Respect and Religion

[Chad]

The problem is that the volatility is artificially amped by those traders in various ways. This extra stress will eventually cause a crisis in the system. It won't happen overnight, but it's kind of like being overweight. The extra stress from the extra weight eventually causes some type of major failure.

[Riggerjack]

. Jacob is somewhat of an elitist insofar that those who know better actually know better.

And eventually, you will be wise enough to understand that knowing better, is not knowing best.

Society needs diversity of thought and thought process the same way populations need genetic diversity.

Honestly, your hand grenade scenarios are silly. If people with hand grenades are in the room with you, and you don't trust them with granades, leave the room! If people chose not to leave, and died, well, the world is not dangerously under-populated.

You will be happier, when you realize that the urge to force a collective good, is really just an urge to control others, and the collective, long term good is debatable.

The greatest good comes as the greatest number free to choose to do good.

[jacob]

@Riggerjack - Hehe, I'm thinking you're a dinosaur ... in the figurative/Cretaceous sense

In any case I agree in the short term, although in the long term ... then again, who ever cared about the long term.

[Ego]

The greatest good comes as the greatest number free to choose to do good.

Hum.

http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number ... -to-earth/

By the year 2050, 41% of Americans believe that Jesus Christ definitely (23%) or probably (18%) will have returned to earth.

That's a large number of people, many of whom believe that if he's going to all that trouble to come back then he'll definitely fix this whole global warming mess for us, lickety-split.

But shit, I don't want to be in the passenger's seat of that car. How do I get out?

[jennypenny]

That's a large number of people, many of whom believe that if he's going to all that trouble to come back then he'll definitely fix this whole global warming mess for us, lickety-split.

Got a source, or are you just assuming that? The report also states "Fully 58% see another world war as definite or probable over the next 40 years. Nearly as many (53%) expect the United States to face a terrorist attack with nuclear weapons." I could assume that those people (who outnumber those who think Jesus will return by a pretty big margin) might adopt the same fatalistic attitude and give up trying to improve things because they think war is inevitable.

If their (in)actions are the same as the religious group you pointed out, are you going to condemn them, too? Or only the religious people because you don't like their reason?

[Dragline]

Well, you could pick up and move. Same thing I say to people who complain endlessly about their job, their neighbors, their government and their taxes.

But you know they have to be mistaken -- in Isaac Newton's car it was definitely going to be 2060 according to his reading of the Book of Daniel. Definitely. My old-age pension plan is to re-popularize that theory. It's going to be YUGE.

One of the principal vanities of the human ego is assuming they live in magical, important times that are way more different or important than the past. For every Christian believing in the second coming in their near future I'm sure you can find many non-Christians predicting the arrival of the Singularity, visits by aliens both benign and not, a new caliphate and any number of unusual ecological or nuclear calamities that seem to AFFECT EVERYONE ON THE ENTIRE EARTH IN THE SAME WAY ALL AT THE SAME TIME. Heck, with the right ideology, we could also have a Workers Paradise or Galt's Gulch, take your pick.

Just watch "Soylent Green" for a prediction of overpopulation and a lack of agricultural products in developed societies in 2015 from 1973. Y2K anyone? Bueller?

It's a feature of humans to gravitate towards certainty and narratives about it. But you probably would have gotten higher percentages circa 1890 and 1990 -- we like round numbers, too. (This is Kahneman & Tversky 101)

I agree those people have something wrong with them -- in Christian terms, guilty of the sins of vanity and self-importance. In non-Christian terms, the difference between the didactic certainties of futurism and the less exciting day-to-day uncertainties of life. No true Christian . . . oh wait, that's another fallacy.

[Ego]

That's a large number of people, many of whom believe that if he's going to all that trouble to come back then he'll definitely fix this whole global warming mess for us, lickety-split.

Got a source, or are you just assuming that?

Yes, Peter 3:10-13

The report also states "Fully 58% see another world war as definite or probable over the next 40 years. Nearly as many (53%) expect the United States to face a terrorist attack with nuclear weapons." I could assume that those people (who outnumber those who think Jesus will return by a pretty big margin) might adopt the same fatalistic attitude and give up trying to improve things because they think war is inevitable.

If their (in)actions are the same as the religious group you pointed out, are you going to condemn them, too? Or only the religious people because you don't like their reason?

I do. How many times have I said that fear is contagious and it fuels many of the horrible things we see in society today?

