Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Nick_A
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Nick_A » Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:14 am

Arising_uk wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:47 am
Nick_A wrote:Simone Weil was a young brilliant Marxist and atheist respected by Leon Trotsky who died a Christian mystic. ...
You missed out " ... who died a Christian mystic and self-absorbed anorexic suicide." Hardly a role-model for the young female.
She was the ultimate individualist. ...
You're right, so self-obsessed she starved herself to death.
You would call her a religious nut. ...
I'd call her mentally ill.
Results of the secular progressive mind.
If that means saying it as it is then so be it.
You think in terms of collectives.
Science says 'We must live,' and seeks the means of prolonging, increasing, facilitating and amplifying life, of making it tolerable and acceptable, wisdom says 'We must die,' and seeks how to make us die well. – Socrates
As a seculrist and advocate of science you have no idea of why those like Jesus, Socrates, Simone, and others died as they did. If you don't know, i cannot explain it

Nick_A
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Nick_A » Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:18 am

Arising_uk wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:43 am
Nick_A wrote:...
Marx said that religion is the opiate of the masses. ...
I really dislike how often this is quoted without the context, that it is misquoted and usually quoted by those who haven't read any Marx. So here's the full quote and in context;

"The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo. "
Simone Weil countered with “revolution is the opiate of the masses.”
I think she's wrong here, it's the opium of the disaffected bourgeois - her in fact.
...
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” ~ John Adams
The secular progressive philosophy and its attack on scapegoats if successful assures the loss of the Constitution and the freedoms it protects. The secular progressives look forward to that day. I shudder at the thought.
Will it be any worse than the killing of black people for driving and owning a car under the current system?
You quoted marx:
The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again.
Marx describes secularized religion. Simone refers to the essence of religion; something you are currently closed to.

Nick_A
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Nick_A » Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:23 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:33 am
Actually very few humans are genuine individuals. Practically everyone seems to have a need to belong to some group or other--just look at the labels we give ourselves and others.
We resemble ants more than anything else.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIv-FUarVWU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om4f1QrjcZA

Ants are so much like human beings as to be an embarrassment. They farm fungi, raise aphids as livestock, launch armies into war, use chemical sprays to alarm and confuse enemies, capture slaves, engage in child labour, exchange information ceaselessly. They do everything but watch television.
--Lewis Thomas
Quite true. You prefer your life being dictated by a collective you have been identified with. Some have no interest in living this way and are called to respond to objective human meaning and purpose so become open to transcending reliance on imagination. You seek to ridicule them

Nick_A
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Nick_A » Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:26 am

Greta wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:39 am
You are all individuals.

We are all individuals!
No, you are a creature of reaction and an atom of the Great Beast. Objective Individuality is our potential. The fact that you deny it just keeps you further from your potential individuality.

Nick_A
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Nick_A » Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:31 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 11:40 pm
Nick_A wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 11:19 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:41 pm
You, an individualist? That's pretty funny. Aren't you the religious nut? The word is an oxymoron for a start. By putting an 'ist' on the end of 'individual' you are immediately putting yourself in a collective.
Simone Weil was a young brilliant Marxist and atheist respected by Leon Trotsky who died a Christian mystic. She was the ultimate individualist. You would call her a religious nut. Results of the secular progressive mind.
An 'individualist' who was a Marxist. You keep on giving :D
Yes, as young seeker of truth she was very mch an individualist. She believed Marxism would provide the world what it needed. Her devotion to truth allowed her to experience that marxism is a dead end so outgrew it.

Nick_A
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Nick_A » Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:46 am

Greta
Exactly. He is 100% orthodox Republican, in lockstep with their every policy stance. His individuality only lies in his role models, Simone and Jacob, whom I admit are commendably eccentric
I am not Republican. I am an Independent
Collectivist n. (NickA lexicon)
- a typically introverted and autistic philosophy forum attendee who holds many unpopular views and believes strongly in personal freedoms.

Individualist n. (NickA lexicon)
- one who strictly follows in all of the Republican Party's touchstone policies and believes that personal freedoms must be controlled by a theocratic state.
[/quote]
Of course you never read the descriptions I posted.

https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/is ... lectivism/

The fundamental political conflict in America today is, as it has been for a century, individualism vs. collectivism. Does the individual’s life belong to him—or does it belong to the group, the community, society, or the state? With government expanding ever more rapidly—seizing and spending more and more of our money on “entitlement” programs and corporate bailouts, and intruding on our businesses and lives in increasingly onerous ways—the need for clarity on this issue has never been greater. Let us begin by defining the terms at hand.

