This guy could very well be your next vice president

[Tampitump]

 

Don't worry, the buffoonery in this video is countered. Sedative not necessary

 

Now, ladies and gentlemen.....Mike Pence!

[thatsneakyguy]

It would be awesome if Aron Ra was the vice president. It would never happen though.

[imatfaal]

It would be awesome if Aron Ra was the vice president. It would never happen though.

 

love it

[DrmDoc]

Absolutely worth every second of the 17 minutes and 31 second required to view in total! Awesome, as the kids might say.

[MigL]

He ( Aron Ra ) presents himself as intelligent and professional in this video.

But in others, while still intelligent, he comes off as a bit of a dick.

 

In politics, its all about telling people what they want to hear.

Edited September 2, 2016 by MigL

[DrmDoc]

He ( Aron Ra ) presents himself as intelligent and professional in this video.

But in others, while still intelligent, he comes off as a bit of a dick.

 

In politics, its all about telling people what they want to hear.

 

I'm not familiar with his other works but I found this video enjoyable and very well done. Are you suggesting that the host is merely telling us what we want to hear?

[MigL]

Heck no.

He's not the politician.

[DrmDoc]

Heck no.

He's not the politician.

Clearly not, I didn't roll my eyes once while watching and listening to his commentary.

[Tampitump]

He ( Aron Ra ) presents himself as intelligent and professional in this video.

But in others, while still intelligent, he comes off as a bit of a dick.

Couldn't agree more, but I like Aron Ra for the most part. He seems like a cool guy and has an honest concern about religion and its infringement into American politics and public life.

As much as I hate to admit it, I can kind of see why most people reject evolution and believe in supernatural things instead. I recently had a 2-3 hour in-church conversation/debate with one of the leading Christian ministers in my area, and all I can say is that he showed me exactly what religion can do to someone's mind. Actually, I'm not sure if its that religion does this to people's minds, or if it's that people inherently fail to think critically and skeptically enough overcome falling victim to magical/wishful type thinking. I can remember what it was like for me to believe in things like god, alien visitations, ghosts, etc. It is definitely more fun to believe in those types of things for many people, I freely admit that. It's also easier to make up simple panaceas to answer tough questions, than to conduct critical, skeptical investigations to get to the bottom of what is actually true. Science always seems to be like the "party pooper". It spoils people's fun. It was much more fun to believe in the aliens, and to believe in the ghosts, and to believe in the gods. I think people want so badly to believe in these mysterious, other-worldly things that they tend to resist evidence that would render these beliefs untenable. That is why religious people tend to be very defensive about their beliefs. Deep down, they know that there is evidence and facts out there that would shatter their worldview to bits, so they fight it. This is also why many religions have built-in fail-safes for this, like telling believers that the people who present these facts are just trying to "deceive" them and are the "enemy". I know that I used to resist other evidence when I was a religious person who believed in god, ghosts, alien visitations, bigfoots, etc. I think it is the child in us all to think this way, and to wish deeply for magic to be real. But every piece of evidence thus far, without exception, shows it to only exist in our imaginations. I also see that once one crosses that threshold of critical thinking, and learns the value of evidence and skepticism in determining one's beliefs, there is really no going back to one's former way of thinking.

[DrmDoc]

I can remember what it was like for me to believe in things like god, alien visitations, ghosts, etc. It is definitely more fun to believe in those types of things for many people, I freely admit that. It's also easier to make up simple panaceas to answer tough questions, than to conduct critical, skeptical investigations to get to the bottom of what is actually true. Science always seems to be like the "party pooper". It spoils people's fun. It was much more fun to believe in the aliens, and to believe in the ghosts, and to believe in the gods. I think people want so badly to believe in these mysterious, other-worldly things that they tend to resist evidence that would render these beliefs untenable.

 

I don't think we're born to this world as critical thinkers or rational beings, I believe much of that is taught or passed on to us by those charged with our parenting. That parenting, I also believe, comes during a period in our lives where the ideas we assimilate are closely associated with our survival interests, which is an innate, preprogrammed aspect of our nature. We initially believe what we are told because it is taught or perceived as essential to our survival. Therefore, I think, religious ideology can become rooted on the bottom floor of our critical thinking by the very instincts with which we were born, which is our survival instinct. In many case, the ideology we assimilate will remain unchanged until it has been consistently and effectively proven incompatible with our survival interests and needs. If we were never taught religious ideology during some prior critical period of development, then there is nothing to change. However, if we were, reasoning alone likely isn't enough to dislodge an idea perceived as basic and essential to our mental, emotional, and physical survival. Along with reasoning, something has to take that ideology's place and that something has to be palpably, viscerally, and equally proven as effective as the ideology we are being asked to relinquish.

