Christianity

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Harbal wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 4:58 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 4:52 pm
No, but you're complaining about a Christian daring to discuss Christianity on a thread somebody started about Christianity.
Well I never intended to complain about that. Will you show me my complaint about a Christian daring to discuss Christianity so that I can acknowledge it and apologise for it?
Oh? You're fine with it, then?

I don't know why you were upset, then. Nothing's wrong.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9563
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Harbal »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:19 pm
Oh? You're fine with it, then?
I think so. It was something else that I wasn't fine about.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Harbal wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:32 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:19 pm
Oh? You're fine with it, then?
I think so. It was something else that I wasn't fine about.
Ah, well...we all have our "senior moments" these days. :wink:
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7219
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by iambiguous »

...in my view, you still refuse to bring your theoretical conjectures about race and intelligence -- and morality and culture? -- down out of the intellectual clouds in regard to how you imagine those of different races interacting either in terms of full equality in an interracial community or, instead, favoring different races/nationalities interacting "somatically" among their own kind. Also, the extent to which, given your own understanding of the "demographic crisis" in America, the reality of race is or is not a factor. And, again, finally, given historical instances of those making a distinction between races in regard to intelligence [as with Hitler] are there any aspects of their policies that you construe to be worthy of consideration given a community that you would deem to reflect the best of all possible worlds.
I'm simply attempting to bring what I construe to be your pedantic "wall of words" intellectual assessment down to Earth in order "illustrate your text" pertaining to race, racism, our demographic crisis and the reaction of those people of color who might get suspicious when they hear someone suggest that "on average" the Northern European white stock race possesses a greater intelligence.
Arguments can be made here that in no way involve either race or ethnicity or Jews. Is that the argument that you are making? Japanese, Nigerians and Frenchmen of all colors and ethnic backgrounds joined together in full equality to push back Progressivism, Marxism and Egalitarianism? Is that what you are advocating?

If so, then, sure, I misconstrued your points above.
iambiguous wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 7:29 am Right. And what does this have to do with race and ethnicity? And are all Swedes of the opinion that "somatically" they should avoid interaction with those who are not like them? Or are there right-wing racists political factions there [as there are in America] who are stirring up the pot politically?
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:26 amRace, national origin, cultural affiliation, and also existential tendency — all of these things together unquestionably operate together. Your mistake is to deny that totality and reduce concerns about the make up of a society to concerns you define as racist. That term is ideological. Its function is to undermine and invalidate the larger range of concerns just outlined.
Unless, of course, your mistake is to assume that -- genetically? biologically? -- human beings are naturally predisposed to be prefer being around those of the same "somatic" makeup. And, sure, that might make sense if, say, Japanese, Nigerians and Frenchmen were literally unable to reproduce other than among their own kind.

Uh, what was nature thinking in allowing them to reproduce with those across board ethnically?!!

But there are any number of communities in which people of all races and ethnic backgrounds interact without basing their relationships on the color of their skin. Or in assuming that some of the races among them are "on average" smarter than others.

You can have situations where a Japanese family can raise a Nigerian baby or a French family can raise a Japanese baby and, through childhood indoctrination, they grow up to think and to feel just like their parents, just like others in any particular culture or community.
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:26 amCertainly Swedes and Swedish culture — intensely ‘progressive’ — are not in agreement with those who seek to preserve Swedish culture. And it is that faction which opened the door to mass immigration and bringing in refugees. The plan was noble in that sense, but the result seems to have been negative. And this has strengthened a reactive Right faction taking a more traditionally nationalist perspective.
And of course this is all predicated on your own strictly objective assessment. Though, sure, to the extent that immigrants are not willing to embrace the cultural mores and traditions of Sweden there is going to be conflict. But that pertains to the behaviors themselves and not the fact that those behaving differently do so because they are of a different color or ethnicity. It's not like those people of color and of different ethnicities can't choose to accept the Swedish culture as their own.
Look, to the extent that those who come to Sweden and become citizens, they are expected to obey the laws of the land just like everyone else. And if they pursue traditions that break the laws, arrest them. And if they are in the country illegally, stop that. But to make it all about Northern European stock sticking together and rejecting all those who are not of "our kind", that's racism. And the science I've come into contact with rejects that as a basis for either de jure or de facto keeping communities "separate but equal". And, of course, they are never really equal. It's just that some take the so-called inherent inequality all the way to the gas chambers.
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:26 amI don’t think you have much or any background in the actual social problems in Sweden that have resulted from recent immigration policy shifts.
Okay, let's assume that you do. So, given the "demographic crisis" in Sweden what is to be done? In terms of government policy pertaining to reproduction, education, employment, culture, morality, social interaction and the like, what should be done given that, in your view, the non-Swedes are likely to be less intelligent and, on the outside, "somatically" different.
Alexis Jacobi wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:26 amCulture and society and citizenship are much more than just the laws and obedience to them. Sweden, according to critics of recent policy changes, took steps that are undermining national identity. A nation is more than an ideological proposition and citizenship based on that alone is described as problematic to the foundation of nationhood.
Look, what you appear to argue is that "national identity", race and ethnicity are one and the same. As though Swedes of all colors and ethnicities can't interact equally in a community that shares the same cultural values. That, in other words, if there is a "demographic crisis" in Sweden today it's because the Northern European white stock has been infiltrated --"infected" -- by the lesser intelligent races.

