Random Thread

[Richard W]

By who? By random people on the street? I think if we are judging by random people on the street, that can lead to a bit of a circular argument: people on the street aren't saying this, therefore we should make people do that, so that people on the street will say this. If we instead mean people who might actually push the idea, then yeah, I see bishops and imams and people like that saying some variation of the argument but I also see nonreligious professors in philosophy departments at secular universities saying some variation of the argument. Just because the followers of the Pope and the Aga Khan AND ALSO the followers of Richard Dawkins and Derek Parfit are variable in terms of how much they follow their leaders' teachings doesn't mean that thinkers aren't pushing it. (Specific individuals are named as random representatives of religion and atheism, respectively.)

The people you've mentioned are generally too remote.

With religion, you get the man in the pulpit, and sometimes the commandments are part of the service, e.g. the Five Precepts at our local Buddhist temple or, at varying frequencies, the Ten Commandments in churches. If you're an atheist, you need not grant anyone the authority to talk at you like that. And it's probably not reminders to adults that matter so much as, on the principle of getting them while they're young, instruction to the children. Secular schools seem very variable in what they deliver.

[rotting bones]

With religion, you get the man in the pulpit, and sometimes the commandments are part of the service, e.g. the Five Precepts at our local Buddhist temple or, at varying frequencies, the Ten Commandments in churches. If you're an atheist, you need not grant anyone the authority to talk at you like that. And it's probably not reminders to adults that matter so much as, on the principle of getting them while they're young, instruction to the children. Secular schools seem very variable in what they deliver.

Do you want to promote goodness in any rationally justifiable sense, or do you want society to be strengthened through conformity with tradition? Because if you only want socially recognized morality, then I don't understand what purpose this social conformity is supposed to serve. Suppose I were to institute a system of fines to be levied if people refuse to attend my immorality lectures. Why would this proposal be worse than yours given the arbitrariness of the moral codes to be preached?

Speaking for myself, moral people of every stripe are out to murder me. Frankly, traditionally moral people scare the shit out of me. Their thinking is so optimistic towards their in-group and their in-group's actions are so horrible at the same time, they remind me of giggling psychotics who would stab me in the back if I gave them half a chance. (Having said that, I fully recognize the right of traditionally moral people to scare the shit out of me.)

[Ares Land]

With religion, you get the man in the pulpit, and sometimes the commandments are part of the service, e.g. the Five Precepts at our local Buddhist temple or, at varying frequencies, the Ten Commandments in churches. If you're an atheist, you need not grant anyone the authority to talk at you like that. And it's probably not reminders to adults that matter so much as, on the principle of getting them while they're young, instruction to the children. Secular schools seem very variable in what they deliver.

On the infrequent occasion I actually go to Church, I can't say I'm much impressed by the man in the pulpit TBH.

Getting the Commandments as part of the service seems very counter productive: non-sociopaths need no regular reminders that they shall not kill. And sociopaths don't care about the sermon.

I went to secular schools and it was fairly heavy on moral lessons. My country in fact insists on secular education and I can't say we suffer from any particular moral degeneracy. If we anything, crime is much lower than it was in the 19th century when most schools wee religious. So it turns not getting the Ten Commandments beaten into you actually makes people better at not killing and not stealing! (Adultery always was a lost cause.)

But that's not the most important part.

The important part is, I find the idea of, say, forcing religious education on my kids is pretty offensive. I insist on my family and I getting our freedom of conscience, thank you very much.

[rotting bones]

Atheists have lower crime levels in general IIRC, though that could be because people who don't need to resort to criminal activities to get by tend to become atheists more often.

[Ares Land]

Atheists have lower crime levels in general IIRC, though that could be because people who don't need to resort to criminal activities to get by tend to become atheists more often.

The drop in crime has everything to do with raising living standards and very little with religion or the lack thereof, to be fair.

[Ares Land]

Oh, and I don't think that, from a spiritual perspective, the idea that atheism leads to immorality really works.
I mean, what in the universe gives you the idea that the Creator would be as unsubtle as that?

[rotting bones]

The drop in crime has everything to do with raising living standards and very little with religion or the lack thereof, to be fair.

I once saw a model claiming to show that crime levels in a neighborhood are predicted by the profitability of criminal activity. For example, rich neighborhoods didn't have theft to the extent that it's bad for business. Poor neighborhoods did to the extent that damage to business was offset by scarcity of basic necessities.

[rotting bones]

Oh, and I don't think that, from a spiritual perspective, the idea that atheism leads to immorality really works.
I mean, what in the universe gives you the idea that the Creator would be as unsubtle as that?

