Page 4

religion is what you make it, no more, no less

6/2/2006 5:23:46 PM

NCSUStinger You should have said...

Quote :

"Page 4 religion is what you make it, no less, no more"

It would have rhymed.

[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 6:03 PM. Reason : ``]

6/2/2006 6:03:02 PM

ill keep that thought alive

for page five

6/2/2006 6:52:23 PM

I see what you did there.

Quote :

"This hypothetical person is the sole judge and jury for whether their life is what they want it to be. I would be inclined to ask him to reconsider, but not to tell him he's wrong."

And the reason you'd be inclined to ask him to reconsider is because (despite how happy he may be) you'd believe he is mistaken in his evaluation of the right thing to do and to what brings about a good life.

Quote :

"Christians believe they do know what is best, without looking at reality"

But you can't have knowledge of what is best without looking at reality!

Quote :

"Mm I'd argue that anybody who believes in the events of the Bible would have lost connection with reality."

Yeah, but at least in most everyday situations, Americans still believe in logic and causality.

Quote :

"It seems to me that your position is that in order to be totally fulfilled in life you need to do whatever you want to do, regardless of the consequences."

I can't speak for McDanger or Nietzsche, but whatever I want to do is wholly dependent on the consequences. btw, selfishness doesn't necessarily mean you're screwing over people.

6/2/2006 7:14:31 PM

Quote :

"And the reason you'd be inclined to ask him to reconsider is because (despite how happy he may be) you'd believe he is mistaken in his evaluation of the right thing to do and to what brings about a good life."

No, I would be inclined to ask him to reconsider because I like to spread knowledge around. I think that's the right thing for me to do. I don't think he's doing the wrong thing, just because he doesn't know what I know. When he has a new set of data available, and he still doesn't budge, then I might think that's wrong.

Quote :

"But you can't have knowledge of what is best without looking at reality!"

"Best" is a matter of opinion. It is subject only to what you know about reality, not the whole of reality.

Quote :

"Yeah, but at least in most everyday situations, Americans still believe in logic and causality."

Lots of Americans believe in miracles too. To admit even onesuch is to lose connection with reality.

6/2/2006 7:29:19 PM

I wasn't actually going to post something substantial because most of this stuff is over my head, but I guess I'll give it a shot...

Quote :

"One should not embellish or dress up Christianity: it has waged a war to the death against this higher type of man, it has excommunicated all the fundamental instincts of this type, it has distilled evil, the Evil One, out of these instincts – the strong human being as the type of reprehensibility, as the ‘outcast’. Christianity has taken the side of everything weak, base, ill-constituted, it has made an ideal out of opposition to the preservative instincts of strong life; it has depraved the reason even of the intellectually strongest natures by teaching men to feel the supreme values of intellectuality as sinful, as misleading, as temptations. The most deplorable example: the depraving of Pascal, who believed his reason had been depraved by original sin while it had only been depraved by his Christianity!"

This is where I totally disagree and kinda get lost.

We make up an intellectual species. We learned to control some of the things around us and to adapt to the things we couldn't control. Nietzsche proposes that Christianity attempts to stamp out intellectualism through the promotion of egalitarianism and charity, but I believe it's that same intellectualism that allows us to be egalitarian and charitable.

If I can get one person on here to agree with me on that, I'm soooo writing a book. I'll call it The Anti-McNietzsche. It would be an ignorant pile of shit, but the title would be worth it.

6/2/2006 7:39:45 PM

Quote :

"We make up an intellectual species. We learned to control some of the things around us and to adapt to the things we couldn't control. Nietzsche proposes that Christianity attempts to stamp out intellectualism through the promotion of egalitarianism and charity, but I believe it's that same intellectualism that allows us to be egalitarian and charitable."

Here's where we depart. Since we make up an intellectual species, there's a gradiant of talent and development. This is why I am against an egalitarian society.

