|
|
|
|
Roddy
New Member
Panama
48 Posts |
 Posted - 12/07/2007 : 12:56:19
|
First of all, let's use the definition of Dogma given by wikipedia:
Dogma (the plural is either dogmata or dogmas, Greek #948;#972;#947;#956;#945;, plural #948;#972;#947;#956;#945;#964;#945;) is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization, thought to be authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or diverged from. While in the context of religion the term is largely descriptive, outside of religion its current usage tends to carry a pejorative connotation — referring to concepts as being "established" only according to a particular point of view, and thus one of doubtful foundation. This pejorative connotation is even stronger with the term dogmatic, used to describe a person of rigid beliefs who is not open to rational argument.
Now notice the words authoritative and "particular point of view". Dogmas are not to be doubted, questioned, let along removed from society.
Thus dogmas are dangerous.
Communism, Nazism, and Facism were all dogmatic ideologies. Stalin had no problems putting to death anyone who questioned him, and Hitler had no problems sending anyone who questioned him to a concentration camp. Hitler (no, no, no he wasn't an atheist) had no problems seeing National Socialism and the Aryan ideal as mankind's only salvation, and this is easily noticed in his speeches and his book Mein Kempt.
Dogmas, although dangerous to societies and freethinking, often disguise themselves as saviors of mankind, a fact that makes anyone who question them an enemy that must be silenced. Many atheists, me included, don't like to hear Christians or any other theists, talking about Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao, for they were atheists, and therefore, they create a link between atheism and some of mankind's greatest atrocities. However communism, not atheism, turned them into the tyrants they were, and this doctrine is dogmatic, just like Christianity, Islam, Scientology are dogmatic (notice the last one I mentioned, which is a new danger on the rise).
The reason why religions are the most dangerous dogmas is that they revolve around men who are not like Stalin or Mao or Hitler, for these men have superpowers, they are perfect and can't be questioned, and the punishment that you will get for doing so can last an eternity. Therefore, as dogmas, religions tend to linger in our societies longer than any other doctrine or form of government. A person who despised Stalin back in his time could still do it in his mind (saying anything was dangerous). With Gods, as Christopher Hitchens keeps pointing out, this form of dictatorship and censorship is also in the mind. We all know it is a virtual dictatorship. A delusion. But, as a former theist, I know how bad it can be.
Perhaps a good new name for atheists would be anti-dogmatic, for we encourage freethought, liberal ideas, and we don't seem to fear people who question them, and that can be seen in forums such as this one, as opposed to Christian forums, where (not always) any user who dares to differ from the typical ideas of the forum, are banned permanently.
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 13:45:12 [Permalink]
|
| Except that there exist dogmatic atheists, and I have little doubt that somewhere in the Web-o-sphere is an atheist forum than bans religious people on sight. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2007 : 01:02:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Except that there exist dogmatic atheists, and I have little doubt that somewhere in the Web-o-sphere is an atheist forum than bans religious people on sight.
|
Those are both true statements, but may be separate ones. I can definitely imagine a web forum which specialized in discussions between unbelievers and banned the religious as a practical matter. It wouldn't necessarily require that dogmatic atheists such a site.
How would one define a "dogmatic atheist"? I find this an interesting question. Is theological disbelief itself a dogma, however firmly it is held? Or would such dogmatic atheism consist of forever quoting some atheist guru's writing, and banning any revisionist deviation from those words? I suspect there are a few such dogmatic atheists, simply because some people are unimaginative and don't think for themselves. But I also suspect that when using "dogmatic atheist," most people are really thinking of outspoken, and/or "hard" atheists, or those claiming to have proof of the non-existence of deities.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 12/08/2007 01:04:45 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2007 : 07:03:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Roddy
Communism, Nazism, and Facism were all dogmatic ideologies. Stalin had no problems putting to death anyone who questioned him, and Hitler had no problems sending anyone who questioned him to a concentration camp. Hitler (no, no, no he wasn't an atheist) had no problems seeing National Socialism and the Aryan ideal as mankind's only salvation, and this is easily noticed in his speeches and his book Mein Kempt. |
Did Stalin put people to death because they were questioning communistic ideology, or because they were questioning him and his interpretation of it?
I contend argue that Stalin was foremostly a power-grabber. You yourself (probably inavertedly) suggest that in your choice of words.
The same goes for Hitler.
Edited to add:
wording changed because I realized I mistakenly picked an opposite. |
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. |
| Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 12/08/2007 18:04:09 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2007 : 11:53:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Those are both true statements, but may be separate ones. |
Absolutely they are separate. Well, independent would be a better term. But Roddy, in that last sentence of his, says that atheists should be called non-dogmatists because atheists don't kick Christians off their forums (not always). It's not true, for two reasons. One is the dogmatic atheists which do exist, and the other is the likelihood of a ban-happy atheist forum. That's all I was saying.
Really, it's three independent issues, because it's possible to be a dogmatic atheist with an open, non-banning forum, too. One can also be a non-dogmatic Christian who's as heavy-handed with the bannination button as DaveScot. It is:- how you believe,
- what you believe, and
- what you do about it.
While there may be trends, there is no necessity for any of the three descriptors to be accompanied by any other of the three.| But I also suspect that when using "dogmatic atheist," most people are really thinking of outspoken, and/or "hard" atheists, or those claiming to have proof of the non-existence of deities. |
I've met a couple. They're more-or-less opposed to even the possibility that some god (not necessarily Christian, hence lowercase) might exist, even within the context of, for example, a philosophical discussion on the limits of knowledge. It's been my experience that this sort of attitude carries over into the rest of their lives, and so they're not the most-pleasent of people to be around. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2007 : 14:38:11 [Permalink]
|
Communism, Nazism, and Facism were all dogmatic ideologies. Stalin had no problems putting to death anyone who questioned him, and Hitler had no problems sending anyone who questioned him to a concentration camp. Hitler (no, no, no he wasn't an atheist) had no problems seeing National Socialism and the Aryan ideal as mankind's only salvation, and this is easily noticed in his speeches and his book Mein Kempt. |
Was Karl Marx dogmatic? Certainly passionate about his idea, and he no doubt believed himself to be right, but was he dogmatic? And the same with all of his followers. You can't label an ideology to be dogmatic unless it is dogmatic by definition. For example, the vast majority of fundamentalist Christians are dogmatic, but there are thousands of Christians who are not. In that same sense, while Stalin approached communism in a dogmatic way, this does not mean the ideology is itself dogmatic. |
Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 12/11/2007 : 19:23:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Except that there exist dogmatic atheists, and I have little doubt that somewhere in the Web-o-sphere is an atheist forum than bans religious people on sight.
|
Been there breifly.
They're on a Delphi forum. Insist on a point-counterpoint argumentation style. No follow ups, no responses. Rhetoric is strictly anti-theist.
I questioned the validity of their argumentation style as an effective form of debate and got banned. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Dogmas
