The substantial cost of theistic morality

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9568
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Res Ipsa »

I propose that the "causes" of Stalin are many, and largely contingent. When belief in some kind of Supreme Being or other is historically near universal, it is always easy to claim some causal connection between anything and religion. Under DT's standard, we can argue that religion is the cause of everything, good and bad. It's an argument that reflects prejudice rather than reason.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9568
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Res Ipsa »

drumdude wrote:
Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:33 am
Rivendale wrote:
Sun Jan 16, 2022 11:41 pm


Socrates by todays standards would be considered a troll for his methods. And he used plenty of mockery.
Good point.
Is it? I can see an argument that Diogenes was his times' equivalent of a troll. But Socrates? Socratic irony was a technique he used in support of arguments -- not just to get an emotional reaction out of people.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
User avatar
Rivendale
God
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2021 5:21 pm

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Rivendale »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:18 am
drumdude wrote:
Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:33 am


Good point.
Is it? I can see an argument that Diogenes was his times' equivalent of a troll. But Socrates? Socratic irony was a technique he used in support of arguments -- not just to get an emotional reaction out of people.
I guess it depends on who you read.https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... 1E35A0B5B6 /
Or https://the-artifice.com/art-of-trolling/
doubtingthomas
God
Posts: 2769
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:04 pm

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by doubtingthomas »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:16 am
I propose that the "causes" of Stalin are many, and largely contingent. When belief in some kind of Supreme Being or other is historically near universal, it is always easy to claim some causal connection between anything and religion. Under DT's standard, we can argue that religion is the cause of everything, good and bad. It's an argument that reflects prejudice rather than reason.
Again, Christianity indoctrinated the Russians to believe that their leader was something more than a human ruler.
"I have the type of (REAL) job where I can choose how to spend my time," says Marcus. :roll:
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8980
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Rivendale wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:39 pm
Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:18 am


Is it? I can see an argument that Diogenes was his times' equivalent of a troll. But Socrates? Socratic irony was a technique he used in support of arguments -- not just to get an emotional reaction out of people.
I guess it depends on who you read.https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... 1E35A0B5B6 /
Or https://the-artifice.com/art-of-trolling/
Very few, if any, will read the abstract and linked article. I took a look at both, but are there excepts in particular you want us to note?

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
User avatar
Rivendale
God
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2021 5:21 pm

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Rivendale »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:08 pm
Rivendale wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:39 pm


I guess it depends on who you read.https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... 1E35A0B5B6 /
Or https://the-artifice.com/art-of-trolling/
Very few, if any, will read the abstract and linked article. I took a look at both, but are there excepts in particular you want us to note?

- Doc
Not really. I guess it depends on definitions. One excerpt denies the troll accusation.
One might wonder whether there is an art of trolling and an excellence; and indeed some say that Socrates was a troll, and so that the good man also trolls. And this is in fact what the troll claims: that he is a gadfly and beneficial, and without him to ‘stir up’ the thread it would become dull and unintelligent. But this is incorrect. For Socrates was speaking frankly when he told the Athenians to care for their souls, rather than money and honors, and showed that they lacked knowledge.
While the other supports.
Socrates sets a series of verbal and logical traps to make his opposition incapable of responding in a reasonable fashion. Socrates even goes as far as to set a double standard, telling Gorgias the same time that he is asking the Sophist to engage within a dialogue that if he is to speak with Socrates, he can only respond using the briefest responses (88). Meanwhile, Socrates throughout the dialogue uses lengthy responses- some even last for multiple pages.
Aristotle all appear to exhibit behavior that adheres to the Urban Dictionary definition of trolling, quoted above, “the art of deliberately, cleverly, and secretly pissing people off… using dialogue.”
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8980
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Thanks for that! I think it’s a delicate space that exists between a good conversationalist and a troll. The problem I have with trolls is they talk at people with no regard for adjusting their own knowledge, philosophy, or opinion on a matter. They waste people’s time because they act in bad faith, enjoying the act of inflicting conflict on others while never intending to increase their own knowledge on the subject at hand. I don’t mind polemicists as long as they can admit wrongdoing or acknowledge they learned something. Conflict isn’t bad, especially in a discussion forum, but an infinite loop of bad acting, to me, is the worst kind of trolling.

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
doubtingthomas
God
Posts: 2769
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:04 pm

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by doubtingthomas »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:38 pm
I have with trolls is they talk at people with no regard for adjusting their own knowledge, philosophy, or opinion on a matter.
:roll:
"I have the type of (REAL) job where I can choose how to spend my time," says Marcus. :roll:
doubtingthomas
God
Posts: 2769
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2021 6:04 pm

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by doubtingthomas »

huckelberry wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:39 am
Russian people may well have had a social concern for an orderly government. People in every country do this.
Not all countries believe their leader is divine. The Russians blindly followed their leader.
huckelberry wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:39 am
Another angle to look at the overlap is to notice that the communists who are force that create who Stalin was and put and maintained him in power were incidentally atheists but nobody is just an atheist. They have ideas.
I am not sure. I think most communist in Russia were Christian.
"I have the type of (REAL) job where I can choose how to spend my time," says Marcus. :roll:
User avatar
Rivendale
God
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2021 5:21 pm

Re: The substantial cost of theistic morality

Post by Rivendale »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:38 pm
Thanks for that! I think it’s a delicate space that exists between a good conversationalist and a troll. The problem I have with trolls is they talk at people with no regard for adjusting their own knowledge, philosophy, or opinion on a matter. They waste people’s time because they act in bad faith, enjoying the act of inflicting conflict on others while never intending to increase their own knowledge on the subject at hand. I don’t mind polemicists as long as they can admit wrongdoing or acknowledge they learned something. Conflict isn’t bad, especially in a discussion forum, but an infinite loop of bad acting, to me, is the worst kind of trolling.

- Doc
You mean they talk at you rather than with you? I get that. Happened on this thread. Weaving and dodging valid criticism as they continue to fan the embers of a mythological belief system.
Post Reply