IAP Political Forum

I have often been asked to identify what it is I believe in.  Like a scientist searching for some valuation or experiment, I have come to a certain criteria, or methodology if you will, of what it is that I search for and how I search.  While I adhere to this methodology strongly and make every attempt to live by it, it has left more than a few people questioning me.  I have been accused by some of he little minds of cowardice because I am not a Christian or because I am not Islamic, or even because I am not making  choice (as if a choice must be made), because I am still attempting to seek and learn the truth.  That does not make me agnostic, since I do believe there is a god, but rather it makes we me a searcher for some greater truth that will allow me the “eureka” moment.  So I discuss belief systems with many different people with different points of view (including some very intelligent atheists who have chosen not to post on this board because of the reather stupid ones that keep posting here.  I give the holders of belief systems the respect they deserve as long as they extol their own system without denigrating others.  If you really believe that your system is superior, there is no need to undermine the beliefs of others through insults and pettiness, the superiority will make itself known and plain to those who review it, along with your ability to articulate that belief system.

When you insult other belief systems, you have shown that you cannot speak well of your views, that you do not know how to present your belief system in an appealing way.  You are in effect forced to denigrate other systems due to your own feelings of inadequacy towards your belief system, or are forced to do so due to your own ignorance, not only of your belief system, but also of your ability to verbalize that philosophy.  I have been the target of some because I defend Islam, the target of others because I defend other ideas that belief systems that aren’t popular, and of course the target of others because I defend Christianity.  Now why do I do that?

I generally follow four rules where belief systems are concerned.

1-When I want to learn of a belief system, I don’t ask the people who are against it.  I don’t ask the people who have anger towards it.  I ask adherents.  They have caught their “vision” and they believe in what they say, so I attempt to hear what they have to say, to understand what the appeal is to them.

2-I seek to make fair comparisons.  It is grossly unfair to compare Usama bin Ladin to Mother Theresa, if you have thugs on one side, you should compare them to the thugs on the other side.  If you have saints on one side, it is only fair to compare them to the saint like on the other side.

3-I want only to know those things which enhance the belief system, not those things which detract from other belief systems.

4-Finally, if a system has been around for a long time, there is bound to be some truth to it.  Some ideal which makes it strong and resilient.  So I seek what might be called "holy envy" (as one professor I know puts it).  It is when here is something about that philosphy or system of thought that you wish you could inculcate in your own life.

It is one reason I have a great deal of respect for many belief systems, and very little respect for the little minds that cannot even begin to tell us why their system is good, and the constantly harp on why the systems of others are evil.  I reject such dogma.

Threads like this leave one open to severe criticism.

If this turns into a flame-fest it will be promptly Infernoed at worst, Lobby at best.

Nonsense. Atheism requires other belief systems to be untrue by definition. It is not possible to defend atheism without attacking the notion of God.
[/quote]


That way you only get one side.


Or just compare the doctrines themselves.


Why?


Argument from Antiquity.


This just means it's a good meme - not that it's true.


It's interesting that even when extolling the virtues of your own belief system you are still throwing personal attacks at others.

Civil differences are better than the Usama bin Ladin approach of "your beliefs are wrong, therefore stupid or evil"

The comparision is telling.

As to atheist belief systems, there are different atheist belief systems even if you cannot account for it.

Some are wholly materialistic in which there is no god, no spirit, no unseen thing.  Others belief there might be a spirit of some sort, but no god, simply the continued existence in another form.  Others believe our essence becomes part of the universe, but with no god attached to the action.

I am surpised self proclaimed atheists don't know about these different philosophies in their own belief systems.

With all respect due to one who is a searcher (and I guess that it is an essential element of being human that we feed our epistemic hunger)....

1. Your conception of 'a belief system' is unduly limited by your apparent presuppositions.  You only seem to consider those based around a belief in a god.  You only seem to consider those which base an ethic on that god.  You seem to be oblivious to the fact that neither are necessary to 'a belief system'. You seem to think of complete  monolithic belief systems; few are, most have a myriad fine distinctions amongst sects and idividual adherents. (Please note I am saying 'seem').  You might wish to consult people who do not share your basic views, rather than attack them as fools and morons.

