Philosophy Now Forum

Belinda wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 8:24 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 12:38 am

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 9:10 am But if you succumb to self deception and lies, you might as well be dead.

The problem with that is the one's who fall for it don't know they're falling for it. That may be due to stupidity or plain ignorance, mostly the former who are immune to explanation and don't realize they're stupid and so have no reason to wish they were dead. When stupidity becomes a ritual it strives to be intellectual.

Germany was overrun by Nazis because Germans' minds were enthralled by Nazism .

That view is a little too generic for me. It's more complicated than merely German minds being enthralled by Nazism.

gaffo wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 12:19 am

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 5:41 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 5:38 pm

Unfortunately, we're talking about Lenin breaking up the worker soviets, not the Vietnam War. You don't have to approve of Lenin in order to be against the Vietnam War.

People fight against their own interests.
The Vietnamese also did many things contrary to their belief system because of the need to protect their country from foreign invaders.
People even do things against their own stated principles when not under any real threat; this characterises the US supporting a Catholic dictatorship in Vietnam, and murdering thousands of innocent people.

Let's bring that back full circle to Murdoch.

the whole Veitnam debacal interests me. ya i know the SV gov was corrupt, but the people i assume preferred it to the NV (some at least). do you much about that war? asking because i do not. other than it was a dumb war. and one to fail in my side.

America failed by missing the opportunity to be friendly with Vietnam in the first place.

Ho Chi Minh was educated in America and was inspired by the American Revolution. His country, Vietnam was a vassal state of France much like America was Vassal to the British Empire.
After WW2 Ho thought that Americans would sympathise with his bid to fain Independence from the French. Ideologically they were much the same. The only problem was that the US having failed in Korea wanted to re-run the situation in Vietnam, and far from being a revolutionary country was basically an Industrial/Military complex that preferred foreign war over aid and assistance.
Ho Chi Minh supported the Allies against Japan, by guerrilla action and by supplying the USA with intelligence against the Japanese. When Ho declared Vietnamese independence from France with the words:

All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among them are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

Obviously the US thought that sort of thing was too good for the slanty-eyed Vietnamese and decided, rather than respond with aid, and encouragement, decided to wage war on the side of the right wing junta.
And so began a long war in which both sides responded with increasing violence and aggression. Not only did the US bomb Vietnam, but also bombed Laos and Cambodia.

Here is a fact about the war you might find incredible.
Even though Laos received no formal declaration of war the US dropped more bombs on Laos than the entire payload of all planes dropped on all countries during the whole of WW2.
Most of the bombs were in the form of anti-personal bomb-lets that buried themselves a few inches under the ground to act as mines. Millions of those bombs still exist and are still killing and maiming Laotians, mainly children that play in the forests.
The US has done precious little in compensation.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/a ... -1.3078351

I can tell you more. If you are an American you should take the trouble to find out why much of the rest of the world think the US is the devil.

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 12:38 am

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 9:10 am But if you succumb to self deception and lies, you might as well be dead.

The problem with that is the one's who fall for it don't know they're falling for it. That may be due to stupidity or plain ignorance, mostly the former who are immune to explanation and don't realize they're stupid and so have no reason to wish they were dead. When stupidity becomes a ritual it strives to be intellectual.

Yes, I feel that the biggest and most obvious ritualised intellectual stupidity is Theology. This seems obvious enough. Next are the totalitarian political systems that model themselves in religion, like Fascism, patriotism and Sovietism.
Wilful ignorance is the next worst crime, as demonstrated in the post immediately above this one.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 10:49 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 12:38 am

Sculptor wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 9:10 am But if you succumb to self deception and lies, you might as well be dead.

The problem with that is the one's who fall for it don't know they're falling for it. That may be due to stupidity or plain ignorance, mostly the former who are immune to explanation and don't realize they're stupid and so have no reason to wish they were dead. When stupidity becomes a ritual it strives to be intellectual.

Yes, I feel that the biggest and most obvious ritualised intellectual stupidity is Theology. This seems obvious enough. Next are the totalitarian political systems that model themselves in religion, like Fascism, patriotism and Sovietism.
Wilful ignorance is the next worst crime, as demonstrated in the post immediately above this one.

