I have an issue with you taking an absolutist position. There’s a whiff in the air that smells like binary, black and white thinking.
What exactly do you present as evidence for your claim then? Saying something is binary thinking isn't engaging the actual argument being presented. It's dodging it. Saying someone else has good ideas but not presenting an argument that uses them in anyway or even demonstrating familiarity with their content is dodging it.
Taking the position that you have without allowing for alternative views is a bit on the black and whitish side, in my opinion. Take it up with Jordan Peterson.
What exactly do you present as evidence for your claim then? Saying something is binary thinking isn't engaging the actual argument being presented. It's dodging it. Saying someone else has good ideas but not presenting an argument that uses them in anyway or even demonstrating familiarity with their content is dodging it.
Taking the position that you have without allowing for alternative views is a bit on the black and whitish side, in my opinion. Take it up with Jordan Peterson.
Regards,
MG
Take what up with Jordan Peterson? That you googled into his name and believe he has something to say that you haven't read or understand? But have 110% confidence is an argument for Christianity being the foundation of western liberal thought?
Anyway, the point was that your claim the Judeo-christian tradition is foundational to a free society is not historically accurate. The framework for our societal freedoms arose out of conflict with the religious and monarchist traditions where divinely appointed kings and church authority was challenged by the notions of universal rights, epistemological knowledge, and use of the scientific method.
Anyway, the point was that your claim the Judeo-christian tradition is foundational to a free society is not historically accurate. The framework for our societal freedoms arose out of conflict with the religious and monarchist traditions where divinely appointed kings and church authority was challenged by the notions of universal rights, epistemological knowledge, and use of the scientific method.
I don’t think your position is quite as cut and dried as you would like it to be.
Regards,
MG
I read the article. I'm not sure if it's worse if you linked to it without reading it? Or if you read it and thought, "Yeah! That nails my point exactly!"
Question: what bits of religion do YOU think served as the foundation on which western liberal democracy is founded?
Last edited by honorentheos on Wed Feb 03, 2021 1:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Take what up with Jordan Peterson? That you googled into his name and believe he has something to say that you haven't read or understand? But have 110% confidence is an argument for Christianity being the foundation of western liberal thought?
You are a fraud.
I’m quite familiar with Jordan Peterson. Been listening to his podcasts for quite a while. Sorry to have to say this, but you’re a liar. And yes, there are intelligent folks that look at the Judaeo Christian tradition as having significant influence on western thought. Obviously this doesn’t dovetail with your bastardized version of history.
My guess is you’re a 1619 kind of guy.
Get off your high horse you imposter/poser.
Regards,
MG
Last edited by mentalgymnast on Wed Feb 03, 2021 2:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Yet clearly you aren't one of them given I've yet to see you do anything but name drop. Just make a clear statement that shows you have an informed position. One. Not, "Jordan Peterson disagrees with you!" But,"XYZ is a foundational element of the liberal western tradition that exists because of the Judeo-Christian religious tradition."
I believe rather strongly that the American experiment is a product of the Enlightenment. I had no idea what 1619 was referencing and frankly, it says something that you are making this a battle built on conservative talk radio talking points, pro and cons.
Anyway, XYZ is a foundational concept built into liberal western democracy that would not exist but for the Judeo-Christian religious tradition.
I'll even let you in on this: I would name a few myself. I don't think they are fundamental in the way the benefits of the Enlightenment that grew out of conflict with said religious and societal traditions are fundamental. But I framed the question to allow you to succeed if you'll just put in a little damn effort beyond posting hyperlinks to things you don't understand or haven't read.
Reasoned faith... meaning what exactly? Give an example the demonstrates how this reasoned faith works.
Looking at evidence pro and con and intuitively choosing what makes sense when all is said and done. 1. Durability of the scriptural canon and the teachings of Christ in the modern world. 2. Anthropic Principle. 3. Book of Mormon evidences. More, but there are some starters.