/lit/ - Literature

>>5230094
ok if you think genes explain everything in the world.

>>5230094
well-written and well-reasoned.

reading one of the preeminent scientists of our troubled times smashing religion and the mindlessness that goes with it is fascinating.

religious tough guys will of course deny its brilliance, but whatever. their loss.

>>5230112
hes a pop scientist, nothing more

*tips towel*

>>5230171
and you're religious, i assume?

>>5230182
No, I'm a biologist.

Look, I get that he mattered say, thirty or forty years ago, but he's irrelevant now.

Dawkins is a twat.

>>5230190
you ever read his twitter? the guy is battling ignoramuses daily. he's still fighting the good fight.

who do you prefer then? lawrence krauss? sam harris? dennett?

>>5230094
Read it from the school library when I went through my euphoric phase many years ago, many tippings were had.

Then I stopped caring when people had different opinions to me.

I read the introduction to blind watchmaker and found him fucking insufferable so I did not read anything else by him

>>5230203
Hitchens.

>>5230193
He said idiotically.

>I don't like him as a person so he is wrong
>this thread

>>5230203
>you ever read his twitter?
No, and I don't read Us Weekly either.
>who do you prefer then?
I prefer people who aren't pop-scientists.

>>5230207
well he's dead. being smothered by dirt as we speak.

>>5230204
Believing in impossible campfire stories of yore that absolutely did not happen is not an "opinion" and it needs to stop being seen as such. It's stupidity and a break with reality, not "I like peanut-butter".

>>5230210
>so he is wrong
can you quote someone drawing this conclusion in this thread pls

>>5230211
>I tool bio 101 and habeeb in muh jebus ;_;

No one cares.

>>5230219
I'm sorry, but I really do have to...

I don't believe myself, but you obnoxious atheists are just as fucking bad, if not worse, than the religious people who constantly preach their shit.

>>5230223
Just wait.

>>5230204
>Then I stopped caring when people had different opinions to me.

The rise of the so-called New Atheism is a direct response to people in positions of power using their--erm...faith guide their way toward bad decisions. Yeah, someone else believes in the tooth fairy--who gives a shit. I agree.

But, when that person who believes in the tooth fairy is fabricating public policy based upon his/her belief in the tooth fairy, then it is a problem.

>>5230094
I don't really care about the book by Richard Dawkins?

I don't like him as a person so he is wrong.

>>5230239
Probably true, but fortunately I don't live in 'mericah, so it's not a huge problem. I only just had an unmarried atheist female as Prime Minister, so...

>>5230244

>>5230219
Has science come up with any evidence that a divine entity is impossible?

>>5230211
why would you drag us weekly into this?

>>5230232
Shut up. It's not an opinion and it's not "harmless". There is absolutely no reason to be tolerant of complete morons who believe in iron age fables about reality. You petulant shitposting retards don't even make sense.
>Hurrr fucking durr you pointing out the obvious is ACTUALLY WORSE than people who believe in magical zombie wizards, dimensions of BDSM and vote accordingly

You're just parroting le ebic mems and falling for the modern brainwash trap of thinking every single retarded, nonsensical belief that any dumb faggot wants to espous is "just as valid as anything else" which falls apart pretty quickly outside of the classroom.

>>5230251
...burden of proof....

...proving a negative.....

...blah blah...

0/10

>>5230251
Has science come up with any evidence that a tooth fairy is impossible?


You are a fucking shit.

>>5230225
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to imply with your ironically garbled text, but I have a degree in biology with a focus on evolutionary anthropology. My problem with pop-sci writers is that they reduce complex issues into easy to digest tidbits and thus produce idiots who think, for example, that quantum physics proves Buddhism or some shit.

So, no I don't like Dawkins or Harris or any of those guys. They can all suck a dick.
>but they stimulate interest in science!
Great if you have high schoolers reading the books. The problem is when adults read them and think they now have a handle on biology or neuroscience. Their misinterpretation of half-grasped watered down ideas, if anything, makes them dumber.

>>5230251
Science has shown that the birth and death of jesus christ is impossible. Can you prove that you aren't a cock-chugging faggot? Didn't think so.

>>5230257

>>5230276
It was a miracle.

