|
Crowsbeak posted:I'll admit that you really made me laugh, with that one, it does sound like I am endorsing polygamy. Look I believe one man one women marriage.
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:55 |
|
|
Maybe Jesus was concerned with some kind of other world and wasn't attempting to solve political problems? That could be one reason why his words seem irrelevant to solving modern political problems.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
Tao Jones posted:Maybe Jesus was concerned with some kind of other world and wasn't attempting to solve political problems? That could be one reason why his words seem irrelevant to solving modern political problems. No, I'm pretty sure he was very concerned about the political problems of Judea circa 0 BCE. Turns out a lot of those issues have changed over the last 2000 years. Imagine that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 05:22
|
|
|
Tao Jones posted:Maybe Jesus was concerned with some kind of other world and wasn't attempting to solve political problems? That could be one reason why his words seem irrelevant to solving modern political problems. The whole "rich people are evil" theme seems pretty relevant, too bad about Christians following their sacred text though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
Ocrassus posted:I think this thread should shift away from the slave trade and focus on modern day issues that many Christians throw their weight behind. Jesus doesn't seem to be especially interested in upholding cultural norms, particularly when they don't serve the interests of the meek. I support gay marriage for this reason and I believe that Jesus would support the LBGT community (or rather, condemn the church for its persecution of the same) if he lived today. Drug use doesn't bother me, Jesus drank wine and I smoke mad weed. We need to reform our drug policy to keep it from unjustly harming minorities.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
religion is the source of all the problems in the world basically, today and in the past. jesus did not exist, he was a corn myth. the bible claims to be the direct word of god but it's full of contradictions--genesis anybody? there's so much more i won't go into. needless to say, to attain to the authentic flourishing of the human species requires that we exercise our dispassionate reason, free from any and all cultural conditioning, and in so doing discover the true nature of morality. Only then can we begin to construct the good society in the light of strong ai.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
au contraire, it is the love of money at the root of all evil.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
if that's true then why are barter based societies full of a-holes too? anyway, yeah the love of money is an evil thing, but the fanaticism that underlies this love of money is itself a religious sentiment. if we were truly rational then we would think about it and discover that no, money is not the be all end all of everything, it's just a tool we use to make the world a better place without religion. one day we'll have sentient robots and a christian would want to make them slaves, but an enlightened society would treat them as equals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
Al Harrington posted:It goes back further than that: That paper seems to be ignoring the fact that the Romans very much looked upon being penetrated s some great dishonor. Also it seems to ignore that a non roman having sex with a younger roman male could get them accused of "ruining the youths reputation". The Romans generally viewed homosexuality as a power equation so to give them this "progressive" light is really rewriting history. Also before you cite Hadrian, Antonius was a foreigner and a boy, him being both made it quite alright to the Romans. Also its not as though you can blame Christians for homosexuality becoming so reviled in the western part of Rome when one considers how the germanics viewed homosexuality. Now for the unions that took place, I am fine with that, its still not marriage though. Calling it a enfraterization or a union is fine. Also as I noted I don't vote on issues relating to homosexuality because Jesus cared alot more about people being abused and the poor being downtrodden, something that still happens today despite some thinking that Jesus's teachings shouldn't apply today. Miltank posted:au contraire, it is the love of money at the root of all evil.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
Orkin Mang posted:if that's true then why are barter based societies full of a-holes too? anyway, yeah the love of money is an evil thing, but the fanaticism that underlies this love of money is itself a religious sentiment. if we were truly rational then we would think about it and discover that no, money is not the be all end all of everything, it's just a tool we use to make the world a better place without religion. one day we'll have sentient robots and a christian would want to make them slaves, but an enlightened society would treat them as equals. You are correct that love of money is a form of religion, but wrong if you think that whatever you replace established religion with will not also be religion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
there's a place in the brain that's where irrational beliefs come from. every human has it but some people use it and others dont use it, depending how rational you are. i would propose that a christian for example vs a rational atheist would have this part of the brain more active, a brain scan would show up a whole bunch of electrical activity in that spot when you ask a christian to talk about the bible. im not trying to be mean i'm just saying that's what would probably happen. taking that bit of the brain out is illegal, so society is pretty much stuck with having to teach people not to keep using it, an impossible task! dont forget, george w bush was president and i think that part of his brain must have been as big as a grapefruit. humans are probably not the way in the long run. all it takes is one rational atheist robot designer to design a robot brain without this bit in it that's all, and it's hard to see how society wouldn't be much the improved for it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
