Government (by which I actually mean The State) is "real" in the same way astrology is "real".
They both exist as a collection of related beliefs. No one can doubt that the beliefs exist and this belief has effects. People truly believe in them and will argue about their "reality". They can point to the horoscopes in the newspaper or online, to the jewelry created in the form of the various astrological signs, to the "laws", and monuments, and giant buildings full of people. But those are just indications that people believe in these things and act on their belief, not that there's any concrete reality beneath the beliefs.
People actually alter their behavior based on their beliefs in these things. People choose who to date based on astrology and choose people to kidnap, rob, and murder based on government. But the beliefs are equally stupid.
In the end, you have nothing but beliefs and people willing to do things based on that belief, but nothing real holding up those beliefs.
Aren't you glad you aren't superstitious like those people?
That being said, sometimes it is necessary, when you are speaking to the believers, to refer to the thing as if it's real in order to point out the flaws in that system of belief. This way you can show that it doesn't actually work as advertised-- although they probably won't listen.
analysis = correct.
ReplyDeletejudge deeds, not advertising
I am beginning to understand why it's hard for you to be in a relationship. I'd guess that you need a Darwinian atheist who believes in nothing except herself and has for her religion a belief that we descend from apes. Those girls are probably out there, but they are few and far between.
ReplyDeleteMy belief is that government is trying to take the place of God and doing a pretty good job of it, especially with Christians. Having said that, I'm already sensing that you think my belief in God is "stupid," as you have said about a belief in astrology. So, I won't reveal more about my beliefs right now.
That said, I enjoy reading your views on government and individual rights, which I believe are given by God. I'm learning a lot by reading your blog, despite my supposed stupidity.
The analogy is valid but of course the two examples (astrology and government) are different in a vital way: one represents misguided, but voluntarily chosen behavior, while the other represents criminals with guns robbing and micromanaging everyone unfortunate enough to live near them.
ReplyDeleteVery true.
Delete@ Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteI can't speak for Kent, since A) I don't have his consent; B) He's an
adult, and C) this is his blog, not mine.
Speaking for myself though, Darwinian atheist women who believe in
nothing but themselves are not so rare as you might think. Being a
Christian as you are, you're not likely to meet many of us, and we
don't all evangelise about our point of view, or our philosophical
leanings.
Continuing to speak for myself, well, I don't think you're stupid for
believing in a god, or following a religion. I do think that you are
misinformed and have been sadly misled. I also strongly suspect that
you have not been very well educated in the application of logic, and
the scientific method, which is not a belief, but a system of thinking
and learning, centered on questioning everything and seeking evidence,
rather than accepting anything on blind faith, or indulging in the
kind of magical thinking common to many religious persons, and
required by many religions.
Speaking for myself, if you want to believe in a god, go right ahead.
Enjoy it if it makes you happy. I have no issue with that, until you
start telling me, that I have to listen to your beliefs because your
mythical being tells you to spread the good word, or until you try to
apply the laws of your god / religion, which you have CHOSEN to
follow, to my body, or my life and relationships.
At that point, we have a problem, because you are in fact at that
point violating my right to self-ownership, and my free will.
Kent speaking against religion on HIS blog, which HE pays for is in no
way a violation of your right to believe whatever you want to believe.
One last thing. I note that you are making a mistake increasingly
common to certain branches of Christianity, the mistake of deeming
science, or the holding of certain hypotheses to explain observed
phenomena, as a "religion". This is erroneous. For any of us to have
a belief that we descended from apes as a religion, we would have to
accept the idea with blind faith, and hold to that belief with no
evidence, and even in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Instead, those of us who think that evolution is the way humanity came
about, study the evidence, and see for ourselves if the data seems to
fit the hypothesis; always ready to throw out the hypothesis and start
over, if the data does not fit. We also admit up front that we don't
know with absolute certainty.
This annoys many religious people because they use religion as a
crutch to get through life in an uncertain world, and they don't like
seeing someone else going about without a crutch the other person has
no need for.
