It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Matewis: o dear god
Yes? What do you want this time?
Post edited May 19, 2014 by Fenixp
avatar
Fenixp: Yes? What do you want this time?
I said egotheism was taken!
avatar
Matewis: o dear god
avatar
Fenixp: Yes? What do you want this time?
A man said up to god, "God what's a million years to you?"
God said to the man, "A second."
And the man said up to god, "God what's a million dollars to you?"
And god said to the man, "A penny."
And the man said up to god, "God would you give me a penny?"
And god said to the man, "Yes I will...in a second."
avatar
P1na: I said egotheism was taken!
Yes, by me. It's kind of distressing that you have suggested being my only believer.
I think it's a question of maturity. Let's say you notice a vitriolic anti religious post on a gaming forum (even in the general discussion section) you can easily just ignore it. If you choose to debate or try to reason with said post/people then you should be ready to defend your beliefs (good luck).Religion is a particularly contentious issue and If you hold such beliefs you simply have to be prepared to be challenged and treated with animosity even if ideally everyone would discourse in a civil and dignified manner. It's very hard to politely say to religious people "the historical and moral foundations of your belief system are very scanty and you've wasted all this time believing in a fictional supreme celestial being".
avatar
Matewis: o dear god
avatar
Fenixp: Yes? What do you want this time?
Half life 3 pronto!
and while your at it : Dungeon Keeper 3 with no DLCs or microtransactions and a proper Disciples 2 sequel. Also fix this :

How many wishes do I have left?
Attachments:
avatar
Fenixp:
avatar
Matewis: Half life 3 pronto!
and while your at it : Dungeon Keeper 3 with no DLCs or microtransactions and a proper Disciples 2 sequel. Also fix this :

How many wishes do I have left?
Uh oh! George Lucas is gonna sue somebody!
avatar
Matewis: Half life 3 pronto!
and while your at it : Dungeon Keeper 3 with no DLCs or microtransactions and a proper Disciples 2 sequel. Also fix this :

How many wishes do I have left?
avatar
tinyE: Uh oh! George Lucas is gonna sue somebody!
Another Jay and Silent Bob film would me awesome, or another Mallrats!!

EDIT : Ooohhhh the picture I uploaded, now I get it :D Lol I was struggling to comprehend your post and all I could think of was that Chris Rock line in Jay and Silent Bob strikes back :) Apparently I'm a bit absentminded today
Post edited May 19, 2014 by Matewis
avatar
tinyE: Uh oh! George Lucas is gonna sue somebody!
avatar
Matewis: Another Jay and Silent Bob film would me awesome, or another Mallrats!!
Meh, Clerks 2 wasn't that great.
avatar
Matewis: o dear god and there it begins, again...
They say history repeats itself...
avatar
Matewis: Another Jay and Silent Bob film would me awesome, or another Mallrats!!
avatar
tinyE: Meh, Clerks 2 wasn't that great.
Except the Star Wars vs LOTR bit which was great! (also, see my EDIT above)
avatar
Telika: Secular maggots coopt history and munch on "hero" corpses just the same, making them symbolic figures of this and that, sacralizing them their own way, and planting their flags on them.
While I understand what you are trying to get at, and agree with some of your core reasoning about the commonality of root causation of affect, I think it's also seductive to overapply reductive parallelism between discrete magisteria.

Since systems like religion and secularism both come out humans, naturally there will be manifestations in each that are driven by the same causes. So it is easy to point to both and say "see, here one does X and the other does Y, naming them different but at heart being the same". But this is also facile if one doesn't consider the multifarious layers that go into those manifestations. This is where reductionism leads to oversimplification.

In terms of sociodynamics, I would say that the overarching difference between secularism and religion is that the former strives for universality, whereas the latter strives for segregation. Secularism is about seeing where we overlap and finding what we all want as humans. Religion, conversely, is about binary absolutes - the believer versus the doubter, the obedient versus the heretic, the saved versus the damned.

If you prefer, you can view secularism as striving for the minimal set, the baseline for what we must do as a society to ensure that individual rights and freedoms are honoured. Conversely religion strives for the maximal set, an orthodoxy of what every individual must believe, and must not believe, in order to ensure stricture. Secularism embraces heterogeneity, whereas religion espouses homogeneity.

A thought experiment that I often return to helps delineate this primary contrast: If we all woke up tomorrow as secular humanists, by the end of the day we'd all still be secular humanists. But if we all woke up tomorrow with the same religion, by the end of the day we'd have splintered into dozens of new sects. Because the former is predicated on where we are alike, and the latter on where we differ.
I don't care what others believe in as long as they don't try to force it on me or otherwise make me uncomfortable because of it.
avatar
IAmSinistar: While I understand what you are trying to get at, and agree with some of your core reasoning about the commonality of root causation of affect, I think it's also seductive to overapply reductive parallelism between discrete magisteria.

Since systems like religion and secularism both come out humans, naturally there will be manifestations in each that are driven by the same causes. So it is easy to point to both and say "see, here one does X and the other does Y, naming them different but at heart being the same". But this is also facile if one doesn't consider the multifarious layers that go into those manifestations. This is where reductionism leads to oversimplification.

In terms of sociodynamics, I would say that the overarching difference between secularism and religion is that the former strives for universality, whereas the latter strives for segregation. Secularism is about seeing where we overlap and finding what we all want as humans. Religion, conversely, is about binary absolutes - the believer versus the doubter, the obedient versus the heretic, the saved versus the damned.

If you prefer, you can view secularism as striving for the minimal set, the baseline for what we must do as a society to ensure that individual rights and freedoms are honoured. Conversely religion strives for the maximal set, an orthodoxy of what every individual must believe, and must not believe, in order to ensure stricture. Secularism embraces heterogeneity, whereas religion espouses homogeneity.

A thought experiment that I often return to helps delineate this primary contrast: If we all woke up tomorrow as secular humanists, by the end of the day we'd all still be secular humanists. But if we all woke up tomorrow with the same religion, by the end of the day we'd have splintered into dozens of new sects. Because the former is predicated on where we are alike, and the latter on where we differ.
oh no he didnt!! hmmm-hmmmm

I'm using that right yes?
avatar
IAmSinistar: I think it's also seductive to overapply reductive parallelism between discrete magisteria.
avatar
Matewis: oh no he didnt!! hmmm-hmmmm

I'm using that right yes?
Possibly, though it's hard to read intent in this particular case. You could be saying that I am guilty of the very thing I speak out against, or merely that I am going "oh SNAP" in a verbose way. Hopefully the latter. :)