I'm at a loss for words.
- Thread starter Joe DeFuria
- Start date
I read this earlier today. Unbelievably sad. I couldn't imagine being the father, who came so close to catching her in the act and being able to stop what she was doing.
The sad fact is, if this had been done by someone who played Doom or Counter-Strike, the Christians would be screaming for the bloody heads of the gaming industry and a ban on such games. But no one ever suggests religion be banned when it converts people into wackos who kill their kids. Remember, this is the second time this has happened. There was another woman who drown like 5 kids. Again, home schooled and religiously adherent.
Granted, both these woman are mentally ill. But so were the columbine shooters. To blame Doom or the Matrix is sad.
Granted, both these woman are mentally ill. But so were the columbine shooters. To blame Doom or the Matrix is sad.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Since when is people screaming their heads off about "violence" in games or entertainment limited to Christians?
I'm one Christian who plays UT quite frequently.
Whenever something like this happens, people (lawyers in particular) are looking to blame anyone but the guilty party. And incidentally, in the drowning case, the "blame" was put on so called "post-partum depression," nothing to do with religion.
John...I thought the same thing.
I'm one Christian who plays UT quite frequently.
Whenever something like this happens, people (lawyers in particular) are looking to blame anyone but the guilty party. And incidentally, in the drowning case, the "blame" was put on so called "post-partum depression," nothing to do with religion.
John...I thought the same thing.
I agree with Joe, I think your triggerfinger twitched just a bit too soon on the anti-Christianity rant DC. What you'll find behind all these cases are mental illnesses which stem from any number of interrelated or independant systemic imbalances in the information integration and processing resources of the individual. Any number of iternative stimuli can induce - over time - such a self-reinforcing belief that results in this, horrible, outcome.
I, personally, have read and seen firsthand the effects conscious, iternative and ritualistic experiences have on the structure and resultant "solutions" an individual sees to a situation wrt OCD patient. There is ample PET and fMRI evidence to show that this is occuring due to the intrinsic neuroplasticity one has; and this only reinforces the theoretical arguments.
So, yes, while religion does catagorically fall into this type of experience, the norm effect is extremely rarely of this type. It's my belief that one can make an extremly strong case that religion and our inherient belief system that "drops out" of the world's religions have had a strong positive effect on societal tendencies and the success our civilization has seen. If you want, I once talked about this parallel between the evolution of the Testiment's of the Christian bible and the societal conditions of the time - I can try and find the speech when I get home. (But I think you've either thought about it or can deduce it pretty quickly)
Contrast this to your average FPS game in which there is strait-up and consistent reinforcement wrt killing and a desensitizing of death. It's no wonder that anyone who wished to look at this objectively will seriously question the effect such gaming can have on a person, who unlike many OCD self-recoverers (is that a word?!?), don't have the mental ability to differentiate their inner, subconscious OC tendencies and how they relate to the greater community around them. Perhaps it's an evolutionary relic - a fuck-up which found it's way back into today's humans, perhaps a hormonal imbalance, neurological disease or pathogen based - I don't know, but the situation is obvious and the questioning justified.
I, personally, have read and seen firsthand the effects conscious, iternative and ritualistic experiences have on the structure and resultant "solutions" an individual sees to a situation wrt OCD patient. There is ample PET and fMRI evidence to show that this is occuring due to the intrinsic neuroplasticity one has; and this only reinforces the theoretical arguments.
So, yes, while religion does catagorically fall into this type of experience, the norm effect is extremely rarely of this type. It's my belief that one can make an extremly strong case that religion and our inherient belief system that "drops out" of the world's religions have had a strong positive effect on societal tendencies and the success our civilization has seen. If you want, I once talked about this parallel between the evolution of the Testiment's of the Christian bible and the societal conditions of the time - I can try and find the speech when I get home. (But I think you've either thought about it or can deduce it pretty quickly)
Contrast this to your average FPS game in which there is strait-up and consistent reinforcement wrt killing and a desensitizing of death. It's no wonder that anyone who wished to look at this objectively will seriously question the effect such gaming can have on a person, who unlike many OCD self-recoverers (is that a word?!?), don't have the mental ability to differentiate their inner, subconscious OC tendencies and how they relate to the greater community around them. Perhaps it's an evolutionary relic - a fuck-up which found it's way back into today's humans, perhaps a hormonal imbalance, neurological disease or pathogen based - I don't know, but the situation is obvious and the questioning justified.
