(January 26, 2018 at 1:38 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(January 26, 2018 at 1:24 pm)Whateverist Wrote: Well in some situations overwhelming is the word for it.  Just read the book Beloved.  Wasn't crazy about it but it sure gives a vivid idea of what the world must look like from the point of view of someone raised in slavery.  Pretty easy to see how little prepared they would have been to provide an adequate start for their own kids.  Over time we can hope that would dissipate just like the advantage enjoyed by the old money fortunes which were made on the backs of those enslaved.

I don't think we're helping it to dissipate by telling certain people that they don't have a chance at success on their own and need the government to lean on.

Nor would I do so.  But I would be happy to use government to lessen the impacts to the disadvantaged in at least some cases.  Naturally you wouldn't approve.

The sweeping generalizations on this thread have gotten a little bit out of hand. At the same time, I do not doubt that personality and temperament differences dispose people towards different political leanings. Likewise, I don't doubt that biology is at least partially, if not largely, responsible the life and career choices made by men and women.

I tend to be skeptical of social science studies, in general. It's all in how you label things and the connotations they imply. "Self-control" could be restraint but it could also be up-tight. The same for all kinds of personality traits - stingy/frugal, passionate/belligerent, bravery/foolhardiness, visionary/unrealistic...

---

(January 26, 2018 at 2:20 pm)GodisintheTV Wrote: We need more atheists like Dawkins,...

Yeah, and we need more Christians like Pat Robertson...I don't think so.

Yep. Self control won't take you very far if you have little under your control and little clue how to get some.

(January 26, 2018 at 2:03 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(January 26, 2018 at 1:51 pm)Industrial Lad Wrote: Most forms of social welfare here have a work requirement. Some people literally don't have a chance without help. If government doesn't help anyone, what are they here for.

To build roads, create and enforce a legal system, etc.

DEBT adds up when the tax cuts for the top exceed the revenue of those who have to compensate for what the top does not pay. NOW if you want roads and police and courts, WHO THE FUCK IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT......... YOU!

And I don't want to hear shit vilifying social safety nets. The assholes you vote for are not going to give up their social security or tax payer funded HEALTH CARE. Our taxes pay their salaries They gut everything to pay for corporate welfare, that debt adds up over time and causes the bubbles we have seen in the past. YOU are too damned stupid to see that.

The top is using you for their ATM for their global gambling, the crappy policies that gave us Bush's triple whammy housing/bank/car bubble crash.

(January 26, 2018 at 2:33 pm)Whateverist Wrote: Nor would I do so.  But I would be happy to use government to lessen the impacts to the disadvantaged in at least some cases.  Naturally you wouldn't approve.

I approve in plenty of cases. But, I believe that at some point it becomes counterproductive.

(January 26, 2018 at 2:46 pm)alpha male Wrote:

(January 26, 2018 at 2:33 pm)Whateverist Wrote: Nor would I do so.  But I would be happy to use government to lessen the impacts to the disadvantaged in at least some cases.  Naturally you wouldn't approve.

I approve in plenty of cases. But, I believe that at some point it becomes counterproductive.

Can't imagine any liberal would disagree with you there any more than I would.

It is kind of encouraging to see so many religious/conservative people on an atheist forum. It should be, uh, an eye-opening experience, if they keep an open mind. I'm always reminded (nerdily, I suppose) of Morpheus and his red and blue pills whenever such folks show an interest in atheism. Take the red pill, buy The God Delusion, see what the truth really is, how deep the rabbit hole goes...

(January 26, 2018 at 2:52 pm)GodisintheTV Wrote: It is kind of encouraging to see so many religious/conservative people on an atheist forum. It should be, uh, an eye-opening experience, if they keep an open mind. I'm always reminded (nerdily, I suppose) of Morpheus and his red and blue pills whenever such folks show an interest in atheism. Take the red pill, buy The God Delusion, see what the truth really is, how deep the rabbit hole goes...

Oof...don't do that.  Whenever atheists talk about themselves like they're 'enlightened' or 'woken up to reality' I always cringe a bit.  It's that sort of attitude that gets us the edgy fedora-behatted stereotypes.  Theists just believe stuff that I don't think is correct, and I like to know why or if they're in fact right.

And there are far better atheist books than the God Delusion.  Dawkins is a fantastic scientist, and his books on biology are great.  But he's not the best when it comes to philosophy or atheism or politics.  Suggesting people only read one book is creepily similar to how some theists act.

Quote: Yeah, and we need more Christians like Pat Robertson...I don't think so.

Neo-Scholastic: To compare Dawkins to Pat is an absurd false equivalency if I ever heard one! You can't be a fanatic about facts.

---

---

(January 26, 2018 at 2:36 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: The sweeping generalizations on this thread have gotten a little bit out of hand. At the same time, I do not doubt that personality and temperament differences dispose people towards different political leanings. Likewise, I don't doubt that biology is at least partially, if not largely, responsible the life and career choices made by men and women.

I tend to be skeptical of social science studies, in general. It's all in how you label things and the connotations they imply. "Self-control" could be restraint but it could also be up-tight. The same for all kinds of personality traits - stingy/frugal, passionate/belligerent, bravery/foolhardiness, visionary/unrealistic...

---

(January 26, 2018 at 2:20 pm)GodisintheTV Wrote: We need more atheists like Dawkins,...

Yeah, and we need more Christians like Pat Robertson...I don't think so.

(January 26, 2018 at 2:56 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:

(January 26, 2018 at 2:52 pm)GodisintheTV Wrote: It is kind of encouraging to see so many religious/conservative people on an atheist forum. It should be, uh, an eye-opening experience, if they keep an open mind. I'm always reminded (nerdily, I suppose) of Morpheus and his red and blue pills whenever such folks show an interest in atheism. Take the red pill, buy The God Delusion, see what the truth really is, how deep the rabbit hole goes...

Oof...don't do that.  Whenever atheists talk about themselves like they're 'enlightened' or 'woken up to reality' I always cringe a bit.  It's that sort of attitude that gets us the edgy fedora-behatted stereotypes.  Theists just believe stuff that I don't think is correct, and I like to know why or if they're in fact right.

And there are far better atheist books than the God Delusion.  Dawkins is a fantastic scientist, and his books on biology are great.  But he's not the best when it comes to philosophy or atheism or politics.  Suggesting people only read one book is creepily similar to how some theists act.

I'm a huge fan of his straight talk. Blatant falsities demand a blunt response.

(January 26, 2018 at 2:57 pm)GodisintheTV Wrote: I'm a huge fan of his straight talk. Blatant falsities demand a blunt response.

Straight talk is fine.  I'm saying there are other atheists who are more equipped than Dawkins to discuss topics like philosophy.  Have you read any books on the subject besides the God Delusion?