Individualism is the idea that the individual’s life belongs to him and that he has an inalienable right to live it as he sees fit, to act on his own judgment, to keep and use the product of his effort, and to pursue the values of his choosing. It’s the idea that the individual is sovereign, an end in himself, and the fundamental unit of moral concern. This is the ideal that the American Founders set forth and sought to establish when they drafted the Declaration and the Constitution and created a country in which the individual’s rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness were to be recognized and protected.

Collectivism is the idea that the individual’s life belongs not to him but to the group or society of which he is merely a part, that he has no rights, and that he must sacrifice his values and goals for the group’s “greater good.” According to collectivism, the group or society is the basic unit of moral concern, and the individual is of value only insofar as he serves the group. As one advocate of this idea puts it: “Man has no rights except those which society permits him to enjoy. From the day of his birth until the day of his death society allows him to enjoy certain so-called rights and deprives him of others; not . . . because society desires especially to favor or oppress the individual, but because its own preservation, welfare, and happiness are the prime considerations.”1…………………………………
You are an atom of the Great Beast, the grand collective. You just like to make things up in the hope it furthers your secular agenda. Not a good quality for anyone with a professed interest in philosophy

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6129
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:16 am

Nick_A wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:23 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:33 am
Actually very few humans are genuine individuals. Practically everyone seems to have a need to belong to some group or other--just look at the labels we give ourselves and others.
We resemble ants more than anything else.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIv-FUarVWU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om4f1QrjcZA

Ants are so much like human beings as to be an embarrassment. They farm fungi, raise aphids as livestock, launch armies into war, use chemical sprays to alarm and confuse enemies, capture slaves, engage in child labour, exchange information ceaselessly. They do everything but watch television.
--Lewis Thomas
Quite true. You prefer your life being dictated by a collective you have been identified with. Some have no interest in living this way and are called to respond to objective human meaning and purpose so become open to transcending reliance on imagination. You seek to ridicule them
I don't know where you got any of that from.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6129
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:19 am

Greta wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:17 am

Google was a reality check for me. I used to come up with ideas that I'd imagined were original and innovative. Then a search on the topic would reveal that about 10,000 people beat me to it, many explaining the ideas with more eloquence, clarity and depth that I could have even imagined, let alone achieved.

I know the feeling :lol:

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 10654
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Arising_uk » Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:56 am

Nick_A wrote:You think in terms of collectives. ...
Actually no, I think in terms philosophical. It's you who is collectivising others.
Science says 'We must live,' and seeks the means of prolonging, increasing, facilitating and amplifying life, of making it tolerable and acceptable, wisdom says 'We must die,' and seeks how to make us die well. – Socrates
That's all well and good when you're an old man whose seen his time but when the same offer was made to younger Greeks they upped and left. :)
As a seculrist and advocate of science you have no idea of why those like Jesus, Socrates, Simone, and others died as they did. If you don't know, i cannot explain it.
Which is why it's such a crock of shit. You really need to use a spell checker as it looks bad when you're too lazy to even spell your nonsense correctly. Weil died because she was a bourgeois narcissistic anorexic who starved herself to death. I thought you a pre-christian(by this do you mean not a Catholic?) so what has Christ got to do with you? Jesus died because he was betrayed and was most vexed upon crucifixion apparently. Unless of course you don't believe the nonsense that was written in the end after all the sectarian conflicts that followed the 'death of Jesus' and the history of Christianity.
Last edited by Arising_uk on Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 10654
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Arising_uk » Fri Jan 05, 2018 5:02 am

Nick_A wrote:Marx describes secularized religion. ...
No he wasn't as you are just making up a nonsense term. If you are not then explain what a non-'secularised' religion is and what it would involve?
Simone refers to the essence of religion; something you are currently closed to.
Didn't stop her killing herself in one of the most self-obsessed and self-absorbed ways did it? If you know what she was talking about then you should be able to tell me, if not you are just spouting self-obsessed bollocks.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Greta » Fri Jan 05, 2018 7:35 am

