/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
|
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 163164165166167 191> |
| Author | ||||||
Slartibartfast 
Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam Joined: April 29 2006 Location: Atlantais Status: Offline Points: 29630 |
 Posted: June 15 2013 at 03:18 |
|||||
jayem doesn't know how to build a proper quote pyramid     Edited by Slartibartfast - June 15 2013 at 03:21 |
||||||
|
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
||||||
 |
||||||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator 
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: June 15 2013 at 07:27 |
|||||
The term "suicide bomber" and "suicide mission" are misnomers - yes, the perpetrator will end his or her own life for their specific cause, whether that is religious or territorial, (hence your metaphor is misplaced) but they are not suicidal by nature or mental illness (depression etc). The Japanese Kamikaze pilots, the Tamil Tigers, the German Leonidas Squadron and even their namesake, the 300 Spartans, were not fighting a religious war nor were they selected from "tormented unsettled souls". The Kamikaze pilots (for example) were upholding a tradition of Bushidō (the way of the warrior) where Tokko (an honourable death) was normal - the Japanese military did not select them because the were suicidal or depressed - the pilots volunteered [in fact every pilot from the Youth Pilot Training School in 1944 volunteered] and the military had more volunteers than they could practically use, they believed they were dying for their Emperor, their country and their families. It is a huge leap to assume that every pilot was naturally suicidal (or King Leonidas and his 300 Spartans come to that).
War is an exploitation of an inherrant trait in humans to fight (and be willing to die) for a cause, suicide bombers are the extreme of that.
|
||||||
|
What?
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Penal Colony Status: Offline Points: 11415 |
Posted: June 15 2013 at 09:03 |
|||||
|
^ the elevation of the promised 'afterlife' as a goal in many religious cultures must be culpable for so many of the indefensible atrocities perpetuated in our midst. Such traditions do not appear to be prevalent in western culture. I know you loathe philosophy Dean, but Nietzsche was right in one regard: most spiritual doctrines despise the here and now and equate the secular realm to their own versions of Hell.
Armed with the foregoing, people are capable of unlimited carnage. I don't buy the idea that a suicide bomber would lay down their life for territory c/f doctrinal beliefs. IRA bombers wished to survive to continue the armed struggle, it's unlikely there were sufficient expired Irish virgins to deliver any equivalent succor to departed martyrs. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
jayem
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 21 2006 Location: Switzerland Status: Offline Points: 995 |
Posted: June 15 2013 at 09:03 |
|||||
OK this did help me understand yes.
Edited by jayem - June 15 2013 at 17:16 |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: June 15 2013 at 18:20 |
|||||
The promise of an afterlife is undoubtedly the most complelling reason for exiting this life and this is just as prevalent in western culture as it is anywhere - the Celts believed that a natural death was a shameful one and Vikings who did not die in battle would fall on their own sword to enter Valhalla rather than die a natural death and be denied that afterlife. Religion is also the most persuasive means of indoctrination but not the only means and therefore religion is not the only reason for matrydom. Certainly suicide for a cause is easier to contemplate if there is a reward for dying since (in the abrahamic religions) the reward for suicide without a cause would have been eternal damnation (as in the catholic idea of purgatory), so manipulation by indoctrination is relevant here, especially when the doctrine is modified to account for such contradictions. But the motivations of a suicide bomber do not have to be based upon a belief in an afterlife, the self-sacrifice can be made for what the protagonist believes to be the right thing to do, for example to save the lives of their family by virtue of saving their country - people die for their country all the time - if that is not laying down their life for territory then what is?
The IRA never practived suicide bombing but proxy bombing, where the suicide bomber was a reluctant victim rather than a willing volunteer. The IRA were not concerned about creating martyrs, nor where they fighting for a religious idealism, though religious sectarian fevour/fanaticism was certainly a motivational form of indoctrination within the IRA.
|
||||||
|
What?
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Penal Colony Status: Offline Points: 11415 |
Posted: June 15 2013 at 18:51 |
|||||
|
^ Surely your cited celts and vikings are features of a very ancient
history and such beliefs must now be largely absent in the west? There
is compelling evidence that those types of extreme beliefs are still
extant in the middle east. (albeit the source dogma changes) Yes,
people are prepared to fight and kill for their country all the time,
but no-one in the west is recruited or volunteers for the specific
purpose of becoming a human sacrifice/weapon. You also state that the IRA were not concerned with creating martyrs. I think any of the numerous deceased hunger strikers in the Maze and elsewhere would contradict this.
BTW I never suggested the IRA practiced suicide bombing. 
