|
|
|
|
ronnywhite
SFN Regular
501 Posts |
 Posted - 11/15/2005 : 22:30:47
|
(just watched PBS NOVA show by that name)
Links from relevant webpage includes a write-up on Newton by Albert Einstein- makes one appreciate just how incredible Newton was...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/newton/
The title of the show- Newton's Dark Secrets- refers to some of his metaphysical speculations and meddlings... had they been publicly known, this would have "put him at odds" with the Church of England and political powers, definately destroyed his life, and possibly landed him in prison although he "probably" wouldn't have been "put to death" as a historian noted. Of course, considering the knowledge base and public mindset of the day, even a man of Newton's brilliance considering metaphysical beliefs isn't especially surprising.
Ya know, we can be thankful that Newton had the good sense (dishonesty?) to keep his mouth shut so he could publish Principia. To the point, I had to wonder- in the big picture, is there ever anything good about involving religion in politics? Applicable cliche- "The more things change, the more they stay the same" (???)
|
Ron White |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2005 : 02:22:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
in the big picture, is there ever anything good about involving religion in politics?
If you are a politician seeking power, religion is one path to political power. It is probably the oldest political tool out there. Control what people learn and think, and you ultimately control them. Religion gives you free reign to ignore things like evidence and logic, which makes it quite a good tool for manipulating people.
I'd have to answer the question with a "no" however.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2005 : 06:11:32 [Permalink]
|
In my youth I thought that politics and religion should go together. Back then I was both a Pentecostal and politically active socialist. However, my ideas set me a bit apart from the rest of my Christian Brethren: I was pro free abortion, pro homosexual marriage (though I was seriously disturbed by seeing two men kissing) but against homosexual couples adopting non-biological children (I still am).
I realised that the secular government have taken over many of the social responsibilities that the (biblical) church used to have in areas like poverty, health care, elder care for those without families etc. and realised that the state has to provide for this: All people aren't necessarily born equal (due to genetics and/or family), but everyone must have equal opportunity to achieve and realise their maximum potential for the optimal benefit of the entire society.
A pure free market economy based society can't do that, USA is an excellent example of this. Communist dictatorships can't do it either, because there aren't enough idealists in the system, and the power is too corruptible to man. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
ronnywhite
SFN Regular
501 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2005 : 07:42:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
... "no" ...
From what little I know about history, seems you could make a pretty strong case.
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
... secular government have taken over many of the social responsibilities that the (biblical) church used to have...
I can't comment on Sweden or elsewhere, but a few thoughts on the US in recent times. First, there's the issue of what "social responsibilities" entails... just (how much/what kind of) social responsibilities anyone has- to anyone else- is highly subjective, with opinions running the gamut. There are some factions in the US with views similar to yours, whereas others see society/government as having little or no inherent responsibility to individuals beyond perhaps providing physical protection from criminality as the law requires (otherwise, "fend for oneself"). RE non-secular organizations, my problem with them isn't what they claim to represent or do, it's what they actually do, or how their claims translate into reality. Without going into detail, I think it does so "very poorly" and as my life experiences have progressed, I've seen little to alter that opinion in the larger perspective... only more evidence to convince me their hypocracy extends farther than I had ever imagined.
Take the homosexuality issue you mentioned. Whereas I find 2 men kissing and the like disgusting to watch, I see no sane reason to attack them constantly as some religious-types do. Geezus, if I'm an atheist and I can ignore them what's with these Bible-pounders who claim the moral "high ground" that they can't? The answer, of course, is that they're a load of crap, or to put it politely, it has more to do with their own psychosexual problems (probably including their own homosexual tendancies, in many instances.)
Their "humanitarianism" is no less hypocritical. It's rationalized, and it's not uniform- it's selective. Beneath the flowery language and public relations campaigns, it's a crock. When the cosmetics are washed away, many are just money-grubbing bastards... the only differences between them and a "business" being a bonafide business is honest enough to say "We're in it to make a buck", whereas these shifty parasites put on a "humanitarian" facade claiming non-secular inspiration and motivation, and usually their performance is lacking, or poor (and sometimes outright fraudulant) due to the lack of monitoring and accountability associated with business transactions.
quote:
...but everyone must have equal opportunity to achieve and realise their maximum potential for the optimal benefit of the entire society...
