Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,806 Year: 4,063/9,624 Month: 934/974 Week: 261/286 Day: 22/46 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is religion good for us?
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1420 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 159 of 181 (759139)
06-09-2015 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by mikechell
06-09-2015 7:40 AM


Re: Thanks for the welcome, Raphael.
Religion as "bad" ... 9/11/2001 ... anti-abortion activist ... anti-gay activist ... white supremacists ... and of course, radical muslims.
Even as easy answers go, the word religion seems to be doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
There's certainly a religious aspect to the way young men are radicalized in the Middle East. But ignoring all the political resentment, cultural ideas about manhood and rebellion, and economic vested interests in the phenomenon of modern terrorism is just way too self-serving. Religion in American history is such a vast subject that simply blaming right-wing numbnuttery on religion is turning a blind eye to the function of religion in such episodes as abolition, the Social Gospel, the civil rights struggle, and women's suffrage. And if you're going to make it sound like the terms radical and muslim go together, you're pretending the docile, Westernized form of Islam practiced in the USA either doesn't exist or isn't True Islam.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by mikechell, posted 06-09-2015 7:40 AM mikechell has not replied

  
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1420 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 180 of 181 (759252)
06-10-2015 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by Larni
06-10-2015 7:27 AM


Re: Wow! talk about off topic !!!
Larni writes:
If there is no evidence to convict John of killing Keith we can't just say:
"But I believe he did".
I agree with Jon that we can say exactly that. We just can't convict.
Not every matter is supposed to be approached like a criminal trial. As a society, we think it's preferable to acquit a guilty person than convict an innocent one. However, skepticism only protects us from making a type-1 error (accepting a false null hypothesis). There are plenty of cases where we act on little or no real evidence to avoid making a type-2 error (rejecting a true null hypothesis). We leave buildings when we hear a fire alarm instead of waiting for the sight of open flames; we take the kid to the emergency room when he falls off his bike instead of holding out until there's proof of bone breakage; and no offense, but we believe what pop science books tell us about the scientific consensus rather than reviewing the raw data first hand.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Larni, posted 06-10-2015 7:27 AM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by mikechell, posted 06-10-2015 9:09 AM MrHambre has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024