Poll

Syria?

Yes
6 (24%)
No
19 (76%)

Total Members Voted: 25

Author Topic: Politics  (Read 324882 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Flisch

  • Arm Wrestling Champ
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Banned - 17/07/15
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2445 on: September 30, 2010, 03:35:21 am »
To clarify my argument here, I am not agreeing with her; I'm for sex education in schools. However, I am saying that saying that her argument is somehow crazy when it's derived logically from her beliefs is silly.
How can something that's derived from an illogical belief system be logical itself?

Then something is seriously wrong with her morality - not with condoms.

Oh Flisch, you appear to have tapped into the perfected understanding of the cosmos - the one true morality! Share with us, oh Mighty One, this grand gift that has eluded mankind since the beginning of its history!

Forgive the sarcasm, but saying her morality is wrong requires some backing up.
:|


<insert godwin's law here>
There is, of course, a difference between having a laugh with someone, and having a laugh at their expense

Offline Daxx

  • TV Smasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 9445
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2446 on: September 30, 2010, 03:44:50 am »
[...]if one of the major liberal blog sites is endorsing this in such a major way, that non-partisanship is in serious jeopardy.

So what so I see before I go to bed tonight?  The freaking President has given the event a thumbs up!

You're absolutely right, and I guess this is the problem. If it's a rally to "restore sanity" it makes sense that many people on the left of your political spectrum would endorse it. It's a reaction to the fear and ignorance narrative that the fringe-right seem to be pushing (after all, the whole point of the rally is to satirise Glenn Beck). Understandably it would be nice to avoid partisanship, but at this point it seems like the type of narrative you subscribe to is a partisan choice. The real shame is that Fox and the rest of the right-wing echo chamber will indeed use this as an excuse to delegitimise the rally because they've pushed the "Obama bad, anything Obama like also bad" narrative for so long that it's starting to stick.

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Stephen Colbert

Offline Axelgear

  • Super Mario Bro.
  • *****
  • Posts: 4996
    • View Profile
    • Axel's Playground
Re: Politics
« Reply #2447 on: September 30, 2010, 05:56:23 am »
Wouldn't reality have a really ultra-capitalist, nihilistic bias? Just saying, it's a grand case of "Whomever has the power makes the rules" in the grand scheme of thing, regardless of pretense of right or wrong. No goals, no grand scheme viewable, just a slow grind into disintegration with everyone along for the ride and unable to stop the car.

Is it crazy to base your philosophy on logical thought within an innately illogical framework? (faith)
How can something that's derived from an illogical belief system be logical itself?

Well, thou shalt not kill comes to mind...

More seriously, what she's saying is based on her past teachings and moral beliefs but such things can be founded in logic as much as faith. Thinking that sex outside of marriage is bad can be backed up by a whole slew of logical reasons, many of which I'm sure she is aware of (or has at least been programmed to say), probably the grandest of which is unwanted pregnancy and resultant child-rearing.

Just because someone's beliefs are guided by faith doesn't mean they are inherently illogical.
Axel's Playground - Come see what I'm playing with today.

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • World of Warcraft Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 28464
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2448 on: September 30, 2010, 06:38:37 am »
Wouldn't reality have a really ultra-capitalist, nihilistic bias? Just saying, it's a grand case of "Whomever has the power makes the rules" in the grand scheme of thing, regardless of pretense of right or wrong. No goals, no grand scheme viewable, just a slow grind into disintegration with everyone along for the ride and unable to stop the car.

But the Conservative elements of american government aren't ultra-capitalist nihilists. They're mostly socially un-permissive and anti-scientific (yes, not ALL of them are like that blah blah).

Since science is the study of reality, and the evidence that statistically scientists and academics seem to ascribe more often to a 'liberal' political philosophy would imply there is a liberal bias to reality :P
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline Mr. Consideration

  • Metroid Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 5470
  • Merry Christmarx, one and all!
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2449 on: September 30, 2010, 07:23:30 am »
Well, thou shalt not kill comes to mind...

Evolutionary Psychologists could easily argue it is a principle that stems from altruistic group behaviour in early human tribal society; however you're right - any attempt to justify it in a modern setting requires some concept of innate rights which is very difficult to justify, ironically, without referencing the sanctity of life - the preposition that humanity is rational and capable of individual thought and thus sovereign of their own body is based on humanity being rational, which, again, isn't strictly true - Descartes be damned!