A very humanitarian and admirable perspective. Fewer of the non-secular crowd shares it than they would want the public to believe. |
Ron White |
| Edited by - ronnywhite on 11/16/2005 08:45:13 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/17/2005 : 00:34:01 [Permalink]
|
quote:
A pure free market economy based society can't do that, USA is an excellent example of this.
The US certainly doesn't have a pure free-market economy. Most realize that such a thing would be short lived and ultimately detrimental to everyone.
No society, regardless of its structure, can take care of everyone.
I think the US comes closer to the mark (of allowing equal opportunity for the most people possible) than you think Mab.
Do we have room to improve? Sure.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
ronnywhite
SFN Regular
501 Posts |
Posted - 11/17/2005 : 01:25:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
No society, regardless of its structure, can take care of everyone.
It's a matter of what one considers the "baseline." The US does pretty damn good compared to a vast majority of the rest of the world, although it could do better.
A thought- I think a society could easily exist that could "take care of everyone" with modern technologies providing efficient production of food and necessities... the state of technology and level of resources required probably exists presently (albeit not in Man's natural habitat) assuming we controlled our population growth... I think the problem resides in human nature. Whereas attitudes encouraging charity and living in mutualistic ways are nurtured in youth and stressed in adult societies, I think our competitive nature and predatorial instincts may prevent more humanitarian societies from evolving... these things eminate from the deepest, primal regions of our brains... socialization, humanitarianism and such from the more evolved outer regions- it's not as instinctive as the former. I don't know that it's "natural" to use our cerebral capacities in these ways, rather, maybe it has to be done as a "disciplined effort." We're not mutualistic creatures by nature, in particular, and I find it possible that an artificially designed mileau of "benevolence" beyond a certain degree might be destined to self-destruct as such.
Is it just "against our natures" not to be somewhat malevolent individually and otherwise, society-wide "genetic changes" being required to make things otherwise in a "modified human species," if it's possible at all? Maybe. Aristotle said "Man is inherently evil, and thre evil has to be controlled." I think he might be right, with the quesiton being whether the people who can and/or choose to use their cerebrums enough to exercise philanthropy do so as a self-destructive exercise in futility when sufficiently outnumbered by those who can't or don't. Socialism, Capitalism etc. seem to all just claim to know the right balance. What the right balance "really is" within a given context(unless I'm dead wrong about all of this) might be something we'll never figure out. It might take objectivity, and as humans, maybe none of us can be objective. |
Ron White |
|
|
|
pfretzschner
Skeptic Friend
USA
67 Posts |
Posted - 11/17/2005 : 11:50:12 [Permalink]
|
| I learned from the documentary that Newton looked a lot like Edgar Winter. I learned from the recent "Einstein" documentary that A. E. acted like a 19th-century Ferris Bueller. Seriously, does anyone think that "reenactments" of that kind, or just showing some guy in period dress walking around, add anything to the subject? |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 11/17/2005 : 20:13:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pfretzschner
I learned from the documentary that Newton looked a lot like Edgar Winter. I learned from the recent "Einstein" documentary that A. E. acted like a 19th-century Ferris Bueller. Seriously, does anyone think that "reenactments" of that kind, or just showing some guy in period dress walking around, add anything to the subject?
It might not add anything to the subject itself, however, it might be enough to get someone interested in the subject. |
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying and vile!"
Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
They (Women Marines) don't have a nickname, and they don't need one. They get their basic training in a Marine atmosphere, at a Marine Post. They inherit the traditions of the Marines. They are Marines.
LtGen Thomas Holcomb, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1943
|
|
|
|
ronnywhite
SFN Regular
501 Posts |
Posted - 11/17/2005 : 21:25:17 [Permalink]
|
That didn't occur to me as I was concentrating on the interviews and not the video (then I read the links,) but pfretz is right... it could probably have just as well been done as a radio broadcast- the imagery was pretty crummy (probably why I wasn't paying attention to it.) Aside from that, I didn't care for the title of the show... "Newton's Dark Secret"... as it kind of inaccurately implied what the show might be about for the sake of a "catchy-sounding" title. Not one of NOVA's better efforts, but it made a few interesting points and the Einstein link was a good read.
Yea, all the "respectable types" looked like "hair rockers" back there-and-then... no news there. Now, if they'd revealed that Newton bit the head off a live bat like Ozzie and reenacted it, instead of the relative dullsville of messing with alchemy and questioning the Church of England... THAT would have been cool. |
Ron White |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
