tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post114580892434036970..comments2024-01-19T02:23:51.665-06:00Comments on Journal Wunelle: More Sam Harriswstachourhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12447198404608861357noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1146175131342198342006-04-27T16:58:00.000-05:002006-04-27T16:58:00.000-05:00I think the evangelism is actually one of those ve...I think the evangelism is actually one of those very functional (if to me the most hateful) evolved adaptations: get people to feel they are <I>morally wrong</I> if they reject your fairy tale, and the impetus to <I>spread it</I>, with force if necessary, is not far behind. It's all like the getting-your-genes-into-the-next-generation aspect of genetics & natural selection.<BR/><BR/>"I can imagine that we wouldn't really be that bad off if folks were able to have their personal beliefs and keep them to themselves."<BR/><BR/>I agree that our problems as a society would be lessened somewhat by this; at least there'd be no bombings or witch-burnings (or choirboy molestation). But his point that (to make a random stab) we might, for example, have had the internet and spaceflight in the 1600s if we had not been impeded by this confusion of truth and mythology still stands.<BR/><BR/>I just think the whole business of embracing the house of cards as real is harmful. It can be made moreso with action and proseletyzing and sectarianism, but it's none of it good.wstachourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12447198404608861357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1146118492301607022006-04-27T01:14:00.000-05:002006-04-27T01:14:00.000-05:00I love that simile - "like an Inquisitor beating a...I love that simile - "like an Inquisitor beating a heretic" - Love it!<BR/><BR/>I think you've hit the nail on the head in your comments - one of the worst aspects of so many religions is their insistance that believers are bound by religious duty to spread thier one true religion to others. I can imagine that we wouldn't really be that bad off if folks were able to have their personal beliefs and keep them to themselves.<BR/><BR/>I used to think that even with its downsides, at least religion served the purpose of providing some guiding principles for vast groups of people who maybe couldn't be trusted to behave properly on their own. Over time I have come to think that I've been to lenient. I think I'd like to see what sort of world we'd live in if religion had never evolved (blasphemy!) and we all just lived by the Golden Rule.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13860812772132171202noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1146070595849443672006-04-26T11:56:00.000-05:002006-04-26T11:56:00.000-05:00I must sheepishly confess to being completely in t...I must sheepishly confess to being completely in the dark about the Colbert Report (slinking away, tail down, to do a quick google search).<BR/><BR/>But I'd have loved to see him speak live.wstachourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12447198404608861357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1146063546234723182006-04-26T09:59:00.000-05:002006-04-26T09:59:00.000-05:00Guess who was on Colbert Report last night. Give ...Guess who was on Colbert Report last night. Give up? yeah. It was Sam Harris.<BR/><BR/>Maybe John Stewart would have been a more thought provoking interview, but I have to say, is there a better foil for Sam Harris than the character Stephen Colbert portrays on that show?Joshuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01675519557526291088noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1146025109008838062006-04-25T23:18:00.000-05:002006-04-25T23:18:00.000-05:00The difficulty is that it almost necessarily boils...The difficulty is that it almost necessarily boils down to a competition between faiths, none of which constitute any better a perch than the others (and all of which are worse than something based on the scienfitic method where evidence and testability--and falsifiability--are valued as a means of coming to KNOW something)(Not that you, Jeffy, need instruction in science!).<BR/><BR/>I'm reminded of W's father, who was asked in a press conference whether atheists could be patriots. He answered, as we watched his mind doing the furious political calculations of the costs of what he wanted so desperately to say, "No, atheists are not patriots!" The idea (from god knows where) was that it didn't matter which groundless mythology you chose to embrace, just so long as you didn't go asking for evidence or some such method that makes us feel bad about ourselves! Thus, American pluralism.<BR/><BR/>I think it can't come down to "THIS faith is better because it's objectively less harmful to people." Rather, we need to get to a point where we heed the stories and moral lessons found in the various bibles without believing them literally true or trying to model our societies after their antique social details.<BR/><BR/>And good luck with that. As you wrote to me, we can only have a conversation among people who are already convinced; there's no reaching the devout--and this is so by design.wstachourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12447198404608861357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1146022684125123392006-04-25T22:38:00.000-05:002006-04-25T22:38:00.000-05:00Getting back to the book under discussion (or at l...Getting back to the book under discussion (or at least a little more on track), this view that we maybe shouldn't be so accepting of Islam is pretty interesting. Our society seems to be willing to draw a distinction between bona-fide religions that we want to grant broad freedoms and other shadier groups that we want to discourage. When a group seems oriented toward harmful beliefs we tend to find ways to rein them in as much as possible.