• In total there are 4 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 4 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am

Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

#26: April - June 2006 & Nov. - Dec. 2010 (Non-Fiction)
User avatar
Dawn

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Graduate Student
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:05 am
13
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 46 times

Re: Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

Unread post

"The faithful have never been indifferent to the truth; and yet, the principle of faith leaves them unequipped to distinguish truth from falsity in matters that most concern them."
-Harris, 68
People of faith are people of revelation, that is, they have a source for truth that transcends man's intellect and latest impressions or popular opinions. This is a curious statement by Harris who from the point of view of the 'faithful' would be seen as someone who is ill-quipped to distinguish the truth in matters that most concern him... Harris speaks glibly of death as coming to all and driving people to religion. There's a reason for this. When faced with death one is more ready to consider their own mortality and inability to know beyond this life by their own intellect. Science is not going to answer questions about 'what next'. Thank God for the revelation given us in the Bible and that we live in a culture that has this Truth as part of our heritage.
"And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."--Jesus
"For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world--to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice."--Jesus
User avatar
Dawn

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Graduate Student
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:05 am
13
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 46 times

Re: Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

Unread post

There are far better reasons for self-sacrifice than those that religion provides. --Harris, 78
Does anybody have any suggestions what those might be?
"And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."--Jesus
"For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world--to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice."--Jesus
User avatar
Dawn

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Graduate Student
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:05 am
13
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 46 times

Re: Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

Unread post

Ok, it's always good to find a positive point of feedback... I like this: Harris says there is
"little doubt that we come hardwired with a variety of proto-linguistic, proto-doxastic (doxa='belief') capacities."
What in the world for? Is this true of animals?
"And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."--Jesus
"For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world--to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice."--Jesus
User avatar
Dawn

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Graduate Student
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:05 am
13
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 46 times

Re: Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

Unread post

Chris OConnor wrote: With that said I have a few comments about lust. Lust is natural, lust is good, not everybody does it, but everybody should. (George Michael from "I Want Your Sex")

On a serious note...lust is indeed natural. To not lust and desire sexually is abnormal. All sexually reproducing species experience a strong sexual desire. This is nature's way of seeing that we get together, have sex and create more little lustful beings. Wow, I said that in such an anthropomorphic way! Let me revise my words. Those organisms that had a strong enough lust for sexual reproduction did the deed and passed along their horny genes. Nature selects for horniness.

It has always bothered me how the Catholic Church (I was raised Catholic) teaches that masturbation is self-abuse and lust outside of marriage is a sin. If we all stopped lusting our species would be doomed. The Catholic Church has an unnatural and unhealthy stance on human sexuality and reproduction. And people ask us atheists why we don't just keep our mouths shut and let people believe whatever they want to believe! Some beliefs are dangerous and deleterious to society. And keeping in line with the topic of this discussion - many beliefs don't stay inside the believers head. Catholics are continuously fighting to get their beliefs incorporated into public policy. Atheists can sit around and wait for believers to act on their beliefs, which can prove to be too late at that point, or we can attempt to teach believers how to think more clearly and critically. We can attack the weed at the root so it stops growing.
Hi Chris, I know this is an old post but... it caught my eye and I had a comment to add. Lust is indeed 'natural', but consider what makes a better foundation for society--lust outside the bounds of a committed relationship or sex within a relationship prepared to nurture the offspring. The Catholic church has its gross faults (celibacy being required of all priests being one of them) but procreation is one of their specialties. If you're talking about evolution providing lust for procreative purposes, the Catholic church could be seen as providing the boundaries that make it really profitable to society. Religious people have gotten a bad rap for negative views toward sex. I disagree. There's nothing that beats sex in a committed relationship. It's the real thing, God's gift, by design and it's good.
"And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."--Jesus
"For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world--to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice."--Jesus
User avatar
Chris OConnor

1A - OWNER
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 17016
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 2:43 pm
21
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 3509 times
Been thanked: 1309 times
Gender:
Contact:
United States of America

Re: Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

Unread post

Sex can be just as good or even better in a more casual relationship. I don't agree that sex should be just for married people. You use the term "committed" but the Catholic Church is more specific in saying that sex is for a married man and woman.

I would never marry someone without having sex first. To me that's like buying a car without a test drive. Sounds humorous, but I'm dead serious. Sex is an important aspect of life, and especially married life, and marrying someone only to find out your new spouse either hates sex or sucks at it is simply irresponsible. It is far wiser to live together and have an established sexual relationship before a lifetime commitment. How wonderful it is to not be burdened by irrational religious doctrines!
User avatar
DWill

1H - GOLD CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6966
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
16
Location: Luray, Virginia
Has thanked: 2262 times
Been thanked: 2470 times

Re: Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

Unread post

Dawn,
You made a number of posts, and I'll just try to respond to some of the points you made in them. I observed that generally you assume the articles of your faith to be true and proceed from there. That's the way it's done in a faith outlook, so I understand that, but of course that beggars the question when the others in the conversation are looking for evidence for the beliefs.