E: gently caress, beaten by miles. I should read the whole thread before I post. Nothing to see here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
Orkin Mang posted:there's a place in the brain that's where irrational beliefs come from. every human has it but some people use it and others dont use it, depending how rational you are. i would propose that a christian for example vs a rational atheist would have this part of the brain more active, a brain scan would show up a whole bunch of electrical activity in that spot when you ask a christian to talk about the bible. im not trying to be mean i'm just saying that's what would probably happen. taking that bit of the brain out is illegal, so society is pretty much stuck with having to teach people not to keep using it, an impossible task! dont forget, george w bush was president and i think that part of his brain must have been as big as a grapefruit. humans are probably not the way in the long run. all it takes is one rational atheist robot designer to design a robot brain without this bit in it that's all, and it's hard to see how society wouldn't be much the improved for it. This is some good pasta.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:27
|
|
|
you're not addressing my points
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:30
|
|
|
Orkin Mang posted:you're not addressing my points You're hypothesising MRI results man
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:33
|
|
|
Its one of those things where even if he's not a troll, his argument pretty much speaks for itself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:43
|
|
|
miltank you should read william t cavanaugh on religious violence
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
This is like that one Hitchhiker's Guide sequel where the scientists realized all they had to do to create a computer that knows everything and can detect all forms of energy is to remove all of the filters that people unwittingly build into all of our current instruments. Except that was a comedy book and not someone purporting to have a serious solution to all the world's problems.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
Miltank posted:This is some good pasta. You know I think we spend a lot of time thinking on and surrounding ourselves with what perceive to be good things, but we don't spend a lot of time trying to understand evil because it scares us and because we feel better when we don't ponder it. People kill themselves or other people because they let what Jung might call the "shadow" bottle up inside them, never facing it head on, until they can't put a handle on their emotions any longer and do horrible things to themselves or others. We are so focused on living up to perfect ideals without understanding that we are human. We fear failure like we fear death. We worship people like Jesus or Buddha who might as well be space aliens for how little they relate to us. The most prude and cautious public societies have the most perverted personal appetites. Evangelicals doggedly fight any attempt to show cracks in capitalist American society, and ironically place all the blame for the country's problems on the most powerless of us, because they represent failure in a society that demands you to be the absolute best. The hobo they see on the street corner is a reflection of their ability for failure and they hate and fear him for that, place the burden of the nation's failure on his shoulders. God throws down a set of arbitrary laws upon us and tells us to follow them. Why? Because God is great, and if you don't think so you'll burn in hell. There's no explanation as to how this evils come to be, except for a big scapegoat bogeyman called Satan. You'd think that if God hated our sin so much he'd give us the tools to change ourselves so we could stop sinning. I say, instead of vainly trying to live up to these inhuman, idealistic characters made in our image that we worship, we need to understand what makes us tick as humans and understand why we do evil, for it is only then that humanity can truly put an end to evil.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
Sometimes I wonder why Star Trek was so over the top and heavy handed when it came to episodes with Spock or Data as the focus in them, but I've learned that sometimes you have to beat people over the head with the message "Being emotionless robots who adhere to perfect logic would gently caress everything up." And in spite of this, there will still be people who don't get it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 07:09
|
|
|
God, at least the Old Testament one, appears to me like a tired parent who, instead of taking the time to teach his children why not to do wrong, goes with the fast route of intimidation.Twelve by Pies posted:Sometimes I wonder why Star Trek was so over the top and heavy handed when it came to episodes with Spock or Data as the focus in them, but I've learned that sometimes you have to beat people over the head with the message "Being emotionless robots who adhere to perfect logic would gently caress everything up." Evangelicals have this attitude that evil is a creation of the devil that lies outside our own physical bodies, and that if you pray and pray somehow this evil will go away, and when you can't fix it with prayer you bomb into oblivion. Drug addicts and other low-lives to them deserve prison, even when many of these people are in the state they are in due to poverty, bad parenting, or other factors. If sin is an innate part of humanity, it is beyond our control, even though we believe that we can control it. You can't say that sin is an innate tendency and say in the same breath that humans have full free will. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 07:24 on Feb 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
a sufficiently well programmed robot would be able to understand morality and the nature of the good society. star trek is a tv show not for real!
