Translate

Saturday, April 9, 2022

WAR AND RELIGION 2

 

(The word "atheist" can very well be replaced by "the-without-religion")

Is religion violent and atheism peaceful? Sam Harris talks about the movement: “Faith religion remains a perpetual source of human conflict." The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the future of Reason (New York and London:: WWNorton, 2004]. In order to bring world peace, we must eradicate religion,. The religions Harris particularly wants to eliminate are Islam Christianity and Judaism. These irrational survivals and of violence susceptible of an era pre-modern must be suppressed. "All reasonable men and women have a common enemy. Our enemy is none other than faith itself". [Ibid.,79]

WAR AND RELIGION

 Would the World Be Safer Without Religion?


     If religion makes people want to murder each other, maybe religion is bad for the world. Killing in the name of God or religious belief, which shames every religion, ought to give the person of faith pause.

 But should it cause us to abandon faith? Would the world be better off if religion disappeared? 
Some people would say yes, and since it’s impossible to conduct this experiment, as faith is definitely not going away, we can’t be sure. But when we observe the horror of religiously motivated violence or hatred, maybe the correct question is, "without religion would it be even worse"? 

LOGICAL FALLACIES

  
1. Hasty Generalizations are based on atypical, irrelevant, or inaccurate evidence.
Example:
Of course our students are physically fit; just look at the success of our sports teams this year.

2.Faulty Cause And Effect (Post Hoc) is the result of assuming that because B follows A, A must be the cause of B.
Example:
Tourism in this city started to decline right after Mayor Sctt was elected. To save our tourist industry, let’s replace her now!

3. Reductive Reasoning reduces a complex effect to a single cause.
Example:
People who want to be healthy should eat turnips. My Aunt Alice loved turnips, and she lived to be ninety four.

4. False Analogies occur when one overlooks the fact that two things being compared are more different than they
are similar.
Example:
Why am I required to take certain courses before I can graduate from this university? No one requires me to buy certain groceries before I can leave the supermarket.

5. Begging (Avoiding) the Question occurs when one assumes as true the very point he or she is arguing.
Example:
Improving public transportation in this city won’t solve highway congestion. Even if public transportation is clean, safe, and efficient, people will still prefer to use their cars.

6. Circular Reasoning occurs when the argument merely restates the conclusion it was meant to support.
Example:
The minister is such a good person because she is so virtuous.

7. Equivocation involves using a term in a completely different way than one’s opponent uses it.
Example:
Why, of course the Central Intelligence Agency wants to know what kind of grades my children get! Otherwise, it wouldn’t be called an intelligence agency, would it?

8. Ad Hominem Arguments attack the opponent rather than his or her argument. (Ad hominem literally means” against the person.”)
Example:
Senator Jones’ bill on gun control should not be taken seriously; after all, this is the same man who has had at least five extramarital affairs.

9. False Either/Or Arguments assume that only two alternatives exist in a given situation.
Example:
The case is clear: either we support the death penalty or we allow crime to run rampant.

10. Band Wagon Appeals suggest that one should accept something because it is popular; that is, everyone else has”hopped on the bandwagon.”
Example:
A recent poll showed that seventy percent of the American public believes emissions requirements on automobiles have gone too far; therefore, these laws are unreasonable and should be repealed.

11. Non Sequitur occur when one fails to show clear connections between his premise (starting point) and conclusion.
(Non sequitur literally means ”it does not follow.”)
Example:
Maria loved college, so I’m sure she will make an excellent teacher

Friday, April 8, 2022

PONTIFICATION

 


Here is one of my often repeated (to myself) pontifications: “Entertainment and entertainers are a waste of my time."
I am a person.
A person differs from other beings by having a spiritual intellect.
I fulfill my nature as a person to the degree that I use my intellect.
For obvious reasons the first (or main) use of my intellect is to help me to survive. Thereafter, 'areas' of my life that maximize the use of my intellect would be the most desirable areas.

Is ‘entertainment’ such an area?
Definitions of ‘entertainment' are numerous and diverse. No matter what the definitions are, if I keep to my 'maximizing the use of my intellect’ point of view, a choice is possible.
Ex.: Watching a game of chess is better than
watching a game of hockey.
- Writing a novel is better than reading one.
- Writing a song is better than singing or listening to one.
Etc. etc

If I want to call work, entertainment ( it might be for some), then mindless work is the least desirable.

One certainly has to take a break from ‘directed thinking’, like:
a) Seeing the world, nature, with the ‘heart’, letting thoughts go by.
b) Watching entertainment that requires little concentration (or thinking). Ex.: musical entertainment, etc.
c) A break could also be had by directing my thinking to a new subject.
d) Directed thinking that involves physical exercise. Ex.: any physical sport.
Irrelevant to my point here (as it would take me too far) is the pertinent question:” Has all ‘directed thinking” the same value?

Do I know why I believe what I believe? To the degree that I know, I’m a thinker and as thinking differentiates me as a human, I’m therefore to that same degree more human.
However, only if I believe that my spirit is an advance, a progress on my mineral, vegetable, animal constituents of my being, only then can I find normal and desirable a further progress in the direction of maximized intellect.
So then, entertainment is not my ‘beef’, but minimal thinking is.

The ‘breaks’ in my life (this is where entertainment comes in) should not take the greatest part of my life.
The ‘breaks’ with the most ‘thinking’ have more value.
So because I think that some entertainment have minimum thinking value, does not permit me to say that all entertainment is undesirable or a waste of time.
What I should have thought is that excessive minimal thinking in one’s life is not desirable.

Does anybody care?
 
Obviously, every one of the points I made here could be analyzed and expanded at great length …not today.