[MigL]

I don't agree at all.

 

Most people know what the odds are for winning the lottery.

Yet even 'critical thinkers' buy lottery tickets.

Why ? Because they're buying hope.

 

I'm not saying everyone needs it , but sometimes life throws us curves which we can't deal with.

( terminal cancer or old age/approaching death, the death of a loved one like a son or daughter, etc. )

It is at precisely those times, that Religion provides us a 'crutch' to lean on, and gives us 'hope' that our/their suffering has ended and we/they are going to a better place.

 

Science just cannot provide this.

It gives us cold, hard facts, not hope.

 

But that's not what this thread is about, though, is it ?

[DrmDoc]

I don't agree at all.

 

Most people know what the odds are for winning the lottery.

Yet even 'critical thinkers' buy lottery tickets.

Why ? Because they're buying hope.

 

I'm not saying everyone needs it , but sometimes life throws us curves which we can't deal with.

( terminal cancer or old age/approaching death, the death of a loved one like a son or daughter, etc. )

It is at precisely those times, that Religion provides us a 'crutch' to lean on, and gives us 'hope' that our/their suffering has ended and we/they are going to a better place.

 

Science just cannot provide this.

It gives us cold, hard facts, not hope.

 

But that's not what this thread is about, though, is it ?

 

Although I'm not sure with which of my statements you disagree or whether you disagree with me at all, dealing with survival affecting influences such as cancer and the threat of death--even with the loss of loved ones--religious ideology severs our innate or instinctive survival programming until it is proven ineffective to some measure of our individual satisfaction. Virtually any notion can replace religious ideology, whether scientific or not, when an individual perceives that the replacement ideology satisfies his or her survival needs, which also includes coping with loss.

Edited September 4, 2016 by DrmDoc

[iNow]

Most people know what the odds are for winning the lottery.

Actually, studies consistently show that people overestimate their chances of winning and actually don't understand the odds. There's a reason they call lotteries a tax on people who don't understand math.

 

It is at precisely those times, that Religion provides us a 'crutch' to lean on, and gives us 'hope' that our/their suffering has ended and we/they are going to a better place.

 

Science just cannot provide this.

It gives us cold, hard facts, not hope.

I have to disagree. Science is a process that provides hope to a countless many, me included. That you would conflate science with some collection of facts suggests that you don't really understand it, not that it's incapable of offering solace, comfort, awe, or joy and all without the woo, worship, and wackiness of religion. Edited September 4, 2016 by iNow

[DrmDoc]

I have to disagree. Science is a process that provides hope to a countless many, me included. That you would conflate science with some collection of facts suggests that you don't really understand it, not that it's incapable of offering solace, comfort, awe, or joy and all without the woo, worship, and wackiness of religion.

Indeed, science can and does satisfy as deeply as ideologies antithesis to science--faith based ideologies.

[Tampitump]

I have to disagree. Science is a process that provides hope to a countless many, me included.

Because you learned to think of it that way. This is not so for many of us. We grow up not being taught the value of evidence and skepticism. It is often much more fun, and much more reassuring of one's preferred reality to make up or embrace false, simplistic answers and to believe in the fantastic, than to force your beliefs to scale with evidence of reality. This is so for so many millions of people. Hence the overwhelming religiosity of 21st century Earth. I have to say that the findings of science are often not consoling to me, and I hate many off them, but I still accept them on the grounds of the evidence they provide.

[MigL]

Sorry DrmDoc, my post was meant for Tampitump.

 

Maybe science can provide some hope while your 10 yr old daughter is still alive and battling terminal cancer, in the way of new treatments.

But when she passes away and you have watched her struggle and deteriorate with the condition for months, do you say...

" Well science did all it could and almost cured her "

or do you say...

" Oh God, why my precious little girl ? "

 

What do you think you would say, iNow ?

 

And again, there is already a thread for this, in which I have made my views public, and so have you guys.

This is the political section where we should discuss an unlikely ( and unlikeable ) future vice-president, or the president of an atheist society ( Aron Ra ).

