5 ms·

The lengths some people go to for religion... smh

by mlatu 6y ago

nanna 6y ago
Some people live their lives for the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Some live their lives for the gods capitalism. I'd say the former is a lot less pernicious.
- joelbluminator 6y ago
  They both have pros and cons. Entire wars were fought over the ideals of both, and both dominate their "believers everyday life.
  - nanna 6y ago
    Where would you argue a war exists today that does not have its roots in the economic domination of one group over another, and is purely fought on religious grounds?
    - nix23 6y ago
      Islamic State?
    - joelbluminator 6y ago
      Crusades, ISIS, the depression of the muslim Uyghur by China, European antisemitism (which culminated in nazism), Armenian genocide, etc etc. Now many atrocities had several factors, but I believe religion plays a dominant role in the ones I listed. Arguably you can put 11-9 and the subsiquent mid east war in there as well...
      - Mediterraneo10 6y ago
        > the depression of the muslim Uyghur by China This is not a religious conflict. China has oppressed the Uighurs because the Xinjiang region was only brought under full Chinese control late, and the Uighurs have been relatively independent-minded. That this conflict isn't about Islam per se is evident from the fact that 1) there is a substantial Muslim population within China outside of Xinjiang, and those Muslims have not been given the same brutal treatment, and 2) there have also been secularist voices of resistance among the Uighurs to Chinese control of Xinjiang.
- quenix 6y ago
  At least capitalism actually exists.
  - nanna 6y ago
    And Judaism, Islam and Christianity don't? Edit: If you believe in a religion, then religion exists in the most real sense possible, as that which guides your relation to the beginning and end of reality itself, God. If you don't believe, then religion exists in no more and no less of a sense as capitalism: it is a fiction which vast amounts of people believe in and live their lives by, and so it is real. Not in the sense of the computer in front of you, but in the sense of a real social relationship. From a secular standpoint religion and capitalism have no more and no less reality than other fictions like gender and race.
    - archi42 6y ago
      This is an excellent comment, and I agree on the conclusion that either exists as much as the other. However ;-), I dare to say your argument is weak: Assume "I believe in the apple on my desk". But you will find there is neither a fruit nor an Apple branded computer on my desk. So an outside observer is bound to believe I am going mad, hence my belief shapes my social relationship with others around me. Now does this make the apple as real as religion, which becomes real due to it's impact on social relationships? Or are people who let religion shape their social relationships as mad as I am? Or is the argument flawed? (edit: No, I can not answer these question). Shapiro's "Thinking about mathematics" springs to my mind, IIRC in the first chapter(s) he gives a nice overview about what philosophers thought about numbers, the realm of numbers and whether they "exist" or not. I think some of that could be applied here. (And, generally, I think it's a great read for computer scientists & mathematicians interested in philosophy, as it gives a great overview across various different schools).
      - nanna 6y ago
        Well, this is fun :) I think the problem with your argument is that you're replacing the concept of religion with the concept of 'apple' which in every sense signifies something that exists as a hylomorphic object. An apple which can sit on my desk. However language is full of concepts which don't share that kind of existence, ones which tend to be the objects of philosophy. Love, justice, power... race, gender, capitalism, religion, God. These exist but not as 'physical' objects, objects whose existence can be accepted or denied according to empirical criteria. For example, in the market I can say I see capitalism before me, even though it's not a physical object. It's in the exchange of goods, the extraction of commodity and surplus value. In the same way in a synagogue or church I can say that I see religion before me, or in the Oval Office I see power (as well as in the streets, of course). With respect to comparing God to an apple, I'd take a Kantian line. One refers to belief, the other to knowledge. Got to make space for one in order to have room for the other ;)
yadco 6y ago
This is not required for Judaism at all.
- wolrah 6y ago
  Nothing is required for any religion. This is pretty well demonstrated by the major religions of the world, where for almost every element of their belief systems you can find a sect that either ignores that part altogether and/or takes it to the extreme.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