6/2/2006 7:54:51 PM

Quote :

"Nietzsche proposes that Christianity attempts to stamp out intellectualism through the promotion of egalitarianism and charity, but I believe it's that same intellectualism that allows us to be egalitarian and charitable."

I think Nietzsche proposes that Christianity attempts to promote egalitarianism and charity through stamping out intellectualism, not the other way around. They stamp out intellectualism by calling it a sin, and therefore people stop thinking, and they earn themselves some peace and quiet.

6/2/2006 8:00:10 PM

Quote :

"I don't think he's doing the wrong thing, just because he doesn't know what I know."

Quote :

""Best" is a matter of opinion. It is subject only to what you know about reality, not the whole of reality."

No, no, no. Just because you don't know about something doesn't mean you're not missing out.

Quote :

"Lots of Americans believe in miracles too. To admit even onesuch is to lose connection with reality."

I know. I was just saying at least they don't think everything is a miracle. At least they're not burning witches anymore.

6/2/2006 8:09:00 PM

I think I used the word "egalitarian" incorrectly. Either way, I suppose what I'm getting at is this: What good are our intellects if we can't use them to be charitable and improve the lives of all?

[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 8:15 PM. Reason : sss]

6/2/2006 8:13:25 PM

snobbing others from their parents' basements of course.

6/2/2006 8:22:57 PM

Quote :

"No, no, no. Just because you don't know about something doesn't mean you're not missing out."

But, we were not talking about missing out. We were talking about the fact that a given Christian believes he knows what's best for himself. You say they don't know because they don't have information. I say they do know because "what is best" is entirely subjective, and subjectivity is constrained to the limits of your knowledge. A person might be missing out, but they're not doing the wrong thing until they know they have other options. Until you know you have an option, you literally do not have that option. You cannot choose it without knowledge of it.

Quote :

"I was just saying at least they don't think everything is a miracle. At least they're not burning witches anymore."

True enough, we know flies don't come from rotting meat. Nonetheless most Americans regard their own births as miraculous. A majority believe we have souls that are entirely nonphysical. And a rare few still burn fags.

6/2/2006 8:27:36 PM

Quote :

"Either way, I suppose what I'm getting at is this: What good are our intellects if we can't use them to be charitable and improve the lives of all?"

Smarter people are not necessarily nicer people. They don't correlate. You can be charitable and improve the lives of all with or without your intellect. You might do a better job with your intellect, but you can still do it without. Christianity's attempt to stamp out intellectualism doesn't undermine their focus on charity.

However -- the more weak people there are in the world, the more charity is needed. The decline of intellectualism affects not the supply of charity, but the demand for it.

[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 8:39 PM. Reason : para.2]

6/2/2006 8:37:22 PM

Quote :

"snobbing others from their parents' basements of course."

Well, neanderthal man has chosen to join us. It's hilarious that so many creationists that cry about the lack of a missing link make a compelling case for one themselves.

Quote :

"I think I used the word "egalitarian" incorrectly. Either way, I suppose what I'm getting at is this: What good are our intellects if we can't use them to be charitable and improve the lives of all?"

At least in this work, less is given to "what you would do with knowledge" than to an attempted revaluation of values.

[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 8:38 PM. Reason : .]

6/2/2006 8:37:42 PM

Have I done something to you that I'm not aware of?

You seem to be harboring more than the usual soapbox level of resentment and contempt.

Can't you be nice to people even without Nietzsche?

6/2/2006 8:57:58 PM

Beyond the higher and lower grades of people, this whole anti-intellectualism point may be outdated. In the past, Christianity may have done a lot to curb individual desires for knowledge, but the printing press (although it was a great way to make the Bible more available) pretty much whooped Christianity's ass, right?

6/2/2006 9:08:32 PM

I don't think so.

Although it did kick the ass of priests who used the fact there weren't many Bibles available to their own advantage.

[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 9:12 PM. Reason : .]

6/2/2006 9:11:09 PM

^I'm tryna understand here. I need more words, man.