<BR/><BR/>Maybe that should be the case with Islam - if belief in this religion implies strict intolerance and promotion of violent behavior then it seems reasonable to try to dissuade folks from following that religion.<BR/><BR/>A religion that preaches total intolerance of other religions is kind of by definition incompatible with a free and pluralistic society.<BR/><BR/>This is a tricky path to follow, though. Just look at all the troubles China is having with its attempts to discourage adherence to Falun Gong (whether or not it makes any sense). When so much of our society is built around the tenets of generic Christianity it is hard to evaluate what ought to be allowed and what could be considered extreme and unreasonable. I tend to classify a lot more as unreasonable than some folks might, but who gets to decide?<BR/><BR/>-- JeffyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1146002983959484102006-04-25T17:09:00.000-05:002006-04-25T17:09:00.000-05:00I should probably mention that A. Random is a long...I should probably mention that A. Random is a longtime friend of mine, who is apparently (without telling me) working toward his <I>Zenmaster's Certificate of Obtusion and Confustication</I>.<BR/><BR/>That teetered on being the most contentious agreement I've had the pleasure of reading!<BR/><BR/>;-)wstachourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12447198404608861357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1146001878634346862006-04-25T16:51:00.000-05:002006-04-25T16:51:00.000-05:00Joshua,And in that, you have solved the puzzle.The...Joshua,<BR/><BR/>And in that, you have solved the puzzle.<BR/><BR/>The victory is yours.<BR/><BR/>Alex RandomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1146000844438509642006-04-25T16:34:00.000-05:002006-04-25T16:34:00.000-05:00"The debate would be quickly lost, I fear."In that..."The debate would be quickly lost, I fear."<BR/><BR/>In that, Alex, we agree.Joshuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01675519557526291088noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145999805029080472006-04-25T16:16:00.000-05:002006-04-25T16:16:00.000-05:00Joshua,The debate would be quickly lost, I fear. T...Joshua,<BR/><BR/>The debate would be quickly lost, I fear. Things aren't always what they seem, even obvious platitudes. The enigma remains in definitions, the ontology not as unambiguous as you may think: a puzzle best solved through quiet reflection.<BR/><BR/>Wunelle is most capable of discerning this true significance. It is a task he was born for. The road to hell that his good intentions pave is the only one of value. Occam's razor's appropriateness lies in this simple fact.<BR/><BR/>Alex RandomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145987096767876352006-04-25T12:44:00.000-05:002006-04-25T12:44:00.000-05:00Right, I know what Occam's (Ockham's) razor IS, I ...Right, I know what Occam's (Ockham's) razor IS, I was asking how it has any relevance to above discussion.<BR/><BR/>And how it ties in with your comment "Remember [Occam's razor] when you choose sides. There can be only one.<BR/><BR/>Occam states that an explanation of a theory should make as few asumptions as possible. "Things shouldn't be multiplied beyond necessity"<BR/><BR/>It does not even, really, relate to what Bil posted, or what you replied. In fact, The Retropolitan's comments aside, Pascal's Wager serves as the better of the two theories you named--not, of course for its ACTUAL value to theological debate, but for its, and this is at the very least, value to topic.<BR/><BR/>And, as long as I am ranting, Occam's razor is about as useful, in philosophical discussion, as Pascal's wager. Chatton, and later Kant, both argue correctly, and more scientifically, that if something cannot be proven (or verified, I guess) by the fewest number of things, than more must be added until it is proven.<BR/><BR/>Now, I am not looking to get into a "flame war", or even a debate. However, I take the smallest exception to platitudes, no matter how eloquently they are spun.Joshuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01675519557526291088noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145981809986141302006-04-25T11:16:00.000-05:002006-04-25T11:16:00.000-05:00Uhhh... Eschew obfuscation!Uhhh... <BR/><BR/><I>Eschew obfuscation!</I>wstachourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12447198404608861357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145913475395831912006-04-24T16:17:00.000-05:002006-04-24T16:17:00.000-05:00Joshua,Occam's Razor is superior for teleological ...Joshua,<BR/><BR/>Occam's Razor is superior for teleological reasons, naturally. Anything less is pure sophistry.<BR/><BR/>My apostasy notwithstanding, and not to be oblique, your answer lies in definitions.<BR/><BR/>Alex RandomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145907777047339792006-04-24T14:42:00.000-05:002006-04-24T14:42:00.000-05:00I just ordered it on half, I will let you know whe...I just ordered it on half, I will let you know when I get done reading it.<BR/><BR/>How is Occam's Razor any better, Alex?Joshuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01675519557526291088noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145896514501416922006-04-24T11:35:00.000-05:002006-04-24T11:35:00.000-05:00How DARE Blogger eat comments for one of my posts!...How DARE Blogger eat comments for one of my posts! How DARE IT!<BR/><BR/>But I appreciate the comments (those that survive the gauntlet).