A traditional religious universe. Many religious people know their in-group does horrible things. Such concerns are all overridden by "Society!" This is why it annoys me to no end when socialists take the perspective of contemporary society over an individualistic view. This orientation reminds me of fascism. Traditionally, socialists hated society and wanted a better one.

[rotting bones]

Also, religious people infamously cherry-pick whichever of their religious authorities appeal to them at that point in time, all of which contradict each other.

[malloc]

It has occurred to me that if religious experiences were real, that would imply that God or the Gods are constantly communicating with other people but never with me. What hope is there for me when the rulers of the universe themselves consider me beneath their consideration? Absurd as it might sound, that thought honestly depresses me. There are so many people who insist that they have experienced the divine. What if they're right and God has embraced them but not me?

[Nortaneous]

It's possible for Xunzi to have been right about the need and effectiveness for moral instruction and for moral instruction in school and church to produce no discernible effect - one way to harmonize the two positions is to say that it just can't be industrialized - there's no reliable, standardizable procedure for the production or vetting of moral instructors the way there is for math teachers. If you want to be Weberian about it, it can't make the transition from charismatic to bureaucratic authority.

This seems like the correct position to me.

[Travis B.]

It has occurred to me that if religious experiences were real, that would imply that God or the Gods are constantly communicating with other people but never with me. What hope is there for me when the rulers of the universe themselves consider me beneath their consideration? Absurd as it might sound, that thought honestly depresses me. There are so many people who insist that they have experienced the divine. What if they're right and God has embraced them but not me?

This is similar to a question I've always had - if some given religion is correct, then why are God or the Gods so parochial? E.g. what about people before a given point in time (e.g. people before the time of Jesus in the case of Christianity) or people not of a particular ethnoreligious group (e.g. in the case of Judaism), or simply people who grew up who had no contact with the correct religion. Why would God or the Gods not try to get as much of humanity to worship them as possible?

[Nortaneous]

Why would God or the Gods not try to get as much of humanity to worship them as possible?

If you're only going to send one messenger, doing it in at the peak of an immense empire that spans three continents seems like a good bet

[bradrn]

It has occurred to me that if religious experiences were real, that would imply that God or the Gods are constantly communicating with other people but never with me. What hope is there for me when the rulers of the universe themselves consider me beneath their consideration? Absurd as it might sound, that thought honestly depresses me. There are so many people who insist that they have experienced the divine. What if they're right and God has embraced them but not me?

This is similar to a question I've always had - if some given religion is correct, then why are God or the Gods so parochial? E.g. what about people before a given point in time (e.g. people before the time of Jesus in the case of Christianity) or people not of a particular ethnoreligious group (e.g. in the case of Judaism), or simply people who grew up who had no contact with the correct religion. Why would God or the Gods not try to get as much of humanity to worship them as possible?

In the case of Judaism at least, God isn’t really too parochial in the way you describe. He doesn’t expect non-Jews to obey Jewish laws; they are required to keep the 7 Noahide Laws — which are mostly basic moral principles like ‘don’t kill people’ — but beyond that there are no restrictions. That is, it is easier for non-Jews to go to heaven (insofar as the concept plays a role in Judaism).

(On the other hand, I’ve never really understood those brands of evangelical Christianity where those who have not heard the light of Jesus will be cast into the fires of hell for all eternity. Perhaps someone here could explain the logic behind that to me.)

[zompist]

It's possible for Xunzi to have been right about the need and effectiveness for moral instruction and for moral instruction in school and church to produce no discernible effect - one way to harmonize the two positions is to say that it just can't be industrialized - there's no reliable, standardizable procedure for the production or vetting of moral instructors the way there is for math teachers. If you want to be Weberian about it, it can't make the transition from charismatic to bureaucratic authority.

This seems like the correct position to me.\

To me too. (Probably alarming for both of us.)

FWIW I think this is why some religions insist on having a personal guru/mentor/confessor, so there's a personal connection and not just book learning.

Not that it necessarily works. It's said that when the Zen master Linqi was dying, his disciples assured him that they would pass his wisdom on. He replied, "Then all is lost. My teachings will die with you,a pack of blind mules!"

[Nortaneous]

FWIW I think this is why some religions insist on having a personal guru/mentor/confessor, so there's a personal connection and not just book learning.

Distinctions between book-learning and a chain of transmission involving a teacher aren't even limited to religion - consider how weird some people get about autodidacts. (Which isn't unreasonable - the metis/episteme distinction that James C. Scott talks about is relevant, but in the American academic context, half the point of departments in the humanities is canons, and if you're not rigorously following the canon...)

