Войти в систему

Home
    - Создать дневник
    - Написать в дневник
       - Подробный режим

LJ.Rossia.org
    - Новости сайта
    - Общие настройки
    - Sitemap
    - Оплата
    - ljr-fif

Редактировать...
    - Настройки
    - Список друзей
    - Дневник
    - Картинки
    - Пароль
    - Вид дневника

Сообщества

Настроить S2

Помощь
    - Забыли пароль?
    - FAQ
    - Тех. поддержка



Пишет Misha Verbitsky ([info]tiphareth)
@ 2018-06-12 19:04:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Настроение: sick
Музыка:MAN OR ASTRO MAN EEVIAC Embedded Electronic Variably Integrated Astro Console
Entry tags:politics, youtube

дикие люди
Светов за визовый режим
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geicFhyGVa0
все правильно говорит

открытые границы с культурными странами
это хорошо, но с дикими странами не надо открытых границ

потому что дикие люди это не вполне люди вообще,
это биомусор типа путиноидов



(Читать комментарии) - (Добавить комментарий)


[info]tiphareth
2018-06-13 12:48 (ссылка)
>атеизм в духе Докинза есть развитие
>пуританства

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Atheism#Atheism_as_an_organized_religion

One of the widest misconceptions, often used as a strong criticism, is that atheism is a religion. However, while there are secular religions, atheism is most commonly defined as "no religion." To expand the definition of "religion" to include atheism would thus destroy any use the word "religion" would have in describing anything. It is quite often pointed out that if atheism is a religion it would be akin to stating that the act of not collecting stamps is a hobby, or that being unemployed is an occupation. Following from this, atheists do not worship Charles Darwin or any other individual. Although some think that atheism requires evolution to be a complete worldview,[44] there is no worship of anything or anyone in atheism, and acceptance of evolution isn't exclusive to atheists — for that matter there is no necessity for an atheist to accept the evidence for evolution (Stalin is a good example: he rejected Darwinian evolution, promoting Lysenkoism instead, and he consistently purged evolution biologists in favor of Lysenkoists). By definition, if atheists worshiped Darwin as a god, they wouldn't be atheists. Basically, "atheism" is a word for a negative. However, this leads to a few semantic issues.

This confuses the religious because they are used to terms of religious identity being a declaration of allegiance to a view, rather than of separation from. This confusion then leads them to assert that a denial of their religion must be an avowal of another. They then do things like declare the so-called New Atheists as hypocrites for denigrating religion while sticking to an unstated one of their own, or declare that because science has an epistemology and religion has an epistemology, therefore science is just another faith (when religion's problem is that science's epistemology provably works much better than religion's).

A standard response is to note that if atheism is a religion, then "bald" is a hair color, "not kicking a kitten" is a form of animal abuse, and so on.

(Ответить) (Уровень выше)


(Читать комментарии) -