Tel Afar, primary school attacked

[ManifestedISO]

If I could go back into time, the deep time of the previous epoch, I would visit the exact moment superstition became more powerful than logic and beat some rationale into the offending hominid. 

 

Wait, maybe someone did that already, and that's how all theistic nonsense began. Clever, universe.       

[Hurlshort]

If I could go back into time, the deep time of the previous epoch, I would visit the exact moment superstition became more powerful than logic and beat some rationale into the offending hominid. 

 

Wait, maybe someone did that already, and that's how all theistic nonsense began. Clever, universe.       

 

Dismissing religion as superstition has always puzzled me.  It seems like an incredibly simplistic way to view human nature and spirituality. 

[thepixiesrock]

Not to mention how silly it is that your solution to what you perceive as irrational behavior is violence.

[ShadySands]

 

If I could go back into time, the deep time of the previous epoch, I would visit the exact moment superstition became more powerful than logic and beat some rationale into the offending hominid. 

 

Wait, maybe someone did that already, and that's how all theistic nonsense began. Clever, universe.       

 

Dismissing religion as superstition has always puzzled me.  It seems like an incredibly simplistic way to view human nature and spirituality. 

 

 

Simplistic maybe but not entirely inaccurate

[ManifestedISO]

A subjunctive pretense for an impossible situation ... I'm positive no one has ever had the sense literally beaten into them. The irony in violence and irrational belief was too much, perhaps.

 

Superstition is an apt, concise description. I stand by it with all the fervor my human nature allows.      

[Walsingham]

The modern obsession with dismissing spirituality is just as mystifying to me as the obsession of my Victorian grandfathers who wanted to dismiss sexuality.

 

At least the Victorians could point the finger of culpability directly at STDs.

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

 

If you're an adult of any description, and you're threatened by something a 15 year old kid says to the extent where you have to ambush and shoot them, then you really need to do a bit more growing up.

 

She is threathing the order of things in the region, which makes her a target, despite her age. Godspeed though.

 

 

The Taliban are the ones threatening the order of the region.  Her whole argument is that things have gone terrible since they entered her region a few years ago.

 

 

What Malcador said.

 

 

She's not threatening the order. She's threatening the disorder. You can't (well, you can, obviously) just abandon a small girl who has the guts to stand up.

 

Although it seems the Nobel committee can.

 

 

I do not think that you see my point. The order of things is that women are not encouraged to be in school and only be silent babymakers that are traded between families for power. That is the order she is challenging. 

 

Kinda like Rosa Parks back in the day.

[Meshugger]

Teenage girls with opinions threaten plenty of people here in North America, regardless of religion.

 

Are you seriously comparing the situation for teenage in girls in north america to afghanistan?  

[alanschu]

 

Teenage girls with opinions threaten plenty of people here in North America, regardless of religion.

 

Are you seriously comparing the situation for teenage in girls in north america to afghanistan?  

 

 

 

No, I was responding to this [silly] statement: "Al it takes for Islam to be threatened is a teenage girl with an opinion."

Edited October 12, 2013 by alanschu

[Meshugger]

 

 

Teenage girls with opinions threaten plenty of people here in North America, regardless of religion.

 

Are you seriously comparing the situation for teenage in girls in north america to afghanistan?  

 

 

 

No, I was responding to this [silly] statement: "Al it takes for Islam to be threatened is a teenage girl with an opinion."

 

 

Eventhough i find Islam to be one of the most spritiually repugnant religions out there, it is beside the point. My bad, carry on

[Walsingham]

Opportunity to step back:

 

Are you suggesting that all Muslims should be judged by the standards of one Muslim country? It's like saying that all Christians are Ugandan Christians. Or English Christians.

[Oerwinde]

Opportunity to step back:

 

Are you suggesting that all Muslims should be judged by the standards of one Muslim country? It's like saying that all Christians are Ugandan Christians. Or English Christians.