[Ares Land]

(On the other hand, I’ve never really understood those brands of evangelical Christianity where those who have not heard the light of Jesus will be cast into the fires of hell for all eternity. Perhaps someone here could explain the logic behind that to me.)

The most reasonable take on the Christian hell is the Orthodox one, I believe.

I'll try not to mangle it too much. Basically hell and heaven are exactly the same: being in the presence of God. If you don't accept God's love, it's going to be a very unpleasant experience...
Besides, hell isn't definitive or permanent.
Within Protestantism I believe it's pretty much CS Lewis' view as well.

Currents within Catholicism and branches within Protestantism have tried to scare people into conversion with tales of fire and brimstone, but the results are illogical I believe.
Leaving Calvinism aside, of course: that doctrine's just nasty.

[Pabappa]

Wiktionary's new Swahili verb conjugation template is the funniest thing I've seen all month:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/penda#Conjugation

i asked about it on the tech help page and Im betting enough other people have seen it that itll be reverted back soon enough, but, who knows?

[alice]

Wiktionary's new Swahili verb conjugation template is the funniest thing I've seen all month:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/penda#Conjugation

Now *that's* what conlangers should be aspiring to!

[bradrn]

(On the other hand, I’ve never really understood those brands of evangelical Christianity where those who have not heard the light of Jesus will be cast into the fires of hell for all eternity. Perhaps someone here could explain the logic behind that to me.)

The most reasonable take on the Christian hell is the Orthodox one, I believe.

I'll try not to mangle it too much. Basically hell and heaven are exactly the same: being in the presence of God. If you don't accept God's love, it's going to be a very unpleasant experience...
Besides, hell isn't definitive or permanent.
Within Protestantism I believe it's pretty much CS Lewis' view as well.

Yes, I very much like this idea. Judaism doesn’t really emphasise the idea of ‘God’s love’ quite so much, but the (Orthodox) Jewish heaven is typically thought of as a place where scholars can study with the greatest teachers for all eternity, and that’s going to be pretty unpleasant if you don’t like that sort of thing…

In fact, there’s a famous Jewish description of heaven and hell which is quite similar to what you describe. In the afterlife, so it goes, people have no elbows. Yet they are perpetually seated in front of delicious food. In hell, people starve for eternity. In heaven, each feeds their neighbour.

Currents within Catholicism and branches within Protestantism have tried to scare people into conversion with tales of fire and brimstone, but the results are illogical I believe.
Leaving Calvinism aside, of course: that doctrine's just nasty.

If you don’t mind answering, what is Calvinism? I’ve heard of it, of course, but being Jewish I have little idea about the ins and outs of Christian belief.

Wiktionary's new Swahili verb conjugation template is the funniest thing I've seen all month:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/penda#Conjugation

Now *that's* what conlangers should be aspiring to!

OK, here you go:

