/lit/ - Literature

I watched the film Children of Men recently which depicts a dystopian future where there is a fascist state and all women are sterile, causing some people to join religious groups of repentance asking God to restore fertility. It caught my interest how the film portrayed this kind of behaviour as a natural outgrowth of the situation. IMO it's right. All that it will take is a catastrophe and people will regain their religious sensibilities. Modern or religion is due to luxury and an easy life.

>>5118422

>The days of our religious identities are clearly numbered.

If this is indeed true (and I really doubt it is), then the time-frame for such a collapse of "religious identities" is probably on order of thousands of years. Harris and others of the "New Atheists" severely underestimate how deeply ingrained religious attitudes and beliefs are, both on an individual and societal level. It is not something that can be dug up, deconstructed, dismantled and destroyed by having a series of debates, discussions and dialogues. It's deeply entrenched, and likely to stay that way for an extraordinary amount of time.

>Whether the days of civilization itself are numbered would seem to depend, rather too much, on how soon we realize this.

My concern for the future of mankind has much more to do with nuclear weapons, environmental collapse, conventional warfare, poverty and disease than the comparatively harmless, idiosyncratic daily behaviors of obscure people the world over.

Does Mr. Harris write out of concern for this species? Then surely he will put a book out one of these days about third world poverty; Perhaps a treatise on nuclear weapons and their danger... but no. Instead we get diatribes on... what exactly? ascientific interpretations of reality?

Finally, I hate this asshole and Hitchens for being apologists for the War on Terror and promoters of Islamaphobia.

Atheism is just another belief. Saying "there would be peace if everyone was an atheist" is no more or less valid than "there would be peace if everyone was a Christian" or the same of any other religion.

>>5118484
>Le phobia buzzword xD

Fuck off propagandist

True religion seems to be replacing the mindless religion of the past. If anything more ppl are spiritual and becoming better at religion

>>5118512

Buzzword is the worst buzzword of them all, ain't it?

Islamaphobia, an irrational nativistic opposition to Islam and all its manifestations, is a real phenomenon.

Don't believe me? Herman Cain said in an interview during the 2012 election that he wouldn't put a Muslim in his cabinet.

Name a single subset of society he could have said that about without an ensuing media shit storm and the end of his candidacy.

>>5118422
I'm concerned about the obvious end of the traditional relationship/family.
What the fuck do we do now? When men finally accept that this shit just doesn't work, that the likeliness for a woman cheating is so great that he might not even raise his own child anymore, and he starts cheating himself, where do we go from there?

>>5118536
>Men cheat because women cheat

>>5118536

>where do we go from there?

/pol/.

For the rest of us, the library.

New Atheism is intellectual laziness.

regards, Catholic Church

>>5118535
Who cares? Religious people are delusional faggots who should be entirely ignored on a political stage and publicly ridiculed. A radicalizing faith that is flooding into other lands with a declared goal of implementing an authoritarian religious regime should absolutely be opposed. Just last year we had the bombing in boston, the riots in sweden, the decapitation in London, and the pushes for insular muslim communities that follow sharia law inside other countries.

Fuck islam and fuck your "open minded" retardation.

>>5118539
just a poor formulation from my side, point was that everyone cheat, or rather, the degree of cheating is rapidly increasing at both sides.

Sometimes I wonder what the fuck is wrong with people.

>>5118484
>My concern for the future of mankind has much more to do with nuclear weapons, environmental collapse, conventional warfare, poverty and disease than the comparatively harmless, idiosyncratic daily behaviors of obscure people the world over.

Daily behaviours like Jihad? Like Dominionism? Crusades? Tithing?

How about the idea of FATE? That we cannot change the outcome, we should just obey (God or Allah or the State, etc) Fatalism teaches us to be satisfied with what things are like, because they could not be otherwise. Fate is logically necessary if you have a typical God-based world-view.

>>5118521
>True religion
Well, fuck.

>>5118554

I just want you to know you're ignorant and that I would loathe being next to you on a plane, and that if you were my coworker I would constantly steer the conversation to video games, and would neither desire nor accept your invitation to get drinks after our shift is up.

>>5118550
Authoritarian organization says individuals are lazy. Nice.

>>5118556
Is it?