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 07:17
|
|
|
LookingGodIntheEye posted:I don't mean to say that we should be perfect robots, I'm saying that society is so focused on evil and failure as something to be destroyed through punishment, but really the better route is to see evil and failure as part of human nature and as something to be corrected. Oh no, I have no issue with what you said, I definitely agree with this. My post was a bit poorly timed since it came after one of yours, but it was in reference to Orkin, not you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 07:29
|
|
|
We need to get rid of morality based in irrational religious beliefs or cultural programming and instead build a perfect robot with access to an ineffable superhuman moral knowledge to hand us an objective code of ethics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 07:34
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:We need to get rid of morality based in irrational religious beliefs or cultural programming and instead build a perfect robot with access to an ineffable superhuman moral knowledge to hand us an objective code of ethics. thankyou, at least one of you understands
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 07:37
|
|
|
Miltank posted:You are correct that love of money is a form of religion, but wrong if you think that whatever you replace established religion with will not also be religion. This old argument? "Not believing is just another kind of believing"? No it isn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 08:03
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:We need to get rid of morality based in irrational religious beliefs or cultural programming and instead build a perfect robot with access to an ineffable superhuman moral knowledge to hand us an objective code of ethics. Should we also require that the robot would need a nano augmented human fused into it to work? Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 08:18 on Feb 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Should we also require that the robot would need a nano augmented human fused into it to work?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 08:35
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Should we also require that the robot would need a nano augmented human fused into it to work? Only if we represent this moment of creation by a painting depicting the robot touching fingers with the perfect man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 11:32
|
|
|
god spelled backwards is dog so imo we should switch to a religion about petting dogs can robots pet dogs? e: just to be clear, I know they can in fact pet the dogs but what I mean is do the dogs like it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 12:31
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:This old argument? "Not believing is just another kind of believing"? No it isn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Get rid of religion and it will replace itself with some other type of functionally identical irrationality. This irrationality won't necessarily have god or magic, but that won't actually make in any more rational. vaccines cause autism nucular power will kill us all climate change is a democratic homobortionist goonspiracy 9/11 was done by reptilian jews
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 12:44
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Kyrie if we managed to make an AI that was alive should we convert it to Christianity?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Get rid of religion and it will replace itself with some other type of functionally identical irrationality. This irrationality won't necessarily have god or magic, but that won't actually make in any more rational.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
It also rather ignores the mechanism by which you might get rid of religion. If you just deleted religion from the human consciousness by some magical means then yes, people would probably turn to something else to believe in, if you remove it by removing the need to believe in it, which isn't a fundamental human need, just something a lot of people like to do, then why would people seek another alternative?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
I think there is a lot to learn from the bible. Strictly speaking; Jesus is an excellent role model and mentor. I have no taste for the dogmatic aspects of Christianity however. I say this as a raised Roman Catholic who doesn't care any more. I go to Christmas mass so my mom can pretend I won't go to hell for a few hours. Well that's my opinion thanks
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
Miltank posted:Get rid of religion and it will replace itself with some other type of functionally identical irrationality. This irrationality won't necessarily have god or magic, but that won't actually make in any more rational. I don't believe so. Some people will never be smart enough to be rational, it's true. But when you take away the sacrosanct nature of a particular kind of irrationality and stop saying "this is the one kind of irrationality you can't question, and it's a case where being irrational is totally good" then surprise, some people will actually become pretty good critical thinkers! Lots of people will ascribe to irrational beliefs like neoliberalism or conspiracy theories or something but there is a difference. Religion is the only case where we specifically say making yourself irrational and insensible to good arguments is the goal and is praiseworthy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I don't believe so. Some people will never be smart enough to be rational, it's true. But when you take away the sacrosanct nature of a particular kind of irrationality and stop saying "this is the one kind of irrationality you can't question, and it's a case where being irrational is totally good" then surprise, some people will actually become pretty good critical thinkers. Rationality is clearly the best way possible to understand the physical world around us. However, when it comes to understanding something that is outside rationality's domain, such as interaction and morality, then what you have will be the religious. Such religion informed only by rationality isn't guaranteed to be any more benevolent than religion informed by any other meaning.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Rationality cannot conjure ethics from the ether, no, but religion is certainly not a good ethical basis either. It's full of arbitrary and demonstrably detrimental guidelines that do not promote the propsperity and happiness of all humans. If you're going to apply rationality to religion to filter out the stupid bits, why bother with the religion at all as a basis for ethics? You are obviously capable of deriving some kind of ethical system without following it rote from a book, so why bother with the book at all? Rationality can certainly be a great aid in developing good systems of ethics that promote good outcomes for all, far moreso than just sticking to the traditional practices in all things, at least.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:55 |
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Should we also require that the robot would need a nano augmented human fused into it to work? "Jesus Christ, Denton!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 22:03
|
|