6/2/2006 9:12:24 PM

I believe the printing press was one of the biggest booms to spreading Christianity.
Or was that not what you were referring to?

6/2/2006 9:15:46 PM

Quote :

"Beyond the higher and lower grades of people, this whole anti-intellectualism point may be outdated. In the past, Christianity may have done a lot to curb individual desires for knowledge, but the printing press (although it was a great way to make the Bible more available) pretty much whooped Christianity's ass, right?"

Not exactly... Via Luther, Christianity adapted to survive alongside the printing press. And, insodoing, it got even stronger and even less relevant. Pre-Schism Christianity at least bent to the will of the clergy, who interpreted (and probably edited) the Bible. But Protestantism started this whole "personal relationship with God" thing, which brought the brainwashing home from church and made it a 24/7/365 ordeal. Furthermore, since the Bible was out of the hands of the clergy, its content and interpretations have stuck largely in the context of the 1400's, and every random yahoo who could read German, by searching for the right verse, felt totally justified in starting wars, burning people, all that jazz. So I would say that the printing press empowered individuals to the same degree that the clergy had been empowered, even as it continued to undermine the pursuit of objective knowledge and reality.

6/2/2006 9:21:38 PM

^^Yeah, that's what I said in the parenthetical portion of my post, but it did a lot more for intellectualism.

^Are you saying books are bad too?

[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 9:24 PM. Reason : sss]

6/2/2006 9:23:02 PM

works of fiction that are treated as the only important thing in the world .. those are bad

6/2/2006 9:24:33 PM

The printed Bible made Christianity reach places it had not been so popular before. The result of the printing press in the long run brought Christianity to places it had never been.

6/2/2006 9:36:06 PM

^I got that part before you even told me about.

^^I agree, but what about other books?

As usual, I'm speaking on my own here, basing this last assertion on only what I have read in this read--Nietzsche had a problem with people, with the societies they invariably create, not just Christianity.

[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 9:58 PM. Reason : sss]

6/2/2006 9:55:53 PM

OK... I tend to think that having books is a good thing.

6/2/2006 10:00:19 PM

^^ explain what you mean by kicking Christianity's ass. I thought you were talking about the number of Christians.

6/2/2006 10:17:14 PM

^You're right. I considered explaining it because I definitely wasn't clear before. I'm glad you gave me a chance to edit...

Quote :

"In the past, Christianity may have done a lot to curb individual desires for knowledge, but the printing press (although it was a great way to make the Bible more available) pretty much whooped Christianity's supposed desire to stamp out intellectualism's ass, right?"

(The edit doesn't sound right, but you know what I mean.)

[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 10:29 PM. Reason : sss]

6/2/2006 10:26:19 PM

That rephrasing makes an interesting difference, and I would agree that it stopped the church from controlling people -- and ever since they have ignored the herders, the cattle have been stampeding on their own. I think it shows that people can wipe out their own intellectualism; they don't need an organized effort to keep them down.

[Edited on June 2, 2006 at 11:03 PM. Reason : .]

6/2/2006 11:02:23 PM

Quote :

"We were talking about the fact that a given Christian believes he knows what's best for himself. You say they don't know because they don't have information. I say they do know because "what is best" is entirely subjective, and subjectivity is constrained to the limits of your knowledge. A person might be missing out, but they're not doing the wrong thing until they know they have other options."

Okay, this is what I'm saying: Consider a guy that has a winning lottery ticket but doesn't know it. He believes that he's doing well, but he's actually doing the wrong thing by not cashing the ticket. I can't blame him (since he doesn't know about the ticket), but he is mistaken about what is best to him. ("Best" as in what causes the most favorable consequences.) I would also say that he has nothing to gain by choosing to ignore knowledge.

Quote :

"True enough, we know flies don't come from rotting meat. Nonetheless most Americans regard their own births as miraculous."