>>5230232
>you obnoxious atheists are just as fucking bad, if not worse, than the religious people who constantly preach their shit.

oh look, more cliches and received thinking

>atheists who hurt my fee-fees are worse than the theocrats who impose their tyranny on others. i'd rather get stabbed for drawing a picture of muhammed (peace be upon him) than hear another atheist say words and stuff.

>>5230261
That's exactly it, there's no definitive proof either way, so there's no sense in saying higher powers are impossible unless there is very strong evidence that it was fabricated by an individual.

>>5230094

Perfectly respectable popular apologetics, often unfairly held to a philosophical standard it clearly doesn't aspire to.

That said, it's the last book by Dawkins I actually enjoyed and I haven't been tempted to re-read it as I have TSG, TEP or TBW, for example. Even Unweaving The Rainbow. And everything after TGD has been coloured by its success - he spends way too much time going into these belaboured asides about stoopid Kris-jinz and so on. Arguably harmful to the cause of educating the masses about evolutionary theory, which was always his bag before.

>>5230269
I don't know about the tooth fairy, but science has proven that Santa isn't real, unless of course he is able to warp time and space. But if he can do that, you might as well call him god.

>>5230249
>mericah

what is the middle-east

>>5230286
>either way

There is such a thing as evidence. Or lack of evidence. Or probability.

I believe that an invisible compacted basketball rules the universe. It's not impossible. To say otherwise would be stupid.

>>5230285
>oh look, more cliches and received thinking
Just an opinion actually

>atheists who hurt my fee-fees are worse than the theocrats who impose their tyranny on others. i'd rather get stabbed for drawing a picture of muhammed (peace be upon him) than hear another atheist say words and stuff.

I'd rather you both fuck off actually, ideologues of all kinds annoy me.

>>5230293
>it happens elsewhere so it's ok here too

I didn't realise you were using the Middle East as a moral compass for US politics. Not sure I can get on board with that.

>>5230293
Such a shithole I never even considered, it sorry.

>>5230297
didn't say that. i was just pointing out that there are better examples of countries that are being/have been destroyed by theocrats.

>>5230294
There is evidence, but not proof. If there were sufficient reason for a belief to be fabricated, then that would be evidence. Also, it doesn't make a difference to me what you choose to believe as long as it doesn't infringe on others' ability to do the same.

captcha: into banspin

>>5230313

Sure there are, but it's not like the existence of murderers justifies GBH, you know?

ITT: Tipping oscillates uncontrollably

>Muh Dawkins, leave him alone

>>5230326
GBH?

>>5230337
>being an anti-intellectual scumbag

>>5230094
Fuck this book and fuck all these new atheists. They only remove God from the picture but keep everything else.

>>5230368
Explain.

>>5230368
what would you propose? what's wrong with removing god from the picture?

>>5230342
>being an anti-intellectual scumbag

Innocence has no resistance
Against a wicked counselor such as I
You won't make it out
Shall I lead you to my parlor
Poison offers disguised, in just your size

You won't make it out.

>>5230368
>>5230371
>>5230372

Modern atheism needs more mustache and less incomplete contrarianism.

>>5230379
>being against something makes you a contrarian

>>5230094
Complete shit written by an idiotic blowhard who doesn't know the first fucking thing about what he's talking about.

It's the equivalent of Ken Ham writing a biology textbook.

>>5230368
Can you even intelligently articulate what this means?

I'm scared shitless that you actually believe taking God out of the picture means you have to take out all advances even marginally related to religion (like Newton's insights), but I hope you're simply not this dumb.

>>5230373
no thanks :)

>>5230388
Why are you pretending theology is complicated and/or not invented out of whole cloth?

>>5230388
Who actually "knows" something about the subject?

That's a fucking stupid thing to say and I hope you know it.

>>5230390
You may think me altruistic
Feel my dark hypnosis closing in

You won't make it out.

>>5230371
>>5230372
>>5230389
Yeah, it is good that there is no God anymore. Yet these "atheists" act the same as if he still existed, same morals. Even worse, Truth with a capital T has gained even more power now so we completely ignore our own morals. At least religious people had the balls and ovaries to actually believe in something.
>>5230379
Yeah, current atheists fight something that's totally irrelevant, existence of a God. If you want to fight religious fanatics, fight their values and politics.
>>5230389
I'm not that stupid m8. Religion itself had some good aspects even.

