Religion Poisons Everything
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-12-2014, 10:19 AM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
(29-12-2014 09:49 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(29-12-2014 08:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  Blind adherence would possibly result in short-term benefit, but not every problem or situation will have an appropriate response or action consistent with the ideology - and that is where the problem lies.

Without critical thinking, the ideologue becomes immune to perception of reality.

Maybe, but you seem to agree, that blind adherence can lead to malevolent actions, as well as benevolent actions, horrible and non-horrible actions. It's not particularly one sided, even if the benefit is one that is short-term.

Would you say the same applies to non-blind adherence to an ideology/clear-sighted adherence to an ideology, that it can produce the same things, malevolent and benevolent results?

If so, what's the difference between blind and non-blind adherence? Merely that one produces short-term results, while the other produces long-term results, regardless if those results are destructive or creative, benevolent or malevolent?

Is the only uniqueness a matter of sustaining power?

The difference is critical thinking - I would have thought that obvious since that was what my post said.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2014, 10:41 AM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
(29-12-2014 10:19 AM)Chas Wrote:  The difference is critical thinking - I would have thought that obvious since that was what my post said.

Ignoratio elenchi.

If the question was one about what's the difference between thinking critically, and not thinking critically your answer here would make sense, but that's not the question.

The question is about the motivating competent, of blind adherence to ideology and clear adherence to an ideology. You seem to answer this by saying that one involves critical thinking, which is an answer for a question that's not being asked here.

You seem to assert that blind adherence has some "unique motivating" component, it's this motivating component that I am interested in. You previously did agree that it can motivate horrible and benevolent actions.

Which I assume could also be said of clear sighted adherence to an ideology, that it can motivate both benevolent and malevolent actions.

At one point I assumed you were suggesting what makes blind adherence different is that it's short-term, but perhaps this wasn't the case.

Are you now suggesting the motivating power of non-cricial/ blind adherence, and clear/critical adherence is the same, but just that one is non-critical, blind, while the other is not?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2014, 11:10 AM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
(07-04-2013 03:58 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(07-04-2013 03:36 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Trust me when I tell you this isn't fun for me, I don't particularly like to dwell on atrocities. I just feel like turning a blind eye or not giving it the proper attention in a place like this is an oversight.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3326/i...ning-women

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/barbara-wad...88403.html

http://listverse.com/2008/04/02/8-atroci...-religion/

A little light reading Dodgy


I think WW II should be added to this list. There was a domino effect that grew out of Christians not forgiving the Jews for Jesus' death. Jews in Europe were discriminated against for almost two thousand years, they were segregated into the ghettos, not allowed to hold any office or have a say in government.

Just think how different the world would have been if Christians had actually acted like Christians are supposed to act and forgiven the Jews, welcomed them into all the communities, allowed them to worship however they wanted, gave them some sense of acceptance and positions in government. Instead the opposite happened, Christians acted like ass holes for centuries and it eventually created a climate for Hitler to go in to the Jewish communities and round them up without much resistance.

I also think many wars are caused by territorial envy and power. Some other country might have better access to a waterways that makes trade easier and, "damn, wouldn't it be nice to annex THAT to our territory".....that sort of thing.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2014, 11:21 AM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
One of the problems with religion being the motivator for any type of action, benevolent or malevolent, is the underlying belief of an outside agent requiring either. This type of adherence eschews thinking for oneself.

For actions that are benevolent, while the outcome can be described as "good" the impetus is foreign. Uncritical adherence to an ideology can produce benevolence and good. Unfortunately the baggage that uncritical adherence to any ideogy brings with it is not contained to benevolent acts.

This brings me to the reason I created this thread. I would argue that the examples herein would not have occurred without the uncritical adherence to ideology, in this case religious ideology.

Would you not agree that any ideology that stunts critical thinking is inherently dangerous?

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2014, 11:24 AM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
(29-12-2014 10:41 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(29-12-2014 10:19 AM)Chas Wrote:  The difference is critical thinking - I would have thought that obvious since that was what my post said.

Ignoratio elenchi.

If the question was one about what's the difference between thinking critically, and not thinking critically your answer here would make sense, but that's not the question.

The question is about the motivating competent, of blind adherence to ideology and clear adherence to an ideology.
You seem to answer this by saying that one involves critical thinking, which is an answer for a question that's not being asked here.