I don't know. It seems to me that much of the compassion and humaneness in our world originally came from the influence of religious prophets and such. But, I think you are right in the sense that Christianity as an organized religion strayed from the teachings of its founder. I think Christ would disapprove of some people who say they follow him.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 11:56 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 10:49 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 12:38 am

The problem with that is the one's who fall for it don't know they're falling for it. That may be due to stupidity or plain ignorance, mostly the former who are immune to explanation and don't realize they're stupid and so have no reason to wish they were dead. When stupidity becomes a ritual it strives to be intellectual.

Yes, I feel that the biggest and most obvious ritualised intellectual stupidity is Theology. This seems obvious enough. Next are the totalitarian political systems that model themselves in religion, like Fascism, patriotism and Sovietism.
Wilful ignorance is the next worst crime, as demonstrated in the post immediately above this one.

I don't know. It seems to me that much of the compassion and humaneness in our world originally came from the influence of religious prophets and such. But, I think you are right in the sense that Christianity as an organized religion strayed from the teachings of its founder. I think Christ would disapprove of some people who say they follow him.

Christ was a Jewish rabbi whose compassion didn't extend much beyond his own group. There was very little left for gentiles. I guess some other god must have created the uncircumcised.

Dubious wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 12:53 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 11:56 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 10:49 am
Yes, I feel that the biggest and most obvious ritualised intellectual stupidity is Theology. This seems obvious enough. Next are the totalitarian political systems that model themselves in religion, like Fascism, patriotism and Sovietism.
Wilful ignorance is the next worst crime, as demonstrated in the post immediately above this one.

I don't know. It seems to me that much of the compassion and humaneness in our world originally came from the influence of religious prophets and such. But, I think you are right in the sense that Christianity as an organized religion strayed from the teachings of its founder. I think Christ would disapprove of some people who say they follow him.

Christ was a Jewish rabbi whose compassion didn't extend much beyond his own group. There was very little left for gentiles. I guess some other god must have created the uncircumcised.

Why do you say his compassion didn't extend beyond his own group? Jesus essentially opened up Judaism to gentiles from what I understand as an interpretation of him. And I'm not aware of any comments Jesus made about circumcision concerning people not going to heaven or something if they aren't circumcised. Did Jesus condemn people who weren't circumcised? If not, then I don't understand your complaint against Jesus.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 2:26 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 12:53 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 11:56 pm

I don't know. It seems to me that much of the compassion and humaneness in our world originally came from the influence of religious prophets and such. But, I think you are right in the sense that Christianity as an organized religion strayed from the teachings of its founder. I think Christ would disapprove of some people who say they follow him.

Christ was a Jewish rabbi whose compassion didn't extend much beyond his own group. There was very little left for gentiles. I guess some other god must have created the uncircumcised.

Why do you say his compassion didn't extend beyond his own group? Jesus essentially opened up Judaism to gentiles from what I understand as an interpretation of him. And I'm not aware of any comments Jesus made about circumcision concerning people not going to heaven or something if they aren't circumcised. Did Jesus condemn people who weren't circumcised? If not, then I don't understand your complaint against Jesus.

It was Paul/Saul who opened up Judaism to gentiles making it very different to what it was, i.e., ecumenical as compared to insular or tribal. If it weren't for Paul, Jesus would have come down as just another charismatic Jew who got crucified.

Dubious wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:00 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 2:26 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 12:53 am

Christ was a Jewish rabbi whose compassion didn't extend much beyond his own group. There was very little left for gentiles. I guess some other god must have created the uncircumcised.

Why do you say his compassion didn't extend beyond his own group? Jesus essentially opened up Judaism to gentiles from what I understand as an interpretation of him. And I'm not aware of any comments Jesus made about circumcision concerning people not going to heaven or something if they aren't circumcised. Did Jesus condemn people who weren't circumcised? If not, then I don't understand your complaint against Jesus.

It was Paul/Saul who opened up Judaism to gentiles making it very different to what it was, i.e., ecumenical as compared to insular or tribal. If it weren't for Paul, Jesus would have come down as just another charismatic Jew who got crucified.

