Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The liberal agitprop machine has lost control of Skynet

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
    There has probably never been a time before religion since the advent of social structures more complex than clans. It now looks as if their will never be a time without religiosity loosely defined. They has also probably never been a time when people high in disagreeableness didn't reject all forms of religiosity. At the very least it is likely that complex social skills and religiosity are evolutionarily related.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrsQY9Bw-kk

    I don't know why you substituted numbers of worker for complex cooperative structures but they would only be loosely related. While pheromones control social interactions in other animals humans rely more on mores to keep culture on the rails. It is arrogant to presume that you would benefit from ignoring entirely thousands of years of cultural evolution.

    ​​​​​​All of human life may not be a religious existence but all religion is unavoidably a byproduct of biological predisposition. It is a mistake to consider either biology or culture in isolation.
    Hmm...now we're talking about clans? And complex social skills are now evolutionarily linked to religion? So the way we behave today traces back to...what? The Maya and their blood sacrifices? The Druids? Ba'al? It always mazes and amuses me how those of faith claim credit for everything in human history including creation itself, but refuse to accept the blame for all of the terrible results that followed. "God created Heaven and Earth and is all powerful", but he isn't therefore responsible directly for the Holocaust? Seriously? Even though the Nazis went to church right next door to the death camps?

    You are the one who related "types of workers" with societal evolution, yet our "evolved" society constantly produces large numbers of workers in the wrong categories due to excessive lead time and poor response. Our society is too volatile to keep up with given the amount of training required. By the time the job de` jour is identified and workers trained, the field is already over-crowded. And yet we cannot produce enough farm labor to handle our needs and haven't done so for decades?

    Your rejection of pheromones is interesting, but I believe you will find that testosterone and estrogen control a major portion of our lives today. Take a look at commercial advertising, or Trump. Trump is the classic, boastful alpha male complete with current trophy wife, and Madison Avenue uses sex to sell everything. I guess the religious society hasn't evolved very much after all. Meanwhile, the people running our nation, all religious, cannot get along and nothing is getting done. So much for societal advancement under religions when personal animosities outweigh societal needs and responsibilities.

    They has also probably never been a time when people high in disagreeableness didn't reject all forms of religiosity.
    Ouch. Well, I've been called worse. Of course, to those of us not engulfed in religious mythology the actions of those who are often resemble those of the insane, 9/11 being a preeminent example, along with the Westboro Baptist Church and Jeremy Wright's infamous church of hatred as only the tip of the iceberg.

    Westboro Baptist Church Home Page

    godhatesfags.com
    Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, KS. God hates fags and all proud sinners (Psalm 5:5).
    Doesn't look like religiousity has led to evolutionary society to me, but hey, I'm just an agnostic who doesn't constantly view the world through god- colored glasses.

    Meanwhile, we no longer have any peacetime between wars, all fought with god's blessing, naturally, which leads me, a guy "high in disagreeableness", to believe that religiousity has failed utterly to cause us to evolve societally. In fact, we are now fighting amongst ourselves over race and other societal issues right here in the streets and neighborhoods of America while we fight everybody else all over the world, and our nukes remain on constant readiness to destroy everybody and everything... in the name of god, of course.

    Maybe America picked the wrong gods? Or could it be that religion is, in fact, a complicating and deleterious component of advanced civilization? Perhaps we have outgrown religion, an ancient, myth-based system of controlling masses of people, and should be moving on.

    I will leave you with Einstein, arguably smarter than the rest of us"

    Einstein did write, “I believe that the abominable deterioration of ethical standards stems primarily from the mechanization and depersonalization of our lives – a disastrous byproduct of science and technology.
    An important principle of most theistic religions is that morality originates with their god: there is no morality apart from their god and, in particular, apart from obedience to their god. This leads many to say non-believers cannot behave morally and cannot be moral, or both. Albert Einstein denied that morality required or even could have a divine source.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

      Hmm...now we're talking about clans? And complex social skills are now evolutionarily linked to religion? So the way we behave today traces back to...what? The Maya and their blood sacrifices? The Druids? Ba'al? It always mazes and amuses me how those of faith claim credit for everything in human history including creation itself, but refuse to accept the blame for all of the terrible results that followed. "God created Heaven and Earth and is all powerful", but he isn't therefore responsible directly for the Holocaust? Seriously? Even though the Nazis went to church right next door to the death camps?

      You are the one who related "types of workers" with societal evolution, yet our "evolved" society constantly produces large numbers of workers in the wrong categories due to excessive lead time and poor response. Our society is too volatile to keep up with given the amount of training required. By the time the job de` jour is identified and workers trained, the field is already over-crowded. And yet we cannot produce enough farm labor to handle our needs and haven't done so for decades?

      Your rejection of pheromones is interesting, but I believe you will find that testosterone and estrogen control a major portion of our lives today. Take a look at commercial advertising, or Trump. Trump is the classic, boastful alpha male complete with current trophy wife, and Madison Avenue uses sex to sell everything. I guess the religious society hasn't evolved very much after all. Meanwhile, the people running our nation, all religious, cannot get along and nothing is getting done. So much for societal advancement under religions when personal animosities outweigh societal needs and responsibilities.



      Ouch. Well, I've been called worse. Of course, to those of us not engulfed in religious mythology the actions of those who are often resemble those of the insane, 9/11 being a preeminent example, along with the Westboro Baptist Church and Jeremy Wright's infamous church of hatred as only the tip of the iceberg.



      Doesn't look like religiousity has led to evolutionary society to me, but hey, I'm just an agnostic who doesn't constantly view the world through god- colored glasses.