You seem to assert that blind adherence has some "unique motivating" component, it's this motivating component that I am interested in. You previously did agree that it can motivate horrible and benevolent actions.

Which I assume could also be said of clear sighted adherence to an ideology, that it can motivate both benevolent and malevolent actions.

At one point I assumed you were suggesting what makes blind adherence different is that it's short-term, but perhaps this wasn't the case.

Are you now suggesting the motivating power of non-cricial/ blind adherence, and clear/critical adherence is the same, but just that one is non-critical, blind, while the other is not?

I am not drawing a conclusion, I am making an assertion.

The difference between following an ideology blindly or not is the absence or presence of critical thinking.
If one follows blindly, critical thinking has been disabled and differentiating good from bad consequences is no longer possible.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
29-12-2014, 11:59 AM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
(29-12-2014 11:24 AM)Chas Wrote:  I am not drawing a conclusion, I am making an assertion.

The difference between following an ideology blindly or not is the absence or presence of critical thinking.
If one follows blindly, critical thinking has been disabled and differentiating good from bad consequences is no longer possible.

Let's back track here, to where this all started:

(28-12-2014 04:47 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-12-2014 03:01 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  If it's not anything unique to religion that motivates horrible actions, what is it then?

Blind, uncritical adherence to an ideology, be it religious, political, or philosophical.

It appears that you were claiming/asserting here that blind, uncritical adherence to an ideology uniquely motivates horrible actions.

Or were you asserting no such thing?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2014, 12:10 PM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
(29-12-2014 11:21 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  Would you not agree that any ideology that stunts critical thinking is inherently dangerous?

Using critical thinking, we might reason that elevating critical thinking to the status of a "one true way" can also be dangerous.

It's not hard to make a case (not proof, just a case) that there is credible evidence that the agreed upon awesome power of critical thinking is leading towards the extermination of the human race.

If we truly believe in critical thinking, we should prove it, by using critical thinking to also test and challenge critical thinking itself, just like anything else.

If we decline to do that challenging, we are just "one true way" ideological dogmatists little different than the theists.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2014, 12:57 PM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
(29-12-2014 12:10 PM)Baba Bozo Wrote:  
(29-12-2014 11:21 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  Would you not agree that any ideology that stunts critical thinking is inherently dangerous?

Using critical thinking, we might reason that elevating critical thinking to the status of a "one true way" can also be dangerous.

It's not hard to make a case (not proof, just a case) that there is credible evidence that the agreed upon awesome power of critical thinking is leading towards the extermination of the human race.

If we truly believe in critical thinking, we should prove it, by using critical thinking to also test and challenge critical thinking itself, just like anything else.

If we decline to do that challenging, we are just "one true way" ideological dogmatists little different than the theists.

There isn't an alternative to critical thinking. It is by its own definition questioning itself as opposed to theistic "thinking" where the ideology is considered beyond reproach.

As for your assertion/observation that critical thinking is leading towards the extermination of the human race I would counter just the opposite, that it is the lack of it that will/could lead us to self extermination.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2014, 01:51 PM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
(29-12-2014 11:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(29-12-2014 11:24 AM)Chas Wrote:  I am not drawing a conclusion, I am making an assertion.

The difference between following an ideology blindly or not is the absence or presence of critical thinking.
If one follows blindly, critical thinking has been disabled and differentiating good from bad consequences is no longer possible.

Let's back track here, to where this all started:

(28-12-2014 04:47 PM)Chas Wrote:  Blind, uncritical adherence to an ideology, be it religious, political, or philosophical.

It appears that you were claiming/asserting here that blind, uncritical adherence to an ideology uniquely motivates horrible actions.

Or were you asserting no such thing?

No, try reading the actual statements and follow the sequence.

You asked if motivating horrible actions was unique to religion, and I said that it was common to blind adherence to an ideology.
That asserts nothing else, and most certainly not "uniquely motivates horrible actions".

Do you make these strawman arguments on purpose or is your reading comprehension just that poor? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-12-2014, 05:32 PM
RE: Religion Poisons Everything
(29-12-2014 01:51 PM)Chas Wrote:  Do you make these strawman arguments on purpose or is your reading comprehension just that poor? Consider

I guess my reading comprehension skills are just that poor, so you likely will have to work with me here to compensate.


Quote:You asked if motivating horrible actions was unique to religion, and I said that it was common to blind adherence to an ideology.

How about non-horrible, seemingly benevolent actions, are they also common to blind adherence to an ideology?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: