I was referring to the difference between the way people ’should’ conduct their lives being a significant step away from ‘do’ conduct their lives. It is facile to speak of a better world through the application of a philosophy or discourse which largely exists outside of actual application.

I’ve already covered the argument of ‘good’ sprouting from critical thought. Ultimately the power resides in the people who can most readily apply the spoils of such an endeavour. Scientific enquiry harnessed the tremendous power of the natural world and put it in the hands of idiots. Regardless of the ‘pure intentions’ or sustaining of an appealing discourse - critical enquiry has proven itself to be just as vulnerable and thus destructive as uncritical enquiry. Both are as corruptable, in fact in recent history the products of science and technological progression have marked a new form of enslavement in the human race because of the real threat to society being ignored… the few who can purchase it.

You don’t think the sciences get more funding than the arts because the government is actually interested in what is happening at a scientific level do you? They are interested in that which will yield most economic profit. If you could prove a poem solved something - and more importantly, that that resolution costs something; the government would be shitting out cash with Roy Fisher’s face on both sides.

I’ve hardly been patronising Paroxysm, my post made no attempt to impugn your education.. never mind, B for effort, but aww aren’t you clever, you must’ve worked really hard in your exams, good for you..

You cleverly agreed with me that following anything without question has led to the most horrifying situations throughout history, whereas challenging ideas and beliefs has led to some of the most pivotal discoveries in life, making it is hard for me to disprove your second attached concept of the many being used as an excuse for the few without discrediting myself… however if everyone was to challenge their ideas and beliefs - might it not temper the radicals, and do little harm to those who choose to follow their beliefs having challenged them?

I have no idea what you’re trying to say “Even with the education system as dire as it is; letting absolute morons in regardless of academic history, publication history or a portfolio of work at the very least, I’d say that’s doing O.K for now.” so I translated it into Arabic and back and it made a bit more sense.. And yes, I agree, history departments do need new text books!

I agree with Dawkins? How convenient - I have never read any of his work, pure coincidence I assure you, how great that you have read his work and decided to challenge ideas and beliefs though, super! I suspect I distance myself when I clarify my position - I don’t deny the possibility of a deity - but I’m happy to operate day to day without one.

Should and Do? Should need religion? Do need religion? I think the vast majority of the world has moved on from needing religion, but that’s partly my perspective.. Religion came about from being unable to explain uncomfortable aspects of life.. our understanding on many things has much improved, society has become much more comfortable in accepting life on as-is arrangement.

On that note, I’m done, you’re quite right that the debate can go on forever, but it should be conducted with due respect for those involved.

If you are not going to engage in the debate then why go out of your way to make a sarcastic comment such as ‘fol de rol’? My objection to lack of response arose after this point.

Queller do you believe that people live their life logically? Do you believe the people out there who read the sun only for the football news each and every work break give a shit about living logically? No they don’t. What they DO is invest their interests in opinions which are most convenient in mapping out reality in servicable terms. They form their whole identity on the convenience of recognition. Even you I see.

My history lessons consisted of Bowen throwing pencils at the teacher’s head and kicking holes in the store room door while Grace and Chantelle spoke of how they’d slept with nearly every guy in the room. Nigel Wade consistently booted me in the base of my spine and told me I was going to get the living shit kicked out of me when it was hometime because I was a swot. ‘Compulsory education system’ Ha! This isn’t ‘The History Boys’ Tarquin.

I did however pick up a few things in my time… 10 A*’s at GCSE and 5 ‘A grade’ A levels sure don’t come outta nowhere Quellerino. Oh shit yeah I forgot about the First with honours and the Master’s you patronising chimp. Even with the education system as dire as it is; letting absolute morons in regardless of academic history, publication history or a portfolio of work at the very least, I’d say that’s doing O.K for now.

Yes wars have been started primarily due to religion but I stress yet again that to many people across the world this is not what religion is about - this is misuse of religion and their way of life to justify a cause of the few - hell, Labour do it all the time. You do not need religion to be benevolent, thanks for pointing that out because it doesn’t seem to be outlined in Dawkins 101. No you don’t need it but nevertheless many people either use it and/or justify their good nature through it. Again you’ll confuse, as many do, the difference between SHOULD and DO.

Of course you’ll have a rebuff because this debate is completely irresolvable and exists in a dimension far above what many care about but nonetheless it feels good to tease out these rediculously inapplicable concepts and ideas of what SHOULD be done as opposed to what is happening.

