Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joan Denoo on December 7, 2011 at 12:57pm

Levini, Wonderful response, and accurate. I really like the prod to be specific.

On the other hand, what flag do these religious groups fight under?  When it is an intra-nation battle, is not the philosophy of the combatants that drive them to war.  Yes, poverty is an appropriate motivator for some disputes, likes-join-likes against "other."  Religion often collects people together around a church; In Spokane we have what we call the "Catholic Ghetto" which isn't a ghetto in the usual sense, it is a very prosperous, beautiful part of our city, and even the Catholics refer to their neighborhood this way.  

Sadly, war is a part of a great deal of time in our history.  There is no evidence, based on not finding weapons in archeology digs, fortified walls, or skeletons with massive injuries that warring creates. Early Çatalhöyük, Turkey is an example of that. There are 22 layers of civilizations, if I remember correctly, one on top of the other.  The early sites at the bottom of the pile had no evidence of weapons of war, no fortifications, no skeletons with signs of broken bones, other than would normally be found.  It appears to have been a peaceful community with no war armaments.  The layers to which I speak are the Neolithic layers.  The archaeologist with whom I spoke was clear about this details.

The way I compiled this list is faulty.  Being a lover of peace and justice, whenever I saw a news article about war and it included references to religious connections, I pulled up my "Wars with Religious Attributes" list and added it.  The list I sent was sorted alphabetically, which makes no real sense other than to be easier to look up.  I wish I had included important details, such as dates, rationale for war, and even names of leaders and their religious affiliations.  

What does archaeology have to tell us about human Life?  Have we always been warlike?  Riane Eisler asked that question.  She was a young Jewish girl that escaped with her family from Nazi persecution; they got on a boat of Jews escaping to the USA and were denied entry.  The boat went to Cuba, if I remember correctly, where they found refuge.  She grew up, became an attorney and wondered why she was limited in her ability to conduct proper legal cases in court.  A judge told her he would not hear a case from a person in a skirt.  She changed to a pant suit and the judge said he would not hear cases from a woman wearing pants. Logical! Right?  Her question: why do some people prejudge others? She was judged for being a Jew and a woman. She turned to legal history, social sciences, systems theory and archeology. "The Chalice and the Blade" followed.  She and Maria Gimbutas, an archaeologist, found common ground and Eisler wrote "The Power of Partnership," and "The Wealth of Nations."

According to Eisler and Gimbutas, there have been war-free societies around the globe at different times on the Eon Scale.  Gimbutas found there was a correlation with violence and religiosity and spiritualism.  When humans turned to sky gods or mysticism, they tended to believe they had a right to access to resources and defended that belief by referring to high authority.  Not all cultures hold such beliefs. There are those who see themselves as part of a larger whole, the "Indra's Net" concept. Everything that is reflects everything that is. 

Therefore, I yield to your excellent and appropriate criticism and find your comments worthy of my attention ... and an addition of categories to answer these legitimate questions.  Thanks, you are a good and valuable reader of my work.  

Attachments:

• indras_net02.jpg, 77 KB
• 74443.jpg, 387 KB
• early.jpg, 45 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by leveni on December 7, 2011 at 7:14pm

I was expecting something to read when I opened the attachments, but then, suddenly, my brain was confronted with these strange images. It took me a second to adjust to the confusion caused by them.

Permalink Reply by Joan Denoo on December 8, 2011 at 2:54am

Levini, There is no Reply button on your comment so I am using the Reply on my comment and hope you can make sense of what I am trying to convey. 

Sorry I confused you with the attachments.  I included the photos to demonstrate 3 dimension concepts, such as Indra's Net, and astronomy images that represent how change in one part of a system can impact many other parts of a system. If a people believe a supernatural power promised them land, another group of people believe a supernatural power promised them the same land, who owns the land? It is the beliefs based upon their stories that brings about constant war.  Those beliefs have repercussions around the earth.  Beliefs, based on superstition, have potential for terrible wars and suffering.  

Permalink Reply by leveni on December 8, 2011 at 10:28am

HI Joan,

Yep I agree, if that is what people believe their God told them

 

So in the particular case of Israel, the Jews say they are using divine prophecy to claim Israel. 