<BR/><BR/>I'm nearing the halfway point now, and he just keeps grinding away. I'm about to start the chapter about Islam, which certain critiques I've read say he is especially fanatical against. But so far he seems quite reasonable to me, though I am naturally inclined extend my hand to any attempt to put faith under the lights.<BR/><BR/>(He's so damn quotable tho--I keep wanting to post quote after quote.)wstachourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12447198404608861357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145890618789252612006-04-24T09:56:00.000-05:002006-04-24T09:56:00.000-05:00My comment disappeared! It was an extended versio...My comment disappeared! It was an extended version of something like this:<BR/><BR/>This sound like a really interesting read, and this guy should go on The Daily Show if he hasn't already.mysterygirl!https://www.blogger.com/profile/01708758561975520042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145847634906106502006-04-23T22:00:00.000-05:002006-04-23T22:00:00.000-05:00Not having read the book I can't be sure, but I su...Not having read the book I can't be sure, but I suspect that I also agree almost entirely with the author. The trouble is, what good does it do the few of us who agree with him to know that the rest of the world's population is probably completely unwilling to consider any challanges to their faith? I don't usually think that sticking my head in the sand is the best course of action, but when there is no other course it doesn't seem so bad. When I can see certain doom on the horizon it seems that rather than discussing the inevitability of it and how miserable an experience it will be I'd rather just hope that those storm clouds are farther away than they appear.<BR/><BR/>We have no hope of fixing the problem, so I'll choose to think happier thoughts.<BR/><BR/>-- JeffyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145841113842461672006-04-23T20:11:00.000-05:002006-04-23T20:11:00.000-05:00Regarding the comment on Pascal's Wager:Agreed. I ...Regarding the comment on Pascal's Wager:<BR/><BR/>Agreed. <BR/><BR/>I meant <B>Occam's Razor.</B><BR/><BR/>Sorry, I'll stop now.<BR/><BR/>Alex RandomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145838184719753172006-04-23T19:23:00.000-05:002006-04-23T19:23:00.000-05:00I think it bears noting that Pascal's Wager was a ...I think it bears noting that Pascal's Wager was a very poorly thought-out reason to believe.The Retropolitanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13492457405392980254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145834432086931042006-04-23T18:20:00.000-05:002006-04-23T18:20:00.000-05:00I recently heard a story on NPR from a man by the ...I recently heard a story on NPR from a man by the name of Kevin Phillips who wrote a book titled <I>American Theocracy</I>. His thesis is that the fall of great nations has happened numerous times before in countries such as Rome and most recently Great Britain. He links all of this to the rise of fundamentalism.<BR/><BR/>http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5290373<BR/><BR/>A Book I might want to purchase on Amazon, as well as <I>The End of Faith.</I><BR/><BR/>Alex RandomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145833366524201942006-04-23T18:02:00.000-05:002006-04-23T18:02:00.000-05:00Established religions perfectly exemplify the meme...Established religions perfectly exemplify the <I>meme</I> of Richard Dawkins, a unit of cultural evolution which seeks its fittest form for an environment; and the environment is the human psyche in our indigenous social habitat (over the last 5,000 years). These memes have evolved to a form where they satisfy our need for a power structure (a way for the power-hungry to lead, and for the rest of us to be led) and where everyone can be enlisted as footsoldiers to keep the order. The inability to question this order should naturally be a part of the structure, especially when the genesis traces back to pre-scientific times.<BR/><BR/>So many, many people believe in their core that religious faith is a GOOD thing, a way to BE A GOOD PERSON; it is a mechanism for them to achieve an honorable desire--to be and do good. The faith is designed to achieve this very belief. And this bedrock belief is the gravity that keeps everything flowing downhill.<BR/><BR/>Even now, reading his book, I despair that our destruction is inevitable, since I think there is no way in hell to get people to really look at and question these things. Their whole world has been structured to keep them from it.wstachourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12447198404608861357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145832088604571102006-04-23T17:41:00.000-05:002006-04-23T17:41:00.000-05:00The road to hell is paved with good intentions, my...The road to hell is paved with good intentions, my friend. Remember Pascal when you choose sides. There can be only one.<BR/><BR/>Alex RandomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145828393143936922006-04-23T16:39:00.000-05:002006-04-23T16:39:00.000-05:00Also, you need more pictures of those puppies.Also, you need more pictures of those puppies.The Retropolitanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13492457405392980254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15935045.post-1145828216539695092006-04-23T16:36:00.000-05:002006-04-23T16:36:00.000-05:00I read that last year, and echoed about 99% of the...I read that last year, and echoed about 99% of the statements he made. Despite the obvious danger that both fundamentalism and 'fuzzy' spirituality can bring, it's still nigh-impossible to criticize them in society. I know that I've alienated at least one of my friends for agreeing with the statements about moderates in the book.The Retropolitanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13492457405392980254noreply@blogger.com