*Religion* likes to take credit, but doesn't like to take any responsibility

[Prophet]

I was making a point that empathy is not special, and that it is a purely physical thing which can be observed, tested & manipulated.

Yes, and as of now you make this "point" with no expertise, knowledge, or support.

 

[Nietzsche]

Yes, and as of now you make this "point" with no expertise, knowledge, or support.

Tell me. How do you know the sun exists? You've never been there. You're just taking it on the word of other people who've also never been there. Why should I trust you, or them, that it exists?

That is the gist of your current argument right now. That I am somehow wrong because I am using the work of others who do know what they're talking about.

 

[Prophet]

Tell me. How do you know the sun exists? You've never been there. You're just taking it on the word of other people who've also never been there. Why should I trust you, or them, that it exists?

That is the gist of your current argument right now. That I am somehow wrong because I am using the work of others who do know what they're talking about.

Then by all means in lieu of your memory, PLEASE DO USE THE WORK OF OTHERS WHO DO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. You have the resources of the entire internet at your disposal! Hell, LegionOnomaMoi is a neuroscientist. Why not ask him or google what the chemical composition of empathy is if you are so sure that it is a chemical?

 

[Nietzsche]

Then by all means in lieu of your memory, PLEASE DO USE THE WORK OF OTHERS WHO DO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. You have the resources of the entire internet at your disposal! Hell, LegionOnomaMoi is a neuroscientist. Why not ask him or google what the chemical composition of empathy is if you are so sure that it is a chemical?

I think there might be some miscommunication.

I was trying to say with my second post, when I linked that article, that I messed up with saying it was chemical. I used that link to show that it is instead a collection of things based on that particular lobe of the brain.

 

[icehorse]

Again I ask, why would I?

Well, I assume you're on RF voluntarily?

I can point you to thread after thread in which an apologist makes arguments that fall into patterns like:

- Oh, that's just what a few fundamentalists do. (BTW, apparently the pope is a fundamentalist )
- The scripture is awesome, you're just not interpreting it correctly
- Secularism isn't that great, look at Stalin
- You can't disprove god
- It's not the religion, it's "other reason X" (culture, economics...)

So, can you find a few threads in which an apologist says: "hmmm, maybe my religion should reform a tiny bit"?

 

[Storm]

Well, I assume you're on RF voluntarily?

Oddly enough, this does nothing at all to demonstrate that you're finally willing to stop ignoring points you don't find personally gratifying.

 

[icehorse]

Storm,

I don't feel you've made any concrete points in this thread that counter the OP. I'm not ignoring anything you've said, I just think that so far you've dodged the OP. I just re-read your posts in this thread. It strikes me that instead of addressing the OP, you've mostly focused on why you don't like the question. I'm not interested in changing the topic of this thread. If you want to crank up a separate thread along the lines of "why religion gets unfairly blamed for stuff", I'll see you there.

 

[ChristineES]

Well, I assume you're on RF voluntarily?

I can point you to thread after thread in which an apologist makes arguments that fall into patterns like:

- Oh, that's just what a few fundamentalists do. (BTW, apparently the pope is a fundamentalist )
- The scripture is awesome, you're just not interpreting it correctly
- Secularism isn't that great, look at Stalin
- You can't disprove god
- It's not the religion, it's "other reason X" (culture, economics...)

So, can you find a few threads in which an apologist says: "hmmm, maybe my religion should reform a tiny bit"?

For that last point, Christianity doesn't have any "set" rules after believing in Jesus and following His commands. Not all Christians believe that Jesus is God, even. Everyone seems to have a different idea of what it should do. So to say "Christianity should reform" doesn't exactly fit. You'd have to say either different denominations should reform or even better, individual Christians need to reform.

 

[icehorse]

For that last point, Christianity doesn't have any "set" rules after believing in Jesus and following His commands. Not all Christians believe that Jesus is God, even. Everyone seems to have a different idea of what it should do. So to say "Christianity should reform" doesn't exactly fit. You'd have to say either different denominations should reform or even better, individual Christians need to reform.

On the surface that all sounds quite reasonable. But for a non-religious person like me, it seems a bit like a shell game, or whack-a-mole.

Over the last several thousands of years we have countless wars and conflicts in which the perpetrators claimed to be acting "in the name of..." (their religion). You know the list of reasons atheists are troubled by religion: pedophila, AIDs preferred to condoms, honor killings, intelligent design, and so on.

And every religious person points to some other sect, as you are doing here.

So the summary seems to be: "Religion is awesome, except when it isn't, and in that case, it's the other guy's religion that needs some fine tuning, my sect is perfect!"