Don't know why you keep replying to this subject. Seems like we're just splitting hairs. Yes, Americans believe in the supernatural and they're stupid for doing so. But at least they're not dumbfuck crazy about it 24/7!

6/2/2006 11:56:06 PM

OK enough hairsplitting, yes.

About the lottery thing -- I don't think he is actively ignoring knowledge; he's just not looking for it, as he would be advised to. Christians don't actively ignore knowledge either, they are compelled to ignore it passively. Contradictions to the Bible look like Satan to them, and they turn away without a chance to think about it.

6/3/2006 12:05:35 AM

Bridget, I agree with what you are saying. Whenever the speed of transfering knowledge jumps exponentially, those who wish to use other ideas and beliefs to quash independant thought will find that task harder.

People in power were trying to use Christianity as a tool to subvert independant thought. I thought you implying that the religion itself was to blame. I did not know you saw past the facade to realize that there were and are far more detrimental forces than Nietzsche working against Christianity, and those are from some of the most vocal and powerful self-proclaimed reverant.

6/3/2006 12:14:22 AM

Contrast has done a good job illustrating his point, and it's pretty close to what I would have said.

^ People in power were using Christianity as a tool to suppress independent thought, sure. But once the Bible was a household item, people could think about Christianity themselves, but they were already locked into that framework. Moving within the framework of Christianity is about the same as having a priest lock you there. The difference and distinction here is that there's the chance for people to bring out their own interpretations. Unfortunately, there are only so many ways to interpret clear wording, and some of the most central and harmful concepts are the most clearly worded.

6/3/2006 12:59:54 AM

is contrast your new alias? just kidding.

Why is it you think that history books vary from country to country?

By choosing not to investigate further, millions of Japanese will not believe that Japan committed attrocities against Koreans during the second world war simply because their school history books left that part out.

The key here is that people have the ability to study further. Many Christians explore other avenues before deciding to be a Christian, every one of them goes through times of doubt and considers other plausable explinations for existence. Not only this, but many Christians study different versions, some even learning other languages to study it. When people talk about Christians as if they were a group of mindless automatons, it is not only an insult to all Christians, but it actually only hurts those people because they are in fact the ones shutting their eyes to reality.

[Edited on June 3, 2006 at 2:02 AM. Reason : .]

6/3/2006 2:00:27 AM

I think you have described a small minority of Christians. Most of them are Christians because they were raised to be and they have a hard time thinking outside that box. The same is true of most religions, I would bet.

[Edited on June 3, 2006 at 2:05 AM. Reason : .]

6/3/2006 2:05:19 AM

Christianity isn't the only problem, but Christian values are a problem too. Once you have the same scale, the same way of rating things in life as a Christian (by being raised as one or exposed to it early on), you're going to evaluate new religions on that same scale. More often than not, you'll return or reject religion wholesale instead of simply choosing another one.

6/3/2006 2:40:39 AM

Agreed. I was fortunate enough to be raised under two parents of different religions who encouraged me to go find things out on my own -- if there was religious solidarity in my family I may never have made it.

6/3/2006 3:19:38 AM

Who told you about our rating system!?!?!?!

Seriously, I have no idea what you're talking about when you say Christians have their scale of rating things. Every time you say something about Christians, it seems (at least to me) that you believe all or even most Christians think the same about everything which is certainly not true.

Could you explain to me how the values of Christianity forces others into rating scales? Maybe a specific value too? Thanks.

Contrast,
My parents were both Christian, but they also encouraged me to do what I wanted, never forced me to go to church etc. Thank God my parents trusted me with that or I might be a pessimist too.

[Edited on June 3, 2006 at 9:52 AM. Reason : .]

6/3/2006 9:42:17 AM

Quote :

"About the lottery thing -- I don't think he is actively ignoring knowledge; he's just not looking for it, as he would be advised to. Christians don't actively ignore knowledge either, they are compelled to ignore it passively."

The point is: if he doesn't have knowledge, he doesn't know how to have a better life.