Also, Muhammad used divine prophecy to conquer the middle east.

The Crusaders used religion as an excuse to take back the "Holy Land"

Bahai's in Iran. (Interesting fact: It is illegal for Bahai's to proselytize in Israel or they will get kicked out of the country)

Babri Mosque

These are of the top of my head. Definitely lots more.

 

I don't want to change your mind about religion being the cause of the above.

But

ultimately for me, the above have nothing to do with religion. I never blame religion. I only blame each individual that participated in the above. 

 

Permalink Reply by Joan Denoo on December 5, 2011 at 11:18pm

Leveni, atheists, brights, freethinkers, secular humanists, skeptics, spiritual humanists are all capable of exploiting and manipulating others, and we can see it when we read, watch or listen to their media.  The difference is they are not trying to take women's right to choose abortion from them as a fundamental policy even in the case of rape and incest,  they do not try take away choice of death with dignity, they don't prevent homosexuals the right to marriage and the rights that go with that institution. I have never seen any of them dismiss or discount domestic violence or rapes committed by ministers, priests or rabbis.  Surely, there are rapists among them, but have you seen anyone that claims to not believe in god get away with the crime?    

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by leveni on December 6, 2011 at 9:57pm

What Jason Spicer said about current vocal atheists is very true.

And I do not know of any current vocal atheist who has committed any crime or consciously deceived anybody. 

But,

I don't think this occurs because of atheism. I think Atheists, freethinkers, secular humanists think a little more than the average person. Even if these atheists were Christians or Muslims they would still not commit those crimes, (most people here at Atheist-Nexus were once upon a time Christians), and one could think that when they were Christians they would not have committed these crimes because they all have the ability to think a little more than the average person.

I still don't think atheism does anything. It is we, it is our own minds that do everything. It is not atheism. Atheism is a by-product of our ability to think. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joan Denoo on December 8, 2011 at 3:01am

Upon reflection I agree with you, atheism is a by-product of our own thinking.  Knowledge and wisdom comes from within our own being.  You are right.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason Spicer on December 5, 2011 at 4:08pm

Leveni, astronomy started as a means to predict crop cycles and aid in navigation. We don't know whether the religious claptrap was grafted onto that from the beginning or added later. If I had to guess, I'd say it was there from the beginning, but astronomy has always had practical uses from the get-go. In any case, I don't think you can state for sure that astronomy got going because of religion.

Likewise, math and architecture were practical and necessary. They would have been developed with or without religion, and it's dubious at best to claim that these things arose because of religion. You are in bad company with the likes of Stanley Jaki if you try to claim that science itself is the result of religion. This is patent nonsense. Religion has certainly tolerated and co-opted science, math, architecture, etc, over the centuries, but it has never been responsible for them in a creative way, except as a powerful and wealthy patron.

The bottom line is that god-belief is a severely debilitating delusion. You are extremely fortunate to have never been so afflicted, so perhaps you can't see how much damage it does. Simple non-belief in gods frees up the mind to better engage reality. This is enormously important personally and societally. It really is disappointing that anybody on an atheist forum would discount this. I haven't even disputed your definition of atheism, though you seem to think that I have. My point all along has been that simple disbelief in god is intrinsically highly valuable. You think it offers nothing, and yet you hang out here at Atheist Nexus. Can't think why that would be.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joan Denoo on December 5, 2011 at 5:02pm

Jason, sadly, I agree with you;  religion, has been a means of control; science has been a process of questions.  Living in the answer or living in the question?  To me, living in the question creates a realm for wonder.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by leveni on December 5, 2011 at 6:35pm

Hi Jason,

Leveni, astronomy started as a means to predict crop cycles and aid in navigation. We don't know whether the religious claptrap was grafted onto that from the beginning or added later. If I had to guess, I'd say it was there from the beginning, but astronomy has always had practical uses from the get-go. In any case, I don't think you can state for sure that astronomy got going because of religion.

Yep, I can't state for sure. It is pure conjecture. This isn't the thread to discuss astronomy and its origins. Maybe we can start a new thread, later on, and go from there. 