Nick_A wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:46 am
Greta
Exactly. He is 100% orthodox Republican, in lockstep with their every policy stance. His individuality only lies in his role models, Simone and Jacob, whom I admit are commendably eccentric
I am not Republican. I am an Independent
Do you deny that your views coincide with Republicans on abortion, women's rights, public education, public health, assisted suicide and homosexuality?
Nick_A wrote:
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/is ... lectivism/

The fundamental political conflict in America today is, as it has been for a century, individualism vs. collectivism. Does the individual’s life belong to him—or does it belong to the group, the community, society, or the state? With government expanding ever more rapidly—seizing and spending more and more of our money on “entitlement” programs and corporate bailouts, and intruding on our businesses and lives in increasingly onerous ways—the need for clarity on this issue has never been greater. Let us begin by defining the terms at hand.

Individualism is the idea that the individual’s life belongs to him and that he has an inalienable right to live it as he sees fit, to act on his own judgment, to keep and use the product of his effort, and to pursue the values of his choosing. It’s the idea that the individual is sovereign, an end in himself, and the fundamental unit of moral concern. This is the ideal that the American Founders set forth and sought to establish when they drafted the Declaration and the Constitution and created a country in which the individual’s rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness were to be recognized and protected.

Collectivism is the idea that the individual’s life belongs not to him but to the group or society of which he is merely a part, that he has no rights, and that he must sacrifice his values and goals for the group’s “greater good.” According to collectivism, the group or society is the basic unit of moral concern, and the individual is of value only insofar as he serves the group. As one advocate of this idea puts it: “Man has no rights except those which society permits him to enjoy. From the day of his birth until the day of his death society allows him to enjoy certain so-called rights and deprives him of others; not . . . because society desires especially to favor or oppress the individual, but because its own preservation, welfare, and happiness are the prime considerations.”1…………………………………
You are an atom of the Great Beast, the grand collective. You just like to make things up in the hope it furthers your secular agenda. Not a good quality for anyone with a professed interest in philosophy
You are also an atom of society - aka your "Great Beast". However, you don't know it. I have no problem with collectivism, as long as the bastards leave me along to do my thing :lol:

Laddie, are you capable of thinking ahead? Is that why you like Trump so much - like you, he lives in a bubble of the present, oblivious to ramifications and consequences (borne out by his relentless destruction of nature in both his old and current jobs, which I expect you approve of too).

The problem you whine constantly about is actually real. Yes, there actually are far too many people on Earth and that is increasingly curtailing freedoms everywhere. The more people there are, the more controls are needed to maintain order.

It's a simple choice today - collectivism or diminution. It's a shame. If there were many fewer people then life for the rest would be much more free. That's why, after the Black Death peaked in the mid 1300s, Europe immediately flourished. People were finally free and opportunities were everywhere. Creativity and happiness flourished not so long after a level of devastation that one might think would reverberate down the generations.

That dynamic may well repeat this century at some stage. If you survive whatever nature's "correction" of our overpopulation and overconsumption brings (your favourite POTUS is working on speeding up the process), you will be much more free afterwards.

uwot
Posts: 3248
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by uwot » Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:58 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:46 am
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/is ... lectivism/

The fundamental political conflict in America today is, as it has been for a century, individualism vs. collectivism. Does the individual’s life belong to him—or does it belong to the group, the community, society, or the state?
Actually, that has been the fundamental political conflict in the rest of the world forever. The church, the military, the judiciary and economic cabals are all collectives marshalled by aristocratic/oligarchic collectives to conserve their position. It is only by weight of numbers that people who do not directly benefit from membership of one of the above, can limit the power of such collectives. It's called democracy. Or "The Great Beast", according to Nick_A.

Nick_A
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Nick_A » Sat Jan 06, 2018 9:52 pm

uwot wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:58 pm
Nick_A wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:46 am
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/is ... lectivism/

The fundamental political conflict in America today is, as it has been for a century, individualism vs. collectivism. Does the individual’s life belong to him—or does it belong to the group, the community, society, or the state?
Actually, that has been the fundamental political conflict in the rest of the world forever. The church, the military, the judiciary and economic cabals are all collectives marshalled by aristocratic/oligarchic collectives to conserve their position. It is only by weight of numbers that people who do not directly benefit from membership of one of the above, can limit the power of such collectives. It's called democracy. Or "The Great Beast", according to Nick_A.
It is the nature of the Beast. All life on earth including animal man reacts in accordance with natural laws, One such law is explains the pendulum effect where everything moves back and forth. the Great Beast or society itself is the same. At one point one part is dominant and after a while another becomes dominant. These are natural life cycles. The point is that people believe the pendulum effect is the result of conscious choice when it is just animal reaction in accordance with universal laws.