PSYCHOKINESIS & PHYSICS *IF I HAVE PULLED OUTSIDE 4.000 JOULE WHEN I CREATED THE PORTRAITS IN THE CLOUDS & VARNISH THESE( joule) THEY MUST LACK TO ME!

PK. ESTABLISHED TEST: “Collision on Flake Cloud” - negative n° 5

ESTABLISHED ITEM: VISIBLE COLLISION ON FLAKE CLOUD TO GOAL TO OBSERVE CLARLY THE ACTION OF FORCES, IN THE SAME TIME CONSTRUCTING THE FACE. WE CAN OBSERVE THE INSTANTANEOUS DISSOLUTION OF THE PART OF THE FLOKE CLOUD IN THE AREA WHERE HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED THE FACE, AND THAT HAS REMAINED OF THE FACE..

IF I HAVE PULLED OUTSIDE 4.000 JOULE WHEN I CREATED THE PORTRAITS IN THE CLOUDS & VARNISH THESE( joule) THEY MUST LACK TO ME!… WHERE ARE THEY ENDED? WE WOULD HAVE TO FIND THEM (joule) ..?

THE LAW OF CONSERVATION OF THE ENERGY IS THE MORE IMPORTANT OF THE CONSERVATION LAWS NOTES IN PHYSICS

In physics, the conservation of energy states that the total amount of energy in an isolated system remains constant..

The joule (IPA pronunciation: [dʒuːl] or [dʒaʊl]) (symbol: J) is the SI unit of energy. It was named after James Prescott Joule for his work on the relationship between heat, electricity and mechanical work..

Thanks.
Martino

http://www.psychokinesis.it

EVIDENCE HERE! http://martino-psicocinesicreativa.blogspot.com

EVIDENCE HERE ! Altri risultati in MARTINO MARTINI - CREO CON LA MENTE RITRATT

A psychiatrist might ask.. Do you frequently believe people [going about their own business] to be making personal attacks against you? They might also find issues with the fact that you post using a name meaning ‘any sudden, violent outburst; a fit of violent action or emotion’ with links to pathological.

“Firstly you need to elaborate upon this flippant comment you have made to avoid insulting one half of the world. Then you need to look in the mirror and repeat three times over ‘Richard Dawkins may well say some things which are not gospel’.”

I agree wholeheartedly with you ‘Paroxysm’ that nothing anyone says should be taken as gospel, including the bible. I especially appreciate the incongruous phrasing binding the concepts of Dawkins and gospel which you have so elegantly constructed.

“simply respect the fact that it is simply inconsiderate and rude to question their choice to follow it”

Are you really saying this? Blind faith has worked so well for so many people.. there’s compulsory education in GCSE history classes to ensure every pupil in the UK is made to understand why it is just simply *NOT* inconsiderate and rude to question their choice to follow an idea! Perhaps you could explain why your teachers were wrong to the billions that have died and suffered all over the world for ideas which were blindly followed based on similar arguments? But then i digress..

“Stop boring them with shit they have already heard and decided as complex people with issues, stresses and lives to reject.”

Well if they will search out an opposing viewpoint and continue to read…

“charity, local events, parties, free food for the hungry etc. to many people this is where their faith lies, in the benevolent and gracious acts which unite people, not drive them apart.”

Your saying you believe this can only happen with faith, despite the infinite examples to the contrary… whereas wars.. they start themselves without religion entering the mix I suppose? Someone only seeing one side of things perhaps?

“portray yourself as being under direct personal attack. Never mind the intention of my post being to highlight the insensitivity of yours.”

Personally I find the manner you go about posting your offhanded comments on this blog to be most aggressive towards the writer. But then your name says it all on that front doesn’t it.

“If the poster refused to even comment then why should anyone else? Fear not Andrew, I shall post no more.”

A free lesson here, the thing with blogs is there is a tendency towards not to having to respond to every insignificant comment on a post. Otherwise all the writers in the worlds - and the typewriting monkeys too - would be far to busy responding to Viagra adverts than posting any form of creative work, opinion or scientific result. Perhaps if you have a blog of your own which you can direct us all to we can return the same positive criticism you provide this blog’s author? If the commenter refuses to even post their own opinion rather than merely comment on anothers then why should anyone care? Oh and I noticed you kept commenting, I guess it *is* always nice to feel right.

The thing is that I noticed the link didn’t work, here: http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=atkins_18_2