Simcountry
Forum General By the will of man (Kebir Blue)

By the will of man (Kebir Blue)

N
nix001
14 Feb 2009 17:56 Link
BC's right you know.
Also Grand Poobah, the educated make the weapons and give them to the uneducated to do the educated's dirty work.
We will always have this problem.
T
The Grand Poobah (Golden Rainbow)
14 Feb 2009 23:59 Link
@BC
So are you going to tell me that the crusade/christian/judea/islamic pillow fight that is still raging, is a bad source to use? Thousands of years of conquest has failed to end either ideology.
The North wasn't even thinking about Slaves rights at the start of the war. READ A MODERN HISTORY BOOK. Not one that still says that Columbus is a hero and a saint. And not one that says that slavery is the driving force behind the Civil war.
The truth is- The south was not happy about the Norths subsidizing of southern crops and purchasing foriegn products...so they practiced a constitutional right...and secceeded.


@Nix.
Ones "education" can vary. The term is clearly used as an umbrella. One could know how to make weapons, but have know clue about modern and historic literature. I was refering to an all emcompasing education. One that allows you to look at the world through realist eyes.

And war is never ok. Never ever. unargueable.
S
SultanCharlie (Kebir Blue)
15 Feb 2009 04:49 Link
Hmmmm, well hello everyone. I'm new to the game and have just started reading the forums. This thread is INDEED very interesting. I'd like to add a little insight I have gained about President Lincoln and the use of Slavery Emancipation. In the World history of the time, England and France had just abandoned slavery. The southern states were courting France for assistance and support to defeat the northern states. Lincoln was VERY aware of this. The southern states were know worldwide to advocate and demand the right to own slaves. Lincoln used this to his advantage to keep the rest of the world out of the war. By declaring the emancipation of slaves he effectively shut the door to foreign support of the south's war efforts. How could France or England be an aid to the south (advocating slavery) and at the same time disavow slavery in their own countries?

Lincoln believed in the moral correctness of ending slavery but could not find a time or way to do so without alienating the support he had in the northern states. Remember he was both trying to impose some federal laws that ran contrary to state's rights. It was the definition of a state's right and a federal jurisdiction that ignited the civil war.

How is war ever right. War is never right and is never wrong. War is a political tool. As a soldier I never questioned my legal orders. My duty as a soldier was not to agree or disagree with a policy. I surrendered that right upon enlistment. I was trained that we were the tool of a politician to effect policies, not to make them. I once had a general staff officer explain to me that war is the cosiquence of a simply stated complexity. "You either stand for something, or you fall for anything." Where we sometimes go astray is to impose our ideologies upon others whom have NO interest or desire for our ideologies.

I have come to view our technologies and social maturity in diverse proportion to each other. In times of our histories technology had not progressed as far as our social and moral maturity. The industrial revolution brought about advances in technology that began to make progress toward a balance between technology and moral/social maturity. Greed and comfort overcame that balance. It drove technology to be valued over and above morality. We stand in a time when right and wrong are very grey and imperical knowledge outways everything else. We will find ourselves being able to manipulate anything and everything around us but without a moral choice and value in doing so.

My question for all to consider and contemplate is: Are we seeing a time in history when religious beliefs are at war with science and technology? Where those that value a moral way of life are strongly opposing those that are in an avid persuit of imperical knowledge?
N
nix001
15 Feb 2009 18:17 Link
God V's Man?
Neither can win and only one can lose.
For the fear of Man created God and the fear of God created Humanity.
G
General Bobo (Fearless Blue)
15 Feb 2009 23:23 Link
tit
N
nix001 (Fearless Blue)
16 Feb 2009 01:52 Link
Say that on your own Booboo.
:) LOL
T
The Grand Poobah (Golden Rainbow)
16 Feb 2009 01:59 Link
Religion is a tool of an archaic and ancient system.
People no longer need slaves. We can make a machine that will do the work of 30 men.
We have computers that can compute the most complex laws of mathmatics and physics.
We have a new understanding of ourselves, the world and the Universe.
We now know that lightning is not "Gods anger". How many religious claims can be discredited by science?


Religion gave us a vision, Technology gives us the means to obtain it.

Don't get me wrong. I believe everyone should be spiritual, but in his or her own way. You don't need a book to tell you right from wrong. You should already know.
The Organized religions now only hold us back and destroy lives through greed, corruption and war.
It has served a purpose, but that purposed has passed.

