General > Biology
Crows are pretty damn smart
ikke:
--- Quote from: jknilinux ---I disagree. I'd say a cult is a religious group that performs practices viewed as negative by the general population. Satan worshipers are a cult and will remain so, so long as they do not constitute more than 50% of the population. LDS- and christian scientist- members do not perform any practices generally viewed as negative, so they are not cults. Wikipedia, btw, agrees with me.
--- End quote ---
I agree that cult has a negative connotation in everyday use that the term religion lacks. So use of either term is subject to the speaker's perception. Romans tolerated many religions, but persecuted early christianity because it was seen as disruptive to society. Clearly cult. I cannot see the RK church stand on condoms in the light of the aids epedemic as anything else than negative. The majority of dutch will probably agree. Same for its stance on same sex relations or the position of women in the church. Does that make the roman catholic church a cult? German gouvernment thought of enacting a berufsverbot against members of Scientology. Earlier berufsverbote have been directed against (neo) nazi's and communists. Scientology, cult or religion?
Numsgil:
--- Quote from: jknilinux ---It may be interesting, but it still is viewed as negative by the general population and therefore is a cult.
--- End quote ---
It is viewed negatively but I think that's as much from ignorance as anything else. Luciferism isn't about sacrificing goats and babies to a big red faun, which is presumably what the common perception of it is.
If you define cult as any group viewed negatively by the majority of society than that's a pretty broad definition. You could include groups like the Black Panthers, Al-Qaeda, Romas (aka Gypsies), Jews in Nazi Germany, etc. etc. I would say that a cult would better be defined as a revolutionary (in the sense of rebelling against the mainstream religious views of their people), authoritarian religious group. Early Christianity was a cult, by this definition, until the Romans mass converted. Luciferism isn't a cult because of it's strongly non authoritarian beliefs.
I'd say the "cultiness" of a group is a function of it's size, acceptance by the surrounding community, and authoritarian leanings.
Numsgil:
--- Quote from: jknilinux ---IMO, to the general population, there's an absolute definition of right vs. wrong, since the general population is religious. Satan-worshipers may be the nicest people in the world, but since what they believe, and therefore do, is completely against the general population's concept of right, they are a cult according to the general population.
--- End quote ---
That's what I mean. The general population thinks Satanists are doing things they would find wrong, but they're really not. Well, maybe slightly distasteful, but not evil. For instance, one of the 11 Satanist "commandments" is to be cruel to people in your home you find annoying. I think Satanism is a good example because if you define cult as a perception by the majority, then it's not really an inherent aspect of the group and it loses all meaning.
--- Quote ---Anyway, do you have any thoughts on the pascal's wager argument?
Since you're atheist, do you view life as nihilistic? If you're religious, do you view religion as non-nihilistic, even though our goal is to experience an emotion forever? Why?
--- End quote ---
I'm less theistic vs. atheistic than I am nihilism vs. non nihilism. People who believe in something are happier and more well adjusted than people jaded with a nihilistic world view. Humans are built to have deep seated convictions. It's encoded in our DNA. It's how our brains are wired. We need it as much as we need air, water, food, and companionship.
Pascal's wager assumes the reward happens after death, but I say the reward comes directly from the belief. It doesn't necessarily have to be a belief in God, just a belief in something less immediate than eating and screwing.
ikke:
--- Quote from: Numsgil ---It's how our brains are wired.
--- End quote ---
Literally, a couple of years ago a region in the brain was found that is linked to experiencing mistical senstations. If it was stimulated people would report all sorts of mystical experiences. A group of nuns was discovered to have a higher natural level of activity than the reference group.
As for wagers argument: the assumption is rationality, which is a stretched goal for humanity. To add to nums direct reward: one of the rewards is the recognition of belonging to the ingroup (however defined). Just being one of the babboons in the troup is already reward and this is handed out through shared ritual behaviour
Numsgil:
--- Quote from: jknilinux ---nums-
If you think our goal is to be happy, then you're embracing nihilism.
Atheism is the belief that the reward is in this life (as in being happy in this life), and so you're left with nihilism. This includes people who go to church, but do it just to have the benefits of going to church so they can be happy in this life- they're atheist and nihilist, IMO, even if they don't know it.
--- End quote ---
If your goal is to be happy I'd say that's more epicureanism. Happiness is everyone's goal; I think that's a Greek Philosophy argument. Everyone does what they think will make them happy. Nihilism to me is strongly associated with self-destruction and hedonism. A world view that happiness isn't worth chasing because it's all just chemical signals in the brain anyway, and therefore entirely immaterial and without value.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version