In terms of absolute numbers or relative?

>>5118570

>Daily behaviours like Jihad? Like Dominionism? Crusades? Tithing?

No, more like the Eucharist, Wudu, prayer or puja.

The fact that religious ideology/doctrine is occasionally steered towards providing a justification for imperialistic endeavors is to me another sign of how evil capitalism / imperialism are, rather than how evil religion is.

Can religion motivate violence? Clearly. Does this mean that religion is an inherently violent institution? No. Does this mean other institutions aren't violent? No.

If violence and dictatorial domination are something you have a problem with (and I do to for that matter), then why don't you attack arms-traders, nuclear weapons manufacturers, governments and military officers? Why are you wasting your time attacking religious gestures like prayer or scriptural mythologies?

>>5118586
i'm on my phone, so I can't be bothered to find stats, but just google it.
Shouldn't come as a surprise though. I have myself fucked more married women than single ladies the year prior to this. And even then, I would suppose those studies are about as trustworthy as self reported penis size charts.

>>5118597
I agree with this anon, religion can be a catalyst or another point of manipulation towards conflict, but I think that when such a thing occurs its reflective of a deeper problem than just religion.

>>5118422
I thought chuckle-head here was a strict determinist, but now he's saying we get to choose our thought patterns? What makes Sammy think religious identity isn't as engrained into the brain as all other thoughts? Harris is a paranoid neurotic that needs an easy, money-convenient answer for why the world is fucked up.

>>5118573
Congratulations, you have absolutely no point whatsoever and know that I'm correct.

>Video games
>Bleeding heart faggot for the sake of it

You are cancer

>>5118503

nobody has flown a plane into a skyscraped because god doesn't exist

>>5118512
New Atheism does it again!

>>5118608
...yet.

>>5118609
Brilliant rebuttal. Muslims are radical savages and all of the sarcastic bitching in the world will not improve their horrific countries or tribal mindsets.

>>5118573

i just want you to know that you are precisely the kind of overly offended, overly tolerant faggot who makes me ashamed to call myself a leftist/liberal these days. you are the cancer killing progressive politics.

>>5118556
Actually cheating went down significantly once it became considered "cheating" to have a mistress who wasn't herself married.
Moved the damn goalposts on us.
To stay on topic: Something most NA don't get is that while the modern religious identities are dying, this will not prompt abandoning them, but rather seeking and adopting new religions.

>>5118536
If the end of the family is cheating then the family has been dead since before even oral history. Could misogynistic paranoia be cured by the death of the family? If so, it's a good thing.
Countdown to screaming about tumblr/reddit/boogey-man flavor of the month

>>5118586
>Between 1991 and 2006, the numbers of unfaithful wives under 30 increased by 20% and husbands by a whopping 45%. These numbers come from a study conducted by David Atkins of the University of Washington Center for the Study of Health and Risk Behaviors.
I'm more interested in the change between 2000 and 2020 though. That's when this whole new generation of dating norms was established.

>>5118608
And yet millions of people died due to secularized, atheistic men's aspiration for earthy power between 1936 and 1945.

>>5118597
Because real things are scary :(

Well, seriously, I do attack those things. I have a problem with people thinking things that make no sense to me, and would like to know if I'm stupid or if people believe in things that aren't real.

Now, I think that if, indeed, people believe in things which, in fact, are not real, then this is a serious problem, which can easily spiral out of control. We know there is much conflict in the world, but in a fight over imaginary figures there can never be a winner, which means, it's a war without end. Moreover, many of these people believe their own belief is the True, the Good, the Just, and all others (by definition) are Not.

Thus, a religious belief, combined with dictatorial, authoritarian aspects, is much more harmful. The Muslim and Jew extremists don't even think they are fighting other humans, so every method is fair, every atrocity justified.

>>5118608
This quite the ridiculous post, actually, anon. Every atrocity is a product of worldview, and I can distance tons of them from religion, and in fact make compelling cases for many of them coming as a result of "no god".

>>5118616
> Savage
> Tribal
tips enlightenement

>>5118597
>If they can make you believe absurdities, they can make you commit atrocities.

>>5118633
Not that I'm a theist or anything either, just that I like my people religious. And I get to feel like I own them too, on top of their being less of a threat to me that way.