Edited by ExittheLemming - June 15 2013 at 18:55 |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: June 15 2013 at 20:14 |
|||||
[edit] It could be argued that the beliefs used by modern suicide bombers are as ancient (read: archaic) as those of the celts and vikings as they essentially come from the same period in time, which was also the time of the "classic" christian martyrs and the formation of the samurai's bushido code in the far east. This is merely an observation with no specific point to make. Yes, I do recognise that of the three middle eastern abrahamic religions only one is currently in the business of creating martyrs through the use of suicide bombers.
This whole line of discussion started from the statement that suicide bombers exist because they are inherently suicidal and not because they are motivated by religious faith. My tact was to show that even while it is evident that some suicide bombers were not motivated by religion directly, there is no evidence to show any of them would have contemplated suicide without a cause. There is evidence that during Kamikaze sorties when an aircraft malfunctioned (so the mission could not be completed) the pilots zeal for suicide rapidly turned into concern for their survival.
Essentially we are arguing against the same point from different directions.[/edit]
During WWII the Germans created the Leonidas Squadron using manned versions of the V1 impluse jet and modified Me 328 aircraft. Their purpose was for suicide attacks, though very few missions were ever flown. Since then there have been no major conflicts of that magnitude in the west that would warrent the use of such tactics, but it is not unknown.
However, the concept is largely absent in the west which is why it is such an emotive weapon when used against us, (though most suicide bombings occur in the middle east), more so when the bombers are women or children.
Martyrs are created by the opposition and commemorated by supporters after the event. For example Joan of Arc was executed by the English and commemorated by the French (albeit much later).
Since the IRA proxy bombers were members of the opposition forced into bombing their own by the IRA then they could be viewed as potential martyrs killed by the IRA. This idea that they could become martyrs did not bother the IRA.
Were the hunger strikers not committing suicide for a cause? Sure no one else died with them, but lives were lost as a result of their deaths.
I am aware of that. I was just following the line of discussion from here:
I see no reason for the "  " smilie.Edited by Dean - June 15 2013 at 20:43 |
||||||
|
What?
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Penal Colony Status: Offline Points: 11415 |
Posted: June 16 2013 at 00:24 |
|||||
|
^ I think the confused emoticon is indicative of my own confusion or lack of understanding and not yours?
(the Irish virgins stuff was just a cheap gag at the expense of a tribe who created my own nation) |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Tor__Hershman
Forum Newbie 
Joined: June 18 2013 Location: West Virginié Status: Offline Points: 14 |
Posted: June 18 2013 at 08:16 |
|||||
|
I strongly doubt that Free Will exists, however...my programing started at age five...my father died and the adults tellin' me that the omnipotent God needed me father in heaven MORE than wee Tor needed him on Earth just didn't seem correct. After much thought I arrived @...well.....let me tell you in song
Edited by Tor__Hershman - June 18 2013 at 08:18 |
||||||
|
||||||
|
presdoug
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 24 2010 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 8616 |
Posted: June 18 2013 at 11:30 |
|||||
|
^this is off topic, but an interesting coincidence just occurred.
For the first time in my 50 years, i came across the name Tor, in any context, just last week, and it was while looking at some classical lps, a conductor called Tor Mann conducting Sibelius's 1st Symphony, and now your name. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
dr wu23
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 22 2010 Location: Indiana Status: Offline Points: 20623 |
Posted: June 18 2013 at 16:07 |
|||||
|
I'm curious how many of the atheists and agnostics here have read Sam Harris ,Richard Dawkins, etc and what do you think of their general ideas about religion? Are they too harsh or does religion deserve the thumping they give it?
|
||||||
|
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin |
||||||
|
||||||
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: May 29 2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 8368 |
Posted: June 18 2013 at 16:13 |
|||||
I'm basically an agnostic, but I find these anti-theists writers very off-putting. On the whole, I believe religion has been a net good for the world, especially now that every religion (except one) has become peaceful and uninterested in holy wars. What annoys me is that they often lump all religion in with Southern Baptism, which takes the Bible literally and consequently believes some truly crazy things. Educated Catholics and Jews have a very sophisticated, nuanced belief system that is really not that far removed from the scientific explanation of how the universe came to be, and it is unfair to mischaracterize their beliefs as "a man in the sky made everything six thousand years ago." |
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: June 18 2013 at 17:38 |
|||||
|
I cannot believe I created this thread.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: December 30 2007 Location: Raeford, NC Status: Offline Points: 32524 |
Posted: June 18 2013 at 17:41 |
|||||
That makes you an aTist. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 16 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 17493 |
Posted: June 18 2013 at 17:51 |
|||||
|
At times I think it makes me an idiotist
.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
dtguitarfan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 24 2011 Location: Chattanooga, TN Status: Offline Points: 1708 |
Posted: June 18 2013 at 18:33 |
|||||
A lot of Christians are starting to come around in that aspect as well. There have been quite a few authors lately who have encourages a deeper reading of the scriptures, taking into consideration historical context and linguistics, and keeping open the possibility of symbolic readings. Science and spirituality do not have to be at odds - in fact they can compliment each other quite nicely if we're not so dogmatic. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Tor__Hershman
Forum Newbie
Joined: June 18 2013 Location: West Virginié Status: Offline Points: 14 |
Posted: June 19 2013 at 10:05 |
|||||
|
Dr. Wu 23, neither Sam or Dawkins are sayin’ very little, that I know of, that moi ‘tweren’t yammering about forty, or more, years ago. I do agree that Dawkins DOES turn Atheism into a religion when he states, as I understand his words, ‘the world would be vastly better off if all religions ceased to exist' for I say “An ape in a Pope outfit, a Dali Llama costume, a Billy Graham Armani or a Chuck Darwin suit ‘tis, ‘twas and ‘twill be…..an ape. Is it a fine or awful ape, a good itch or a bad itch? That's what do not or do grooves." Also, unlike Dawkins, I have proven far beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt, and most empirically, that there is/are no MEANINGFUL God(s) and/or Satan(s).