It's time for everyone to stand on their own feet and quit hiding behing the vail of "god".

It's time to cut the dead weight and move on.
Z
zapadka (Fearless Blue)
16 Feb 2009 04:11 Link
stone is a tool of an archaic and ancient system.

wood is a tool of an archaic and ancient system.

television is a tool of an archaic and ancient

system.
T
The Grand Poobah
16 Feb 2009 05:11 Link
Stone is a natural resource
Wood is a natural resource

Television IS a tool of an Archaic and modern system


Religion blinds the minds eye. Narrows your forsight. Allows you to accept rediculous claims as fact and leads to hatred, misunderstanding and continued human suffering.

Television and religion are of our own creation and need a serious overhaul.
Z
zapadka (Fearless Blue)
16 Feb 2009 06:11 Link
"Religion blinds the minds eye. Narrows your forsight. Allows you to accept rediculous claims as fact and leads to hatred, misunderstanding and continued human suffering"


In a pantheistical context,allowing for extream

immaturity,perhaps.

In a panentheistic context,not so much.Actually

it would be a natural resource.

In a human context all you really need are

guts ,the statement has no meaning.
T
The Grand Poobah (Golden Rainbow)
17 Feb 2009 05:44 Link
So, if religion is a natural resource. Can you eat it? make shelter out of it? Does it grow back after you harvest it? Is there a vain of Religion in the rocks? If not, it's not a resource. More like ancient enviromental observations, superstitions and ignorance.


I believe your statement only has fragments of meaning.
B
BorderC (Fearless Blue)
17 Feb 2009 14:55 Link
"More like ancient enviromental observations, superstitions and ignorance."

And an explanation to explain everything other than "it just happened".

I guess gravity is just "ancient enviromental observations, superstitions and ignorance" as well.
T
The Grand Poobah
17 Feb 2009 23:54 Link
"I guess gravity is just "ancient enviromental observations, superstitions and ignorance" as well."

a dramatic increase in Universal expansion has physicists taking another look at the laws of gravity.
Even to the point of rethinking the theory of the "Great Crunch". What we "know" about the universe changes rapidly. Remember, a theory is just a theory.

also, Gravity is an ancient enviromental observation. It is not, however, a superstition or the acts of ignorance.

I meant that most organized religions are made of the three combined.
Z
Zdeněk Pavlovský (Fearless Blue)
18 Feb 2009 00:19 Link
From "the will of man" the debate evolves to religion.

Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast: The Evolutionary Origins of Belief by Lewis Wolpert

Our leaps of faith
REVIEWED BY JOHN CAREY

[snip]

Neuroscience reveals that belief and logic activate different parts of the brain, and where belief and logic clash, humans will almost always opt for belief, sticking to it obstinately despite adverse evidence. Students offered alternative sets of statistics will choose the one that confirms their prejudices, and a dogged reliance on existing beliefs shows up emphatically in matters affecting health. The belief that vitamin supplements provide a defence against illness, and that "natural" products are not harmful, is widespread even among educated people. Wolpert does not condemn such superstitions, for beliefs, it seems, can keep you healthy, whether they are valid or not. Experiment shows that all sorts of pain can be relieved with a sugar-pill placebo, provided the patient believes in its curative powers. Credulity may ensure survival better than logic.

The same applies with religious beliefs. Surveys suggest that religious people are happier, more optimistic, less prone to strokes and high blood pressure, more able to cope with life's problems and less fearful of death than the irreligious. It follows that belief in the supernatural is an evolutionary advantage, and our ability to have such beliefs must, Wolpert deduces, have been partly determined by our genes.

[snip]

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/non-fiction/article741335.ece


The Nobel prizewinning physicist Niels Bohr kept a horseshoe nailed to the wall above his desk and, when asked whether he believed it would bring him luck, replied: "Not at all. I am scarcely likely to believe in such nonsense. However, I am told that a horseshoe will bring you luck whether you believe in it or not." - Quote of the day :)
T
The Grand Poobah
19 Feb 2009 00:00 Link
"It follows that belief in the supernatural is an evolutionary advantage."

Only recently have people been confident enough to strike out and say "I have not religeous affiliations". Granted, you'd get burnt on the stake at one time for doing so.