Modern atheism is built on denying god, but rarely challenges the moral and psychological structures that come from religion, which means that its either denying god for the denial itself or it isn't very well thought through.
I'm aware atheist ethicists exist, but people who practically worship Dawkins and pop science are the ones who need Nietzsche.

>>5230388

>the study of theology requires as much intellectual rigor as the study of biology

>needing to drink gallons of diarrhea before saying that it doesn't taste good

kek to the max

>>5230420
>a society filled with people who look out for themselves above all else

I'd rather the average atheist still held moral thoughts based in religion, even if they have a logical tension they are totally ignorant of

>>5230419
>Yet these "atheists" act the same as if he still existed, same morals

It's been proven over and over that our senses of morality isn't given to us by religion, but by culture. Being an atheist doesn't mean your morals differ at all from believers.

So, that's silly to have that critique.

>>5230420
>the moral and psychological structures that come from religion,

Like what? To me it seems more like religion has been used as an excuse for otherwise good people to do horrible things and get away with it, and psychologically I cannot see how you can say religion has been anything other than repressive, both intellectually, sexually (maybe especially sexually) and otherwise. In these areas I cannot possibly see how religion does any good. It is tiresome to see how religious people still feel like they have some sort of monopoly on morality and ethics, when in reality there will always be people who are positively evil for a variety of reasons regardless of what they believe (but a lot of them use religion as an excuse).

>>5230392
>>5230395
>>5230410

You faggots couldn't comprehend a page of Aquinas or Anselm, let alone Rahner.

Man, what the fuck happened to the days when atheism meant Feuerbach, Bauer, and Marx, not butthurt manchildren pissing and moaning that God doesn't make them feel good.

>>5230458
man what the fuck are you talking about? did you mean to post in another thread?

>>5230458
Sycophancy, solipsistic
Spider plays the fool
To lure the fly

You won't make it out.

>>5230449
>Being an atheist doesn't mean your morals differ at all from believers.
Yes it does. Morals aren't a universal concept, and the morals you subscribe to were formed by Christian culture and Christian theology.

>>5230274
Thank you anon, you are my hero for bitch-slapping the nut-hugging new athesists

>>5230458
>You faggots couldn't comprehend a page of Aquinas or Anselm, let alone Rahner.

Classic meaningless retort. Here on /lit/ theology is a buzzword -- and people like Aquinas and Anselm as well -- that you people use in order to feel superior, much the same way as you post these fedora-pictures in order to feel superior too. It's really pathetic.

Nothing Aquinas or anyone else of those Saints ever wrote has any value today because it's vapid, meaningless hogwash that is impossible for a thinking person to take seriously.

But have fun acting the way you ironically claim atheists act, like a pseudointellectual manchild, and feeling superior about it too. Embarrassing. The lack of insight from you people, atheist and christian manchildren alike, is just hilarious, and precisely why this fedora-crap is funny. But keep in mind it's funny when you idiots do it too.

>le sophisticated theology faec ;)

>>5230219
>campfire stories of yore
The funny thing is that for such a individual and unique group, you fucking modern atheists have to use the same analogies and terms every damn time.


It's like, you're getting your ideas about the (non)existence of a divine entity from a book written by men, and are spreading the word and ostracizing people with different points of view on the matter.

You sound suspiciously like a certain type of people, but I can't quite put a name to them...

>>5230257
Anon has a good point. Pretty soon you'll be strapping on some c4 and blowing up people, buildings, etc., etc.

Just as bad as fundies, but on the other end of the spectrum.

>>5230449
But that's because "God" is only one small part of religion, almost only an abstract representation of it all. In this sense we basically removed only representation of morals, so now we don't even recognize that we believe in an absolute moral judgment. Not consciously, sure not, we're all cynics consciously. Yet we still resent others, we still judge them, we still call them evil, we're still all scared of living life to the full power like there is some being there is going to judge us. But we only judge each other, even more so now that we are in a "society" and not in monarchy.

>>5230431
I agree wholeheartedly, but similar values could be found elsewhere with enough mental work.

>>5230454
Religion has been used as an excuse before, but it has also been used as the basis of government and human rights in the united states, most of europe, pre-cultural revolution china(while this can be argued), post-WWII japan, and others. Without the foundations provided by religion, human rights would be a far more alien concept than it is today.

>>5230342
>GBH?

Grievous Bodily Harm, ie, assault.

>>5230257
>being this determinist
>1914

>>5230480
>>You faggots couldn't comprehend a page of Aquinas or Anselm, let alone Rahner.