Is that what annoys you about atheists? By the way, I'm not rendering
an opinion either way as far as what you think, or what your
motivations are. Not my place to. Just engaging in Socratic inquiry;
and yes, I'm aware of what happened to Socrates for pissing off too
many people by asking questions which caused them to have to challenge
their preconceived notions.
For JdL; I disagree somewhat with your statement. Why? I'll just
drop this quote here:
"Religion is a cruelly employed tool used to enslave entire
populations for the benefit of a select few megalomaniacal
psychopaths." attribution Unknown
Cordially,
Shinseiko
--
Fo-su to tomo ni aran koto o...
Thank you for the quote--it's interesting. Religion is a human-made entity; therefore, it's far from perfect. And yes, it is certainly being used (and has been used) to enslave.
DeleteIf you will read my writing more carefully, you'll see that I did not claim to be a Christian within what I said, although I do claim to be one. I've done a lot of research into a lot of things and I feel comfortable calling Christianity home.
Your beliefs are your beliefs and I respect them. I am married to someone who claims to be an atheist--not all Christians "evangelize." I would suggest that you do more research on Darwin. If you're going to place your beliefs in one man's theory, you might want to pick a different man. But you might want to stay with Darwin and the religion of science.
I have a degree in mathematics and took physics and chemistry; so, I'm familiar with the scientific method. As good as it is, I don't put all my faith in everything that claims to be derived from it. Like most things, science started out with good intentions, but try getting a climate-change believer who blames the proletariat for destroying the planet to look at a study that does not support his or her belief. You'll see some religious fervor. I sure hope that Christians aren't the only ones seeing how science has been made into a religion.
For KentForLiberty's sake, it's good to know that there are lots of Darwinian atheists. Maybe you and KentForLiberty can exchange e-mails, or you can introduce him to some of your friends.
Cordially back at ya!
Anon, with due respect, there appear to be several parts of my comment
Deletewhich you apparently did not read. My acceptance, for the moment, of
evolution as a hypothesis, is *not* a "belief", which I have
previously defined in said post.
I will thank you to cease and desist making false and inaccurate
statements about me.
If I came across evidence, (real evidence, not just the words of
Bronze Age and Early Iron Age tribesmen and religious leaders) that
dinosaurs did indeed walk the Earth with man, and the entire world was
made six thousand years ago, I would throw evolution out the airlock.
So far, there is not any credible evidence of this. Sure there are
claims made, but saying something does not make it so.
Science has not been "made into" a religion. There may be and
certainly are people who use science as a religion such as the
aforementioned climate believers. That's not science, and we both
know it. Science is never settled. If you claim it is, you're not
doing science.
Science itself is not in and of itself a religion. They are two very
separate things with very major differences between them, largely in
that science does not state anything with certainty, and is willing to
accommodate new information, by modifying existing hypotheses, or
generating new ones in the face of conflicting or contradicting
evidence. Religion does not do this. I am not going to spend more
time trying to explain the differences here; if you are open-minded
enough and intellectually honest enough apply logic to things and
operate from a factually proven premise, I won't need to. If you're
not, then as appears to be the case, your mind is already made up, and
it would be pointless. I can lead someone to knowledge but I cannot
force them to think. Nor would I wish to.
Darwin is not the only person to have proposed, researched or
supported evolution as a hypothesis. I am not placing "belief" in any
person's theory. Also, I am very aware of Darwin's flaws. You
continuing to bring Darwin into things indicates either a poor
knowledge of the theory of evolution, or an attempt at a straw man
argument.
It also could indicate a use of one of Alinsky's rules; "Pick the
target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the
support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people
and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is
cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule
works.)"
My theory at the moment is that this is the primary reason for your
continued obsession over Kent's love life. That should be his
business, not yours, unless you happen to be part of his circle of
friends. Even were that the case, shouldn't you ask his permission
before bringing up a subject such as this in a public forum?
For your sake, I hope that you grab that D-ring, and give a good sharp
tug on the ripcord and open the parachute of your mind. I will also
thank you to stop concerning yourself with Kent's love life, or mine.
You haven't earned the privilege of making comments or suggestions to
either one of us on that issue.
This discourse is at an end. I'm out of troll food.
Good day.
Shinseiko