I never said that spirituality is bad. Untill the "what created existence?" question can be answered, we cannot discredit divine creation. However, organised religion is a sham, a scam and a farce. The history books prove this. Read them as you choose.
Z
Zdeněk Pavlovský (Fearless Blue)
19 Feb 2009 01:09 Link
IF belief is indeed an evolutionary advantage, and it is partly coded in our genes, question is:

Why and how to get rid of it?

or perhaps:

What to replace religion with?

IF the need for such belief is natural, biological, and even healthy in a sense, what we are going to do with the 75% or so of the people all around the world who believe in .. something?
N
nix001
27 Feb 2009 00:54 Link
Science.
They will start to believe in life and death for what it is. The fear will bring them a new perspective of being and what it means to be.
Some will go to the dark side for protection. The rest will have no choice but to unite and fight the dark side for protection.
For when they lose God they will become God, judge and executioner. Instead of turning the other cheek knowing God will deal with them, the good will deal out their own punishment.
It will Good men v's Bad men.
Religion will be replaced with War.

Peace&Hardcore...............Nix001
MNA
S
Serpent (White Giant)
27 Feb 2009 04:55 Link
THE history of religion is as old as the history of man himself. That is what archaeologists and anthropologists tell us. Even among the most primitive, that is to say, undeveloped, civilizations, there is found evidence of worship of some form. In fact The New Encyclopedia Britannica says that as far as scholars have discovered, there has never existed any people, anywhere, at any time, who were not in some sense religious.
When it comes to the question of origin, people of different religions think of names such as Muhammad, the Buddha, Confucius, and Jesus. In almost every religion, we can find a central figure to whom credit is given for establishing the true faith.
Even though these individuals are considered founders of the major religions that we are familiar with, it must be noted that they did not actually originate religion. In most cases, their teachings grew out of existing religious ideas, even though most of these founders claimed divine inspiration as their source. Or they changed and modified existing religious systems that had become unsatisfactory in one way or another.
So basically religion is a set of beliefs or ideology that people subscribe to. Many times when the word 'religion' is used it is in a negative connotation. And for certain 'religions' it is deserved.
But wouldn't the best way to determine what religion, or set of beliefs is best, be to look at the followers of that code, or religion? Because as history so often shows, actions speak louder than words. By the religions followers actions and conduct you can determine if a religion or set of beliefs is true or correct.
N
nix001 (Fearless Blue)
06 Mar 2009 16:57 Link
We have lost the beginning of this thread :(
I started it by hoping that by the will of man and through the actions of the captains of capitalizum (who got us into this economic crisis) the problem will be sorted.
Well. They have come up with an idea. Print more money.........Sorry..........implement quantitative easing for the banks and big buisness.
In other words....keep the rich rich through the taxs of the future generations.
I know. What other choises do they have except to tell the people the countries broke and that they are all going to have to live like many other countries around the world. By the means of bare necessity. I know. The rich won't like that. But if they had'nt of squandered and betted with the worlds money in the first place we would'nt be in this mess.
Bloody Capitalists.
I also advised at the beginning of the thread to step outside, look at your home and check it's secure, grow some veg and buy a stab/bullet proof vest.

Quantitative easing. I wonder how much someone got paid to come up with that?
S
shaun (Little Upsilon)
08 Mar 2009 10:51 Link
just noticed this thread i must say i thoroughly enjoyed it and spent like an hour reviewing all the posts with their internet sources and texts cited as evidence in your presentations of arguments.

got to agree with the i think religion is bullshit when it was made up, but it had purpose to help a species cope with the uncertainties of everyday life/death and it still has its role but it has been horribly abused by individuals at times and the only way to get rid of it is to replace it with science in the new generations and breed it out of existence with law and persecution spanish inquisition style fun fun :( . i consider myself athiest but that wont get me out of accompanying my 52 yr old mother this weekend to her crazy upbeat sing and dance church. show me proof of god ill believe if not science rules...

about the country well a republic can only last until the people learn that they can get money out of communal coffers and at that point it is only a matter of time until economic collapse. people are greedy by nature unfortunately its a baser survival instinct.