Vince said:
It's my belief that one can make an extremely strong case that religion and the belief system that comes from it has had a hugely negative effect on societal tendencies.
On another subject:
how that is a defense is beyond me.
I dont give two shits if she followed what she thought "god's will" to be.
And speaking of desensitizing violence, you dont think all the bloodshed in the lords name that happens in the bible does that?
Wiping out entire cities because they "sin"?
Get fucking real.
Althornin said:
What history supports that? What analogous civilization without such beliefs have survived and prospered? Charles Van Doren's book comes to mind as it paints a short story of the history of knowledge and civilization and shows the parallel religious influences. I'll be interested to see what civilizations or groups that suceeded were totally godless, I can't think of any offhand.
First off, there are different tones and morals in the Testiments of the bible, which I even stated earlier. Perhaps you should get "fucking" educated and do some reading on the many theories behind the neural evolution of humans and the role a "God" figure could play in developmental strategies and early, advancing, societal entities. The point is we don't know the early evolution of the brain and when your independant "consciousness" emerged, you don't know what role a "God" figure plays in this process and exactly what trends, be them societal, biological, or both, underlie many of the differences between very early human beliefs and subsequent times. Your stance is insignificant and I'm not sure why I'm replying.
Yet, what I do know is that structured religion and a belief system has been with humans as far back as we can tell. I know that the belief/fear/desire of an all powerful God (manifested in any form) is quite a motivating force for a population historically. I also see that structure, self responcibility and obedience have been provided under the aegis of "religion" and a "God," contained in a message which has evolved with society and human's development and level of relative knowledge and cognative abilities. This holds true from the early "Eye for an Eye, Gay people die" thinking upto the more contemporary "Turn the other cheek" strategy. I wonder why and if there's an underlying reason. I try to see how this works into what we know, today, about analogous events like OCD and the human mind, I see a possible case. I briefly outlined this earlier and anyone can expand upon what I said quite easily. Others do as well, it's hardly like my thinking is unique or new in academic circles. You only bash religion and further extend the line of ignorant, superficial, emotionally charged, anti-status quo thinking which is so popular today. Mr. Reynolds does the same thing, and it irks me.
The Arab world has been held back by religion, so clearly, not all religion is good for empires or civilizations.
Yes, in the past, some "religious" codes of behavior (really, existing behavior which evolved and then got codified into religious values) was beneficial to some cultures. For example, monogamy decreases the likelihood of STD and increases chances for your offspring to survive.
But the fact that human beings have a neurological tendency to experience "God" (clearly explained by modern neuroscience, right down to experiments that can simulate it for anyone) does not mean that we should be bound to this behavior. Nor does the requirement for *law and order* mean that we must submit to religious or mythological sources of authority. Our children can be raised on myth as Joseph Campbell has said, but they can also be "weaned" from it when they pass through adult hood. We tell our children lots of stories as kids: Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy. But they do not persist as behavior governing philosophies after adult hood. Why do we need to keep the big bad vengement god around who's going to burn you in Hell?
Humans also have a tendency towards tribalism, and there are many historical behaviors that may have served us in the ancient world, but do not fit into modern society today.
The Chinese have gone through 2 generations of enforced atheism and not suffered for it. They thrived on religions that are relatively agnostic (Taoism, Confuscism, Buddhism), do not have all powerful dieties. China had a huge secular civil service and bureaucracy when Christians in Europe were running around in furs and painting themselves blue. The emperor was about as close as you got to an all-powerful entity, but the emperor's power derived from army and elite, and he and the ruling elite were not beyond criticism (especially from Zen)
I think we've outgrown religion. A highly educated society doesn't need it to distinguish right from wrong.