>>Nothing Aquinas or anyone else of those Saints ever wrote has any value today because it's vapid, meaningless hogwash that is impossible for a thinking person to take seriously.

I am an outside third party. No meaningful discussion has taken place between you two. Just assertions, which although confidently made, are not backed by any explicit reasoning.

You just look like you're posturing.

>>5230487
human rights came out of the enlightenment you god damn imbecile, the founders of the united states were deist, which is about as close to atheism as you can get, ever wonder why all the early american architecture and shit is based on roman and greek shit and not some ugly ass medieval cathedral? and the french revolution took it a step further and went full atheist, christianity didn't do dick for human rights. i don't give a shit about christianity either way but just keep your facts reality based.

>>5230487
>Without the foundations provided by religion, human rights would be a far more alien concept than it is today.

How fucking stupid do you have to be to say something like this? Are you just going to ignore how western religions have been used to support bigotry, slavery, witchhunts, the killing of people of other faiths, anti-homosexuality, anti-women, anti-everything-that-is-different? Even today people are struggling to get their basic human rights primarily because of religious bigotry, e.g the US and their ridiculously insane political system which is influenced far too much from religion.

What you say can be interpreted as correct in the sense that we only have views of human rights today that can be called morally sane precisely because we have spent the last hundreds of years fighting against what has been a totalitarian religious morality that was inhumane and insane.

>>5230487
>>5230508
>human rights
>humanism
you guys just don't realize how these "human rights" and "humanism" fucked you in the ass
read some Foucault for fuck's sake, he has a nice history of it in Discipline and Punishment
in short: it was just a change of power

>>5230480
You're only proving you haven't read anything you pretend to know about, you stupid twat.

Seriously? The most important Aristotelian of the Middle Ages wrote nothing of value that no thinking person can take seriously? Go fuck yourself.

>>5230506

Wait, I'm posturing?

Wow. You really have no insight into yourself at all do you?

I only made one post by the way. I haven't been involved in this thread before that. I'm just sick and tired of seeing these buzzwords thrown around here on lit, by posturing people like you. You're even so up your own ass that you claim to just be a poor "outside party" looking from the outside in, shaking your head at the stupidity of everyone else -- why can't everyone not be as sophisticated and intelligent as you? Why can't people do like me, read these Saints and get a sophisticated view of things, like me, don't you know? I'm so deep and knowledgeable. These poor fools, they probably don't even know who St. Anselm is! hahaha, I'm so superior, it's actually a little sad.

Fuck off.

>>5230522
like i said "i don't give a shit about christianity either way", i was just pointing out that "human rights" didn't flow out of the bible or we would have had human rights about 1300 years before we did

>>5230508
The Founding Fathers based their political philosophy on scholasticism, particularly the writings of Robert Bellarmine.

>French Revolution
>Doing anything at all for human rights

Pick one.

>>5230534
I'm not alone. Here's one of the most influential philosophers of our time essentially agreeing with me:

He does not, like the Platonic Socrates, set out to follow wherever the argument may lead. He is not engaged in an inquiry, the result of which it is impossible to know in advance. Before he begins to philosophize, he already knows the truth; it is declared in the Catholic faith. If he can find apparently rational arguments for some parts of the faith, so much the better; if he cannot, he need only fall back on revelation. The finding of arguments for a conclusion given in advance is not philosophy, but special pleading. I cannot, therefore, feel that he deserves to be put on a level with the best philosophers either of Greece or of modern times.

Go fuck yourself, posturing asshole. No one takes any of these morons seriously anymore, it's only of historical value, and in that sense even I think it's interesting.

>>5230535
>Getting this rustled
step it up breh

Secondly, when I said that I'm an outside party, I literally meant that that was my very first post in this thread. I am not the guy you were responding to about being a faggot who couldn't understand Aquinas.

>>5230534

Also I said it had no value TODAY.

It had then, because the time was fucking stupid, but today it's meaningless garbage.

>>5230546
Bertrand Russell didn't know a fucking thing about what he was talking about.

>>5230554

But I'm sure you do.

>>5230553
>the time was fucking stupid

Please don't tell me you're one of those twats who thinks the medievals believed in the flat earth and, later on, that Galileo was a persecuted victim and the Spanish Inquisition killed millions of people.

