worst thing man has ever unleashed upon the earth

[Emperor Ing]

Of course, picking up the actual books themselves and reading them is a good place to start, school or no school. The danger in that though is that you lose a lot of valuable context that a classroom environment can give to a work; example: If you just read Nietzsche without at least understanding/nominally-familiar-with Kant, Hegel, the British empiricists aka Hume, and perhaps the Greek epics, you are not going to see him in the same way, and some meaning is lost.

Actually, you make the false assumption that the education in the US understands "Nietzsche, Kant, Hegel, the British empiricist etc" and that getting degrees in history and philosophy gives the vast majority of those with it a meaningful employment. I wouldn't bother talking about such things with someone who thinks they know about it because they have some history or philosophy degree, because from my experience they oftentimes don't know dick about it. And also from my own experience, philosophy and liberal arts majors end up as construction workers, burger flippers and straight to the unemployment line. All they get is a false sense of higher intelligence and end up being that annoying guy who thinks he's smarter than everyone when he's working a crappy job with no real direction in life.

Read my post again, pl0x. You missed key points, ie, everything.
If you subscribe to that you, you are truly underestimating the scholars and professors of America. Perhaps in a community college the rigors are different, but you might find different examples, as you so trumpet, in major liberal arts colleges.

Hell, the university I go to, as well as shitloads of universities I know, the class sizes are on average 40 people or less. The classes with 400 students are precisely the paths you are trumpeting as "the different path" ie: medicine, science/biology, and engineering. So to say "there's too much research, not enough teaching" is a gross overstatement on your part, that honestly warrants NO consideration.

Also, you fallaciously assume that just by NOT getting a liberal arts degree, you are guaranteed employment. This is also FALSE. The market is inundated with Business majors, along with Engineers (who can't even erect dispensers at opportune locations) and Pre-Meds. More and more I have heard of people in those professions hiring OUTSIDE of the 'standard set' of majors, because nothing differentiates a thousand Business majors other than different names (in fact, having liberal arts majors or minors is now becoming a more common way of hiring someone in a field not necessarily connected with liberal arts). Why you keep on assuming that there are no opportunities for people with liberal arts degrees is frankly infuriating, considering of all the fucking examples to the contrary; sorry your backwater part o' town has a bunch of LA-folks in shitty jobs, but I know plenty of practical major people in shit jobs, too. So please, rethink your arguments before you just hide behind the shield of "examples", because anyone with a brain will soon figure out example after example will just be ad hoc argument with no real substance. But you'll say "But you used examples!" Yeah, I did, but your logic is not sound no matter how you look at it.


Also angering me is your assumption that jobs beneath the oh-so-vaulted ideals of 'jobs in medicine and engineering' are clearly, since they are not practical, are not worth even having. Because again, this is also false.

Books have no practical purpose? Well, I think I know where you're going with that, but the vast majority of liberal arts majors don't write books, they end up bagging groceries. You don't gain any insight or skills in the fields of economics by bagging someone elses groceries, that's for sure.

Please read my post again, because, as becoming your stands on education and meaning in education, you totally did not get anything I said. And I mean anything.


You may think that is condescending, but I am seeing nothing but condescension from a guy who thinks he has everything figured out because he wants to get into engineering, because of course a job with money is obviously the right path.

Your utilitarian approach to education may help people become the assistant lower-manager at some shitty clothing store chain, but not much else. Also, your assumptions that everyone you know (again, a shitty argument) ends up 'bagging groceries' are also not worth warranting as a serious argument.

Your idea of what makes a 'meaningful' education is also repugnant and disgusting. If 'meaningful' just means "getting money" (while ignoring at the same time everyone else WHO ACTUALLY MAKES MONEY TOO), then the human race has landed itself in one shit-fuck of an asshole.



----

Also: read Nietzsche's "On the Genealogy of Morals" (Kaufmann translation) to see why modern atheists and atheistic scientists have become a dogmatic religion in their own right. Suffice to say: they believe in 'truth', without ever questioning what 'truth' even means. Thus, faith in an undefinable concept.

[Steamlord]

[spoiler]The Pain Series.[/spoiler]

PLEASE don't look it up. If you have even the tiniest bit of innocence left in you it will destroy you. You may be tempted to look at it since I'm telling you not to, but just DON'T. Trust me. NO, this is not reverse psychology. I'm serious. You'll regret it.

[Emperor Ing]

Oh and canceling Firefly and Arrested Development was a dick move by humanity.

[sharonlover]

@IMB - I didn't word that right. I said some people 'treat' it as a religion. My definition of religion doesn't quite follow the oxford dictionary; HOWEVER, the supreme court considers Atheism a religion by law in order to protect their 1st Amendment rights.

So should atheists fight the courts for stating Atheism is a religion when in fact it isn't? (retoricle question...I expect no answer but the thought crossed my mind).

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874

@Yutz - Indeed Access 2007 is a pain in the ass. The whole Ribbon system is a pain in the ass except in Word 07' where the live preview is pretty awesome

[Steamlord]

Oh and canceling Firefly and Arrested Development was a dick move by humanity.

Oh yes. Well, I haven't actually seen Arrested Development (it's on my to do list), but Fox is just dumb as hell for cancelling Firefly. Thanks to them, all we've got are one season and a mediocre movie.

