- Joined
- 2 July 2008
- Posts
- 7,102
- Reactions
- 6
So, let's stick to the topics of today and discuss how we can change people's attitudes to one another. How we can eliminate Stone-Age ideas from today's interpretation of religious beliefs and spread the notion of tolerance across society.
Thank you, luutzu;
for a very concise and unbiased digest of the history of science.
In the context of religion, it may be worth adding a few non-British influences.
When Britain was still asleep in the Dark Ages, Arab scholars were busily studying Greek philosophers, Indian numerals, Egyptian art; they saw no conflict between "Western" ideas and the Qur'an. Their bridgehead in parts of Spain became a melting pot and provided much of the impetus that centuries later sparked the European Renaissance. Even after their defeat in 732, Arab scholars and artisans were highly regarded in Central Europe and invited to teach medicine and other sciences.
In Italy (of all places!) a few thinkers began comparing their findings with Church Doctrine, which was found wanting. Free thinkers like Leonardo broke taboos and measured and dissected bodies, so they could understand how to draw correct portraits. Johann Gensfleisch (German for goose flesh; no wonder he changed his name to Gutenberg) built the first functioning reusable printing press, which, for the first time, made ideas more readily available to ordinary people. No longer were thoughts controlled by religious and state rulers. It took a few centuries to filter through, but in the 18th century, Friedrich Schiller could finally plead freedom of ideas "Sire, geben Sie Gedankenfreiheit."
Some of these geniuses worked within the confines of the Church; Gutenberg's first book was the Bible. But he would be well aware that the benefits of his device wouldn't stop there. Luther, Erasmus, Melanchthon, to name but a few, could have their ideas disseminated on "fliers", in defiance of Church Doctrine. Copernicus' description of planetary motions spread across Europe in print. Would Shakespeare's plays have had the impact they did without people being able to read them?
I suppose you must have some plan in mind, but I haven't got a clue what it is. Could you please enlighten me on your notion of spreading tolerance across society by ignoring history and burying our heads in the sand. Is it based on Abbott's notion of "Team Australia"?
I suppose you must have some plan in mind, but I haven't got a clue what it is. Could you please enlighten me on your notion of spreading tolerance across society by ignoring history and burying our heads in the sand. Is it based on Abbott's notion of "Team Australia"?
Religious myth, legends and the fantastic claims therein deserve no respect and should be accorded none by anyone claiming to be an atheist. One's basic human rights and dignity should be respected, not their belief in imaginary sky Gods, demons, spirits, edicts etc. and all the supernatural claims used to justify such belief.I'm an atheist with a lot of respect for religion...
Indeed, a tool to manipulate, control, deceive and subjugate the minds of gullible believers and give them a false confidence, hope and surety about eternity.Organised religion is, as those who have used it in the past have clearly noticed, a tool
Speak for yourself and not on behalf of anyone else with such generalization.Plenty of us are violent hateful idiots. We all are, at least a little bit.
As an atheist, I have no desire to become part of any religious tribe. If there is such a thing as a "decent" religion how would you define it and to what end? Engaging or promoting any religion as a useful tool for controlling human behaviour is a slippery slope that leads to religious fascism, theocracy and domination.But at least a little of that stupidity can be mitigated if we accept a decent religion, and use it, as a way of allowing people to accept each other. To make a religion that brings all humans into the tribe.
Really? So irrational religious beliefs should be encouraged to bring out the best in people? I suggest that being rational about human wellbeing and caring about the welfare of others makes more sense than needing or claiming a heavenly reward or motivation for doing so.We're irrational. Sometimes the irrational can bring out the best is us.
When the Aids epidemic broke, Mother Theresa left India with heaps of nuns to set up a hospital in the US to care for the dying because no one else wanted to.
So sorry, as with Weatsop I have respect for religion too and find some of the intolerance shown in this thread distasteful.
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/blog-oltre-tevere-by-giacomo-galeazzi/detail/articolo/10445/
Religious myth, legends and the fantastic claims therein deserve no respect and should be accorded none by anyone claiming to be an atheist. One's basic human rights and dignity should be respected, not their belief in imaginary sky Gods, demons, spirits, edicts etc. and all the supernatural claims used to justify such belief.
Indeed, a tool to manipulate, control, deceive and subjugate the minds of gullible believers and give them a false confidence, hope and surety about eternity.
Speak for yourself and not on behalf of anyone else with such generalization.
As an atheist, I have no desire to become part of any religious tribe. If there is such a thing as a "decent" religion how would you define it and to what end? Engaging or promoting any religion as a useful tool for controlling human behaviour is a slippery slope that leads to religious fascism, theocracy and domination.
Really? So irrational religious beliefs should be encouraged to bring out the best in people? I suggest that being rational about human wellbeing and caring about the welfare of others makes more sense than needing or claiming a heavenly reward or motivation for doing so.
Weatsop said:God is so obviously something people made up, that I can't understand how anyone who actually believes in a god manages to function day-to-day. Why don't they walk into trees? How could you be so stupid and still remember to breathe?
Half a million odd women were raped in during the India-Pakistan war. She was adamant that even under those circumstances abortion was never right. It's a shame her compassion didn't extend beyond her religious dogma.
The perfect example of the wolves suppressing freedom, you must be part of the Communist party, McLovin.
You are the first to say that people should be allowed to speak their mind, and now you are saying she can't?
I thought you were for freedom of speech.
OK, so you want a Communist country where we are not allowed to express our views.
Maybe you should read your own posts, McLovin.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?