>>5230290
Really? Which scientists conducted that experiment? Can you cite the paper?

>>5230554
great refutation, ace. have any more pearls to throw before us swine?

>>5230203
>you ever read his twitter? the guy is battling ignoramuses daily. he's still fighting the good fight.
What
his twitter is full of pseudo-intelligent moralising rants

>>5230566
remove the ''pseudo-'' and you've got yourself an accurate post.

>>5230561

No.

Although yeah, the time has been called the dark ages for a reason, even if a very few handful of historians say this is unfair. Even their arguments are hard to really get convinced by.

Say what you want, but this period in history was, compared with what came afterwards and what was before, pretty fucking shitty.

>>5230512
Extreme assholes did shitty things, but the idea of everyone being created equal came from religion, as well as caring for your neighbor, and a good number of other social goods. Beyond that, not all religions are that totalitarian and I'm not referring solely to western religion.

>>5230508
Deism may be as close as you can get to atheism on a religious scale, but it is still religious in nature.

>>5230522
Discipline and Punishment did do a good job of summarizing that, but humanism doesn't have to be a complete loss and society as a whole doesn't have to behave like the prison system.

>>5230575
Yes, it was called the dark ages because Enlightenment faggots made shit up to justify their own bullshit. No real historian talks about "the dark ages."

>>5230574
If he's not talking about evolutionary psychology he's not worth listening to.

Or is this a troll and am I wasting my time.

>>5230580
>but the idea of everyone being created equal came from religion,

Then it is funny that this idea has not really come into practice until non-religious humanism happened.

>>5230537
>"human rights" didn't flow out of the bible or we would have had human rights about 1300 years before we did
Christianity did change through time though. But yes, most of political developments towards human rights were made kind of independently of it.
BUT. I'd say the seed for it did come from Christianity, since it created the concept of universality of a human person. I dare say there was no such clear concept of "humanity" before, just various groups of persons defined by their region.

>>5230112
Fucking fedoratheist. Gtfo

omg another utilitarian ethics thread fml

>>5230592
>I'd say the seed for it did come from Christianity, since it created the concept of universality of a human person. I dare say there was no such clear concept of "humanity" before, just various groups of persons defined by their region.
read the Egyptian Book of the Dead
faggot

>>5230458
>and Marx,
Fucking /lit/ man

>>5230586
That was mostly confined to europe, china had a merit-based system since the Han dynasty while a smaller tribes like the Bedouins had a pretty healthy system going.

>>5230603
I'm not familiar with it, but was it really that similar? Keep in mind the whole "human is sacred and weak, we must protect him" direction that Christianity took.

>>5230534
Nietzsche > aquinas

>>5230584
so when he says that females shouldn't have their genitals mutilated against their will, do you go: ''man, what a fucking asshole!''

or ditto his comments about how religion shouldn't be forced on people?

>>5230625
confucianism is an ethical system, not a religion with magical spooks that punish you for wacking off, it's a stretch to compare it to a religion

>>5230620
Confirmation bias?

>>5230648
No I mean his recent idiotic "logical" statements on rape and paedophilia.

>>5230594
can't handle the truth?

go pray, tough guy.

>>5230648
uh, the rise of male circumcision among non-jews in europe came out of some kind of bizarre secular medical idea that it could cure "chronic masturbation", the catholic church opposes chopping dicks, that genital mutilation was a secular idea dreamed up by your precious scientists

>>5230630
Yes it says things like
"I have not done evil to man"
"I have not committed violence to the poor"
"I have not taken milk from children's mouths"
"I have given bread to the hungry, water to the thirsty, and clothes to the naked."

>>5230654
so religion and genital mutilation shouldn't be forced on children but cock should? okay buddy

>>5230659
>can't handle the truth?
You're cancer to atheism.

>>5230666
>your precious scientists

is that supposed to be like the ultimate put down?

>>5230671
Why are you strawmanning.
These are the tweets in question.

He's posting "logical" statements (with out even defining his propositions lel) just to incite mediastorms.

>>5230685
what's wrong with that tweet?

>>5230679
no just pointing out all high priests treat humans like guinea pigs whether they are in clerical robes or a labcoat.

>>5230685
Didn't he tweet the exact same thing but with date rape and rape by knife or something?
>>5230688
Fake probably.