Both are intolerant of the other's point of view, but at least Aron Ra has facts and evidence on his side.

[Tampitump]

Sorry DrmDoc, my post was meant for Tampitump.

 

Maybe science can provide some hope while your 10 yr old daughter is still alive and battling terminal cancer, in the way of new treatments.

But when she passes away and you have watched her struggle and deteriorate with the condition for months, do you say...

" Well science did all it could and almost cured her "

or do you say...

" Oh God, why my precious little girl ? "

 

What do you think you would say, iNow ?

 

And again, there is already a thread for this, in which I have made my views public, and so have you guys.

This is the political section where we should discuss an unlikely ( and unlikeable ) future vice-president, or the president of an atheist society ( Aron Ra ).

Both are intolerant of the other's point of view, but at least Aron Ra has facts and evidence on his side.

I lack the equipment to rebut you.

 

I agree that Aron Ra would probably be somewhat intolerant, though I'm not convinced that he wouldn't be pro-free-speech as a politician.. The only real differences between the two are that Aron Ra is smart and understands that he is being intolerant, and Pence is an unlettered ignoramus and idiot who does not really understand how secular society works, and thinks the United States is a Christians-only social club.

 

I said I accept the consensus of mainstream science. I choose it every time. I don't have to like some of it's findings. Btw, I never specified which findings I didn't like. I love medicine and the germ theory of disease. It's the bleakness of scientific findings I don't like. We are apes, no purpose, we are going to die and never exist again, it doesn't matter whether we exist or not as far the universe is concerned, etc etc etc. Well, maybe this is just my "interpretation" of scientific scripture. lol

[iNow]

Maybe science can provide some hope while your 10 yr old daughter is still alive and battling terminal cancer, in the way of new treatments.

 

But when she passes away and you have watched her struggle and deteriorate with the condition for months, do you say...

" Well science did all it could and almost cured her "

or do you say...

" Oh God, why my precious little girl ? "

 

What do you think you would say, iNow ?

I would trust science to offer us the best chances and the most hope.

 

I'd ask people to fund research before asking them to pray.

 

I would not turn to the nonanswers of religion, neither during nor after such a trauma.

 

I can say this with confidence having done some serious suffering and experiencing analogous situations.

 

I prefer hard truths over simple specious "answers."

 

 

As for Pence, yes. He's just another ignorant fool blinded by a god fog combined with a deep personal ambition to control others and impose his worldview (a bit like ISIS that way).

 

 

[mp][/mp]

Because you learned to think of it that way. This is not so for many of us.

Irrelevant to my point which was to rebut the remedially false claim that science CANNOT offer hope and is little more than a collection of facts. Edited September 5, 2016 by iNow

[Tampitump]

I would trust science to offer us the best chances and the most hope.

 

I'd ask people to fund research before asking them to pray.

 

I would not turn to the nonanswers of religion, neither during nor after such a trauma.

 

I can say this with confidence having done some serious suffering and experiencing analogous situations.

 

I prefer hard truths over simple specious "answers."

 

 

As for Pence, yes. He's just another ignorant fool blinded by a god fog combined with a deep personal ambition to control others and impose his worldview (a bit like ISIS that way).

Spot on, and agreed.

 

Irrelevant to my point which was to rebut the remedially false claim that science CANNOT offer hope and is little more than a collection of facts.

My point was colloquial and only meant to convey what likely happens in the majority of cases. It was not intended as a claim that science CANNOT be consoling. MOST of the findings of science are consoling to me. Actually, its kind of weird. I'm consoled by ALL science in the sense that I'm happy I understand the truth. I'm definitely consoled by the methods of science and the fact that we have a way of uncovering what is most likely true. Sorry if it sounded sweeping.

 

Also, if you read my earlier posts in this thread, you'll see that when I made these statements, I was referring to the religious part of my brain. There is, despite my atheism, still a part of me that doesn't want to strain credulity sometimes. That's when I have to put my foot down and resist that urge. I'm not religious in the slightest, and believe ZERO of the nonsensical claims of religion, but the religious mindset can still affect freethinkers for some time after they have acquired their reason. Well, I can't say this for sure ,but I find this in myself quite often.

Edited September 5, 2016 by Tampitump

[iNow]

No worries. Keep in mind I was responding to MigL above anyway