      Meanwhile, we no longer have any peacetime between wars, all fought with god's blessing, naturally, which leads me, a guy "high in disagreeableness", to believe that religiousity has failed utterly to cause us to evolve societally. In fact, we are now fighting amongst ourselves over race and other societal issues right here in the streets and neighborhoods of America while we fight everybody else all over the world, and our nukes remain on constant readiness to destroy everybody and everything... in the name of god, of course.

      Maybe America picked the wrong gods? Or could it be that religion is, in fact, a complicating and deleterious component of advanced civilization? Perhaps we have outgrown religion, an ancient, myth-based system of controlling masses of people, and should be moving on.

      I will leave you with Einstein, arguably smarter than the rest of us"


      You are missing the main point which is that religiosity has it's roots in evolved predispositions. The various manifestations of those predispositions are in their details largely irrelevant. As to behaving morally it doesn't require a religion for chimpanzees to engage in warfare. Religion like adherence to a sports team is an expression of tribal instincts. The question of the rational nature of religious belief is another discussion.
      We hunt the hunters

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

        You are missing the main point which is that religiosity has it's roots in evolved predispositions. The various manifestations of those predispositions are in their details largely irrelevant. As to behaving morally it doesn't require a religion for chimpanzees to engage in warfare. Religion like adherence to a sports team is an expression of tribal instincts. The question of the rational nature of religious belief is another discussion.
        Didn't "miss the point"...don't accept that viewpoint. Gods did not create man; man created gods, and interprets them to fit his objectives.

        We are way past the point of tribal instincts as a reasonable factor when we have developed the ability to destroy the entire world many times over. Therefore, we have also outgrown the primitive need for mythical deities to explain why we're frightened of the dark.

        Religion is, as I have stated, holding us back by attempting to influence all aspects of behavior. Remember, if you will, the Church's repressive stance on science and their treatment of Gallileo. Religions are heavily invested in the status quo and responsible for the majority of murderous mayhem throughout history, in direct contravention to their actual "teachings". (I know you have at least read a bible and a koran. I'm agnostic and I have.)

        Comment


        • #19
          So you reject the evidence that genetics and religiosity are related. That pretty well ends the conversation.

          To be clear I have no subjective interest in any religion and do not believe that you can take any discussion of religion out of the genetic cultural matrix it is embedded in.
          We hunt the hunters

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            Religion is, as I have stated, holding us back by attempting to influence all aspects of behavior. Remember, if you will, the Church's repressive stance on science and their treatment of Gallileo. Religions are heavily invested in the status quo and responsible for the majority of murderous mayhem throughout history, in direct contravention to their actual "teachings". (I know you have at least read a bible and a koran. I'm agnostic and I have.)
            This is really only true (there are exceptions though) when religion is mixed with politics. When a religious order can influence and use the power of government they can do those sorts of things. Religion on its own really can't stop science or much else since it can only act to persuade its own membership and then only by verbal coercion and peer pressure.

            Thus, today the Catholic Church can't really do much to stop science or changes in social policy within a society. On the other hand, Islam can still do this because it mixes politics with religion heavily.

            Comment


            • #21
              A definition:

              Agitprop
              (/ ˈ ć dʒ ɪ t p r ɒ p /; from Russian: агитпроп, tr. Agitpróp, portmanteau of "agitation" and "propaganda") is political propaganda, especially the communist propaganda used in Soviet Russia, that is spread to the general public through popular media such as literature, plays, pamphlets, films, and other art forms with an explicitly political message.

              So, the use here of the term 'agitprop' us properly incorrect.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Remember, if you will, the Church's repressive stance on science and their treatment of Gallileo.
                And how long ago was that...five or six hundred years?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                  This is really only true (there are exceptions though) when religion is mixed with politics. When a religious order can influence and use the power of government they can do those sorts of things. Religion on its own really can't stop science or much else since it can only act to persuade its own membership and then only by verbal coercion and peer pressure.

                  Thus, today the Catholic Church can't really do much to stop science or changes in social policy within a society. On the other hand, Islam can still do this because it mixes politics with religion heavily.
                  It managed quite well with the power of excommunication, and still wields enormous political influence behind the scenes. The Church continues to wiled power with dictates about everything from birth control to foreign aid and political policy in other nations. Listen to the Pope's proclamations if you doubt this.

                  You might also recall that even today religion is behind the push to establish Creationism as the official doctrine to be taught. I consider that considerable political influence, don't you?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Massena View Post
                    A definition:

                    Agitprop
                    (/ ˈ ć dʒ ɪ t p r ɒ p /; from Russian: агитпроп, tr. Agitpróp, portmanteau of "agitation" and "propaganda") is political propaganda, especially the communist propaganda used in Soviet Russia, that is spread to the general public through popular media such as literature, plays, pamphlets, films, and other art forms with an explicitly political message.

                    So, the use here of the term 'agitprop' us properly incorrect.
                    If you believe that propaganda is not spread to the American public through popular media, then you are correct. But I'm sure that many would disagree with you
                    Last edited by Skoblin; 04 May 19, 07:07.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Skoblin View Post

                      If you believe that propaganda is not spread to the American public through popular media, then you are correct. But I'm sure that many would disagree with you
                      Propaganda is anything specifically intended to alter thought processes or attitudes to produce a given result - thus, the main stream media and all advertising agencies, as well as government at all levels, fall into that category.
                      Last edited by Skoblin; 04 May 19, 07:07.

                      Comment

                      Latest Topics

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X