I suppose it depends on what motivates her beliefs - I'd hazard she holds them from Biblical scripture and has gathered the rest of her reasoning later to support the conclusion she had previously made. Not that I can prove that.

I feel the 'Rally to Restore Sanity' will largely be preaching to the converted as the Tea Party movement is; I don't think swing-voters will grasp onto the humour and devote themselves to coming along - making it a likely liberal lovefest. Whether it can present itself as a genuine political alternative and propagandist to the Murdoch empire and conservative networks remains to be seen; I personally doubt it. Perhaps it will galvanize the liberal, ahem, 'left' of the American political spectrum before November.

"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone elses opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation." - Oscar Wilde

Yes, I am aware of the irony.

Offline Flisch

  • Arm Wrestling Champ
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Banned - 17/07/15
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2450 on: September 30, 2010, 09:34:45 am »
How can something that's derived from an illogical belief system be logical itself?

Well, thou shalt not kill comes to mind...
Actually, it doesn't. The instinctive imperative not to kill members of your own species is basically inherent in all animals with a very few situational exceptions like the consumption of the male arachnids and mantids as well as the infanticide present in some hierarchically structured species such as lions.

So, what I am saying is that the "morale" not to kill other members of your own species is not something the ten commandments or the bible made up. They just wrote it down, but it existed long befre there were even humans.

Plus, religious belief systems of any kind are, by default, illogical as they don't center around facts but beliefs. That's why they are called "belief" systems.
There is, of course, a difference between having a laugh with someone, and having a laugh at their expense

Offline munchkin5

  • Boulder Dasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 3657
  • Gentlemen.
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2451 on: September 30, 2010, 09:46:52 am »
*brace for poorly conducted and pointless religious debate*

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • World of Warcraft Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 28464
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2452 on: September 30, 2010, 11:38:31 am »
HEY GUYS IF RELIGION IS TRUE WHY HAVEN'T WE FOUND A FOSSILISED JOHN THE BAPTIST YET?
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline Inkling

  • Civilization Emperor
  • *****
  • Posts: 10137
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2453 on: September 30, 2010, 03:42:39 pm »
Since science is the study of reality, and the evidence that statistically scientists and academics seem to ascribe more often to a 'liberal' political philosophy would imply there is a liberal bias to reality :P

Or perhaps people with 'liberal' political philosophies are more inclined to go into academia and hard sciences, while scientific minded people with 'conservative' political philosophies go into medicine or engineering or some other field where they can actually make money :P

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • World of Warcraft Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 28464
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2454 on: September 30, 2010, 03:47:14 pm »
Naw, they go conservative AFTER they make their money because they don't want to lose too much of it to taxes.
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline munchkin5

  • Boulder Dasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 3657
  • Gentlemen.
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2455 on: September 30, 2010, 04:07:31 pm »
Actually they're mostly conservative now because thats what their parents did.

Offline Axelgear

  • Super Mario Bro.
  • *****
  • Posts: 4996
    • View Profile
    • Axel's Playground
Re: Politics
« Reply #2456 on: September 30, 2010, 04:36:23 pm »
But the Conservative elements of american government aren't ultra-capitalist nihilists. They're mostly socially un-permissive and anti-scientific (yes, not ALL of them are like that blah blah).

They're also rarely conservative; usually they're just puppets for big business. Republicans are, at least. Libertarians tend to be bros.

Since science is the study of reality, and the evidence that statistically scientists and academics seem to ascribe more often to a 'liberal' political philosophy would imply there is a liberal bias to reality :P

I got the joke. I just think the joke is stupid.

I suppose it depends on what motivates her beliefs - I'd hazard she holds them from Biblical scripture and has gathered the rest of her reasoning later to support the conclusion she had previously made. Not that I can prove that.

She probably did, yes.

Actually, it doesn't. The instinctive imperative not to kill members of your own species is basically inherent in all animals with a very few situational exceptions like the consumption of the male arachnids and mantids as well as the infanticide present in some hierarchically structured species such as lions.

