Category: Religion, Myth, and Theology

  • ON BEAUTY: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAM (From a post elsewhere, where someone very gracio

    ON BEAUTY: A CRITIQUE OF ISLAM

    (From a post elsewhere, where someone very gracious was criticized as being racist. When she is anything but.)

    ~Aphrodite,

    You are one of the most tolerant people out there. Don’t sweat it.

    Arguing against a religion is not arguing against a race. You cannot change your genes. You have the volition to change your ideas. If arguing against a religion is racism then arguing against Christianity is anti-white racism. This whole line of reasoning makes no sense.

    Islam is not a religion. It is a political system structured as a religion. It is the highest evolution of monotheism, which successfully institutionalized mysticism as law. That we grant this political system the same status as religion out of tolerance is a convenient trick of marketing that we could call deceptive if it were applied to any other product or service. It is perfectly logical, and perfectly consistent with western secular tolerance to criticize a political system – even if it is structured as a religion. That is because the western concept of tolerance is predicated on the requirement that the purpose of any government is the production of prosperity for its people.

    Islam reduces people to poverty. It always has. It always will. It must. It is intellectually closed. And the market economy which is what produces wealth, requires constant disruptive innovation through that process of competition. One cannot have prosperity and certainty. Islam promises certainty and delivers what certainty must: poverty.

    Therefore we are perfectly legitimate in criticizing Islam as a political system whether or not people treat that political system as a religion. In the west, democratic secular socialist egalitarian humanism has risen to the status of unquestionable religion – an act of faith that is contrary to the evidence. Yet we allow ourselves to criticize it. We encourage ourselves to criticize it.

    You are the author of an artistic sentimental publication stream. Whether consciously or not, the dominant properties of the beauty you admire and promote are a) ‘the presence of resources’, and b) ‘there is always plenty’, and c) ‘humans are capable of creating beauty and as such we should wonder at the marvel of it’. These are the conceptual concepts that you work with whether you articulate them rationally as I have just done, or whether you intuit these properties without being able to articulate them.

    However, the underlying problem with beauty is that it may contain a false promise, just as do religions: the promise of the absence of scarcity. The absence of scarcity means we do not need to compete. It means we do not need to constantly calculate for the purpose of producing something which others will trade for us.

    Islam makes a similar promise: that we can be seduced by certainty. That we can avoid the problem solving that science provides us with the tools to constantly bear. That innovation in thought thought he competition of ideas is not only unnecessary but undesirable.

    It may be possible to tolerate the myth of the absence of scarcity, because that myth provides us with the desire to create beauty by creating plenty – prosperity. But it is not possible to tolerate the myth of certainty – because it produces poverty. It can only produce poverty.

    It is certainly within our moral code to criticize Islam on political and material grounds. And whomever argues that Islam is a religion rather than a political system hiding under the cover of a religion, is either engaging in deception or error.

    And whomever argues that stasis, certainty and poverty are preferable to innovation, uncertainty and prosperity.

    Islam is institutionalized ignorance and poverty. It is a failed economic system. And there is nothing beautiful or plentiful about it.

    That may be too deep a bit of philosophy for Facebook, but it is pretty solid logic all the way ’round. Maybe, it will help you assuage your conscience. You’re a wonderful person and I”m glad that you make the world a better place by reminding us how beauty makes it so.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-02-11 05:39:00 UTC

  • THE YULE FESTIVAL – OUR PAGAN ROOTS

    THE YULE FESTIVAL – OUR PAGAN ROOTS


    Source date (UTC): 2012-12-20 13:31:00 UTC

  • “Mother is the name for God in the lips and hearts of little children.” –Willia

    “Mother is the name for God in the lips and hearts of little children.”

    –William Makepeace Thackeray


    Source date (UTC): 2012-12-06 03:09:00 UTC

  • FERTILITY AND INHERITANCE

    http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/01/07/rspb.2010.2504.full.pdfRELIGION FERTILITY AND INHERITANCE.


    Source date (UTC): 2012-12-04 03:14:00 UTC

  • DO ANY OTHER PROTESTANTS HOLD THE SUBCONSCIOUS FEAR THAT IF YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT

    DO ANY OTHER PROTESTANTS HOLD THE SUBCONSCIOUS FEAR THAT IF YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU’RE HAPPY THEN GOD WILL PUNISH YOU?

    Or is it just genetic. 🙂

    Perhaps an ambiguous riddle obscures it enough to sneak off with a bit of humble celebration.

    A year off. Successful writing. Painful Illness. Curative surgery. A new venue. A new business. And a group of great friends.

    My friend Navin Mithel once told me he never felt wealthier than when working as a kid in a restaurant. The money you make is yours and it’s in your hand. It’s enough. You know how to make more of it. You have no long term obligations. -That sounds like freedom to me. And freedom is happiness. It is the undiscovered valley. Sense that the future is full of opportunity.

    A musician friend asked me last night why I had the eyes of an eighteen year old. Bright, joyful, and full of energy.

    My personality is returning to its natural state of frequent giddiness. I recognize myself in the mirror again. I love every human being again. And I can do it without battling constant pain.

    I wish that it was as easy as waiting tables. 🙂 But the wisdom of the statement prevails.