Quote :

"Many Christians explore other avenues before deciding to be a Christian, every one of them goes through times of doubt and considers other plausable explinations for existence. Not only this, but many Christians study different versions, some even learning other languages to study it."

For me, there's little difference between "believing something without a reason" and "believing something without a reason after thinking about it for a while."

6/3/2006 10:47:30 AM

There is also a difference in pretending people don't have a reason because their reason(s) aren't acceptable or understandable to you and actually saying their reason(s) aren't acceptable to you.

[Edited on June 3, 2006 at 12:10 PM. Reason : .]

6/3/2006 12:09:29 PM

Quote :

"Contrast, My parents were both Christian, but they also encouraged me to do what I wanted, never forced me to go to church etc. Thank God my parents trusted me with that or I might be a pessimist too."

My parents are both Christian too, but one is Catholic and devout while the other is Protestant and lax. I was forced to go to church, by the one, while the other stayed home. So you can see how I was led to question my situation. However you shouldn't take me or Nietzsche for being pessimists -- McDanger is admittedly onesuch but I tend to think we're all ok and it's going to work out, and that this big mess is not anybody's fault anymore.

6/3/2006 12:14:14 PM

I didn't mean to say you were a pessimist I meant to say like Nietzsche.

I agree about McDanger though. I hope he grows out of it.

6/3/2006 12:28:44 PM

Quote :

"Could you explain to me how the values of Christianity forces others into rating scales? Maybe a specific value too? Thanks."

I'm not talking about a rating system like eBay or anything like that. I'm talking about a framework of morality that makes most people think of things as "good" or "bad".

Edit:

I'm not a "pessimist" -- that would suggest I expect the worst. I don't expect the worst so much as I perceive it -- I just have a different idea of what a crime is than you. To suggest I have something to "grow out of" is silly, and would be about like me saying that I wish you "grow out of" bedtime stories and imaginary superheroes.


[Edited on June 3, 2006 at 12:38 PM. Reason : .]

6/3/2006 12:32:30 PM

so much stupidity. so little time

6/3/2006 2:18:28 PM

So you're argument is that Christianity is bad because it presents a set of moral values?

I guess parents, society, and "everybody poops" books must be evil as well.

6/3/2006 2:18:56 PM

Quote :

"So you're argument is that Christianity is bad because it presents a set of moral values?"

Because it presents a set of moral values in opposition to nature, which it vilifies. Come on man. This information is readily available in my first post. Read it.

6/3/2006 2:25:56 PM

I'm quite sure it is natural for people to bash each other's skulls when they want what the other has, and for males to get as many females pregnant as possible.

What is natural is not always best.

6/3/2006 2:34:55 PM

Quote :

"There is also a difference in pretending people don't have a reason because their reason(s) aren't acceptable or understandable to you and actually saying their reason(s) aren't acceptable to you."

Sorry for pretending that having a totally illogical reason is the same as not having a reason.

6/3/2006 3:01:31 PM

It is illogical to you. ok, we get it.

It is logical to others. do you get that?

6/3/2006 3:15:45 PM

Humans have created Religions all throughout the world since the rise of language. It is known that throughout history, societies have created Religions to control their citizens or members in their societies, (with division of labor, financial agreements:tithe, etc...). All cultures on every continent have old Religions, even older than the old Religions of today. Knowing this alone should make everyone question their own Religion and possibly their Religion's set of values, but it doesn't! Many people of Religion dismiss it immediately and entirely, and they use their values as support for their judgement. This obviously hinders personal growth and experience. Try not to say "no" to real questions, because of your Religion alone. I think that is what I would personally project from Nietzsche's words, but nothing more.

[Edited on June 3, 2006 at 3:37 PM. Reason : -]

6/3/2006 3:34:08 PM

I wonder what type of personal growth and experience having religion hinders. Probably the kind you'd like us to have?

6/3/2006 3:52:03 PM