2.  Why compare as such?  Certainly you can compare your judgements of the theories (often the contents are incommensurable), but why compare adherents at all?  

3.  Some systems either actively or passively detractt from others (think of the jihad theme, or judaism's exclusivity).

4.Conservatism is not a sensible permanent view.  The persistence of an idea may not have anything to do with its 'truth' (what do you mean by that in this context?).  Polytheism has been around much longer than mono.  Does this mean you believe it has a valid core... I doubt it, given your 'givens'.  

You reject 'little minds' that cannot say why their system is good, and concentrate on why others are bad.  Yet point 3 of your methodology is to 'make comparisons'.  Don't forget that some movements (religious, political, artistic - all belief systems) are founded on the rejection of what went before, and usually they see it as being for a good reason.

I mean these criticisms in good faith.  I hope you can come to a more stable view of what you see as your core beliefs.

I suggest you read more carefully.  God has nothing to do with belief systems.  It appears to be YOUR presupposition, not mine.

True, though you did make it appear that way though by mentioning christians, muslims, and atheists. Would I be wrong if I said that most of your beliefs are based around God from the perspective of the people of this forum?

I even drew your attention to the use of 'seems'.   If you feel that I have misunderstood your views, I would be pleased to see your clarification.  But please don't just walk away with the usual statements or insinuations of stupidity.

It is clarified, was clarified, you simply reduce your arguments to navel contemplation, I have little respect for people who love to get caught up in the minutae and nauseatingly miss the big picture.  They tend to be the whiners in any group.

"Seems" is not an escape when you deconstruct and take one portion out of context in order to whine about something.

Allow me to quote, with a small change or two....

"When you insult other {people}, you have shown that you cannot speak well of your views, that you do not know how to present your belief system in an appealing way.  You are in effect forced to denigrate other {people} due to your own feelings of inadequacy ... or are forced to do so due to your own ignorance, not only of your belief systems but also of your ability to verbalize that philosophy"

Applauded.

How little self-awareness is demonstrated in having at once offered an observation of presupposition as a criticism made in good faith, then identified the very same observation in return as "the usual statements or insinuations of stupidity"?

You committed an error in your essay. Atheism isn't a belief system. It's a lack-of-belief system.

No, belief systems deserve some level of respect, the bigots who take various belief systems and attempt to twist them into attacks deserver none.   But then when you attempt to minimize respecting (and actually argue for bigoted views) one is not surprised and your defense of those who actually attack people.

I have presented how I view belief systems.  You of course say such toleration is all wrong.  I am sure you would be first to lead the book burning sections.

Are you sure?

Absolutely sure. Atheism isn't a belief system. Ergo, claiming it's one is false. Claiming Atheism is a belief system is like claiming lack of belief in Chewbacca is a belief system. Fucking Absurd on it's face. Lacking belief in magical faeries isn't a system of belief unless you rape the term of meaning and replace it with whatever the hell you want it to mean, but then again...you do that regularly.

Apparently other atheists disagree with your rather limited dogmatic statement.

Care to explain why atheists cannot have those beliefs which are differing views from yours?

a)  Your presentation was not easy to understand or follow.  I invited you to clarify.  You responded with a refusal and veiled insults.

b) I say nothing of the sort concerning tolerance.  I do however think that some ideas are wrong and lead to evil actions and attitudes. Even if they have 'stood the test of time'.

Why?

I didn't read any of this thread.

It matters very little what somebody's world view is, or their belief system. Very little.

Lots' of people have lot's of beliefs.


What matters is their REASON for having those beliefs. If people simply spout their beliefs as if they should be taken seriously without explaining why, they are simply masturbating all over their audience.

I bet all b did was talk about his belief in some neo-PC manner and think that everyone should espouse his beliefs.


Perhaps he should discuss ideas rather than people - and in this case, talking about one's self has got to be lowest on the scale.

After all, there is nothing more authoritarian and egotistical to write your own beliefs as if they are valid and then simply engage in ad homs when you actually get a chance to defend them.