>>5230688
he's making baseless value judgements just to provoke, and then claim he's being "logical" and act condescending.
>>5230693
>Didn't he tweet the exact same thing but with date rape and rape by knife or something?
yes
>Fake probably.
nope

>>5230692
that's cool and all, but exactly who treats scientists like ''high priests''?

>>5230700
you do

>>5230668
Didn't know that. Thanks you fucking hetero.

>>5230561
>that Galileo was a persecuted victim

That Galileo went looking for trouble does not mean he wasn't a persecuted victim. I sense that the contrarian is strong in you.

>>5230697
>yes
He's really not that active in his thoughts is he? He likes to conserve what he's already thought of in the past. It's almost like he's some kind of ... conservative.

>>5230561
the spanish inquisition was a lot like the american war on drugs, it's a good excuse to beat up people you don't like and take their property, there really wasn't so much ideology in it

>>5230697
>baseless value judgements

well... i can see your point, but in all fairness:

a) it all began with some pretty innocent tweet and the SJW/tumblr/feminazi/whatever crowd got mad so he began explaining himself

b) criminals receive different punishments for different crimes. a guy who rapes a kid will probably be punished harsher than a guy who rapes an adult. but whatever, i can see your point.

>>5230714
idk, he can be pretty racist too

I just think he's craving attention to sell some more books.

>>5230171
This.


Anyone who assumes that they have everything figured out is to be dismissed, whether they are atheist or religious. While our sciences certainly keep us moving forward, we would be completely delusional to think that we know for certain what is in this universe and what isn't, or beyond it for that matter.

>>5230697
>he's making baseless value judgements

I'd hardly say that his value judgements as expressed in that tweet are 'baseless'. The proposition that an immoral act is worsened by violence seems aptly based on the general notion that violence requires justification and that an immoral pursuit cannot provide same.

Like, does 'burglary is bad, burglary and arson is worse' seem 'baseless' to you?

>>5230718
>criminals receive different punishments for different crimes. a guy who rapes a kid will probably be punished harsher than a guy who rapes an adult.
le social contract theory fais

>>5230702
so i say that females shouldn't be genitally mutilated against their will and religion shouldn't be imposed on people, and you take that to mean that i believe everything any given scientist says?

i guess you're just trying to be profound by using that ''science is just another religion, maaaaan!'' rhetoric. whatever.

>>5230257
Oh look, another looney, just a looney from a different belief system.

If you want people to ever take your opinions seriously, you need to learn to control yourself and not disrespect people during conversations. I couldn't care less what you believe, but I'm never going to give any attention or respect to someone so obnoxious and foul mouthed.

>>5230728
>I'd hardly say that his value judgements as expressed in that tweet are 'baseless'.
It depends on how you judge an immoral act.
For instance, in the date rape example. How do you know that rape by someone you trusted isn't as bad as violent rape.

Do you jude an immoral act by its material severity or its effect on the psyche of the victim?

>>5230274
This, so much this. I love you anon. Keep up the good work.

>>5230748

I don't know what Dawkins precisely means by 'date rape' as I'd always considered it simply a rape that takes place while the parties are on a date (ie, I'm not aware of anything to say date rape can't be violent).

But I maintain that as demonstrated in the tweet I addressed my remarks to, there's nothing to say his value judgements are 'baseless'.

>>5230274
sounds like that shitty book david foster wallace wrote about infinite...hard to take dfw seriously after he penned that piece of pop bullshit for a paycheck, the man is no artist

Defend Dawkins all you want with your "logic" and "rationality". At the death of this thread he will still be a person who's done nothing good for atheism.

>>5230746
but why shouldn't females be genitally mutilated? because muslims do it? jews genitally mutilate men and no one cares, hell jewish doctors even published papers about the "scientific benefits" of cutting your dick up, god designed us all in his image but we need to chop part of it off to satisfy him, sounds legit

>>5230775
>for atheism

You are a silly person.

>>5230782
I really am :)

>>5230659
So if I appear opposed to you, you immediately assume that I am the type that prays? You must be a rigid New Atheist.

Also, every Dawkins thread always digresses into semantics about biological determinist MRA bullshit. Look at this tripe.

>>5230777
point me to where i said that male circumcision is ok. never cared for it, never will.

the only scenario i can imagine where circumcision would be acceptable is when you have, like, phimosis. the point being that no one should push dubious practices like this on people.

>>5230190
>Look, I get that he mattered say, thirty or forty years ago, but he's irrelevant now.

