Posts: 4807
Threads: 291
Joined: October 29, 2008
Reputation:
35
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 5:35 pm
(January 31, 2009 at 5:31 pm)bozo Wrote: (January 31, 2009 at 5:20 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: The argument you make here is exactly the reason fundamentalists rationalize killing people who do not share the same ideology as they do.
You may think that but I don't in the circumstances of revolutions.
okay, then you need to explain this to me. How is this different?
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Posts: 1446
Threads: 77
Joined: October 1, 2008
Reputation:
11
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 5:41 pm
(January 31, 2009 at 5:35 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: (January 31, 2009 at 5:31 pm)bozo Wrote: (January 31, 2009 at 5:20 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: The argument you make here is exactly the reason fundamentalists rationalize killing people who do not share the same ideology as they do.
You may think that but I don't in the circumstances of revolutions.
okay, then you need to explain this to me. How is this different?
No religious stimulus.Revolutions are about changing society for the better.
 A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
Posts: 4807
Threads: 291
Joined: October 29, 2008
Reputation:
35
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 5:44 pm
(This post was last modified: January 31, 2009 at 5:44 pm by leo-rcc.)
It's both an ideology, both are trying to change society in their favor by means of force. Just because one does not have religious background is not sufficient to rule it as "different". For the better is a subjective term anyway.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Posts: 1446
Threads: 77
Joined: October 1, 2008
Reputation:
11
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 5:54 pm
(January 31, 2009 at 5:44 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: It's both an ideology, both are trying to change society in their favor by means of force. Just because one does not have religious background is not sufficient to rule it as "different". For the better is a subjective term anyway.
I'm not in favour of changing society on the basis of religious faith, they're all crap. Whereas attempts to create a better society through revolution ( where the regime to be overthrown was seriously evil ) is ok by me.
A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
Posts: 4807
Threads: 291
Joined: October 29, 2008
Reputation:
35
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 6:07 pm
(January 31, 2009 at 5:54 pm)bozo Wrote: (January 31, 2009 at 5:44 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: It's both an ideology, both are trying to change society in their favor by means of force. Just because one does not have religious background is not sufficient to rule it as "different". For the better is a subjective term anyway.
I'm not in favour of changing society on the basis of religious faith, they're all crap. Whereas attempts to create a better society through revolution ( where the regime to be overthrown was seriously evil ) is ok by me.
I don't think anyone here on this forum except maybe psalm23 and that other guy that disagree that religion is crap. However these fundamentalists are no less sincere of their perception that they are changing society for the better than the revolutionists.
And again, evil regime is an subjective term. Sure the monarchy in France really had its head up its ass and can be accused of ignorance and stupidity, but evil is yet to be proven.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Posts: 1446
Threads: 77
Joined: October 1, 2008
Reputation:
11
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 6:23 pm
(January 31, 2009 at 6:07 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: (January 31, 2009 at 5:54 pm)bozo Wrote: (January 31, 2009 at 5:44 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: It's both an ideology, both are trying to change society in their favor by means of force. Just because one does not have religious background is not sufficient to rule it as "different". For the better is a subjective term anyway.
I'm not in favour of changing society on the basis of religious faith, they're all crap. Whereas attempts to create a better society through revolution ( where the regime to be overthrown was seriously evil ) is ok by me.
I don't think anyone here on this forum except maybe psalm23 and that other guy that disagree that religion is crap. However these fundamentalists are no less sincere of their perception that they are changing society for the better than the revolutionists.
And again, evil regime is an subjective term. Sure the monarchy in France really had its head up its ass and can be accused of ignorance and stupidity, but evil is yet to be proven.
The revolution wasn't primarily about the monarchy. Indeed, the royal family was only despatched after much debate. It was the " ancien regime " that was considered evil and needing to be overthrown.
A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
Posts: 4807
Threads: 291
Joined: October 29, 2008
Reputation:
35
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 6:28 pm
okay, but that was not the main point I was making. And it was evil in the eye of the revolutionaries, just like the infidels are evil in the eyes of the fundamentalists. Where is the real distinction according to you, and coming back to the end an means, how does one rationalize that it is worth killing thousands of people over?
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Posts: 1446
Threads: 77
Joined: October 1, 2008
Reputation:
11
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 6:31 pm
(January 31, 2009 at 6:28 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: okay, but that was not the main point I was making. And it was evil in the eye of the revolutionaries, just like the infidels are evil in the eyes of the fundamentalists. Where is the real distinction according to you, and coming back to the end an means, how does one rationalize that it is worth killing thousands of people over?
Well, as atheists, wouldn't we all say it was wrong to kill thousands, millions, trillions, zillions in the name of religion?
It's different with politics.
A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
Posts: 4807
Threads: 291
Joined: October 29, 2008
Reputation:
35
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Is it different with politics? When did we arrive to that conclusion?
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Posts: 1446
Threads: 77
Joined: October 1, 2008
Reputation:
11
RE: End and the Means
January 31, 2009 at 7:48 pm
(January 31, 2009 at 6:38 pm)leo-rcc Wrote: Is it different with politics? When did we arrive to that conclusion?
It's dealing with reality not superstition, don't you agree?
Sorry for the delay, been watching football.
A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
|