Perhaps Paul played a role in popularizing him but what evidence do you have that the historical Jesus wasn't compassionate or else wouldn't have been compassionate toward "outsiders" or would have rejected outsiders from following his teachings?

The question is how to free children and open minded adults from the chains of stupidity to the freedom of reason. Nazism is a case in point. Germany was overrun by Nazis because Germans' minds were enthralled by Nazism . Why this happened as an actual historical event is usually said to be due to the Treaty of Versailles, and largely aided by Hitler's opportunism. The Treaty of Versailles was bad social psychology. Opportunistic politicians are still with us and always will be.

Dubious, you misquoted me when you abstracted only one of the conditions in what I had written and which I have copied in full, above .I really think you should not attribute to me an opinion I don't hold.

The narrative I suggested is an explanation of Nazism in Germany up to the rise of Hitler. If you disagree you may of course do so but not by misquoting me.

The narrative I suggested does not answer the original question but I hope it might illuminate the question a little. The Treaty of Versailles was bad social psychology. A large number of people who feel threatened might combine today in a movement to promote their own interests at the expense of others. Nazism is the rationalisation of tribalism versus universalism.

As for Jesus of Nazareth, the seeds of universalism were present in his beliefs and in his lifelong commitment to universalism. Paul of course was instrumental as the political promoter of universalism.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 11:56 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 10:49 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 12:38 am

The problem with that is the one's who fall for it don't know they're falling for it. That may be due to stupidity or plain ignorance, mostly the former who are immune to explanation and don't realize they're stupid and so have no reason to wish they were dead. When stupidity becomes a ritual it strives to be intellectual.

Yes, I feel that the biggest and most obvious ritualised intellectual stupidity is Theology. This seems obvious enough. Next are the totalitarian political systems that model themselves in religion, like Fascism, patriotism and Sovietism.
Wilful ignorance is the next worst crime, as demonstrated in the post immediately above this one.

I don't know. It seems to me that much of the compassion and humaneness in our world originally came from the influence of religious prophets and such. But, I think you are right in the sense that Christianity as an organized religion strayed from the teachings of its founder. I think Christ would disapprove of some people who say they follow him.

Compassion and humanity did not origin from prophets. There is no doubt that a minority of so called prophets commented on compassion, and some even encouraged it. But feelings towards out fellow humans predate what we know as humans as such. Homo Erectus would never has been able to leave Africa without care and compassion for their fellows.
I think you would be hard pressed to be able to find any prophets from history that you would agree with, even Jesus had several bad points. Whilst I agree that Jesus would be horrified as most so-called Christians, there is plenty of negativity in his message.
No, religion comes with "civilisation", to bind and enthrall people to one purpose; a means of social control; a myth factory to tell lies that people are literally "bound" to follow.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 8:59 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 11:56 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 10:49 am
Yes, I feel that the biggest and most obvious ritualised intellectual stupidity is Theology. This seems obvious enough. Next are the totalitarian political systems that model themselves in religion, like Fascism, patriotism and Sovietism.
Wilful ignorance is the next worst crime, as demonstrated in the post immediately above this one.

I don't know. It seems to me that much of the compassion and humaneness in our world originally came from the influence of religious prophets and such. But, I think you are right in the sense that Christianity as an organized religion strayed from the teachings of its founder. I think Christ would disapprove of some people who say they follow him.

Compassion and humanity did not origin from prophets. There is no doubt that a minority of so called prophets commented on compassion, and some even encouraged it. But feelings towards out fellow humans predate what we know as humans as such. Homo Erectus would never has been able to leave Africa without care and compassion for their fellows.
I think you would be hard pressed to be able to find any prophets from history that you would agree with, even Jesus had several bad points. Whilst I agree that Jesus would be horrified as most so-called Christians, there is plenty of negativity in his message.
No, religion comes with "civilisation", to bind and enthrall people to one purpose; a means of social control; a myth factory to tell lies that people are literally "bound" to follow.