The Llama 73, thou art most wise stating that ye be an agnostic. I used to be one when I didn’t know. As George Harrison said “It’s better to be an Atheist than a hypocrite” however it is much less profitable in most cases. NOTE: Me parodies “Crispy Krishna” & “Chanting The Name Of The Turd” However, if you feel that other religions beyond Islam ain’t carrying on wars, in the economic trenches - @ least, then that is what you feel.
Epignosis, “aTist,” most droll-fully adroit.
DT Guitar Fan, allow moi to correct Prof. Einstein’s one sayin’, “Religion without Science is Religion & Science without Religion is Science.”
President Doug, I am so sorry to hear that the only Tors, as a proper name, that ye hast ever heard of be i-self & Tor Mann. You have obviously had zero access to the finer products of our CULTure if you have never heard of this Tor...The Tor of Tors..... ...and now, Pres. Doug, I shall return the thread back to subject with a bit of me wee research/filmmaker-feces...
Edited by Tor__Hershman - June 19 2013 at 10:07 |
||||||
|
||||||
|
dr wu23
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 22 2010 Location: Indiana Status: Offline Points: 20623 |
Posted: June 19 2013 at 15:56 |
|||||
 |
||||||
|
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Tor__Hershman
Forum Newbie
Joined: June 18 2013 Location: West Virginié Status: Offline Points: 14 |
Posted: June 19 2013 at 19:09 |
|||||
|
Firstly, we must define our terms: Empirical Based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. Objective Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts. Subjective Based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. Meaningful Having a serious, important, or useful quality or purpose. So you see Empirical & Objective are the quintessential essences of Meaningful. Now, just follow the advice in me wee video and you'll find that you can replace ( or keep ) ANY god/devil with any OBJECT, e.g., Gumby, Batman, Tor, Turds, and the result of pure meaningless shall result. When you merge Meaningful with Subjective you get Voodoo, Crusades, Jihads and such heat-exchanges that are based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, shame, fear, opinions and simple conditioning. BTW all of nature is meaningless, me wee vid is proof enough, DYT
COMING SOON: The Origin Of Jesus Christ Edited by Tor__Hershman - June 19 2013 at 19:10 |
||||||
|
||||||
|
stonebeard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 27 2005 Location: NE Indiana Status: Offline Points: 28057 |
Posted: June 19 2013 at 23:41 |
|||||
Generally they are spot on. Dawkins's tone is often abrasive and doesn't make convincing the religious easy. Harris is like a logic robot, which is nice. Just google some videos of the guy talking. So calm and articulate. Look, religious claims about the world have been thoroughly debunked. Basically all of them. The empirical claims that paraded as science have been thrown out outright and the logical claims proposed by Augustine, Anselm, ancient Greeks and Mesopotamians, etc. have all been superseded by the rational logic of science and discovery. There is not one square inch of of reality that can better be explained by a religious belief than by science. Dawkins and all the others did not need to come around to obliterate the truth claims of religion, because they were already done away with by Bertrand Russell if not countless others centuries before. I'm all for the freedom to believe in a religion and the let that belief influence your own life to the any degree, provided that you do not cause harm to others. However, it's my personal belief that any attempt to salvage Christianity, Islam, or other religions through the use of logic or study of ancient texts is a futile regression into a pointless past when there is actual discovery on the horizon. Religion won't get us there, but science will. Of course they're not incompatible, but you don't check the Bible when you want to discover dark energy or the Higgs boson. Yes I think religion deserves everything it gets from them.
Edited by stonebeard - June 19 2013 at 23:44 |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 163164165166167 191> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
The Atheist - Agnostic - Non religious thread
Topic Options
silverpot wrote:
