One of the smartest people ever!

Post Reply New Topic

Wait, wait, wait, wait...

I thought we shoved them down everyone else's throats. I'm confused!

Perhaps us delusional religionists aren't capable of telling the difference reliably?

Let's analyze these claims critically.

You claim: Religion has done x, y, z, and n bad things.
Therefore, religion does not know right from wrong and does not include a moral code.

This is called a non sequitur. It is a logical fallacy. The first and second statements really have nothing to do with each other, and the truth value of the premise means nothing to the truth value of the conclusion.

Even if your reasoning were not fallacious, let's look at the examples you gave of terrible things caused by religion.

Pogrom: More based upon racial bias against Jews and resentment towards their success.
Crusades: Land war, plain and simple. The Byzantines wanted to strengthen their international position, and to do so they needed a buffer zone from the advancing Arab armies. Some racial undertones.
Jihad: If you are referring to modern day jihadists, it seems primarily to be blowback to some poorly thought-out foreign policy by certain Western powers. More geopolitical than religious.
Martyrdom: Well, this is not something that is considered to be bad in general, and is often praised very highly as long as we identify with the martyr in question. In the United States, we honor such figures as Nathaniel Hale for their martyrdom, and there are many other examples of martyrs who died for non-religious reasons.

In short, I am going to have to brand your post as an epic fail.

No s**t. Do you even know what science is? Where does morality cross science, at all? Really, I can't get over how stupid this argument is. It's like saying "Mathematics is a great tool to solve problems with, but it can't tell me what car to buy". And if you're attempting to assert that people who follow Science do not have a moral code, that's ridiculous in itself.

That's not what I'm saying, is it? And yes, I know what science is.

You were saying science cannot tell us how we should live our lives or what is right and what is wrong, am I correct? I was saying in the above post that it's not even close to attempting to, as that's not what science is about.

Correct!

But sometimes it is made into something it's not, like a God.

Condell is more of a critic and essayist than a philosopher. His observations are usually on the mark and he is extremely witty. His put down of Islam is marvelous.

Peace. \ /

ruveyn

Quo pro Quid topic

I miss George, as well. He must be having some rip-roaring time with the Old Man of the Universe.

Nothing is like a God, not even the gods described in religious texts really describe what an omnipotent all knowing god would be like. And putting that aside it's indisputable that people generally do not receive their morals from religion.

I find Pat to be quite hilarious, but I suppose I sympathize with many of his stances and enjoy his flavor of half-satirical comedy.

I realise you don't believe in religion, but you needn't insult anyone! That's just as bad as te people who come to your door and try to convert you insistently...

Indisputable?

If you say so.