dont go nuts on me for this theory i just came up with but i think unfortunately due to the substantial but not complete decrease in the white mans racism and bigotry in america there is not much to drive the poverty stricken and ignorant masses to strive to achieve and conform since they are now our equals they got nothing to prove and so now my america is a country of lazy drug abusing kids who will never grow up. i feel sorry for you old folks u will have horrible after care if its left to these under achievers to care for you in your old age. that is how i see my generation i am 23 with a bba in management and no one else in my families generation will even get an associates ever... but atleast they all made it through highschool rofl.

as a country we need to learn to live within our means, balance budgets government and personal, and for gods sake we need serious education reform and the sooner the better...colleges have put education second to the demands of the customers capitalism at work great... anyway keep posting comments nice to hear from educated people. ive spent my whole life working blue collar jobs with drug addicts and felons and you just cant get this kind of insight from them.
S
Scott Hifeng (Kebir Blue)
09 Mar 2009 00:03 Link
shaun, that made me think of an oft-quoted line about survivival from the glory days of fuckedcompany.com (Circa 2001): "Ordinary men were battered and smashed, except for mike91919595, who was equipped with some AK-47s and a Honda full of silver."

As to religion, although you'd never know it from the news, I believe it's on the way out. Centuries ago, the Church was everything, and called all the shots. Then came governments, then came capitalism. At the risk of oversimplifying, corps now rule the roost, they just need occasional help from government to bail them out of their bigger mistakes. But churches? Please.

At the turn of the millenium I read an interesting meta-history of human endeavor. To paraphrase: if there were a galactic museum of the universe, one might find there a display of Earth from the period 1000 A.D. to 2000 A.D., showing a suit of armor and a 747 labeled "examples of metalworking from the period." Perspective is everything.

Anyhow, being 57 myself, I look forward to some young whippersnapper subsidizing my retirement even as he's wiping the applesauce from my saggy chin. *winks*
A
Angus88 (Little Upsilon)
11 Mar 2009 14:02 Link
Shaun comfort breeds complacency. Only when you know the price for underachievement do lazy people realize the importance of achievement.

Give a 3rd world child an opputunity for a good education and they will not take it for granted. Its a bit of a shame, probably the greatest minds of America fail because they are stuck in a povery trap. I feel that now more then ever governments should be providing support and opputunity to disadvantaged citizens if developed nations are to keep their standing in the world. I guess this recession might be a wake up call to all the Bam Margeras and Paris Hiltons. Or who knows in a decade it will be reverse roles for immigrants, immigrants migrate to the developed world for higher employment while nationals do all the shitty jobs.
N
nix001 (Kebir Blue)
03 Apr 2009 07:06 Link
Zdeněk Pavlovský (Fearless Blue)
Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 06:07 pm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q&A: Islamic finance

[snip]

What is Sharia law?

Under Sharia Islamic law, making money from money, such as charging interest, is usury and therefore not permitted.

[snip]

How does Islamic finance work?

The overarching principle of Islamic finance is that all forms of interest are forbidden.

The Islamic financial model works on the basis of risk sharing.

The customer and the bank share the risk of any investment on agreed terms, and divide any profits between them.

[snip]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3548656.stm

-------

In an Islamic monetary system, money itself has no value. 'Islam denies the conventional
mentality that out of every dollar a new dollar has to be created', says Shariah scholar Dr. Imran.

This means, that capital can only increase in value in value if a financial vehicle's underlying asset increases in value. Since interest is forbidden under Islamic law, money can not add value to itself. - http://www.ameinfo.com/177501.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yo Zde. They have just been talking about that on the news. They were wondering why the G20 are'nt talking about implementing it.
Z
Zdeněk Pavlovský (Fearless Blue)
03 Apr 2009 12:09 Link
im not qualified to have educated comment, however, some of those who qualified are do indeed suggest that such system would probably help to "prevent" the so called financial, which then some believe translated to economic, crisis we go through.

i guess we can now see why the current system we have at the moment is preferred, thus defended, by some, and its not about ideology, religion, freedoms, rights, nor efficiency on global scale ;)

well, history teaches us that every system was overcome, but whats behind the corner nobody knows, not even Nobel prize for economy winners.
M
MasterofAll
03 Apr 2009 19:30 Link
Nix,

That's all well and good, but it relies on trust. It offers no incentive other than kindness to give somebody else your money. If anything it hurts the lender, they are no longer free to invest their money. It's like a risky bank account with no interest potential.

Ben