BTW, I have a structured belief system. It doesn't require a deity. It consists of the golden rule (derivable from Game Theory), a respect for my place in the world and the fact that I need other people, and a general distaste for causing or seing pain in others (the latter of which turns out to be the largest reason why most people aren't violent) I don't commit evil acts because God will punish me (don't believe in the slightest, I'm a radical materialist, if you want to label my beliefs) I don't commit them because I don't like doing it, and I don't like the secular legal repercussions.
Perhaps this is too complicated for children, and they need simple "good" and "bad" rules. But they can get these rules by observing their parents behavior when young, or taught in school. Isn't secular punishment enough by parents or community leaders? Do children even understand what it means to burn in hell for eternity? Teenagers certainly show a very short term view of the future, and don't understand the repercussions of actions they take at a young age.
At the very least, if we were to discover that children need mythlogical stories when young to be taught codes of behavior, we can secularly devise such stories and synthesize them. They've gotta be better than a religion with 678 counts of violence: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html
Yes, in the past, some "religious" codes of behavior (really, existing behavior which evolved and then got codified into religious values) was beneficial to some cultures. For example, monogamy decreases the likelihood of STD and increases chances for your offspring to survive.
But the fact that human beings have a neurological tendency to experience "God" (clearly explained by modern neuroscience, right down to experiments that can simulate it for anyone) does not mean that we should be bound to this behavior. Nor does the requirement for *law and order* mean that we must submit to religious or mythological sources of authority. Our children can be raised on myth as Joseph Campbell has said, but they can also be "weaned" from it when they pass through adult hood. We tell our children lots of stories as kids: Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy. But they do not persist as behavior governing philosophies after adult hood. Why do we need to keep the big bad vengement god around who's going to burn you in Hell?
Humans also have a tendency towards tribalism, and there are many historical behaviors that may have served us in the ancient world, but do not fit into modern society today.
The Chinese have gone through 2 generations of enforced atheism and not suffered for it. They thrived on religions that are relatively agnostic (Taoism, Confuscism, Buddhism), do not have all powerful dieties. China had a huge secular civil service and bureaucracy when Christians in Europe were running around in furs and painting themselves blue. The emperor was about as close as you got to an all-powerful entity, but the emperor's power derived from army and elite, and he and the ruling elite were not beyond criticism (especially from Zen)
I think we've outgrown religion. A highly educated society doesn't need it to distinguish right from wrong.
BTW, I have a structured belief system. It doesn't require a deity. It consists of the golden rule (derivable from Game Theory), a respect for my place in the world and the fact that I need other people, and a general distaste for causing or seing pain in others (the latter of which turns out to be the largest reason why most people aren't violent) I don't commit evil acts because God will punish me (don't believe in the slightest, I'm a radical materialist, if you want to label my beliefs) I don't commit them because I don't like doing it, and I don't like the secular legal repercussions.
Perhaps this is too complicated for children, and they need simple "good" and "bad" rules. But they can get these rules by observing their parents behavior when young, or taught in school. Isn't secular punishment enough by parents or community leaders? Do children even understand what it means to burn in hell for eternity? Teenagers certainly show a very short term view of the future, and don't understand the repercussions of actions they take at a young age.
At the very least, if we were to discover that children need mythlogical stories when young to be taught codes of behavior, we can secularly devise such stories and synthesize them. They've gotta be better than a religion with 678 counts of violence: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html
Being that religion is almost universal in influencing societies in the past its very hard to draw objective comparison outside the modern era as to whether they are worse or better than societies created without or with less such influence.
The genocides associated with atheistic communism however can arguably be based on other influences. Nothing says a religious Russia ruled by as ruthless but religious Stalin wouldnt have been as genocidal. What with the changes it underwent after the revolution. Or China's pre communist revolution genocides where religion was still present (the bloody 19th century). Or Napoleon's butchery (tho some say he was atheistic in outlook religion in fact was widespread in France and the empire of the time but he did try to reduce the influence).
Hitlers Germany certainly wasnt areligious. But long term influences where societies have time to live under secular regimes may prove them to be as viable as religiously influenced regimes in the past. We could pick up the argument in a few hundred years hhe...
At least in terms of genocide and mass crimes I think things are not much diff with or without religion.
