Secular Intolerance

[Greta]

It seems to me that the fact that this thread is so long lived is a prime example of secular tolerance.

Exactly, Alfie. As I pointed out to Nick much earlier on, a friend of mine joined a Catholic board to speak about the behaviour of their molester priests (he went to a Catholic school and knew the score). He was banned from the forum in two days.

Meanwhile, Nick has started well over 100 threads and made thousands of posts on secular forums to protest against secularism.

This in itself shows his complaints to be just more solipsist projection.

[Lacewing]

My dead heroes help me to remember what had been forgotten. This is one of the good things humanity does for itself from generation to generation.

Do you think it might be a double-edged sword? Perhaps it's best to MOVE ON from some stuff. Evolving beyond past understandings and the limits of those, you know? There's a whole evolving universe out there, Nick... much bigger than the past. Those dead heroes would probably think you're missing an amazing opportunity, by looking back so much.

[Nick_A]

It seems to me that the fact that this thread is so long lived is a prime example of secular tolerance.

Exactly, Alfie. As I pointed out to Nick much earlier on, a friend of mine joined a Catholic board to speak about the behaviour of their molester priests (he went to a Catholic school and knew the score). He was banned from the forum in two days.

Meanwhile, Nick has started well over 100 threads and made thousands of posts on secular forums to protest against secularism.

This in itself shows his complaints to be just more solipsist projection.

When have philosophy forums by definition become secular? When they do they will have to exclude Plato, Plotinus, Kierkegaard, Simone Weil and others. If that happens the only thing worth discussing will be the ideal female behind and how long can people keep that going?

[Nick_A]

My dead heroes help me to remember what had been forgotten. This is one of the good things humanity does for itself from generation to generation.

Do you think it might be a double-edged sword? Perhaps it's best to MOVE ON from some stuff. Evolving beyond past understandings and the limits of those, you know? There's a whole evolving universe out there, Nick... much bigger than the past. Those dead heroes would probably think you're missing an amazing opportunity, by looking back so much.

You are referring to learned cultural adaptations which are not perennial truths but just whims of the Great Beast. There was nothing forgotten to begin with. Plato enables a person to remember perennial truths.

Suppose a woman experiences and remembers respect for life as a perennial truth. She experiences her previous abortion of convenience as an unnatural act. Animals don't kill their young for convenience. Secularists will say nonsense. We create our own values and if we value convenience over respect for life it is proof of an evolved education. If you call that evolved education then IMO, education is nothing more then indoctrination in accordance with the whims of the Beast which secularism supports as the ultimate path to define human meaning and purpose.

[Lacewing]

You are referring to learned cultural adaptations

Why must you start right off by claiming something that's not true? Are you doing it because it serves the points you want to make? It just wastes discussion energy, and that's a dishonest way of interacting. I consistently focus on the awareness and realizations we have about ourselves and our connection with all. Those are the understandings I think we can evolve if we don't cling to the ideas of others and the ideas of other ages. Why wouldn't the present be as vitally capable and alive as any time in history?

which are not perennial truths but just whims of the Great Beast.

I don't know what these things are. They're apparently part of your daydream. Are these the ideas that you think make you "right"? Ideas aren't solid, you know.

Animals don't kill their young for convenience.

I'm guessing there are many reasons for killing their young, including... there's not enough food, or the animal is too weak, or the adult just suddenly thinks there's a threat. We are animals too. We are doing our best in our circumstances. And if you could expand your perspective to be more loving of THE ENTIRE PICTURE, instead of just how YOU think it SHOULD be, you might discover that there's a lot of AGREEMENT going on between souls.

For example, if I was an unborn baby, and my Mother could not cope with my birth for whatever heartfelt reasons, I... as a soul... would give her permission to do what she needed to do! I'm guessing that I'm not the only soul to feel this way. So your perspective is not the whole picture... and it certainly doesn't speak for unborn babies.

[Nick_A]

You are referring to learned cultural adaptations

Why must you start right off by claiming something that's not true? Are you doing it because it serves the points you want to make? It just wastes discussion energy, and that's a dishonest way of interacting. I consistently focus on the awareness and realizations we have about ourselves and our connection with all. Those are the understandings I think we can evolve if we don't cling to the ideas of others and the ideas of other ages. Why wouldn't the present be as vitally capable and alive as any time in history?

which are not perennial truths but just whims of the Great Beast.

I don't know what these things are. They're apparently part of your daydream. Are these the ideas that you think make you "right"? Ideas aren't solid, you know.

Animals don't kill their young for convenience.

I'm guessing there are many reasons for killing their young, including... there's not enough food, or the animal is too weak, or the adult just suddenly thinks there's a threat. We are animals too. We are doing our best in our circumstances. And if you could expand your perspective to be more loving of THE ENTIRE PICTURE, instead of just how YOU think it SHOULD be, you might discover that there's a lot of AGREEMENT going on between souls.

For example, if I was an unborn baby, and my Mother could not cope with my birth for whatever heartfelt reasons, I... as a soul... would give her permission to do what she needed to do! I'm guessing that I'm not the only soul to feel this way. So your perspective is not the whole picture... and it certainly doesn't speak for unborn babies.