And let's not forget the role that capitalism plays in all of this. From America to Qatar to Europe, immigrants are welcome into nations precisely because corporations exploit them as a source of cheap labor. Then when enough of them are there the ruling class can rile up the white workers to see them as the enemy and not the bosses.

And, sure, there will be those in Sweden who are in fact racists. Like you, they believe that the Northern European white stock must sustain their own culture as the Northern European white stock.

Of course, whether you are in fact a racist too, you wish to keep up in the theoretical clouds. But, again, I suspect that black, brown and red folks -- and Jews? -- will be more interested to learn exactly what their fate might be when you do come down out of the didactic/pedantic stratosphere and, walking the talk, join those intent on stemming the "demographic crisis".
Last edited by iambiguous on Fri Jan 27, 2023 6:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7219
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by iambiguous »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 1:15 am
iambiguous wrote: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:46 pmIt's just that some of them insist that in regard to moral and political and religious value judgments, if you are not a member of their community and refuse to accept their own moral and political and religious values then not only are you necessarily wrong -- "one of them" -- but in being wrong that might revolve in turn around the color or your skin or your gender of your ethnicity or your sexual persuasion.
What I find interesting in the moral position you hold to — adamantly — is simply that you have internalized the ideology of multiculturalism. You present it as a moral imperative. This is what I have labeled ‘Americanism’ in a somewhat later form. That form began to emerge in the early 20th century. It is (note) diametrically opposed to the worldview of the Founders, and certainly even of Lincoln.

How did you come to embrace these views? From whence you certainty — and your moral guilt-slinging — that right is on your side?

How do you explain that?
On the contrary, as I posted above:
I have noted a number of times that, as with all value judgments of this sort, "I" am no less "fractured and fragmented" when it comes to race. I recognize that my own value judgments here are political prejudices and in no way would I argue that I can demonstrate that all rational men and women are obligated to think as I do. The sheer complexity of genes and memes intertwined in ever evolving historical and cultural contexts can make these things profoundly problematic. But the science that I have encountered over the years seems pretty convincing about intelligence and race. There does not appear to be any hierarchy with Northern Europeans whiles on top and sub-Saharan blacks on the bottom.
You are the one who keeps insisting that I embrace multiculturalism morally and/or ideologically. Whereas, if I am permitted to speculate on my own motivation and intention, I am no less drawn and quartered here as with all other value judgments. I root my own conclusions -- political prejudices -- existentially in dasein: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

Just as you do.

Same with my views on the Christian God. If someone believes this God does in fact exist, let him or her demonstrate this.

Here, what you do is to link us to those who support your own political prejudices regarding race and intelligence. But if others Google that they will come upon far more links to those who believe just the opposite.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5153
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

phyllo wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 1:40 pm You can present your position on a subject without turning it into an attack on some group. In this case leftists, Democrats and Biden but the other side attacks conservatives, Reps and Trump in exactly the same way.

Not cool, not philosophy.
The term “Democrat” and what it has come to mean and what it encompasses is, I say honestly, a progressive fascist-like phenomenon. The American State has always shown corrupt influences but this new phenomenon is alarming. Frankly I do not know even how to describe it.