The lengths some people go to for religion... smh

by mlatu 6y ago

The lengths some people go to for religion... smh

Some people live their lives for the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Some live their lives for the gods capitalism. I'd say the former is a lot less pernicious.

joelbluminator 6y ago
They both have pros and cons. Entire wars were fought over the ideals of both, and both dominate their "believers everyday life.
- nanna 6y ago
  Where would you argue a war exists today that does not have its roots in the economic domination of one group over another, and is purely fought on religious grounds?
  - nix23 6y ago
    Islamic State?
  - joelbluminator 6y ago
    Crusades, ISIS, the depression of the muslim Uyghur by China, European antisemitism (which culminated in nazism), Armenian genocide, etc etc. Now many atrocities had several factors, but I believe religion plays a dominant role in the ones I listed. Arguably you can put 11-9 and the subsiquent mid east war in there as well...
    - Mediterraneo10 6y ago
      > the depression of the muslim Uyghur by China This is not a religious conflict. China has oppressed the Uighurs because the Xinjiang region was only brought under full Chinese control late, and the Uighurs have been relatively independent-minded. That this conflict isn't about Islam per se is evident from the fact that 1) there is a substantial Muslim population within China outside of Xinjiang, and those Muslims have not been given the same brutal treatment, and 2) there have also been secularist voices of resistance among the Uighurs to Chinese control of Xinjiang.
quenix 6y ago
At least capitalism actually exists.
- nanna 6y ago
  And Judaism, Islam and Christianity don't? Edit: If you believe in a religion, then religion exists in the most real sense possible, as that which guides your relation to the beginning and end of reality itself, God. If you don't believe, then religion exists in no more and no less of a sense as capitalism: it is a fiction which vast amounts of people believe in and live their lives by, and so it is real. Not in the sense of the computer in front of you, but in the sense of a real social relationship. From a secular standpoint religion and capitalism have no more and no less reality than other fictions like gender and race.
  - archi42 6y ago
    This is an excellent comment, and I agree on the conclusion that either exists as much as the other. However ;-), I dare to say your argument is weak: Assume "I believe in the apple on my desk". But you will find there is neither a fruit nor an Apple branded computer on my desk. So an outside observer is bound to believe I am going mad, hence my belief shapes my social relationship with others around me. Now does this make the apple as real as religion, which becomes real due to it's impact on social relationships? Or are people who let religion shape their social relationships as mad as I am? Or is the argument flawed? (edit: No, I can not answer these question). Shapiro's "Thinking about mathematics" springs to my mind, IIRC in the first chapter(s) he gives a nice overview about what philosophers thought about numbers, the realm of numbers and whether they "exist" or not. I think some of that could be applied here. (And, generally, I think it's a great read for computer scientists & mathematicians interested in philosophy, as it gives a great overview across various different schools).
    - nanna 6y ago
      Well, this is fun :) I think the problem with your argument is that you're replacing the concept of religion with the concept of 'apple' which in every sense signifies something that exists as a hylomorphic object. An apple which can sit on my desk. However language is full of concepts which don't share that kind of existence, ones which tend to be the objects of philosophy. Love, justice, power... race, gender, capitalism, religion, God. These exist but not as 'physical' objects, objects whose existence can be accepted or denied according to empirical criteria. For example, in the market I can say I see capitalism before me, even though it's not a physical object. It's in the exchange of goods, the extraction of commodity and surplus value. In the same way in a synagogue or church I can say that I see religion before me, or in the Oval Office I see power (as well as in the streets, of course). With respect to comparing God to an apple, I'd take a Kantian line. One refers to belief, the other to knowledge. Got to make space for one in order to have room for the other ;)

yadco 6y ago

This is not required for Judaism at all.

wolrah 6y ago
Nothing is required for any religion. This is pretty well demonstrated by the major religions of the world, where for almost every element of their belief systems you can find a sect that either ignores that part altogether and/or takes it to the extreme.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]