But what is wrong with that? As humans we are endowed with the awareness that our existence is ultimately limited and as self-aware beings we are uneasy about that. Rationality is limited and there are questions that can never be answered rationally which is where faith comes in. Objectivists would argue that those questions are meaningless and that we should accept the given that we exists and we die with nothing further. In a purely materialistic level that is true but being self-aware its not so easy to just dismiss it that way and even if we could that leads to all sorts of other problems. Yes I believe in general we should be rational but at the same time as self-aware thinking beings we're confronted by questions that have no rational answers: Why am I here? What happens when I die? Is there a purpose to my existence?
exactly, sishir. hotballa, i didn't answer you because you could have looked it up yourself. sishir put it better than i would have anyways. i am glad that you are optimistic about the rox making the playoffs. i haven't counted them out but the season is getting shorter.
There is nothing wrong with finding solace in the irrational. But I do get irritated with the judgemental attitude inherent with professions of faith. Even that I could handle, but when the moral and ethical extensions of one's religion infiltrates a secular government, I'm revolted. It's one thing to be secure in one's faith, it's entirely different to base that security in influencing the actions of others. And thus - you come to my distrust/disinterest in organized religion - an institution (more or less) solely created to push religious political agendas. Frankly, politicizing a religious message cheapens it. It makes it all the more apparent that the guiding motivation is intolerance and elitism - a complete lack of respect for those who don't conform. EDIT: Maybe I'm still not clear. If the same fear that drives one to believe in the supernatural also causes one to demand the same fear of others - that concerns me.
one of your best posts. Those are the three basic questions that frame our opinions and views of life itself. How a man answers these questions will reveal much.
i'm not mixing the issues, i'm commenting on the issues mixing. see rhad's post. while i don't care if religious people judge me, though i thought they weren't supposed to do that, i just want them to keep it out of politics. rhester is an example of the way a christian ought to be. max too, and many others. i am not trying to define what it is just were it shouldn't be.
Well said. And I agree that rhester and max are great examples of christians. Which, no doubt, is why I really enjoy to talking to them about thse things. Much like why I enjoy discussing philosophy with Sishir.
I've enjoyed lunches with Max, he's genuine great person and sincere -(Jesus in his heart). Examples ???(thanks) but we Christians know the minute we think we are doing good...5-4-3-2-1-(boom!) we make fools of ourselves. Thanks. Jesus Christ- He is our religion (totally). Jesus said the law was love. Love one another. Profound. I'm thankful to come here, I've met very nice people I have really enjoyed making bbs relationships with so many, God bless. PS- Do I have permission to use your (all) comments in sermons on Sunday mornings. There are some really good points made. (serious)
I did look it up, didnt see anything of it. But I did manage to catch a quote from another one of Bertrand Russell's speeches. You'll have to forgive me if I pass on regarding him as some sort of genius http://www.aboutsudan.com/issues/population/russell.htm
Sorry to rain on the well deserved accolades for Rhester and Max but they are self-admitted Jesus freaks and many of their political views derive from their Christian views. For instance Rhester's libertarian political views he has stated come from his belief in God endowed rights. It seems to me that your view of what a Christian ought to be is how much you, a non-Christian, think. From what I understand Christianity is a proselytizing religion and therefore should be trying to preach the gospel to as many as possible. So while I certianly find Rhester and Max agreeable how am I a non-Christian to know if they are more of a Christian than the Jehovah's Witness who keeps on knocking at my door?
Simple. Your firm belief in the separation of church and state is at odds with the misguided (IMO) support for a consummate realpolitik "god-king" and his advocacy for politico-religious "self-determination."
Don't speak upon what you don't know. I expect better of you hotballa. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_Russell#Eugenics_and_race
Are you saying he didnt write this then? i'll also point this little passage out So he is either a racist, a sexist, or a hypocrite, since he changes his mind later about inferior "negroes" but not about women. I dunno Rhad, I really don't see you winning this one.
don't you think its up to a Christian to decide what a Christian should be like? I'm sure you wouldnt tell a black man how a good black man should act like.
sigh. I give up. First, you disregard the point of the essay originally posted to focus on some obscure reference to "oriental despotism". After being corrected, you move along to find some quotes from Russell in 1927 that are racist. Shocking. Show me a white man who wasn't in that time period. Then, after having it pointed out that Russell rescinded those views in his later years, you have the audacity to remark that since he didn't change one other line - he must be a sexist. Ad hominem after ad hominem after ad hominem. Useless. EDIT: You know, I think Russell would get a real chuckle out of you (a staunch christian) making so many desperate attempts to ignore the relevant portions of his myriad of essays on religion and logic.
Good one - and I've read damn near everything Twain ever wrote, he's one of my favorites. pwned by wnes - I may never live it down.
rhad, if someone is going to quote you something on something as personal as your religious belief or lack of, wouldn't you want that quote to be from someone that you would listen to? You wouldn't listen to me if I quoted you something on religion from someone like Pee Wee Herman would you? How do you go from one spectrum to the other so quickly? It isnt like he developed his opinion about African Americans while he was young or he was raised in the south. It was 1927, not 1827. Plus, he nevr took back his remarks about women. So how can I listen to a guy who is 1) sexist, 2) a racist, 3) a flip flopper? Also, just because everyone else is wrong doesnt make him right. Isnt this why we consistently criticize Bush?
You just equated Bertrand Russell and Pee Wee Herman. Pardon me while I ignore this silly ****. I hate to break this to you, but racism still existed after the civil war. Nevermind Russell was British. And yes - racism existed in England as well. You're really off base here - if you actually bothered to read his works you would find he was way ahead of his time with regard to sexual equality. Still is, actually. But you are right - for whatever reason he decided not to change this sentence. Therefore all of his other points are forfeit. Bummer. Maybe he was - I doubt it though. His works regarding sexual ethics are still racy today. (Our Sexual Ethics, 1936) You're right - he once said something racist. And people never change... A reformed racist is now a flip-flopper. You sir, are just a little out of line here. I never said he was right. On that note - I'm done debating this with somebody not even aquainted with the works in question.
So that excuses him for saying that black people are only good for working in the tropics and thats the only reason why they shouldn't be exterminated? I think it takes a bit more than growing up in an environment to think that way. Taking hatred of black people that far requires some serious work. All the more torubling then that he thinks women are stupider than men. It's like saying that JFK was a great civil rights leader even though he thought minorities were stupider than whites. That wouldnt make sense would it? Bush makes good points about the fight on terrorism too, so does Cheney. David Duke says he loves black people now. Do you believe him? well then was he wrong?
