Matthew 7:7-8, “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.”
1 Like
They aren’t imaginary at all, even if you are a secular atheist. There’s nothing imaginary about deeply held beliefs that shape individual and group priorities, principles and actions.
Indeed, our society’s relationship with the friends you call imaginary form the basis of all Western Civilization. It is the main reason why theocracies still exist in other parts of the world, where Judeo-Christian thought has not prevailed.
Religion is as real as it gets as long as people believe in it.
5 Likes
I agree with all of this. I think we’re on the same page, just using different words.
2 Likes
It was on my mind today because of a podcast I was listening to on my commute, the latest episode of Dan Carlins Hardcore History. The subject was Viking history in the 10th century and Carlin points out that magic is very real.
If you believe that there are 9 worlds and that women can use magical abilities and elves exist, it is nearly irrelevant whether or not it can be proven scientifically.
The mistake secular atheists make is assuming that the people whose motivations are rooted in the supernatural don’t actually believe in it. That they want the same basic things that secular atheists want.
Whose beliefs are more rooted in fantasy in that scenario?
5 Likes
No problem, thank you for a willingness to find any value.
Maybe, but I tend toward agreeing with them usually
Here’s why
Reverse engineering your post and I hope you don’t mind
Not a great question. I can agree with the answer you seem to prefer, I might have great difficulty in proving it wrong, were I so inclined to try, I prefer to persuade you to ask better questions instead (with no disrespect intended)
I believe people would tend towards wanting it all if they believed that they could have it all
Is it an argument over the relative values of positive things?
(an argument over which positive things are more important?)
or an argument over what’s actually positive and what’s actually negative
or is it a not quite perfect agreement on which things are more positive/important than others?
Sure, they might not have made it that far yet to actually “afford” to want specifically the things you vaguely refer too - but don’t make the mistake of taking that as “would not prefer”, in my opinion
But that isn’t the point. It’s the consequences of the belief that is at issue.
3 Likes
And where do we arrive with this mindset? So called “my truth.”
None taken. It was a hot take post written in between meetings. The basic notion, which we all seem to agree on, is that there’s nothing imaginary about people’s deeply-held beliefs. These beliefs often inform individuals of what actions they ought to take in this world so they might be better prepared for the next.
That general belief, which we’re both discussing in rather vague terms, was the basis for much of the USA’s failed adventures in nation building during the late 20th, early 21st century. It turns out that the people of Afghanistan and Iraq didn’t want much of what we had to offer, materially or otherwise. I can understand why. That’s part of what informs my opinion that we ought to believe people when they tell us what their priorities are.
When it comes to matters such as war and the motivations people have for waging it in 2023, theology still lies at the heart of most conflicts. Even capitalism vs communism and similar ideological struggles. No amount of rhetorical gymnastics can place you too far from the theological basis from which societies have crafted their wildly varying policies. Even the atheist communists arrived at their policy positions in a society that allowed them to take shape, as opposed to chopping off their heads for heresy or something like that. Even when I was a firm atheist, I still understood that Christianity informed most of the aspects I value most about living in a secular, western society.
I’ve never lived in an Islamic society, but I don’t think it is a stretch to opine that Islam similarly informs the people who practice it of their policy priorities.
That’s how Hamas wins elections.
Edit: I would like to clarify. I’m not saying that electing Hamas is an inevitable outgrowth of implementing Islamic policy priorities, but rather that Islamic priorities seem to have resulted in the election of Hamas to govern Gaza.
And yes, I’m being deliberately vague again.
2 Likes
Here’s a “primer” on why the US isn’t backing Israel just because of 'da joos.
1 Like
Yup, I agree with that.
I didn’t believe that was the basis and after some reconsideration I still don’t, but what you say makes sense at least
I don’t think the people of Afghanistan or Iraq have told what their priorities are, but you are of course entitled to your interpretations
I would agree if it were said a little differently:
It turns out that the people of Afghanistan and Iraq didn’t much want much of what we had to offer, materially or otherwise.