 

[ChristineES]

On the surface that all sounds quite reasonable. But for a non-religious person like me, it seems a bit like a shell game, or whack-a-mole.

Over the last several thousands of years we have countless wars and conflicts in which the perpetrators claimed to be acting "in the name of..." (their religion). You know the list of reasons atheists are troubled by religion: pedophila, AIDs preferred to condoms, honor killings, intelligent design, and so on.

And every religious person points to some other sect, as you are doing here.

So the summary seems to be: "Religion is awesome, except when it isn't, and in that case, it's the other guy's religion that needs some fine tuning, my sect is perfect!"

I know it does, but it can't really be helped. Catholics have a lot a different beliefs than Protestants have. What you are mostly referring to is Catholicism. Protestants don't have anything against birth control, including condoms. That's just one example. The pedophilia thing is rather unfair, after all, Jesus spoke about what should happen to a person who harms a child and it wasn't nice. That isn't really apart of Christianity or even Catholicism. It was a scandal with some priests.

 

[Storm]

Storm,

I don't feel you've made any concrete points in this thread that counter the OP. I'm not ignoring anything you've said, I just think that so far you've dodged the OP. I just re-read your posts in this thread. It strikes me that instead of addressing the OP, you've mostly focused on why you don't like the question. I'm not interested in changing the topic of this thread. If you want to crank up a separate thread along the lines of "why religion gets unfairly blamed for stuff", I'll see you there.

Well, you're getting there.

I haven't dodged anything. I'm trying to get you to see that the way you frame the question and dodge points that undermine your agenda prevents the very same honest examination you claim to want.

There's a world of difference between dodging and knowing better than to play a rigged game.

 

[icehorse]

Storm,
It seems to me that you continue to claim it's a "rigged game". I can only conclude that means the OP is a claim you cannot refute.

Christine,
Can you find a thread in this forum in which a religious person owned up to their sect needing to reform?

==

For both of you, virtually every other significant activity* that humans engage in, opens itself up to constant criticism, review and improvement. Why not religion?

*From tennis, to engineering, to philosophy, to music, to education, to plumbing, to agriculture, and so on.

 

[Prophet]

I think there might be some miscommunication.

I was trying to say with my second post, when I linked that article, that I messed up with saying it was chemical. I used that link to show that it is instead a collection of things based on that particular lobe of the brain.

Collection of things? Really? Bereft of all support, you've equivocated into unfalsifiable language which says nothing concrete. I see no point to continuing our debate.

 

[Sapiens]

Storm,
It seems to me that you continue to claim it's a "rigged game". I can only conclude that means the OP is a claim you cannot refute.

Christine,
Can you find a thread in this forum in which a religious person owned up to their sect needing to reform?

==

For both of you, virtually every other significant activity* that humans engage in, opens itself up to constant criticism, review and improvement. Why not religion?

*From tennis, to engineering, to philosophy, to music, to education, to plumbing, to agriculture, and so on.

Perhaps not since Martin Luther?

 

[Prophet]

For both of you, virtually every other significant activity* that humans engage in, opens itself up to constant criticism, review and improvement. Why not religion?

No one, to my knowledge, is suggesting that we close off religion to criticism. Everyone here is suggesting to you that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

 

[icehorse]

No one, to my knowledge, is suggesting that we close off religion to criticism. Everyone here is suggesting to you that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Which glass houses would those be?

 

[Prophet]

Which glass houses would those be?

"People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" is a proverb about the folly of judging others by standards by standards you, yourself cannot be bothered with adhering to... a basic warning against hypocrisy.

 

[icehorse]

I understand the proverb, I'm curious to understand what hypocrisy you think you see?

Most of the atheists I know value critical thinking and are up for increasing their understanding of the world, and discarding ideas that no longer work.

 

[ChristineES]

No one, to my knowledge, is suggesting that we close off religion to criticism. Everyone here is suggesting to you that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

That's very true. There are a lot of problems within any Church, any denomination. I never said anything differently. I was saying earlier that there are no problems within Jesus' teachings (in the view of my faith, that is) that I am aware of.

 

[icehorse]

That's very true. There are a lot of problems within any Church, any denomination. I never said anything differently. I was saying earlier that there are no problems within Jesus' teachings (in the view of my faith, that is) that I am aware of.

Ah, so the "glass house" thing is referring to the idea that one sect can't criticize a different sect, because none of them are perfect? Hmmm, how about "take no care for the morrow"? That seems like a problematic teaching in this age of global warming and diminishing resources...