Nick_A
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Nick_A » Sat Jan 06, 2018 9:57 pm

Greta wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 7:35 am
Nick_A wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:46 am
Greta
Exactly. He is 100% orthodox Republican, in lockstep with their every policy stance. His individuality only lies in his role models, Simone and Jacob, whom I admit are commendably eccentric
I am not Republican. I am an Independent
Do you deny that your views coincide with Republicans on abortion, women's rights, public education, public health, assisted suicide and homosexuality?
Nick_A wrote:
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/is ... lectivism/

The fundamental political conflict in America today is, as it has been for a century, individualism vs. collectivism. Does the individual’s life belong to him—or does it belong to the group, the community, society, or the state? With government expanding ever more rapidly—seizing and spending more and more of our money on “entitlement” programs and corporate bailouts, and intruding on our businesses and lives in increasingly onerous ways—the need for clarity on this issue has never been greater. Let us begin by defining the terms at hand.

Individualism is the idea that the individual’s life belongs to him and that he has an inalienable right to live it as he sees fit, to act on his own judgment, to keep and use the product of his effort, and to pursue the values of his choosing. It’s the idea that the individual is sovereign, an end in himself, and the fundamental unit of moral concern. This is the ideal that the American Founders set forth and sought to establish when they drafted the Declaration and the Constitution and created a country in which the individual’s rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness were to be recognized and protected.

Collectivism is the idea that the individual’s life belongs not to him but to the group or society of which he is merely a part, that he has no rights, and that he must sacrifice his values and goals for the group’s “greater good.” According to collectivism, the group or society is the basic unit of moral concern, and the individual is of value only insofar as he serves the group. As one advocate of this idea puts it: “Man has no rights except those which society permits him to enjoy. From the day of his birth until the day of his death society allows him to enjoy certain so-called rights and deprives him of others; not . . . because society desires especially to favor or oppress the individual, but because its own preservation, welfare, and happiness are the prime considerations.”1…………………………………
You are an atom of the Great Beast, the grand collective. You just like to make things up in the hope it furthers your secular agenda. Not a good quality for anyone with a professed interest in philosophy
You are also an atom of society - aka your "Great Beast". However, you don't know it. I have no problem with collectivism, as long as the bastards leave me along to do my thing :lol:

Laddie, are you capable of thinking ahead? Is that why you like Trump so much - like you, he lives in a bubble of the present, oblivious to ramifications and consequences (borne out by his relentless destruction of nature in both his old and current jobs, which I expect you approve of too).

The problem you whine constantly about is actually real. Yes, there actually are far too many people on Earth and that is increasingly curtailing freedoms everywhere. The more people there are, the more controls are needed to maintain order.

It's a simple choice today - collectivism or diminution. It's a shame. If there were many fewer people then life for the rest would be much more free. That's why, after the Black Death peaked in the mid 1300s, Europe immediately flourished. People were finally free and opportunities were everywhere. Creativity and happiness flourished not so long after a level of devastation that one might think would reverberate down the generations.

That dynamic may well repeat this century at some stage. If you survive whatever nature's "correction" of our overpopulation and overconsumption brings (your favourite POTUS is working on speeding up the process), you will be much more free afterwards.
Clueless. Your ass is fighting with your elbow and you call it progress. All you are doing is fighting with your self. Either way your self wins.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Scapegoats for Secular Progressives

Post by Greta » Sat Jan 06, 2018 11:03 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Sat Jan 06, 2018 9:57 pm
Clueless. Your ass is fighting with your elbow and you call it progress. All you are doing is fighting with your self. Either way your self wins.
I am not surprised at your continued inability to read posts and address the points made sensibly.

Clueless is a fine description of you. Stick to that words - it resonates with you nicely , locked away as you are in your egocentric bubble of anger and sadness.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 8 guests