The argument about being held back by religion is also not easily generalized. The arab world was a center of learning for nearly a millenium under islam. The renaissance owes a lot to them.
I think we need a lot more human history to draw conclusions about religion being more good or more bad on humanity in general. It can certainly be both.
The genocides associated with atheistic communism however can arguably be based on other influences. Nothing says a religious Russia ruled by as ruthless but religious Stalin wouldnt have been as genocidal. What with the changes it underwent after the revolution. Or China's pre communist revolution genocides where religion was still present (the bloody 19th century). Or Napoleon's butchery (tho some say he was atheistic in outlook religion in fact was widespread in France and the empire of the time but he did try to reduce the influence).
Hitlers Germany certainly wasnt areligious. But long term influences where societies have time to live under secular regimes may prove them to be as viable as religiously influenced regimes in the past. We could pick up the argument in a few hundred years hhe...
At least in terms of genocide and mass crimes I think things are not much diff with or without religion.
The argument about being held back by religion is also not easily generalized. The arab world was a center of learning for nearly a millenium under islam. The renaissance owes a lot to them.
I think we need a lot more human history to draw conclusions about religion being more good or more bad on humanity in general. It can certainly be both.
DemoCoder said:
Overall I think we agree (not much to disagree on) and I was really impressed by your "PS" comment which was very well articulated. My beliefs are very, very similar, yet I still yeild to organized religion because I do believe that it still has continued utility in todays world. In my eyes we're at this odd crossroad in our development: between those who comprehend this situation yet retain morals (the number of which are very few); those who are somewhere below the first group in grasping the situation and instead turn to bashing these organizing/guiding dynamics such as religion as this horrible, alien entity which is the devil, without seeing the role it plays (large 1st world group and growing); and finally those who are at a level in which structure religion plays a solid structural role in (large 3rd world population).
I do believe we shall outgrow religion as you stated, it's no longer a sheerly evolutionary barrier but one of education. It has served us well, yet I do question if education is enough to get us to the (IMHO) next stable level of societal interaction which is the first group I talked of earlier. I do fear that we'll reach a point (that I see hints of in secular Europe and the US) where religion and patriotism (an analogue to tribalism) are largely gone without anything to replace them. Have we reached a stage where the general populace understands that they have a moral duty, an obligation? I don't think so, not in this world. Not yet.
Religion can be an effective vehicle for rehabilitation when the individual being rehabilitated aren't receptive to other methods. As long as these types of people exist, there will always be a place for religion or any type of belief system based on real or imaginary ideas. I don't think the human race will ever outgrow religion..due to education. There will always be educated people that just don't operate with a full deck of cards. Wasn't Hitler fairly educated? Of course he also had a belief system too...
Depending by what we mean by religion if you extend this to mean any form of spiritual belief I seriously doubt religion will ever stop existing. Its as easily conceivable that education will simply change religion freeing it from its superstitious coats of paint and rituals and simply reveal the simple moral and theological underpinings that exist under them.
About 50% of Canadians declare themselves non denominational but 'religious' or 'spiritual'. As long as we are faced with such absolutes as mortality and fragility of our lives there wont stop being questioning about life's meaning.
I dont see how better education can overcome this.
But if you mean the old rituals and traditions there is a lot of that that will go the way of the dodo. They may have had a purpose in helping to preserve knowledge and ideas at one time but are pretty much only cultural in value to me now.
About 50% of Canadians declare themselves non denominational but 'religious' or 'spiritual'. As long as we are faced with such absolutes as mortality and fragility of our lives there wont stop being questioning about life's meaning.
I dont see how better education can overcome this.
But if you mean the old rituals and traditions there is a lot of that that will go the way of the dodo. They may have had a purpose in helping to preserve knowledge and ideas at one time but are pretty much only cultural in value to me now.
Ignoring the saddest part, which is the fact that even this thread has become religious-fighting ground yet again =YAWN=, this story is so sad.