Baldar, stop TELLING people what you think and start explaining why you think you, yourself, should believe it. Defend your beliefs with logic, not spout them and attack people for not agreeing with you.

It is troubling that I should even have to mention this.

Inflammatory, disrespectful and uncivil references to Silver Lining with intent to harm will be promptly deleted. There is no acceptable decent and civil rationale for attacking the memory of a former member who cannot personally respond to attacks against his character...or attacks referencing him or his memory as some sort of "weapon" against another.

The deleted posts from this thread reside in the Moderator area for reference.

I decided not to Inferno them because this will not be allowed to continue here or anywhere else on the Forum.

DO NOT use this thread to continue the subject of the deleted posts or why they were deleted.

If you have a comment or question, PM me.

LOL, well you seem big on telling people what THEY think and WHY.  Why should we spoil all of your fun.

You simply are taking the typical passive aggressive approach of the intellectually challenged.  The why's are there.  Your trouble is that its a bit "complicated" for you.

We expect a little higher level of decorum here.  Attacking someone that has no ability to defend themselves will not be tolerated.  Excellent move here Patton.

Clearly.

Excellent.  You have sussed out the ones we missed.  Couldn't help notice you didn't bother to quote the ones that got caught.  But then that would go counter to your point wouldn't it?

Not at all.  How would I quote deleted material anyway?

The implication that I failed to quote every instance because doing so would "go counter to" the point is incorrect.

Here is part of an exchange Abraxas found especially entertaining.


The decorum horse left the barn long ago.  The point is that a contrary expectation isn't reasonable.

This is getting old rather quickly and it reminds me of when my 8 year old thinks my 4 year old is "getting away" with something...we are supposed to be adults here.

To have an expectation that every single post will be viewed by a member of the Moderating staff is setting yourself up for a failed expectation from the start.

If something is brought to my attention, I deal with it...if I miss something...it can't be used as some lame example of "different standards" applied for different people.

If I make a judgement call on something and you wish to ask why, I am more than happy to oblige...I have a rationale for every action I take here, and am more than willing to explain...and if you wish, you may tell me how you think I am wrong....I will listen...and if warranted will apologize, redact my action...or disagree and the call stands...it's really quite simple.

You might do something like this....
Novel concept.

I think you failed to quote any instance because it went counter to your point.  Easier to look put upon when they other guy always gets away with it!   ;D

Yes?  What is your point?   ???

So, it's the old 'he's an ass, so I can be an ass' game?  What are we 9?  Come on zuk, I don't want to see report posts all over the place, but is this really a defense in your mind?   :-\

You know, all I stated is "this is how I deal with different belief systems".

Of course the crazed zealots out there found all kinds of reasons to attack dialogue and toleration.  But it is simply this is how I view other belief systems.

so? who cares? are you a prophet or something and should be heeded "just because"?

why not give a REASON for why people should believe things, instead of talking about yourself?

Better a prophet than a whining unemployed architect.  :laugh:

Oh gee, isn't barney the one claiming there isn't a "reason" for everything?  Or is he just inconsistent like the bible he claims is inconsistent?  Poor barney is all tied up in knots isn't he?  8)

No response. Another win for me.

I think I should be more heeded than you.  I do more good in the world than you do.  I tend to be better off.  Unlike you I have proved my worth to the world and I am more likely to leave people of different belief systems alone as long as they aren't attacking anyone else.

Yeah, I guess that makes me better than you.  Hence I should be more heeded.  I don't need to be a prophet.  But lets put it this way, if you and I walked into any room of educated gents and ladies in just about any culture, I would more likely be listened to, while you, well, they might not have busboys, who knows.  ;)

You asked the question.  I gave you the answer.

By the way, how goes the job hunt?

B, I won. Game over.

Childish.

My 8 year old daughter does that too.  When she doesn't win in chess, she keeps saying to herself "I won"  "I won".  Now she does it out of childish disappointment, I believe you do it out of, delusion?  Or childish disappointment?  ;)

 ;D ;D ;D

B, I don't get any more points after the game is done. I won. I can't win this one any more than I did.

My points are well made, and find foundation in your replies, thank your for agreeing with me.  ;D