    Source date (UTC): 2012-11-19 02:50:00 UTC

  • ON DAWKINS: THE TEN COMMANDMENTS IN PROPERTARIAN LIBERTARIAN LANGUAGE

    http://www.youtube.com/comment?lc=Jb5710g4e6zNsbln0KYCrwvbbpebYN70xdFGO6Dg4xkRIFFING ON DAWKINS: THE TEN COMMANDMENTS IN PROPERTARIAN LIBERTARIAN LANGUAGE


    Source date (UTC): 2012-08-16 20:50:00 UTC

  • CONTRA THE ATHEISTS American christianity is a revolt against the state, not an

    CONTRA THE ATHEISTS

    American christianity is a revolt against the state, not an advocacy of mysticism. The purpose of all religion; to place limits upon the state. To determine the limits of rule. To place control of society into the hands of small local groups, each with a variety of different interpretations and preferences. To make the individual in control of his or her life, and his or her destiny.

    Seeing christianity as a movement consisting of irrational statements toward an irrational end, is very different from seeing it as practical means of achieving a rational end, regardless of the irrationality of its arguments.

    Marxism is based on a false assumption. Democracy is based upon many false assumptions. Inter-temporal redistribution is based upon many false assumptions. Why is it that Religious Conservatism must be based upon true assumptions?

    All movements are political. I find the argument about the FORM of religious doctrine always somewhat childish – judging a book by its cover. The CONTENT of religious doctrine can be analyzed. The RESULTS of applying religious doctrine can be criticized.

    There is no evidence that most of what we debate in society is rational. And as Caplan has tried to show us, it may not be possible for public discourse to be rational. FORM does not matter. CONTENT matters,and content can be judged by the RESULTS it produces.


    Source date (UTC): 2012-08-15 13:48:00 UTC

  • TODAY IS CELEBRATE THE FIRST CRUSADE DAY! July 16, 1099 – First Crusade: Christi

    TODAY IS CELEBRATE THE FIRST CRUSADE DAY!

    July 16, 1099 – First Crusade: Christian soldiers take the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem after the final assault of a difficult siege. The First Crusade was the result of the Byzantine emperor Alexios I’s appeal to Pope Urban II for mercenaries to help him resist Muslim Turk advances into territory of the Byzantine Empire.

    Happy First Crusade Day! 🙂

    (And people say I have no sense of humor.)


    Source date (UTC): 2012-07-15 14:08:00 UTC

  • Is Islam A Political Ideology? (And Are Progressivism, Scientism, Democratic Secular Humanism Religions?)

    From The Global Secular Humanism Group: “Should ‘Islam’ be considered as a political ideology and a religion at the same time?” The question should be restated in this fashion in order to illustrate Islam’s political content: A) Should Islam be considered a Religion? (Yes/No) YES: Religions consist of Myths and rituals. It does appear that religions require some form of magian reasoning. However, scientism, secular humanism, progressivism, all require ‘faith’ (in methodology, reason, or technology) that is expressly counter to the historical evidence. So, it is quite possible to create a personal philosophy that is the premise for a religion (scientism, secular humanism, progressivism) on faith. Scientism has myths, rituals and institutions. Progressivism has them too. Secular humanism is getting close, but I tend to treat secular humanists as simply anti-christian atheists and progressives as Democratic Secular Humanists. That means Secular Humanism is a minor ideology, and Democratic Secular Humanism as a major ideology. Both of which rely upon faith. But Democratic (Socialist) Secular Humanism, like islam, has both laws (human rights), institutions (academia, the press, the party structure, and it’s developed expressly for use in majority rule under parliamentarianism). So it appears to be both an ideology, a religion and a political system. B) Should Islam be considered a political Ideology? (Yes/No) YES: The purpose of an ideology is to obtain political power through excitation of the masses. Islam was invented to obtain political power. Islam was used as a means of conquest, and succeeded in obtaining political power. Islam is used to obtain, justify and use political power. Political power is the power to enforce the primacy of a set of laws. Islam contains a code of laws with explicit commandment to their primacy. Therefore islam is a political ideology. C) Should Islam be considered a political system? (Yes/No) YES: While a primitive political system only requires the ability to resolve disputes, A political system capable of coordinating investments (taxes and expenditures on infrastructure) requires at a minimum, laws, and an organization that mandates the exclusivity of those laws above all other laws, rules and norms. Islam has both a set of laws (Sharia) and a system of producing judges for those laws (Mullahs) and a system of intergenerational teaching for the purpose of propagating those laws (Religious Schools). In effect islam is a legal system with magian origins (instead of natural rights). That islam does not include other formal institutions (a parliament) is simply a function of it’s antiquity and tribal authoritarianism. Islam conquered a roman state (Byzantium) and assimilated it’s administrative structure. But did not include it on it’s own. In fact, much of islamic administration relied upon slaves and eunuchs because the byzantine administration could not adapt to Arab tribalism. (See Fukuyama’s recent book.) Islam is a religion, a political ideology, and a political system. If one argues that it is not, then one must define the terms religion, political ideology, and political system. And that exercise would lead to either confirmation of that it is a religion, ideology and political system, or one would define those terms using selection bias by sampling normative rather than structural rules.

  • An Argument In Support Of Faith As A Limit On The State

    An Argument In Support Of Faith As A Limit On The State http://www.capitalismv3.com/2012/04/16/an-argument-in-support-of-faith-as-a-limit-on-the-state/


    Source date (UTC): 2012-04-17 17:16:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/192300628926664704