Humans kill each other all the time. It's estimated by some that up to 4% of the population are psychopaths who'd feel nothing if they killed another human being, and there's probably just as many sociopaths out there of similar mindset. The fact that we can't measure half a century, yet alone a full one, of recorded human history without a war SOMEWHERE on the planet suggests that the instinct in humans NOT to kill each other is not so deeply ingrained as much as it is encouraged by cooperative relationships that develop from interdependence.

So, what I am saying is that the "morale" not to kill other members of your own species is not something the ten commandments or the bible made up. They just wrote it down, but it existed long befre there were even humans.

Plus, religious belief systems of any kind are, by default, illogical as they don't center around facts but beliefs. That's why they are called "belief" systems.

Just a quick note: It's moral, not morale. It's a small, meaningless typo, but it's like when people write "rouge" instead of "rogue", it just bugs me.

I'll grant you that the belief system is largely irrational (irrational and illogical are different terms), but that doesn't mean the beliefs espoused by the people that follow them are, nor are their reasons for doing so. She could argue very sound and logical reasons for what she states. Doubtful, especially on the Creationism one or the "human brains in mice" one, but I can certainly see the reason she has for some of them.

Axel's Playground - Come see what I'm playing with today.

Offline Lush City

  • SunDog Pilot
  • *****
  • Posts: 3395
  • Get those blasted Power Rangers!
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2457 on: September 30, 2010, 04:48:20 pm »
100? I doubt you could go 10. Really "Though Shall Not Kill" is an impossible standard to hold a heterotroph to, without limitations. Most cultures excluded foreigners from their definition (allowing war) and then of course is that slavery specter. Funny enough, the Bible doesn't really portray anybody killing outside of God's explicit orders as unambiguously good.(Sampson,David, Eligha etc.) I don't know much about the Koran, does anybody have a similar response
.

Offline Flisch

  • Arm Wrestling Champ
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Banned - 17/07/15
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2458 on: September 30, 2010, 05:52:15 pm »
Actually, it doesn't. The instinctive imperative not to kill members of your own species is basically inherent in all animals with a very few situational exceptions like the consumption of the male arachnids and mantids as well as the infanticide present in some hierarchically structured species such as lions.

Humans kill each other all the time. It's estimated by some that up to 4% of the population are psychopaths who'd feel nothing if they killed another human being, and there's probably just as many sociopaths out there of similar mindset. The fact that we can't measure half a century, yet alone a full one, of recorded human history without a war SOMEWHERE on the planet suggests that the instinct in humans NOT to kill each other is not so deeply ingrained as much as it is encouraged by cooperative relationships that develop from interdependence.
Well, obviously the "thou shall not kill" rule only applies to followers of the same faith, otherwise I don't know how anyone can explain the crusades and witch burnings to me.

So, what I am saying is that the "morale" not to kill other members of your own species is not something the ten commandments or the bible made up. They just wrote it down, but it existed long befre there were even humans.

Plus, religious belief systems of any kind are, by default, illogical as they don't center around facts but beliefs. That's why they are called "belief" systems.

I'll grant you that the belief system is largely irrational (irrational and illogical are different terms), but that doesn't mean the beliefs espoused by the people that follow them are, nor are their reasons for doing so. She could argue very sound and logical reasons for what she states. Doubtful, especially on the Creationism one or the "human brains in mice" one, but I can certainly see the reason she has for some of them.
Irrational and illogical might be different terms but they are pretty close together and overlap in many things actually. However, even then I would say the reverse is true. Religions might be rational as they follow their sense of reasoning and are coherent in themselves. On the other hand, they are illogical by default as they ignore facts and proofs that go against their beliefs. But as I said, it's a pretty moot point, and this is worse than splitting hairs.

Just a quick note: It's moral, not morale. It's a small, meaningless typo, but it's like when people write "rouge" instead of "rogue", it just bugs me.
Last time I checked moral isn't even a noun, but what do I know? Anyways, let's just call it morality, that seems to be the word I meant.
There is, of course, a difference between having a laugh with someone, and having a laugh at their expense

Offline Lush City

  • SunDog Pilot
  • *****
  • Posts: 3395
  • Get those blasted Power Rangers!
    • View Profile
Re: Politics
« Reply #2459 on: September 30, 2010, 08:01:42 pm »
Yes it is a noun, but let's not get into semantics. Really O-Dog (as I'm calling her now) is just standard fundie crazy wrapped up in regular crazy, I almost want her to win just for the lulz factor.