Likewise, math and architecture were practical and necessary. They would have been developed with or without religion, and it's dubious at best to claim that these things arose because of religion. You are in bad company with the likes ofStanley Jaki if you try to claim that science itself is the result of religion. This is patent nonsense. Religion has certainly tolerated and co-opted science, math, architecture, etc, over the centuries, but it has never been responsible for them in a creative way, except as a powerful and wealthy patron.

Again, the origins of architecture and maths can never be know. We can know the people who first wrote them down on paper. But how or why we developed them is going to be pure conjecture.

The bottom line is that god-belief is a severely debilitating delusion. You are extremely fortunate to have never been so afflicted, so perhaps you can't see how much damage it does.

American Atheists often say things like this. I guess we, in Australia, are just more secular than you guys. 

Simple non-belief in gods frees up the mind to better engage reality. This is enormously important personally and societally. It really is disappointing that anybody on an atheist forum would discount this.

I often use an anecdote very similar to this when the subject of atheism comes up and when the person I am talking with is a religious person, who has shown an interest in morality and ethics.

Sorry for my berating style, I guess for me, 'engaging in reality' and 'atheism' are two separate issues. (I could make a lot of jokes about myself with that statement.)      

I haven't even disputed your definition of atheism, though you seem to think that I have.

Again, sorry for my berating style.

My point all along has been that simple disbelief in god is intrinsically highly valuable. You think it offers nothing, and yet you hang out here at Atheist Nexus. Can't think why that would be.

I come here to question other atheists. To push them and to be pushed, about what we think. I mostly stay on this particular thread because it is about atheism. 

After reading your lost souls and McShrine, I'm guessing you come here to get some peace and quiet, time-out for a relaxing chat with your fellow atheists, whilst sipping on a nice hot cup of coffee and with your feet up. And then this Leveni comes along and spoils it all. What can I say? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason Spicer on December 7, 2011 at 12:34am

Hi Leveni,

 

You've guessed more or less correctly about why I visit Atheist Nexus. It is a place where I don't have to pretend quite so much.

 

I wouldn't say you spoil my visits here, but I do find your statements rather baffling. More below.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joan Denoo on December 5, 2011 at 8:37pm

Jason, you wrote, “astronomy started as a means to predict crop cycles and aid in navigation.”

I agree. Astronomy was studied and used to build and plant by pre-christian cultures as demonstrated by the astronomical nature of buildings, monuments, and farming  such as:

*Çatalhöyük, Turkey, 6400 BC, Neolithic period, domesticated plants and animals, used astronomy;

*Egypt, 6000 BC, Neolithic period, built rudimentary ships with single-sail, used astronomy for navigation; 

*Sumerians, 3500 BC developed astronomical sciences, intense religious beliefs, and tightly organized city-states.

*Newgrange, Ireland, built in about 3200 BC, faced so the sun would reach into the interior once a year;

*Stonehenge, UK, built in about 3100 BC, designed by astronomical discipline;

http://www.catalhoyuk.com/history.html

http://www.newgrange.com/

http://www.stonehenge.co.uk/about.php

“The Archaeology of Measurement: Comprehending Heaven, Earth and Time in ancient societies. Measurement in navigation: Conceiving distance and time in the Neolithic.” By Helen Farr. Page 25, described navigation and spirituality:

Neolithic seafarers, engaged in dynamic relationships with currents, winds, weather, tides, stars and seasonal rhythms, "constructed beliefs and rituals as a means of ordering and defining knowledge of the world."

The bottom line is that god-belief is a necessary but not sufficient delusion when faced with such powerful challenges. In these circumstances, the “god of the gaps” prevail.  One can set aside such delusions as testable  knowledge grows.

Jason, You so insigtfully wrote, “Simple non-belief in gods frees up the mind to better engage reality. This is enormously important personally and societally. … My point all along has been that … simple disbelief in god is intrinsically highly valuable. You think it offers nothing, and yet you hang out here at Atheist Nexus. Can't think why that would be.”

 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 117
• 118
• 119
• 120
• 121
• …
• 155
• Next ›
• Page