Ok, well lets look at other Muslim countries, we've already established Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Somalia, and the Arab muslim countries as giant crap holes of horrible people, what's left?

[Walsingham]

Have you ever actually met any Afghans? Somalis? Malaysians? Qataris?

 

Because I have, and right now you're sounding a lot like an ignorant ****ing racist.

[Tagaziel]

 

If I could go back into time, the deep time of the previous epoch, I would visit the exact moment superstition became more powerful than logic and beat some rationale into the offending hominid. 

 

Wait, maybe someone did that already, and that's how all theistic nonsense began. Clever, universe.

 

Dismissing religion as superstition has always puzzled me.  It seems like an incredibly simplistic way to view human nature and spirituality.

 

You'd have a point if there was the slightest bit of evidence that spirituality has some scientific basis.

[Hurlshort]

 

 

If I could go back into time, the deep time of the previous epoch, I would visit the exact moment superstition became more powerful than logic and beat some rationale into the offending hominid. 

 

Wait, maybe someone did that already, and that's how all theistic nonsense began. Clever, universe.

 

Dismissing religion as superstition has always puzzled me.  It seems like an incredibly simplistic way to view human nature and spirituality.

 

You'd have a point if there was the slightest bit of evidence that spirituality has some scientific basis.

 

 

Again, that sounds incredibly dismissive towards something that has existed for the entirety of human history.  Science and spirituality aren't two competing sports teams where you need to choose sides.  Both science and religion act as keys that a human can use to unlock very different types of doors.  You do not need to keep one door closed in order to open the other.    

 

The science of spirituality is also a very real thing.

 

And yes, I know I used two different analogies, but it is early and I like them both.  I also thought about using an analogy about different types of tools.  

[Tagaziel]

Again, that sounds incredibly dismissive towards something that has existed for the entirety of human history.  Science and spirituality aren't two competing sports teams where you need to choose sides.  Both science and religion act as keys that a human can use to unlock very different types of doors.  You do not need to keep one door closed in order to open the other.

 

The science of spirituality is also a very real thing.

 

And yes, I know I used two different analogies, but it is early and I like them both.  I also thought about using an analogy about different types of tools.  

Just the fact that a certain belief existed throughout human history doesn't mean it's true. You're committing the classic fallacy of appeal to tradition/age. For example, identifying the precise mechanism for proliferation of infectious disease invalidated centuries of beliefs about bad air, magic, and all other more or less wacky ideas about the mechanics of infection. Another example is most of alternative medicine, which is supposedly based on centuries of "natural wisdom" but does precisely squat when examined with a critical eye.

 

Furthermore, I'm not sure why you're presenting both spirituality and science as equal, but different types of keys for understanding the world. In what way does spirituality help you understand the world? Does it explain how the world functions? How it came to be? Does it meaningfully improve life, like vaccines or advanced medical procedures do? Has spirituality given us the ability to harness fire, plant, metal, atom?

 

It didn't. Spirituality is a fundamentally unfalsifiable thing that relies entirely on theories created without the slightest bit of scientific evidence to back them up. Comparing spirituality and science as equals when one has given us so much and the other precisely squat is like comparing a dull cutting utensil to a Swiss army knife. Except you can actually eat something with the former, so even that's not an accurate analogy.

[Hurlshort]

I'm not sure how more clearly I can say this:

 

Science and Spirituality do not need to be compared.  They are not in competition with one another.  The question of equality is moot.  This is a close-minded approach towards understanding.

 

I'm guessing you didn't read through the links I offered.

Edited October 12, 2013 by Hurlshot

[Guard Dog]

I'm coming to a point in life where I believe that organized religion and belief in and love for God are two entirely different things that are, at best, only tangentially related. 

[Tagaziel]

I did and I saw science being used to dissect spirituality. Nothing there proves that spirituality is anything more than a scientific phenomenon occurring as a result of our wiring as a species.