PZ Myers pls.

>>5230800
>Look at this tripe

your post?

>>5230810
so what does that have to do with religion? both male and female genital mutilation in africa and europe have their roots in ancient egypt, it predated christanity and judaism. if you don't like it it's a lot easier to end it than to end religion, sorry about anti-genital mutilation scare mongering is just islamophobia in disguise, many times promoted by the same people who condone male genital mutilation as part of their own religion, so it is quite frankly all a load of shit

>>5230828
No, percebe, no.

>>5230831
so you condone genital mutilation against people's will?

>islamophobia

this is about as useful a phrase as 'fascistophobe'.

>>5230845
there's something really distasteful about jews bashing islam, isn't killing palestinian babies enough? do you have to make snarky comments on the internet too?

>>5230845
the ironic thing is the biggest proponents of female genital mutilation are the women who had it done to themselves, they push the most for the same to happen to their daughters. a similar pattern was seen with chinese footbinding, the allure had long passed for chinese men but the women always pushed to bind their daughters feet, some kind of weird mother-daughter sadism? a misguided but earnest attempt to make their daughter more attractive? hard to say what's going on there but it is largely women on women, blaming religion or even men is failing to understand it

>>5230871
Misery loves company.

>>5230871
>I had this pain so you need to have it too

>>5230650
What about the mandate of heaven, Confucious' emphasis of the Tao, his endorsement of the gods, and the sacrifices to ancestors?

>>5230879
the mandate of heaven is just a fancy way to say if you fuck up and don't rule properly the people have a right to overthrow you, not sure confucious emphasized the dao that much, don't remember the part about the gods and sacrifices to ancestors is just part of the family values of china, basically if you sacrifice and work hard it won't be for nothing because your family will remember you, i guess it might have gotten kind of dogmatic in the song dynasty i think but overall it's a pretty secular program

>>5230854
ooohhh, ice burn.

>>5230871
none of this justifies mutilating someone's genitals against their will. whatever the causes, it's horrendous.

>>5230561
>>5230717

funny, because Spanish Inquisition was the "softest" Inquisition out there.

>>5230906
>none of this justifies mutilating someone's genitals against their will. whatever the causes, it's horrendous.

in their culture letting someone go through life without mutilated genitals would be unjustifiable. isn't it a little late in history to believe your mores and taboos apply to all culture?

>>5230895
I'd bet Mohism had something to do with the dogmatism, but Confucius wrote about how he put part of every meal in a special dish as an offering to his ancestors, that heaven/the Tao gave him life and he used it to develop his virtue, and that sages gain their wisdom through communion with heaven/the Tao.

>>5230924
so all the little girls want their genitals to be mutilated against their will?

i don't know man, kinda arrogant of you to assume that everyone who has brown skin likes this kind of practice.

>>5230924

This line might be more tenable if you could tell at a glance who had and hadn't had it done.

>>5230932
what if the dao got translated as "energy" or even "life" while "heaven" gets translated "universe", i bet if you translate the greeks using a bunch of words with religious connotation it sounds wacky too, if you say it's the "will of the universe" that shitty rulers should be deposed it sounds better than the mandate of heaven says you lost your divine right to rule, i don't think it was ever some "divine right of kings" or some shit, although peasanty plebs might have understood it that way i guess...really i think people just couldn't get their head around china not having some religion with indo-aryan skygods nor judeo-christian power-dads so they kind of refactored the beliefs to fit what they wanted to find

>>5230284
fucking magnets

>>5230948
As much as religion has been downplayed in china's history, Confucious' description of the will and rule of the universe still give it a religious connotation, regardless of whether or not there's a big sky daddy.

>>5230945
but the fact that no one can tell who had it done shows it is a deeply personal matter of family values and not a matter for religion, state or western liberal doogooder intervention

>>5230940
again, female genital mutilation is a left over from egyptian antiquity and predates islam, trying to imply this is something all savage "brown people do" is retarded, you are really an imperialist wrapped up in liberalism, fuck off, i thought this board was smarter than that

>>5230989
>but the fact that no one can tell who had it done shows it is a deeply personal matter of family values

Total non-sequitur. You don't have much here.

>>5231000
non-sequitor, eh? then why did you bring it into the conversation. simple fact is you are an imperialist who wants to meddle in the person lives of egyptians

>>5231017
>non-sequitor, eh? then why did you bring it into the conversation.