Lacewing

I consistently focus on the awareness and realizations we have about ourselves and our connection with all. Those are the understandings I think we can evolve if we don't cling to the ideas of others and the ideas of other ages. Why wouldn't the present be as vitally capable and alive as any time in history?

But doing so requires the ability to begin to “know thyself.” If we don’t even know what it means, nothing can evolve other than more creative fantasies and expressions of secular intolerance aimed at those questioning these evolved fantasies.

I'm guessing there are many reasons for killing their young,……..

Of course, but abortions of convenience is the only unnatural reason and the fact that it is a celebrated right is proof of the loss of respect for life as a perennial truth. This isn’t a sign of the evolution of human "being" but rather devolution of humanity into self serving fragments.

[Lacewing]

doing so requires the ability to begin to “know thyself.” If we don’t even know what it means, nothing can evolve other than more creative fantasies

Many know themselves as much as one can know oneself within this grand illusion. There is not some pinnacle of knowing within an illusion. Evolving creative fantasies is what we're doing. Why would you think there's some sort of static reality knowable by humans?

This isn’t a sign of the evolution of human "being" but rather devolution of humanity into self serving fragments.

Why are you taking it all so seriously? And what makes you think that you know how it NEEDS to be? Don't you think that THAT which we're a part of is as it should be? Why do you give humans so much credit for being destroyers? We're just doing what we do... and we'll probably wipe ourselves out... and it's all very natural in the big flow of energy that is expressing itself.

[davidm]

You are referring to learned cultural adaptations which are not perennial truths but just whims of the Great Beast.

Preach it, Nicky!

There was nothing forgotten to begin with. Plato enables a person to remember perennial truths.

Plato was full of shit. So was Aristotle. Everything they claimed was wrong.

Suppose a woman experiences and remembers respect for life as a perennial truth.

Ja? (Dollars to doughnuts you support capital punishment.)

She experiences her previous abortion of convenience as an unnatural act.

Yes, we know, all those sluts sleep around and then have abortions of convenience. There can't possibly be any other reason they have abortions -- at least, not to a misogynist like you.

Animals don't kill their young for convenience.

Animals kill their young all the time -- kill them, and eat them. Perhaps you think that's OK, because it was an emergency? They were hungry? If so, I guess you would have to say that it's OK for a human mom, if she's hungry, to kill and eat her newborn. But, dicky Nicky, the main point here is that human moms do not kill their young. If they do, they are prosecuted for murder.

Secularists will say nonsense. We create our own values and if we value convenience over respect for life it is proof of an evolved education.

A classic example of how you dishonestly stack the deck. But, Tricky Nicky, you're fooling no one here.

If you call that evolved education then IMO, education is nothing more then indoctrination in accordance with the whims of the Beast which secularism supports as the ultimate path to define human meaning and purpose.

As has been explained to you many times, "secularism" is the advocacy, supported by vast numbers of theists, that the state and the church should be separate. But then, you are thick and dishonest in apparently equal measure.

[davidm]

Delete dread double post.

[Nick_A]

You are referring to learned cultural adaptations which are not perennial truths but just whims of the Great Beast.

Preach it, Nicky!

There was nothing forgotten to begin with. Plato enables a person to remember perennial truths.

Plato was full of shit. So was Aristotle. Everything they claimed was wrong.

Suppose a woman experiences and remembers respect for life as a perennial truth.

Ja? (Dollars to doughnuts you support capital punishment.)

She experiences her previous abortion of convenience as an unnatural act.

Yes, we know, all those sluts sleep around and then have abortions of convenience. There can't possibly be any other reason they have abortions -- at least, not to a misogynist like you.

Animals don't kill their young for convenience.

Animals kill their young all the time -- kill them, and eat them. Perhaps you think that's OK, because it was an emergency? They were hungry? If so, I guess you would have to say that it's OK for a human mom, if she's hungry, to kill and eat her newborn. But, dicky Nicky, the main point here is that human moms do not kill their young. If they do, they are prosecuted for murder.

Secularists will say nonsense. We create our own values and if we value convenience over respect for life it is proof of an evolved education.

A classic example of how you dishonestly stack the deck. But, Tricky Nicky, you're fooling no one here.

If you call that evolved education then IMO, education is nothing more then indoctrination in accordance with the whims of the Beast which secularism supports as the ultimate path to define human meaning and purpose.

As has been explained to you many times, "secularism" is the advocacy, supported by vast numbers of theists, that the state and the church should be separate. But then, you are thick and dishonest in apparently equal measure.

The blind vehemence of secular intolerance. And this attitude infests progressive education attacking anyone regardless of age questioning its dogmas. Scary stuff.

[Greta]

It seems to me that the fact that this thread is so long lived is a prime example of secular tolerance.

Exactly, Alfie. As I pointed out to Nick much earlier on, a friend of mine joined a Catholic board to speak about the behaviour of their molester priests (he went to a Catholic school and knew the score). He was banned from the forum in two days.

