From Ancient Times to the Present — Transferring Guilt Makes a Mockery of Justice
Transferring guilt across generations from ancient ancestors to their heirs was highly convenient for religious authorities.
A collection of 157 posts
Transferring guilt across generations from ancient ancestors to their heirs was highly convenient for religious authorities.
During his 2015 speech at a Boston mosque, U.S. President Barack Obama said: “And we can’t suggest that Islam itself is at the root of the problem. That betrays our values.”
Traditional militancy required careful selection, tests of loyalty, and secrecy.
According to polls, roughly half of people in the United States and Britain believe in ghosts. Furthermore, around 25% of people report having seen or been in the presence of a ghost.
It is only the theocratic movement of Islamism that seeks to silence critics with character assassination, blasphemy laws, threat of riot and the dirty murder of cartoonists.
The progress we as a society have made in recent decades—in women’s rights and in gay rights, for starters—largely stems from our overcoming religion-based prejudices.
Creationism is the belief that a superior being, unbound by the laws of nature, created the universe.
The kernel of an explanation lies in the fact that the majority think that Islam is incompatible with Western democracy and the Western way of life.
If Hirsi Ali’s critics are tempted to cite statistics minimizing the threat, they will have to explain at what point – after how many more deaths – they will consider it necessary to take action.
If we teach men and boys that simple chivalry is a form of sexism that must be opposed, how do we convince them to commit to the braver, more difficult chivalrous demands?
How about the Inquisition? Not a real reflection of Spanish Catholicism in the early modern period, right?
There’s nothing to do but keep on going, or else nothing will change. If we allow these threats, these fears, to shut us down, things won’t change.
Claiming that the war on terrorism is 'fictitious' is conspiratorial and irresponsible.
I see very little promise in grounding a moral realism (insofar as such a thing is ultimately a viable project) in terms of evolutionary fitness, and much more promise is taking Harris’ tack.
Make no mistake, we should be wary of the effects that beliefs might have.