(didn’t want it badly enough)
I might want 10 million dollars but not want it badly enough to go get it
I might want 10 billion dollars but not want it badly enough to go get it
Factually speaking they didn’t want it badly enough to take it or keep it - I don’t know how hard it would have been or how much effort was spent in trying
Subtle, nitpicky, but also maybe worth considering
Then you seem to be alluding to the supposed charter of Hamas. I do doubt the accuracy of that information, but October 7th makes it not worth arguing anyways
Have you gone Christian? I didn’t know.
What do you mean by this? Christianity informed most of the aspects that you valued? I don’t get what that means
I get that Christianity functions as a part of the foundation for the society, but you seem to be saying something else
yeah I tended towards disagreeing with the last two paragraphs, naturally, but figured I should try for more clarity on the one that seems more foundational, which was the third last paragraph pre-edit
In thinking it over some, I can see something about “never surrender” being related in a way - but that is more for a particular battle than waging losing forever wars I think, and closer to an (mis)interpreted ideal than a commandment from God anyways
Then there is also the obvious possibility that someone barks “antisemitism”. While Islam functions as a preventative to acts of injustice against Jews, or anyone, there are some teachings that I suppose would function as a reason to dig one’s heels in during a dispute, and be slower to let bygones be bygones than if it were another group
So antisemitism doesn’t make sense to me as a driving force from an Islamic perspective, I can see some mechanisms where it could work on a Muslims mind in decisions.
That’s all I came up with on first pass. There could be an elephant in the room to me that I’m just not noticing right now.
Part of the hadith tells me to make 70 excuses for my brother, so here goes something inshaAllah
I think the two main mechanisms are
-
Something between offense and defense. They think they’ve been wronged, stolen from. I tend to agree. They want it back. Morally, they would have had the right if they could have gotten it in the first generation. They didn’t have the military power. As time slips, so does the moral right as it slowly continues becoming “retaking” from the children of thieves rather than thieves. So it’s something between offense and defense to me while most conservative Americans would tend to see it as purely offense. And as time has gone on, so has the difference in military power, which I would think would tend to make this a less significant mechanism
-
Defense. I would tend to think that part of the reason for voting for Hamas had something to do with an expectation of better defense against Israel than Hamas’ opposition.
Deliberately vague is way underrated
I’m no longer atheist. Lapsed Catholic would be accurate. What I mean by this is that most of our laws, especially our charter documents, are all a direct outgrowth of Christian teachings. We don’t have to speculate about this when the people who created them told us.
Otherwise I’ll compliment you on being reasonable to discuss these issues with. Good post.
1 Like
This is up for debate and hardly as cut and dry as you claim.
1 Like
I think most ideas and things in those charter documents may have come from Christian foundations, but Christianity took them from somewhere else as they existed long before Christianity.
I have a massive gap in knowledge on this stuff. Does anyone know a decent “summary” type video? I know these things are quite complex but I’d like to learn as much as I can quite quickly.
As is the case with many concepts. You can trace plenty back to Rome and Greece.
Which society founded by non Judeo-Christians comes to mind as having similar values today in 2023?
Japan is the only one that comes to my mind, but modern Japans social transformation took place through Christian influence as well. Feudal Japan and Imperial Japan had very different values before being defeated and occupied by the west.
Hinduism came to mind, but I am no expert there.
I am no expert when it comes to most religions. I know enough about a few for conversation and I was raised Southern Baptist, which is an entirely different conversation.
That’s no coincidence. However you want to parse it, Judeo-Christian teachings and values created the conditions that allowed modern, secular societies to take shape.
That’s both through religious doctrine, like The 10 Commandments, or through tolerance for liberal thought.
That’s a facile way of looking at things. Western society/culture/civilization was founded by non Judeo Christians.
We can go further down this rabbit hole and see the influence that Aristotle and Plato had on Christian thought.
I would argue modern society is taking shape via abandoning those teachings.
3 Likes