Meanwhile, Nick has started well over 100 threads and made thousands of posts on secular forums to protest against secularism.

This in itself shows his complaints to be just more solipsist projection.

When have philosophy forums by definition become secular? When they do they will have to exclude Plato, Plotinus, Kierkegaard, Simone Weil and others. If that happens the only thing worth discussing will be the ideal female behind and how long can people keep that going?

Alas, the boy is not very bright. If something is not associated with a religion then it is secular. If a forum is not secular, then it is affiliated with a religion. However, like many secular societies, people are allowed to believe what they like. On a philosophy forum, the backup for assertions needs to be better than "You people lack the capacity".

As per my friend's example, no such tolerance is afforded to the non religious by the religious.

[Nick_A]

Greta

Alas, the boy is not very bright. If something is not associated with a religion then it is secular. If a forum is not secular, then it is affiliated with a religion. However, like many secular societies, people are allowed to believe what they like. On a philosophy forum, the backup for assertions needs to be better than "You people lack the capacity".

As per my friend's example, no such tolerance is afforded to the non religious by the religious.

You have described the problem of secular intolerance. It is concerned with beliefs but intolerant of what is required for understanding. You can believe what you like but what good is it if you lack understanding? A person believes one thing on Monday and the opposite on Tuesday. What good is that?.

Secular intolerance condemns recognition of the human condition Plato described as if in a cave. What does this have to do with beliefs? It is the human condition which a person is invited to verify. Don't believe in the human condition; verify it. Know Thyself. There is no way a person can verify spiritual blindness without first being open to the possibility. Secular intolerance which has the Great Beast as its God deplores any recognition of reality greater than what the senses of the Beast and its interpretations can provide. It fights blind beliefs but denies its potential and benefits of awakening to experiential understanding. This blind denial has effects far worse than those of the blind beliefs it egoistically condemns. What is worse is it not only contaminates the purpose of philosophy but the hearts of the young through its ever improving methods of spirit killing. Albert Einstein said:

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

It seems he was right.

[Harbal]

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

It seems he was right.

Although your stupidity does seem to be very persistent, that doesn't mean it's infinite, I think it's a bit too early to tell. You do seem to be heading in the right direction though and I hope you've noticed how we are all putting up with it, thus displaying our secular tolerance.

[davidm]

You are referring to learned cultural adaptations which are not perennial truths but just whims of the Great Beast.

Preach it, Nicky!

There was nothing forgotten to begin with. Plato enables a person to remember perennial truths.

Plato was full of shit. So was Aristotle. Everything they claimed was wrong.

Suppose a woman experiences and remembers respect for life as a perennial truth.

Ja? (Dollars to doughnuts you support capital punishment.)

She experiences her previous abortion of convenience as an unnatural act.

Yes, we know, all those sluts sleep around and then have abortions of convenience. There can't possibly be any other reason they have abortions -- at least, not to a misogynist like you.

Animals don't kill their young for convenience.

Animals kill their young all the time -- kill them, and eat them. Perhaps you think that's OK, because it was an emergency? They were hungry? If so, I guess you would have to say that it's OK for a human mom, if she's hungry, to kill and eat her newborn. But, dicky Nicky, the main point here is that human moms do not kill their young. If they do, they are prosecuted for murder.

Secularists will say nonsense. We create our own values and if we value convenience over respect for life it is proof of an evolved education.

A classic example of how you dishonestly stack the deck. But, Tricky Nicky, you're fooling no one here.

If you call that evolved education then IMO, education is nothing more then indoctrination in accordance with the whims of the Beast which secularism supports as the ultimate path to define human meaning and purpose.

As has been explained to you many times, "secularism" is the advocacy, supported by vast numbers of theists, that the state and the church should be separate. But then, you are thick and dishonest in apparently equal measure.

The blind vehemence of secular intolerance. And this attitude infests progressive education attacking anyone regardless of age questioning its dogmas. Scary stuff.

The fact that you can't meet any of the points is very telling.

[Greta]

Secular intolerance condemns recognition of the human condition Plato described as if in a cave.

This is your imagination. Theism is intolerant, secularism is far, far more tolerant, as evidenced by the above comparison of secular and theist forums to dissidents (where you could say in terms of postings allowed that secularists showed themselves to be thousands of times more tolerant than theists).

In your case, it's not intolerance of your theism that you detect. No, people are just intolerant of incessant whiners prone to insulting everyone around them.

Let's look at your claims. Throughout history, leaders have not wanted their subjects to see how they are being manipulated. This is not a modern or "secular" innovation. The "cave" (in context with your Great Beast) is basically people buying into the propaganda they are fed. It is true that our minds are pressured from all sides in society - by the right, the left, conservatives, progressives, warmongers, peaceniks, destroyers, greens, theists - ideologues of all stripes.

If we discount exploiters who find their way into every avenue of every society, all of the above competing groups are simply people airing their concerns based on their particular perspectives. Somewhere in all the argy bargy, solutions are found for problems, although the upcoming restructuring of the Earth's surface appears to be a game changer.