Code: Select all

zhaazhgzhoomaam
zhaazhgzhoomaamen
zhaazhgzhoomyek
zhaazhgzhoomyeken
zhaazhgzhoomaam
zhaazhgzhoomaamen
zhaazhgzhoomyek
zhaazhgzhoomyeken
zhaazhgzhoomaam
zhaazhgzhoomaamen
zhaazhgzhoomyek
zhaazhgzhoomyeken
zhaazhgzhoomaam
zhaazhgzhoomaamen
zhaazhgzhoomyek
zhaazhgzhoomyeken
zhaazhgzhoomaam
zhaazhgzhoomaamen
zhaazhgzhoomyek
zhaazhgzhoomyeken
zhaazhgzhoomaam
zhaazhgzhoomaamen
zhaazhgzhoomyek
zhaazhgzhoomyeken
zhaazhgigzhoomaam
zhaazhgigzhoomaamen
zhaazhgigzhoomyek
zhaazhgigzhoomyeken
zhaazhgigzhoomaam
zhaazhgigzhoomaamen
zhaazhgigzhoomyek
zhaazhgigzhoomyeken
zhaazhgigzhoomaam
zhaazhgigzhoomaamen
zhaazhgigzhoomyek
zhaazhgigzhoomyeken
zhaazhgigzhoomaam
zhaazhgigzhoomaamen
zhaazhgigzhoomyek
zhaazhgigzhoomyeken
zhaazhgigzhoomaam
zhaazhgigzhoomaamen
zhaazhgigzhoomyek
zhaazhgigzhoomyeken
zhaazhgigzhoomaam
zhaazhgigzhoomaamen
zhaazhgigzhoomyek
zhaazhgigzhoomyeken
zhaawgzhoomaam
zhaawgzhoomaamen
zhaawgzhoomyek
zhaawgzhoomyeken
zhaawgzhoomaam
zhaawgzhoomaamen
zhaawgzhoomyek
zhaawgzhoomyeken
zhaawgzhoomaam
zhaawgzhoomaamen
zhaawgzhoomyek
zhaawgzhoomyeken
zhaawgzhoomaam
zhaawgzhoomaamen
zhaawgzhoomyek
zhaawgzhoomyeken
zhaawgzhoomaam
zhaawgzhoomaamen
zhaawgzhoomyek
zhaawgzhoomyeken
zhaawgzhoomaam
zhaawgzhoomaamen
zhaawgzhoomyek
zhaawgzhoomyeken
zhaawgigzhoomaam
zhaawgigzhoomaamen
zhaawgigzhoomyek
zhaawgigzhoomyeken
zhaawgigzhoomaam
zhaawgigzhoomaamen
zhaawgigzhoomyek
zhaawgigzhoomyeken
zhaawgigzhoomaam
zhaawgigzhoomaamen
zhaawgigzhoomyek
zhaawgigzhoomyeken
zhaawgigzhoomaam
zhaawgigzhoomaamen
zhaawgigzhoomyek
zhaawgigzhoomyeken
zhaawgigzhoomaam
zhaawgigzhoomaamen
zhaawgigzhoomyek
zhaawgigzhoomyeken
zhaawgigzhoomaam
zhaawgigzhoomaamen
zhaawgigzhoomyek
zhaawgigzhoomyeken
zhaaygzhoomaam
zhaaygzhoomaamen
zhaaygzhoomyek
zhaaygzhoomyeken
zhaaygzhoomaam
zhaaygzhoomaamen
zhaaygzhoomyek
zhaaygzhoomyeken
zhaaygzhoomaam
zhaaygzhoomaamen
zhaaygzhoomyek
zhaaygzhoomyeken
zhaaygzhoomaam
zhaaygzhoomaamen
zhaaygzhoomyek
zhaaygzhoomyeken
zhaaygzhoomaam
zhaaygzhoomaamen
zhaaygzhoomyek
zhaaygzhoomyeken
zhaaygzhoomaam
zhaaygzhoomaamen
zhaaygzhoomyek
zhaaygzhoomyeken
zhaaygigzhoomaam
zhaaygigzhoomaamen
zhaaygigzhoomyek
zhaaygigzhoomyeken
zhaaygigzhoomaam
zhaaygigzhoomaamen
zhaaygigzhoomyek
zhaaygigzhoomyeken
zhaaygigzhoomaam
zhaaygigzhoomaamen
zhaaygigzhoomyek
zhaaygigzhoomyeken
zhaaygigzhoomaam
zhaaygigzhoomaamen
zhaaygigzhoomyek
zhaaygigzhoomyeken
zhaaygigzhoomaam
zhaaygigzhoomaamen
zhaaygigzhoomyek
zhaaygigzhoomyeken
zhaaygigzhoomaam
zhaaygigzhoomaamen
zhaaygigzhoomyek
zhaaygigzhoomyeken
zhaasagzhoomaam
zhaasagzhoomaamen
zhaasagzhoomyek
zhaasagzhoomyeken
zhaasagzhoomaam
zhaasagzhoomaamen
zhaasagzhoomyek
[…skip 680 lines…]
yaasagzhoomyeken
yaasagzhoomaam
yaasagzhoomaamen
yaasagzhoomyek
yaasagzhoomyeken
yaasagzhoomaam
yaasagzhoomaamen
yaasagzhoomyek
yaasagzhoomyeken
yaagizhgzhoomaam
yaagizhgzhoomaamen
yaagizhgzhoomyek
yaagizhgzhoomyeken
yaagizhgzhoomaam
yaagizhgzhoomaamen
yaagizhgzhoomyek
yaagizhgzhoomyeken
yaagizhgzhoomaam