Sure, there was compassion and humaneness before the Axial Age. Humans had to cooperate with each other. However, it was primarily directed towards one's own tribe. It seems to me that Jesus and others, through example, united people from diverse backgrounds. What sort of negativity was in Jesus' message? Things like "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbor" seem like pretty good messages to me.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:23 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 8:59 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 11:56 pm

I don't know. It seems to me that much of the compassion and humaneness in our world originally came from the influence of religious prophets and such. But, I think you are right in the sense that Christianity as an organized religion strayed from the teachings of its founder. I think Christ would disapprove of some people who say they follow him.

Compassion and humanity did not origin from prophets. There is no doubt that a minority of so called prophets commented on compassion, and some even encouraged it. But feelings towards out fellow humans predate what we know as humans as such. Homo Erectus would never has been able to leave Africa without care and compassion for their fellows.
I think you would be hard pressed to be able to find any prophets from history that you would agree with, even Jesus had several bad points. Whilst I agree that Jesus would be horrified as most so-called Christians, there is plenty of negativity in his message.
No, religion comes with "civilisation", to bind and enthrall people to one purpose; a means of social control; a myth factory to tell lies that people are literally "bound" to follow.

Sure, there was compassion and humaneness before the Axial Age. Humans had to cooperate with each other. However, it was primarily directed towards one's own tribe.

And what exactly is your evidence for that?
I can tell you there is much evidence to the contrary.

It seems to me that Jesus and others, through example, united people from diverse backgrounds. What sort of negativity was in Jesus' message? Things like "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbor" seem like pretty good messages to me.

You are kidding aren't you? Where do I start?
How about shun your family and follow me in Matthew?
How about believe in me or burn?
Matthew 3
3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Mark 6
6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

And what do you take THIS to mean?
Luke 12
12:46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

It goes on...
12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
12:52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
12:53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law

Where is your "It seems to me that Jesus and others, through example, united people from diverse backgrounds...." NOW?

...or to put it bluntly the whole decrepit Jesus story is one big piece of BS written by humans who never even met the original Jesus, have no idea what he was like (the gospels are propaganda as is well-known) or whether he even existed. Western civilization has made itself stupid with that story long enough and used it to justify every kind of atrocity. It was Paul not Jesus who destroyed the future of the West for at least 1500 years. Also almost everything Jesus supposedly said was not in the least original but derived from other sources.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:03 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 3:23 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 8:59 am
Compassion and humanity did not origin from prophets. There is no doubt that a minority of so called prophets commented on compassion, and some even encouraged it. But feelings towards out fellow humans predate what we know as humans as such. Homo Erectus would never has been able to leave Africa without care and compassion for their fellows.
I think you would be hard pressed to be able to find any prophets from history that you would agree with, even Jesus had several bad points. Whilst I agree that Jesus would be horrified as most so-called Christians, there is plenty of negativity in his message.
No, religion comes with "civilisation", to bind and enthrall people to one purpose; a means of social control; a myth factory to tell lies that people are literally "bound" to follow.

Sure, there was compassion and humaneness before the Axial Age. Humans had to cooperate with each other. However, it was primarily directed towards one's own tribe.

And what exactly is your evidence for that?
I can tell you there is much evidence to the contrary.

It seems to me that Jesus and others, through example, united people from diverse backgrounds. What sort of negativity was in Jesus' message? Things like "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbor" seem like pretty good messages to me.

You are kidding aren't you? Where do I start?
How about shun your family and follow me in Matthew?
How about believe in me or burn?
Matthew 3
3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Mark 6
6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

And what do you take THIS to mean?
Luke 12
12:46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

It goes on...
12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
12:52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
12:53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law

Where is your "It seems to me that Jesus and others, through example, united people from diverse backgrounds...." NOW?

Jesus lived a rough life in rough times. He supposedly spoke in proverbs and metaphorically. I don't know what he means by those passages you cite. I'm not a Biblical scholar. What do you think they mean? For example, the words "follow me" and shun your parents could be interpreted as Jesus saying that one should not follow wicked parents (parents who won't follow his teachings). Maybe he's preaching only to those who need it most. He walked among the poor and sick quite a bit.