That's why this "432 emails" comment was so utterly depressing to me.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=6614&start=25#p99787

432 emails of fear.

[Riggerjack]

. But shit, I don't want to be in the passenger's seat of that car. How do I get out?

We have a whole thread dedicated to global warming impact. I believe the concensus was to say goodbye to the sun, and move to the Puget Sound.

[theanimal]

Ego- North to Alaska. Give it 20 years, Anchorage will be the new San Diego . May be even sooner than that if the recent years are any indication.

[BRUTE]

You will be happier, when you realize that the urge to force a collective good, is really just an urge to control others, and the collective, long term good is debatable.

The greatest good comes as the greatest number free to choose to do good.

invisible hand is invisible

brute enjoys Riggerjack's unashamedly individualist/libertarian stance. brute is not convinced that individual freedom always leads to the optimal collective good, plenty of incentive traps out there. but even then, what's the alternative? making humans do it?

[Chad]

. Jacob is somewhat of an elitist insofar that those who know better actually know better.

And eventually, you will be wise enough to understand that knowing better, is not knowing best.

The pot calling the kettle black?

[jennypenny]

I do. How many times have I said that fear is contagious and it fuels many of the horrible things we see in society today?

That's why this "432 emails" comment was so utterly depressing to me.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=6614&start=25#p99787

432 emails of fear.

Ok, but I don't think we can assume that everyone will react the same way to fear, or in a destructive way. Take my hardcore prepper friends. Yes, they might be a little paranoid and some are convinced the end is nigh for various reasons. But what has their response been? They are more likely to be out of debt. They are more likely to attempt self-sustaining lifestyles and own an alternative energy system like solar or wind. Many avoid flying and spend their vacations camping or doing other outdoorsy activities. Fear might be their motivator, but they live lifestyles that are much better for the planet than my prius-driving Stepford neighbors who think they are doing more because they 'like' the green causes on facebook and recycle their Fiji water bottles.

Actions matter. We don't have to agree about the 'why' of them. I think that's aiming for the wrong target.

[jennypenny]

Actions matter. We don't have to agree about the 'why' of them. I think that's aiming for the wrong target.

To be clear, I'm not just talking about climate change. This thread is about religion and religious motivations. My point is that we can't assume that what we see as faulty reasoning will automatically produce negative actions, we shouldn't discount positive actions because we don't like the motivation behind them, and we can agree on what actions need to be taken even if we disagree about why or what the result might be.

That's why I have such a problem with Bill Nye. He doesn't just want action on climate change. He wants to convince religious people to think more like him. Why does he feel that's necessary? How much time will be lost combating climate change while he tries to convince people that their religious beliefs are wrong? Why not just focus on changing policies and leave the religious stuff out of the argument?


The Catholic church has greatly expanded the services offered to immigrants given current circumstances. (I'm sure other churches have also done this.) We've had special collections almost every week. Sometimes for cash, sometimes for specific items like furniture, coats, food, infant items, and school supplies. When the representative appears before the congregation to ask for help, they don't get into the politics of immigration or open borders. They shouldn't. I would guess half of the people in our congregation oppose open borders and want immigration curtailed. If you base the appeal on changing their stance towards immigration, you won't get much. If, however, you explain that there are hundreds of new immigrants coming in for help each week who need everything from shelter to medical services, you get a much better response (which they do). The politics of immigration don't factor into the decision to help people who are already here and in need.

You can convince people to take the right action without showing disrespect for their position on the larger issue or trying to change it.

[Ego]

Take my hardcore prepper friends. Yes, they might be a little paranoid and some are convinced the end is nigh for various reasons. But what has their response been? ...... Fear might be their motivator....

I am trying to follow the reasoning here.

Fear is good because some people use it to do the things we want them to do? So, for that reason it is good to spread fear?

The reaction to fear you are talking about is a learned response. It has been taught, ingrained, indoctrinated. (please watch this)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkaH3hEmV3M

I happen to believe there are nobler ways to achieve the same goals than scaring people senseless with conspiracy theories, but the two approaches are mutually exclusive. If we train that reaction to fear then people are blinded by it and we lose the ability to appeal to their better nature. They lose the faculty for reason and start believing whatever they are told. They believe they can buy their way out of it with zombie apocalypse tools and more powerful suvs. And they believe they can get out of it by being reborn.

[IlliniDave]

I am trying to follow the reasoning here.