yaagizhgzhoomaamen
yaagizhgzhoomyek
yaagizhgzhoomyeken
yaagizhgzhoomaam
yaagizhgzhoomaamen
yaagizhgzhoomyek
yaagizhgzhoomyeken
yaagizhgzhoomaam
yaagizhgzhoomaamen
yaagizhgzhoomyek
yaagizhgzhoomyeken
yaagizhgzhoomaam
yaagizhgzhoomaamen
yaagizhgzhoomyek
yaagizhgzhoomyeken
yaagizhgigzhoomaam
yaagizhgigzhoomaamen
yaagizhgigzhoomyek
yaagizhgigzhoomyeken
yaagizhgigzhoomaam
yaagizhgigzhoomaamen
yaagizhgigzhoomyek
yaagizhgigzhoomyeken
yaagizhgigzhoomaam
yaagizhgigzhoomaamen
yaagizhgigzhoomyek
yaagizhgigzhoomyeken
yaagizhgigzhoomaam
yaagizhgigzhoomaamen
yaagizhgigzhoomyek
yaagizhgigzhoomyeken
yaagizhgigzhoomaam
yaagizhgigzhoomaamen
yaagizhgigzhoomyek
yaagizhgigzhoomyeken
yaagizhgigzhoomaam
yaagizhgigzhoomaamen
yaagizhgigzhoomyek
yaagizhgigzhoomyeken
yaagiwgzhoomaam
yaagiwgzhoomaamen
yaagiwgzhoomyek
yaagiwgzhoomyeken
yaagiwgzhoomaam
yaagiwgzhoomaamen
yaagiwgzhoomyek
yaagiwgzhoomyeken
yaagiwgzhoomaam
yaagiwgzhoomaamen
yaagiwgzhoomyek
yaagiwgzhoomyeken
yaagiwgzhoomaam
yaagiwgzhoomaamen
yaagiwgzhoomyek
yaagiwgzhoomyeken
yaagiwgzhoomaam
yaagiwgzhoomaamen
yaagiwgzhoomyek
yaagiwgzhoomyeken
yaagiwgzhoomaam
yaagiwgzhoomaamen
yaagiwgzhoomyek
yaagiwgzhoomyeken
yaagiwgigzhoomaam
yaagiwgigzhoomaamen
yaagiwgigzhoomyek
yaagiwgigzhoomyeken
yaagiwgigzhoomaam
yaagiwgigzhoomaamen
yaagiwgigzhoomyek
yaagiwgigzhoomyeken
yaagiwgigzhoomaam
yaagiwgigzhoomaamen
yaagiwgigzhoomyek
yaagiwgigzhoomyeken
yaagiwgigzhoomaam
yaagiwgigzhoomaamen
yaagiwgigzhoomyek
yaagiwgigzhoomyeken
yaagiwgigzhoomaam
yaagiwgigzhoomaamen
yaagiwgigzhoomyek
yaagiwgigzhoomyeken
yaagiwgigzhoomaam
yaagiwgigzhoomaamen
yaagiwgigzhoomyek
yaagiwgigzhoomyeken
yaagiygzhoomaam
yaagiygzhoomaamen
yaagiygzhoomyek
yaagiygzhoomyeken
yaagiygzhoomaam
yaagiygzhoomaamen
yaagiygzhoomyek
yaagiygzhoomyeken
yaagiygzhoomaam
yaagiygzhoomaamen
yaagiygzhoomyek
yaagiygzhoomyeken
yaagiygzhoomaam
yaagiygzhoomaamen
yaagiygzhoomyek
yaagiygzhoomyeken
yaagiygzhoomaam
yaagiygzhoomaamen
yaagiygzhoomyek
yaagiygzhoomyeken
yaagiygzhoomaam
yaagiygzhoomaamen
yaagiygzhoomyek
yaagiygzhoomyeken
yaagiygigzhoomaam
yaagiygigzhoomaamen
yaagiygigzhoomyek
yaagiygigzhoomyeken
yaagiygigzhoomaam
yaagiygigzhoomaamen
yaagiygigzhoomyek
yaagiygigzhoomyeken
yaagiygigzhoomaam
yaagiygigzhoomaamen
yaagiygigzhoomyek
yaagiygigzhoomyeken
yaagiygigzhoomaam
yaagiygigzhoomaamen
yaagiygigzhoomyek
yaagiygigzhoomyeken
yaagiygigzhoomaam
yaagiygigzhoomaamen
yaagiygigzhoomyek
yaagiygigzhoomyeken
yaagiygigzhoomaam
yaagiygigzhoomaamen
yaagiygigzhoomyek
yaagiygigzhoomyeken
yaagisagzhoomaam
yaagisagzhoomaamen
yaagisagzhoomyek
yaagisagzhoomyeken
yaagisagzhoomaam
yaagisagzhoomaamen
yaagisagzhoomyek
yaagisagzhoomyeken
yaagisagzhoomaam
yaagisagzhoomaamen
yaagisagzhoomyek
yaagisagzhoomyeken
yaagisagzhoomaam
yaagisagzhoomaamen
yaagisagzhoomyek
yaagisagzhoomyeken
yaagisagzhoomaam
yaagisagzhoomaamen
yaagisagzhoomyek
yaagisagzhoomyeken
yaagisagzhoomaam
yaagisagzhoomaamen
yaagisagzhoomyek
yaagisagzhoomyeken

This, of course, is not nearly a complete listing.