These conversations are not so much doing Philosophy as they are a way that a group of people reveal their situation within society.

So it’s all valid in my opinion.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9563
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Harbal »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 6:51 pm
The term “Democrat” and what it has come to mean and what it encompasses is, I say honestly, a progressive fascist-like phenomenon. The American State has always shown corrupt influences but this new phenomenon is alarming. Frankly I do not know even how to describe it.
Do you not find the fact that it was possible for a narcissistic moron like Donald Trump to become president of the USA alarming?
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9563
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Harbal »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:50 pm
Ah, well...we all have our "senior moments" these days. :wink:
What do you mean by that?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Harbal wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:10 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 5:50 pm
Ah, well...we all have our "senior moments" these days. :wink:
What do you mean by that?
If you forgot why you were upset, it could just be a lapse in consciousness. Those things happen.
User avatar
phyllo
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 5:58 pm
Location: Слава Україні!

Re: Christianity

Post by phyllo »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 6:51 pm
phyllo wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 1:40 pm You can present your position on a subject without turning it into an attack on some group. In this case leftists, Democrats and Biden but the other side attacks conservatives, Reps and Trump in exactly the same way.

Not cool, not philosophy.
The term “Democrat” and what it has come to mean and what it encompasses is, I say honestly, a progressive fascist-like phenomenon. The American State has always shown corrupt influences but this new phenomenon is alarming. Frankly I do not know even how to describe it.

These conversations are not so much doing Philosophy as they are a way that a group of people reveal their situation within society.

So it’s all valid in my opinion.
Most of the discussion is about other members and supposedly 'problematic' groups.

There is little discussion of issues. What little there is, usually consists of unsupported assertions.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9563
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Harbal »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:12 pm
If you forgot why you were upset, it could just be a lapse in consciousness. Those things happen.
I was annoyed, not upset, and I didn't forget why I was annoyed.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Harbal wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:19 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:12 pm
If you forgot why you were upset, it could just be a lapse in consciousness. Those things happen.
I was annoyed, not upset, and I didn't forget why I was annoyed.
And you were annoyed...why? You said that it was because I spoke from my "religious" and "political" perspective...Impossible for me not to do, given that a) I'm a Christian, so can't speak "from another perspective," whatever that would look like, and b) am on a thread devoted by its originator to the topic "Christianity."

But c) all threads are elective, and people choose where they go...and you've chosen to be here.

Given all that, I can't see a grounds for you being "annoyed." I'll muster sympathy when it's warranted, of course...but is it warranted here? It's hard to see any way it can be. You're choosing to be "annoyed" by picking a topic and situation you find "annoying."

Can't help you with that. :wink:
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9563
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Harbal »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:41 pm
And you were annoyed...why? You said that it was because I spoke from my "religious" and "political" perspective...Impossible for me not to do, given that a) I'm a Christian, so can't speak "from another perspective," whatever that would look like, and b) am on a thread devoted by its originator to the topic "Christianity."

But c) all threads are elective, and people choose where they go...and you've chosen to be here.

Given all that, I can't see a grounds for you being "annoyed." I'll muster sympathy when it's warranted, of course...but is it warranted here? It's hard to see any way it can be. You're choosing to be "annoyed" by picking a topic and situation you find "annoying."

Can't help you with that. :wink:
I'm sure that anyone following this conversation will know what I was getting at, so your pretending not to know isn't of concern to me, and is pretty much what I have come to expect.

I'm not asking for your help, btw.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22265
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Harbal wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 8:00 pm I'm sure that anyone following this conversation will know what I was getting at, so your pretending not to know isn't of concern to me, and is pretty much what I have come to expect.

I'm not asking for your help, btw.
Now, now, Harbal...no need to get all huffy. :D I'm totally fine with it. I just don't see the cause for it, and absent that, can't feel it's much of a worry.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9563
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by Harbal »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Jan 27, 2023 8:06 pm
Now, now, Harbal...no need to get all huffy. :D I'm totally fine with it. I just don't see the cause for it, and absent that, can't feel it's much of a worry.
You know what I'm like, IC, I will insist on being me.
Post Reply