Fear is good because some people use it to do the things we want them to do? So, for that reason it is good to spread fear?

Should folks in Flint be afraid of their water? Wasn't part of the gov't's initial response to that an attempt to squash the spread of fear? (That's not a rhetorical question--I think it's true but sometimes my memory betrays me).

Seat belt laws, drunk driving laws, child safety seats, vaccinations, regulations to protect the environment, food safety laws, creating an emergency fund, buying insurance, creating a storm shelter, wearing a life jacket, the whole climate change policy debate (i.e., what to do about it)--all things motivated ultimately by fear. Fear is probably the most basic emotion of all. Of course humans use it as motivation for positive action/change. Can it be misused? Obviously, but what can't be misused? Is fear good or bad? In my mind it just is. And fear isn't an objective quantity. Different people fear different things in different degrees.

[jennypenny]

@Ego--You only seem to object to fear when it's used to promote something you don't agree with. You use fear as a motivator in other situations ... viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4800&p=68332#p68332

No, we don't control everything, but we do control a lot. Fear of the unknown is a strong motivator. Take away even a portion of that fear and you remove some of the motivation to do everything within your power to be healthy.

You're going to die no matter what you do, Ego. Sometime around that 2050 date from the other post, your end will come. Yet you persist in doing all you can to make sure that your body is in the best shape possible before that day comes. You use fear as a motivator to keep working toward that goal. See where I'm going with this?

You just don't like fear based on religion or SHTF scenarios. Fair enough, but recognize it for what it is.

[Riggerjack]

The pot calling the kettle black?

Absolutely!

[Dragline]

Fear is good because some people use it to do the things we want them to do? So, for that reason it is good to spread fear?

The reaction to fear you are talking about is a learned response. It has been taught, ingrained, indoctrinated. (please watch this)

No, fear is actually an evolutionary response that we share with many animals, and certainly with almost all mammals. This actually relates to the last couple posts in the documentary thread about the existence and evolution of violence in human societies, which is related to both fear (on the animal side) and abstracted desire (on the human side). Watch the Ian Morris video.

This is why there is virtually no society without a punishment dogma, first expressed in religion and now secularized. There is an interesting new book about this written by a professor at Oxford (yes, an atheist):

https://global.oup.com/academic/product ... us&lang=en&#

"Drawing on new research from anthropology, evolutionary biology, experimental psychology, and neuroscience, Johnson presents a new theory of supernatural punishment that offers fresh insight into the origins and evolution of not only religion, but also human cooperation and society. He shows that belief in supernatural reward and punishment is no quirk of western or Christian culture, but a ubiquitous part of human nature that spans geographical regions, cultures, and human history."

Bottom line -- Rousseau was just wrong.

[Ego]

@Ego--You only seem to object to fear when it's used to promote something you don't agree with. You use fear as a motivator in other situations ... viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4800&p=68332#p68332

Ah, but you left out the first two paragraphs of my response that dealt with the moral hazards of longterm care insurance.

Apples to oranges. As you so eloquently say, we are all going to die. Death is a certainty. It is REAL. And my point in the post is, the natural fear can be used as a self-motivator and also it's not all that scary so we don't need overwhelming insurance to protect against it.

Using delusional (UNREAL) fears to 1) control others and 2) profit from the fear is... well, not very nice.

.....but a ubiquitous part of human nature that spans geographical regions, cultures, and human history."

I am not saying all fear is unnatural. I am saying that a lot of our fear is generated for a purpose (to control us). Some feel is natural and innate (snakes) but a lot is learned....

How Fear is Learned
http://psychcentral.com/news/2007/03/16 ... d/691.html

[Riggerjack]

.brute enjoys Riggerjack's unashamedly individualist/libertarian stance. brute is not convinced that individual freedom always leads to the optimal collective good, plenty of incentive traps out there. but even then, what's the alternative? making humans do it?

Individual freedom always leads to optimal collective good, when the good of individual freedom and costs of coercion are factored in. That optimal collective good doesn't match fantasy ideal good is merely the result of trying to impose fantasy on reality.

If incentive is poorly matched to objective, optimal collective good suffers. Change incentive or objective, don't try to herd cats, lure cats, or accept a wider disposition of cats. If you Need cats to be in a particular time/space/density, accept that this will be unpopular, disruptive, inefficient, difficult, and likely only of benefit to you.