 

Furthermore, define precisely what is understanding. I can lean on physics to give me an understanding of how physics and, on a larger scale, matter works and interacts. I can use chemistry to understand the underlying principles of the world around me, biology to gain insight into the way living organisms work and interact, geography to know how the world works, astronomy to grasp the universe, and a myriad of other fundamentally scientific disciplines to refine my understanding of the world around me.

 

What, exactly, is close minded about rejecting avenues of thought that offer no insight or bear usable fruit at all? Especially when I have an actual intellectual discipline, philosophy, that provides the same kind of insight as religion, except without irremovable reliance on paranormal premises?

[Hurlshort]

What, exactly, is close minded about rejecting avenues of thought that offer no insight or bear usable fruit at all?

 

Ah, but that is the trap.  There are millions of people who can tell you that spirituality has given them insight and has been immensely useful to them.  

 

It is perfectly reasonable to say that you have examined the concepts of spirituality and found them to be unsuitable for you.  But when you dismiss them entirely, despite the weight of human history and the role it still plays in modern societies, it is close-minded.

 

As for understanding, you are perfectly correct that there are many disciplines to help us understand the world around us.  At no point should we stop pushing forward in our quest for understanding.  Maybe some day we will reach a state where we simply know everything about the world around us.  But we are not at that ascended stage yet, there are still more questions than there are answers.  We can't even reasonably define love!  We know it exists, we have a ton of evidence to back it up, we can even pinpoint the chemical reactions that occur in the brain.  But that really only scratches the surface of the raw power of love.   

[Tagaziel]

Again, what insight? This is dancing around the issue. What kind of insight does spirituality give that science cannot? What kind of definite answers can it provide that science cannot? The mere fact that there are uncountable religions around the word purporting to be the one true faith is a clue that none of these are actually answers, but hypotheses without a shred of evidence behind them.

 

You're consistently arguing for science as the superior. Critical examination of spirituality and human behaviour falls under the purview of sociology, psychology, and related sciences. Furthering the understanding of the world around us is likewise the domain of science, not spirituality.

[ManifestedISO]

Nothing there proves that spirituality is anything more than a scientific phenomenon occurring as a result of our wiring as a species.

 

Which explains our incalculable need to explain things, and why the need to believe in something unknowable feels so real. They are hard-wired into our heads very close to emotion and memory. Like deja vu ... an odd, yet real sensation that was finally isolated and demystified. 

 

But not lessened in impact. Demystifying things like strange or powerful feelings shouldn't take away from them as experiences. How crazy is it that we're alive in the first place, with super-fast mush inside a hard shell capable of processing audio/video input. That's where I think religion fails to account for unbiased spirituality--people say they have the answers, but they all want you to believe in their brand. Usually to pay for the 'privilege' (a la mormonism, where ten percent of your income will get you into a proprietary heaven). Living with one foot in the next life reduces the quality and mystery of our lives here, I think. 

[pmp10]

What, exactly, is close minded about rejecting avenues of thought that offer no insight or bear usable fruit at all? 

That's kinda the problem - you can easily argue that spirituality improves peoples lives.

For example meditation has been proven to have health-benefits even if it's not scientifically explained why.

[licketysplit]

 

If I could go back into time, the deep time of the previous epoch, I would visit the exact moment superstition became more powerful than logic and beat some rationale into the offending hominid. 

 

Wait, maybe someone did that already, and that's how all theistic nonsense began. Clever, universe.       

 

Dismissing religion as superstition has always puzzled me.  It seems like an incredibly simplistic way to view human nature and spirituality. 

 

 

It's all about separating our emotions from the facts, which isn't simple to do at all. Human spirituality in indeed complex but that says nothing about whether it is factual. 

 

@Alan. How is my statement silly? Al-Qaeda was threatened enough by an educated woman that they shot her. Their vehicle for discussion, their ideals, are rooted in Islam. Seeing how the majority of women in the Islamic world don't share the same freedom and respect that they do in western countries...well. 

Edited October 12, 2013 by licketysplit

[Hurlshort]

Malala's views and ideals are also rooted in Islam.