I sense that you strongly feel that were it not for the foundation of Christian belief we have in the West, and especially in the U.S., we could not have been as good a country as we have been. Actually, you say we are superior. I disagree that we are superior in any comprehensive way, and I point to the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, who singled out American exceptionalism as "the persistent American sin." But I don't dismiss what you say about Christianity being in some way the foundation of our country. I think it's likely to be true, even self-evident, that the values of our religious forbears account for much of the strength of our institutions. I'm a humanist, and part of what humanism means to me is that our enduring institutions, religion being one, serve positive purposes for us, as well as those we may see as negative. Although I'm atheist in outlook, I don't think I can choose which influences have come together to form the person that I am. Joe Coffey said that humanists like me are benefiting from the moral capital built up by believing Christians. I know that most atheists probably scoff at this statement, but I really don't. My main belief in this whole arena is that nobody--not believers, atheists, or those in between--has any entitlement to a comfort zone. If we are honest with ourselves, we'll admit that we're groping and uncertain about the truth.

I do strongly disagree with your partisanship, however. It always surprises me how the closely related Abrahamic faiths can be so much at each others' throats. The rule here must be that family feuds are the most bitter feuds. Sam Harris says that currently it is Islam that has the most potential for harm, but that is because we seem to be past the most troublesome phase for Christianity. In the not-so-distant past, Christianity provided plenty of fuel for those who thought non-Christians deserved to die on the basis of belief alone. Elsewhere you said that Islam is based on a lie. There could be no better illustration of what Harris is trying to say about the harm of dogma, where one group will think that its own particular religious narrative trumps all the others. If you want to talk in terms of sin, as Niebuhr did, this tendency for groups of humans to believe they've cornered the market on truth ranks at the top.

You said other things as well, but that's probably enough for now.
User avatar
Dawn

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Graduate Student
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:05 am
13
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 46 times

Re: Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

Unread post

Chris OConnor wrote:Sex can be just as good or even better in a more casual relationship. I don't agree that sex should be just for married people. You use the term "committed" but the Catholic Church is more specific in saying that sex is for a married man and woman.

This certainly may be true for a guy but for a girl, not true. And really your preference comes down to a preference, not what's best for a society... but at least you're honest.

Chris OConnor wrote:I would never marry someone without having sex first. To me that's like buying a car without a test drive. Sounds humorous, but I'm dead serious. Sex is an important aspect of life, and especially married life, and marrying someone only to find out your new spouse either hates sex or sucks at it is simply irresponsible. It is far wiser to live together and have an established sexual relationship before a lifetime commitment. How wonderful it is to not be burdened by irrational religious doctrines!
I've heard this rationale before and it sounds logical--the analogy is even cute but statistics don't seem to support it, this being a random sampling: http://www.leaderu.com/critical/cohabitation-socio.html
Sex is an important aspect of life. I'll stick with the original Operator's Manual :) I've not been disappointed!
Thanks though for your perspectives. Yours is a popularly held opinion.
"And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."--Jesus
"For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world--to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice."--Jesus
User avatar
Dawn

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Graduate Student
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:05 am
13
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 46 times

Re: Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

Unread post

DWill:My main belief in this whole arena is that nobody--not believers, atheists, or those in between--has any entitlement to a comfort zone. If we are honest with ourselves, we'll admit that we're groping and uncertain about the truth.
DWill, I would refer you to Jesus' own 'thread' on truth in John 8 blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn& ... p;t=KJV#32. It is where my own assurance lies. Am I entitled to a 'comfort zone'? Only because of Him who said we could know the truth and so be set free to really live. "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (Jn. 8:32)
Thanks for checking back with my 'slow poke' comments.
"And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."--Jesus
"For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world--to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice."--Jesus
User avatar
DWill

1H - GOLD CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6966
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
16
Location: Luray, Virginia
Has thanked: 2262 times
Been thanked: 2470 times

Re: Is it ethical to kill people for their beliefs? Chapter 2.

Unread post

Dawn wrote:
DWill:My main belief in this whole arena is that nobody--not believers, atheists, or those in between--has any entitlement to a comfort zone. If we are honest with ourselves, we'll admit that we're groping and uncertain about the truth.
DWill, I would refer you to Jesus' own 'thread' on truth in John 8 blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn& ... p;t=KJV#32. It is where my own assurance lies. Am I entitled to a 'comfort zone'? Only because of Him who said we could know the truth and so be set free to really live. "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (Jn. 8:32)
Thanks for checking back with my 'slow poke' comments.
Well, thinking about it, I probably gave the wrong impression of my thought. Truth is a word that you can see in many ways, and I meant it in the sense of how we put together all the diverse data, viewpoints, and experiences to make generalizations about life and the world. No one of us has the answer in that regard. Truth in the sense of what to live by as personal value is different and attainable.

I wanted to say something about the sex issue. I believe, too, that sex should occur in a committed relationship, although not necessarily between married people. In other words, love needs to be involved. When I ask myself why I believe this, I really can't say for sure. Is it a holdover from religion? Does such a belief need to be from religion? I don't know, but it wouldn't bother me if someone was to call my belief "religious." That would not be saying anything very specific, after all.
Last edited by DWill on Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply

Return to “The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason - by Sam Harris”