welsh
Junkmaster
Ah John, nothing like pointing out the lunacy of religiosity to get your goat. How a thinker such as yourself can willingly accept faith in the supernatural as superior to your "God-given" rationality is amazing.
Only In Ameri.....The Netherlands?
- Thread starter John Uskglass
- Start date
Ah John, nothing like pointing out the lunacy of religiosity to get your goat. How a thinker such as yourself can willingly accept faith in the supernatural as superior to your "God-given" rationality is amazing.
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
Rationality has done as much damage to the world as religious fanatiscism.welsh said:
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
What's you're point?Bradylama said:
welsh
Junkmaster
Bradylama- I sometimes wonder if the Crusades were about religion or used religion as a means of collective action to seize some primo real estate in the middle east. Remember, back in those days the Holy Lands was the place to be if you wanted to be rich.
Sorry John, but given a choice between faith and rationality, I go with rationality. It's nice being able to form your own opinion and coming up with some of your own ideas about the nature of the universe and values. Better perhaps thatn having some individual spoon feed faith to you like a drug so that he makes me feel good in exchange for a little economic enrichment or political power.
But that might be a bit radical for some folks.
Sorry John, but given a choice between faith and rationality, I go with rationality. It's nice being able to form your own opinion and coming up with some of your own ideas about the nature of the universe and values. Better perhaps thatn having some individual spoon feed faith to you like a drug so that he makes me feel good in exchange for a little economic enrichment or political power.
But that might be a bit radical for some folks.
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
I don't even attend a Church, so all this is meaningless to me in every possible way. No one gets secular wealth or power because of my faith.
welsh
Junkmaster
Yet you advocate organized religion as the answer for others? Isn't that a bit odd?
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
Some people need the social gathering and tradition, and I don't doubt I'll end up with a Church sooner or later. And I'm still opposed to you raving Laïcitéophiles.welsh said:
John Uskglass said:
Not really. The pre-communist Chinese, for instance, had been ethically bound by Confucianism for centuries, and you can hardly call anything Confucianist a 'Church'.
And one can't brush aside the Chinese as 'marginal' either, since there's a shitload of them...
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
Confuscism is an interesting philosophy, but it's a philosophy and not a religion in the same way as the Abrahamic or Vedic faiths. It's somewhat comparable to Stoicism or other classical philosophies more then even religions in the traditional sense like Daoism or Buddhism.
Besides, religion in East Asia tends towards the syncretic. Those who follow Confuscious might also practice some aspects of ancestor worship, be a Buddhist and believe Jesus to be a Buddha.
At the moment I'm going through something of a Dostoyevsky-Kierkegaard esque Christian Existential thing, memorizing The Grand Inquisitor and all.
Bradylama
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Well sure, but that doesn't mean that people didn't honestly think that what they were doing was the right thing to do. The difference between then and now being that they were basing right and wrong on a religious base, rather than ideological or nationalistic ones.
People are just as willing to do stupid shit nowadays as they were centuries ago. While the cause has changed, people are still willing to die for concepts.
Sure, you could say that people would make the rational decision not to die for a cause, but people have been making that same "rational" decision for centuries. Ultimately, the culture war is meaningless, as we all end up doing the same old thing.
John Uskglass said:
Yeah... That's exactly my point. Confucianism wasn't a religion, yet it did give people a chance for tradition, ethics and social gathering.
My point.
True; but generally the majority of Chinese in Eastern China was only Confucian, IIRC.
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
Has more to do with the majorty of Han Chinese bordering on non-religious with the whole 50 years of athiest tyrrany, I would think. There are still 200 million Buddhists, a shitload of Christians that are growing rapidly as an alternative to Falun Gong, another major religious sect. Not to mention Taoism, which I have to admit for being non-theistic is pretty fucking cool.
EDIT: Neo-Confucianism is also as close to a religion as East Asia gets without the Abrahamic faiths.
My point was that for spiritual matters they went to other religions. Religion in the East is something of a buffet. In Japan, if you want a wedding you get a Christian wedding, if you want a funeral you get a Shinto funeral, etc...
Bradylama
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Isn't that the same thing, though? If you're arguing for rational "enlightenment," then how does a blind adherence to traditional behaviorism become a case for enlightenment?
You're just making a semantical distinction in that people can be ignorant without a church.
Bradylama said:
The way I see it, the mayor reasons for the Crusades were, in order of importance:
1. Western culture is an inherently violent culture. The Church tried to change that ever since Medieval times (to no avail), mostly by issuing 'Peace liga's' - sorta the Christian version of the Olympic peace. Western Early and High midieval culture, however, needed war to sustain its political and economical system. When the Church didn't 'allow' them to fight in Europe anymore (which was actually quite effective, a breach of the Peace Liga could mean excommunication - so the Medieval kings generally stayed in line); the pope said they'd better direct their agression against the Muslim infidels in the Holy Land.
Which they did.
2. Economical motives. Especially the Italian city-states wanted to bypass Byzantium in their trade connection to the east, so what better way to establish trading posts on in the Middle East? The only way to do that, however, was maily through war.
3. Religious motives - yes, only third place. Because, if they REALLY thought Islam was a threat to Christianity, then why didn't they attack the Muslims when Jerusalem was conquered by the Muslims in the 7th century, or when the Caliph destroyed the Holy Sepulcer in the beginning of the 11th century? Why only in the end of the 11th century? Answer: because religion really wasn't that big of a motive in the Crusades.
4. Personal wealth and glory for the crusaders.
So there.
*Pats himself on the ass*
John Uskglass said:
I wasn't talking about general Eastern religious customs, I am talking about the fact that Confucianism allowed for tradition, ethics and social gathering without being a religion. Sjeesh. CONCENTRATE!
Bradylama said:
I didn't make any statements about wether or not Confucianism was the path to enlightenment, I said that in pre-communist China Confucianism gave people tradition, ethics and social gathering without being a religion.
What, do I have a big sign on my head that says "DERAIL ME"? I don't even have a clue what you people were arguing about, I'm only here to correct mistakes in historical perspective!
Bradylama
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
So then the motives are nationalistic. As are the motives for any war. Sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
John Uskglass
Venerable Relic of the Wastes
And I'M saying that because following parts of one religion in the east DOES NOT CANCEL OUT FOLLOWING ANOTHER RELIGION, that your argument is pretty baseless. A person who reads Confucius is pretty likely to be a Daoist or a Buddhist, both of which are religions.
And you are arguing about a Confuscism that simply does not exsist anymore. Original Confuscism is somewhat close to what you are arguing, but Neo-Confuscism, the only kind left, is simply not.
Bradylama
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Then I salute your drive at picking nits. That is how we learn.
John Uskglass said:
*Sigh*
Not all Confucianists were also Taoists, Buddhists, Muslim, Christian, Scientologists or whatever. IIRC, a majority of Chinese in pre-communist times were only Confucian. And heck, even if it was only a couple of million Chinese, it still disproves your statement that all social, ethical and traditional currents of thought turn into religions.
That's why I said "Pre-communist" Confucianism.
Ta-daaa!