This is a good time for you to google 'non-sequitur'.

>simple fact is you are an imperialist who wants to meddle in the person lives of egyptians

If I wanted to meddle, I'd meddle. What I'm doing is passing judgement, which, inter-culturally speaking, is pretty taboo in a lot of liberal circles.

>>5230996
goddamn you're fucking illiterate.

>>5231052
what about little girls who don't want to get braces? i bet if you took some tribe out of the amazon and told them you were going to straighten all their teeth their would be fucking horrified by the barbarism, learn to think simpleton

>>5231067

GUYS GUYS WHAT ABOUT WHEN KIDS DON'T WANT TO EAT THEIR GREENS TOTALLY THE SAME GUYS LEARN TO THINK

>>5230714
>It's almost like he's some kind of ... conservative.

>>5230719
>he can be pretty racist too

Truly the worst kind of monster

I find it humorous that a lot of the same people who complain how people still believing in "sky fairies" are the same who complain about people who believe that STEM careers are the only meaningful ones.

>>5231151
yeah, this always makes me laugh when some marxist schmuck prattles on about how once technology reaches a certain point the marxist prophecy will come true blah blah but then he majors in like literature or queer studies or some shit, it's like you truely believe technological advances are needed to usher in utopia on earth then shouldn't you be dedicating all your possible time and money to creating better technology instead of going to little protests to support trannies or undocumented fruit pickers or whatever

>>5231151

This could do with a rewrite, there's like three different things you could mean by it. Though none of them are really worth much.

>>5231163
Sorry, but >>5231161 nailed what I meant perfectly.

>>5231067
so to you getting braces in order to fix dental problems which can lead bad teeth is the same as mutilating someone's genitals because ''it's their culture''? (btw, your assumption that everyone who is born into a certain culture will automatically like that culture and its demands is pretty dumb and arrogant.)

whatever you say, ace.

>>5231181
according to jewish doctors chopping your foreskin off will prevent aids, i'm sure an egyptian doctor or scientist could come up with a reason female genital mutilation is good

>>5231200
>here is some bullshit, i'm sure someone could invent some bullshit to rationalise FGM too

I was wrong when I said you didn't have much.

>>5231221
if FGM was truly "bad" no one would fucking do it, obviously somebody out there think it's pretty "good" since people are still doing it, how fucking autistic are you, fucking retard

>>5231265
>if FGM was truly "bad" no one would fucking do it

TIL murder isn't ""bad"". Something new every day.

>>5231293
1500 palestinians killed so far and you and your "tribe" consider it quite "good" so there you go my friend

>>5230768
haha what the fuck are you talking about?

he wrote a layman's guide to understanding a complex mathematical topic. wtf is wrong with that/

>>5231200
again, point me to where i support circumcision of any kind.

>>5231265
why are you so defensive? so much hostility.

why is it so important to you that girls with brown skin should have their genitals mutilated against their will for no good reason?

>>5231298
>you and your "tribe" consider it quite "good"

Yeah, I'm a shill for Israel, something something. Guess that signals the end of the argument. I'd say 'well played', but really it wasn't, and you should feel embarrassed.

this place really is the same threads over and over

and when did lit get so fast? half of you fuckers need to go

>>5231310
>why is it so important to you that girls with brown skin should have their genitals mutilated against their will for no good reason?

is it hard for you to go around carrying all that white man's burdern?

>>5231120
Not a monster. He's weak. Can't form new thought and can't stomach difference in others.

>>5230094
0.999... =/= 1

>>5231746

Everyone should get their cat declawed, it's awesome.

>>5231340
>is it hard for you to go around carrying all that white man's burdern?

Why don't you answer the question instead of being a slippery little shit?

Why do you care so much about defending a barbaric practice? Women and men who have been circumcised have had their genitals altered before they were cognizant enough to interfere. This isn't something transient like fucking braces, it's permanent.

I don't give a shit if it's not vogue to pass judgment. The practice is antiquated and on par with foot binding.

>>5231746

>>>/sci/

>>5232019
don't bump a dead thread with your islamophobic bullshit, take it to some zionist forum

>>5232055
Don't try and muzzle me with dismissive buzzwords, it's fucking tumblr-tier.

Either address the argument or fuck off.

>>5232110
>getting softly trolled