>>5118630
McCarthy, you're dead, go back to sleep.

>>5118630
Pic related: Nazi belt buckle.

That says "Gott mit uns".

Guess what that means.

Guess when it is from.

>>5118630
>My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a
fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded
by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and
summoned men to fight against them
Adolf Hitler Munich, 1922
>Checkmate popefags

>>5118628
Are you implying infidelity has been constant since the birth of the traditional family?

Oh hey, I'm a philosopher and think people should be more interested in it because it can still be relevant to issues people care about. I'm also not going to agree on any point with new atheists publicly despite the fact that I agree with many of their premises and conclusions. Because they hurt people's feelings and some said philosophers were dumb.

signed,
/lit/

The Islamic extremists are the same retards as the Christian ones, just content with power over women where Christians are up in arms about everything (sexual frustration most likely the cause).

>>5118649

what are you trying to argue? that the nazi's were theist?

>>5118422
90% of the "atheists" I know would not be atheists if it weren't for the internet and 'freedom' it gives you and exposes you to.

he's not right, although it does seem like he is
when's the last time you've seen a religious person on the internet or anywhere that uses the internet or any gadgets that's religious, and is younger than 20, /lit/?

>>5118649
As if their formal worship mattered when they disregarded their religions' morals and law.

>>5118637

And what if one such absurdity is an insistence on not committing atrocities?

>>5118652
Seems more reasonable than the idea that infidelity was invented somewhere circa 1900's

>>5118659
They kill a lot more people at the moment though

Hitler very obviously went nuts with nihilism and went for building something like Nietzsche's ubermensch. Dude didn't believe in any sort of god who wasn't a complete cunt.

>>5118632

Illogical, irrational humans are not just always going to be around... we'll be (and are) among them.

>>5118651
Oh shit, heretical views of Christianity!

>>5118422
>implying ecological issues like dwindling resources and climate change aren't going to scuttle society before any social ones do.
>implying, but muh religious thinking is the source is right, and the religious thinking isn't part of a larger problematic epistemology that links the religion with the politics that deny ecological problems

>>5118669
America has been at war every year for like the last 20 years dude. There are probably drones landing on newborn Arabs right now.

>>5118660
>And yet millions of people died due to secularized, atheistic men's aspiration for earthy power between 1936 and 1945.
I was replying to that, which is a full-blown lie (secularized, I mean, not people being dead). He was implying the Nazis were power-hungry because of atheism.

For that matter, Stalin's "officially atheist" Union was blessed by the Russian-Orthodox church.

>>5118665
See top of this post.

>>5118669
>he thinks Islamist death count is even close to the Christian West's imperialism even now

>>5118679
I don't really count the US army as christian extremists`

Oh hey, are we defining as evil what is harmful to humans yet?

Because nothing has ever been deadlier than God.

>>5118668
So for it increase over time, it would have to be invented somewhere along the line? what the fuck man, that's the dumbest shit I've heard all day.
Given that the importance of a stable relationship is significantly decreasing, there's no reason to it shouldn't have increased either, given that it is normal to us to fuck around.

Hell, just look at japan.

>>5118608
Way to miss the point entirely.

>>5118687
I do.

>>5118633

you can abstract anything into anything if you try hard enough, but you have to admit it's far harder to compel a human to do anything based on a negation than a positive assertion.

>>5118422

disgusting man completely destroyed by zizek of all beings

>>5118687
Anyone familiar with US military could tell you it's is a weird military death-cult hoped up on the American Protestant Fundamentalist money-cult.

>>5118717

>American Protestant Fundamentalist money-cult

do you have any idea of what you are talking about?

>>5118684
>>5118597
Doesn't matter. Capitalism and Imperialism are both religious institutions: metaphysical beliefs above skepticism upheld by a priestly caste. They both have justifications for whenever its institutions or rules punish people, to argue they are actually helping them. The both have convenient excuses for pain and suffering.

So are Capitalism's major competing alternatives religious.

>>5118709
And negations make room for positive assertions. It's a matter of what works.

>>5118717
American here. This. It's an institutionalized cult. It has uniforms, or ceremonial dress, ceremonies, rituals, dogma (modes of behaving towards superiors, America is just, Jesus is on our side...), its own ceremonial language, scriptures, holy items (the flag, uniforms...) etc etc.

