyLoo]

 

 

if the extent to which death is bad motivates your ethics then you've completely picked the wrong bug bear lol

 

what i'm trying to convey

(and failing, admittedly)

is that

many people think that small problems are non-problems

and they will never even admit they are problems

btw this is exactly where chomsky took advantage of sam harris in the latter's publicity stunt. the massive death toll of western actions hardly rises to the level of notability.

 

you won't ever in a million years find me defending US foreign policy

 

 

i guess the way i see it is this: the idea that "many people" won't acknowledge the threat of religious violence is just out of touch with how the world really seems to be working. sure, bill maher has some arguments with democrats and hollywood liberals but this is not a reflection of anything but popular, celebrity-based discourse. both side of the mainstream american political spectrum are totally dedicated to pummeling the shit out of the middle east. we came. we saw. he died. fuck them.

 

it's super convenient to have this cartoon of beliefs to get all pissed off about. it's much more fucked up to consider that state torture is now perfectly legal and an acceptable position of "enlightened" liberal american intellectuals. when they come for you, they will NOT be in berkas.

 

 

I have a hypothesis:

 

our well-meaning cultural-pluralist values sometimes undercut our humanist, rationalist values

 

 

there was semi-recently a study of moral judgement in trolley/footbridge scenarios involving race

(the relevance of which i will point out in a moment)

 

(study)

http://journal.sjdm.org/9616/jdm9616.pdf

(summary of study)

http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2010/10/study-finds-people-apply-principles-inconsistently

 

TL;DR =

when self-described liberals are asked if they would sacrifice a black person to save 5 white people, they say no

when self-described liberals are asked if they would sacrifice a white person to save 5 black people, they say yes

(this effect isn't found in self-described conservatives)

 

now clearly, given the history of whites' treatment of blacks

there is good reason to be (at least) hesitant to sacrifice any amount of blacks for any amount of whites

and even i am grossed-out by the idea

but the problem is that this effect seems to remain no matter the price

(e.g. sacrifice one black person to save 1,000 white people)

now, i'm not saying that population ethics is simply a matter of plain arithmatic

but surely there is a point at which one would say 'yes'

 

now, i think this same effect can be found in discussions of religion

where we have a well-meaning, completely-understandable reluctance

to criticize the beliefs or practices of other cultures

especially when those cultures have a history of being oppressed in whatever manner

and so our humanist values lose out to our anti-oppression values

 

I think that liberals need to be less squeamish about these issues

and admit that

since science can tell us about the world

those with beliefs that directly disagree with scientific findings are simply wrong

and furthermore that as good humanists and rationalists

we have a moral duty to do so

[Guest Atom Dowry Firth]

This is an interesting read

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/suddenly-it-looks-like-we-could-have-done-with-osama-bin-laden-staying-alive-10273207.html

[cwmbrancity]

It shows the hole sorry mess up for what it is

 

Ground war via some kind of coalition is surely on the horizon, refugees hemorrhaging across that region already, aid-crisis should be far more substantial given the west & the Gulf States collective disposable incomes.

 

More meatheads loitering by a mosque close to local environs last week.....pathetic & staggering ignorance,, polis nowhere again when it matters

[brian trageskin]

and furthermore that as good humanists and rationalists

we have a moral duty to do so

 

sounds like bush jr./obama