And the details alone are just horrible, how she got them to put their heads on a big rock and then crushed their heads with another rock... Unbelievable, insane, and thinking this woman most certainly LOVED her children is the saddest part, i'm not saying SHE is the victim ultimately, but if she really didn't know what the hell she was doing, how is she going to live her life, should she get back into a normal state of mind? I kinda hope she never will. Although i don't know the dynamics of mental health and i'm not sure someone can "pull through" certain things...
And the details alone are just horrible, how she got them to put their heads on a big rock and then crushed their heads with another rock... Unbelievable, insane, and thinking this woman most certainly LOVED her children is the saddest part, i'm not saying SHE is the victim ultimately, but if she really didn't know what the hell she was doing, how is she going to live her life, should she get back into a normal state of mind? I kinda hope she never will. Although i don't know the dynamics of mental health and i'm not sure someone can "pull through" certain things...
pax said:
Well, quick example before bed would be concerning God's influence in out lives. I doubt someone like Democoder (correct me if I'm wrong) believes in God's will guiding him to an inevitable ends in asfar as there is a God as described in the bible pulling the proverbial strings.
I'm sure there was a time when a farmer would look to the dark night sky and ask "God" why it has yet to rain, for what has he done to deserve this. Nowadays the farmer is asking where the butterfly is and how can he kill it.
There was allways that deep human tendency to ponder what's over the next hill, obscured in the dark and mysterious world around him. Knowledge and education has just moved that hill far, far away... to a point that's so far away many think they know it all and can do away with that whole "fucking" God once and for all. Give a kid an inch and he'll take a mile - without thinking of the responcibility that goes with it.
What I hope they see, but fear they don't, is that "God" - real or not - manifested himself in a very real ways in our civilization. Ok, now off to bed, later.
PS. Whose arguing Londonboy? If anything I'd say this is an interesting thread.
Vince said:
Very interesting... Not the point tho...
Do you have any scientific evidence to back that up?DemoCoder said:
I would say on the contrary, offspring has a better chance of survival on a large tribe or flock, like for example wolves and lot of indians/"primitive" people live in.
There is AFAIK nothing that indicates the humans are inherently monogamous.
As I see it, the west has already begun to phase out religion somewhat, and instead use more ideological beliefs like democracy and individual freedom and all that instead of religion. With the mindset we have today I don't really see it as odd at all that we're starting to move away from religion, since we want to think that we're in charge of our own lives and that the individual is what's important. We no longer need someone high above to believe in, but rather want to believe in ourselves. Although I want to agree with DemoCoder, I don't think most people are ready to give up religion, and I don't really see us leaving it entirely any time soon. But I guess I'm pretty biased too since in Sweden the number of active church-visitors tend to be around or below one per cent, and if our prime minister would pull anything like 'God bless Sweden!!' he'd most likely get stomped by the media heh.
Squeak said:
I'd agree with your last statement but its undeniable that we have a far greater tendacy towards it that other animals. If you consider how long our childhood is it makes a lot of sense too. Humans require at least 12 to 13 years until they can begin to fend for themselves, and a lot longer to do it properly.. our nautral lives without medicine stands at about 30 years. Thats nearly half our life needing parental help... you improve sucess of that child by having a father that can hunt/gather and a mother that can nurture.
Squeak, a large tribe or flock is generally called an extended family.
If you want evidence and theory, search for "evolutionary psychology", "evolutionary stable strategy", and "sociobiology" on google in combination with monogamy, or your favorite cultural ethic.
With respect to STDs, promiscuity increases your chances of getting one. Cultures and tribes with monogamous relationships would be more likely to survive longer and healthier, and therefore, growth larger in population, making it more likely that their memes would become dominant.
As for evidence of this, look to Africa today. Any subgroup of people practicing monogamy or abstinence will have a much higher survival rate than others.
If you want evidence and theory, search for "evolutionary psychology", "evolutionary stable strategy", and "sociobiology" on google in combination with monogamy, or your favorite cultural ethic.
With respect to STDs, promiscuity increases your chances of getting one. Cultures and tribes with monogamous relationships would be more likely to survive longer and healthier, and therefore, growth larger in population, making it more likely that their memes would become dominant.
As for evidence of this, look to Africa today. Any subgroup of people practicing monogamy or abstinence will have a much higher survival rate than others.
Similar threads