The only difference is there is a big fraction of people in it for the money.

>>5118727
I disagree, these institutions are not inherently religious, though they do mimic such, because they are created by religious people for religious people, and today followed, like a religion, by religious people. It is no wonder they function so similarily, and no wonder the skeptically-minded are frustrated by nationalism and jingoism, the false dichotomies some democracies puppet about as governmental options, the so-called apolitical organizations that are supposed to be above it...

>>5118744

As someone who grew up on military bases, I can agree with this.

It's too bad too. A lot of good people get caught up in the jingoism. I suppose a lot of good people get caught up in a lot of stupid ideas though.

All right, I'm sold. America is a religion of its own, and the worst religion.

>>5118681
> He was implying the Nazis were power-hungry because of atheism.
No, I implied that due to their amorality, Nazis were free to practice their power games in Europe. If they were restrained in Christian Morality, that would not have been possible.

>no fedora posted yet
here

>>5118776
Not following Christian morality doesn't make the Nazis amoral.

>>5118787

Thank god.

>>5118766
USA! USA! USA! USA!

>>5118794
Killing six million Jews does.

>>5118815

How are you here and not on /int/ or /tv/?

>>5118776
If they had been restrained by morality, like the Christianity that was clearly practised by them at the time? Oh, right, that's not TRUE Christianity, clearly, since they did such horrible things. Fuck that. You're saying that all the evil religion seems to do, is done because evil people take the churches' names in protection.

I only agree this far: it is people doing evil.

If Christianity would have prevented them from doing this, then it is not because Christianity is so morally powerful that it would have been impossible: evidence shows they knew it (nazi pocket bibles, for instance), thus for Christianity to stop them, something deeper is needed. Being a practising follower of every one of The Bible's teachings? There's an awful lot about what to do with your enemies, and what sorts of people are your enemies...

So, what, being like Jesus? Do you have to be LIKE JESUS these days, in order to be considered good? Because that involves going against the Bible on a number of points.

So, what Christian Morality? And why that one, in particular, not the other one? Doesn't it depend on what God wants? So should we follow the Pope? Which one? Should we be like Jesus? Seems like he would have told people to think for themselves, rather than follow a thing because you're told to.

Screw "Christian Morality", that is completely based on a book that tells you to kill people, and you want to consider THIS MORAL?

Be a Jesusite or something, and give away your possessions, which you do not need and which will make it harder to get into heaven. You want to go to heaven, right?

>>5118815
And do you think they killed them BECAUSE they were not as Christian as they (obviously) should have been?

What if they killed them because they thought the Christian thing to do is to follow your leader? Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, y'know

>>5118794
No, but Fascism essentially renouncing theism and making Nation the new god to which no deed is too much does.

>>5118850
Fascism is a religion, indeed. It begins with its belief of its own superiority in hand, and removes all obstacles to this belief, no matter what those may be.

Nazis believed they were superior. The Jews believe they are Chosen By God. Boom! Religious war!

>>5118846
> And do you think they killed them BECAUSE they were not as Christian as they (obviously) should have been?
I think that they killed because they held power as the highest goal and felt no restraints in achieving it i.e morals.

> What if they killed them because they thought the Christian thing to do is to follow your leader? Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, y'know
That's not a theologically feasible position to hold. However, Protestantism (also main power base of NDSAP) is historically seen as a religious ideology that advocated all strong state and blind loyalty to it. The argument that Germans allowed the atrocities to happen due to their Protestant religo-cultural values is nothing new, yet, acts more as an argument against Protestantism than religion in General.

>>5118833
> If they had been restrained by morality, like the Christianity that was clearly practised by them at the time?
What do you mean, clearly practised? I wouldn't call a protestant nation willing to fight offensive wars a very Christian.
> Oh, right, that's not TRUE Christianity, clearly, since they did such horrible things.
More like its not true Christianity because it is against Christs teachings?
> You're saying that all the evil religion seems to do, is done because evil people take the churches' names in protection.
Not all, but something like WW2? Yes. Even though it wasn't even done in the name of Church.
> I only agree this far: it is people doing evil.
I'd like to remind you that atheism knows no good or evil.
> Being a practising follower of every one of The Bible's teachings?
It appears to me that you don't know a fairest thing about Christian theology.
> Rest of the post
Jesus, how about you read some theology and philosophy before embarrassing yourself like this again?

>>5118866
>I think that they killed because they held power as the highest goal and felt no restraints in achieving it i.e morals.

>Power highest goal
Sure. That's an argument that can be made.
>felt no restrains, ie morals
So, no moral person would seek power?
>I think they killed them because...
The Jews stood in the way of power, and had to die?

No, anon, you're full of shit.

>acts more as an argument against Protestantism than religion in General.
Protestantism is not the only religion to suggest something like that. It's not even religions that exclusively do this.

>>5118665
Lotsa genocide in the old testament. A little mob violence is even in the new one.
Nazism is perfectly in keeping with the values of Christianity.

>>5118891

yes when i think Christianity i think god smiting heathens in the form of nazis killing jews.

>>5118889
> So, no moral person would seek power?
Christian morality forbids the seek of earthy power for its own sake.
> The Jews stood in the way of power, and had to die?
Nay. Killing Jews did not confer NDSAP more power, it just reflected how much power they had already gain.
> Protestantism is not the only religion to suggest something like that.
If you can find me another religion that suggests blind obedience to state, and state above people please inform me.

Sam Harris disappointed me with his spiel on torture.

>>5118881
> I wouldn't call a protestant nation willing to fight offensive wars a very Christian.
But if they would, why should anyone give a shit what you think? You are defining the terms so that anyone who performs a harmful act cannot be Christian, and surely, it is UN-Christian, but then their self-identification was insufficient for their moral fibre's strength, and this shows "being Christian" (say, culturally, like the Germans) is not enough for one to follow the moral code. So you end up with a situation where someone un-Christian is going to lie, attempting to appear Christian, and no one can tell until their actions betray them. How can this happen? How can no one tell? I claim, it happens because they are IMPLICITLY TRUSTED, because they are, after all, Christian! People are not good enough liars to get away with it, unless it is let slide, out of this trust. "Oh, you're rounding up the Jews, eh?" "Yep. We're taking them to a special camp!" "Well, play nice, now!" The same is true in all these child abuse cases that have popped up. Priests are implicitly trusted, and more: the church wants to "handle it internally" which somehow involves not firing or excommunicating the priest... Which means the organization itself tacitly accept it.

>I'd like to remind you that atheism knows no good or evil.
People hurt others. Better? Do *I* need to describe to *you* what "evil" is?

>>5118906
How about Islam? The Government IS the religious elite. Rousseau, religious person and philosopher, suggested the people must be made to see the sovereign's right to power, because once they see, they will inevitably accept. I don't think many explicitly say as much, but a little digging shows interesting things. For instance, religiously based political organizations by definition work like this, because they can do no other, as the ultimate power above the government is God or whatever Divinity, and as followers of said God, want to bring His world to fruition, so defying the organization is to defy God.

>Christian morality forbids the seek of earthy power for its own sake.
>for its own sake
No True Power-grubber?

>it just reflected how much power they had already gain.
And pray tell, how did they gain this power? Nah, more; why?

The first mistake the enlightened, rational and pseudo-scientific blabbering people like Harris, Hitchens and co make is that they can scientifically and logically debunk something that is rooted in neither science nor logic.

Other than that, empirical evidence suggests the days "clearly" aren't numbered. Hell, look at how prevalent religion still is in rich and educated areas like northern and western europe and the USA. Only in top notch countries religion doesn't rule daily life. And think of the time (if ever) it will take for areas like africa and the middle east to come to even this level. just not gonna happen sammyboy

>>5118622
>ashamed to call myself a leftist/liberal
My god you're a fucking idiot, do you think a person can be a leftist and a liberal? Do you know what these words mean? You sound utterly clueless

>>5118608
you don't need religion to do bad

>>5119009
>is rooted in neither science nor logic.

Science?

"It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. Which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?"

>>5118687
it is do

>>5119043
So by that definition Hegel is a scientist.

>>5119043 Wait a second... >>5119009 you're false-flagging me, aren't you?

>>5119062
Being a scientist, being scientific, and using science are all different things.