[Redwing]

If the Bible says "Thou shall not kill", anyone who disobeys this can't be considered Christian.

Woah woah woah woah, I'd just like to point out here that that isn't how Christianity works...
You follow Christ and you resist temptation, but sinning doesn't kick you out. In fact, as far as my view of Christianity goes, you can't get kicked out. You can only walk away.

So, uh, what were we talking about again? This thread is Is There A God? II interposed with random Disturbing Pornography References. Can we rename it?

[Outlaw]

Woah woah woah woah, I'd just like to point out here that that isn't how Christianity works...
You follow Christ and you resist temptation, but sinning doesn't kick you out. In fact, as far as my view of Christianity goes, you can't get kicked out. You can only walk away.

QFT, pretty much this.

What's Access 2007?

A really annoying database program.

[IMB706]

in major liberal arts colleges.

Ask 95 percent of people with just liberal arts majors if they're massively in debt and if they have any real meaningful employment, that has good wages, good access and good advancement. They'll say no. People in my family have have liberal arts degrees and they all work at department stores and such. My mom still works at Target at 54.

I'm certainly not bothering with liberal arts.

u, you are truly underestimating the scholars and professors of America.

I don't. Almost everyone with liberal arts degrees doesn't become scholars and professors. That's the point. They end up serving you pastrami at Subway.

Hell, the university I go to, as well as shitloads of universities I know, the class sizes are on average 40 people or less.

I never said all universities, and that's not even my biggest problem with them. Debt is actually the number one issue I have with universities. In California, it's damned difficult to get into debt with community colleges, yet you can easily get into 10 thousand dollars in debt at your first year at a UC. It's ridiculous.

The classes with 400 students are precisely the paths you are trumpeting as "the different path" ie: medicine, science/biology, and engineering

No, it's the major universities that have major liberal arts degrees available that don't do dick. UCLA, USC, you get the idea. If I ever do choose to go to a university, I'll go down the CSU route, which is more like what you're describing.

Also, you fallaciously assume that just by NOT getting a liberal arts degree, you are guaranteed employment.

Um, nope. I never said that. I said simply getting a liberal arts degree is not a guaranteed means of employment. I know this from experience, too many people lose with useless degrees.

The market is inundated with Business majors, along with Engineers (who can't even erect dispensers at opportune locations) and Pre-Meds.

So? Your point being? I never denied that.

Business majors are among the most useless degrees ever, but still on average they get better jobs than liberal arts degrees. My big sister is not headed towards a path of success (she's a business major) but she's on a better path than liberal arts majors.

"there's too much research, not enough teaching" is a gross overstatement on your part, that honestly warrants NO consideration.

::rollseyes:: yeah, okay.

(in fact, having liberal arts majors or minors is now becoming a more common way of hiring someone in a field not necessarily connected with liberal arts)

Not anymore. Back in the day, yes, it was easy to get into the job market with a simple general bachelors in liberal arts, but the job market has changed, and that's no longer an accessible route. I don't even think that's totally a bad thing.

Why you keep on assuming that there are no opportunities for people with liberal arts degrees

I never said there was no opportunities whatsoever. I said the majority. If you go down the liberal arts path and get a good job, good for you. Most don't, that's the issue. You keep putting words in my mouth and assuming absolutes with me.

infuriating Also angering me

I think that's a problem here, you're taking this personally.

So please, rethink your arguments before you just hide behind the shield of "examples", because anyone with a brain will soon figure out example after example will just be ad hoc argument with no real substance.

So evidence doesn't matter?

sorry your backwater part o' town has a bunch of LA-folks in shitty jobs, but I know plenty of practical major people in shit jobs

I don't even live in LA, and this is a national problem. Utah is one of the only states that doesn't really have this problem, on this level anyway, since they strangely have a better focus on education, minus all that mormon stuff.

hat jobs beneath the oh-so-vaulted ideals of 'jobs in medicine and engineering' are clearly,

I never said anything is beneath anything. It's all relative. I don't want a liberal arts major because I don't want my time wasted that I could be using on pursuits I'd rather do and life choices better suited towards me.

Please read my post again, because, as becoming your stands on education and meaning in education, you totally did not get anything I said. And I mean anything.

Um, thanks for clearing that up.

You may think that is condescending, but I am seeing nothing but condescension from a guy who thinks he has everything figured out

I never claim I have everything figured out, I just am choosing what path I've decided is best for me. I've studied a lot about it, my brother too, we even check the Department of Labor to see the current trends. I want to make sure I live a comfortable life and not some agonizing life like a lot of americans live.

because of course a job with money is obviously the right path.

I mean, it's all a matter of opinion, but a job without money is a right path? If you don't want an income, why bother getting a job? Sure, let's see there was a 60,000 dollar a year job that was comfortable and a 100,000 dollar a year job that was stressful, I'd probably pick the 60, but both are comfortable incomes that facility opportunities. I don't want some shitty minimum wage job with long hours and no opportunities. That's not a life to live.

Your utilitarian approach to education may help people become the assistant lower-manager at some shitty clothing store chain,

What, we don't have an epidemic of that? I know plenty of people who flat out say they are working to become grocery store managers. This is about the biggest aspiration americans have nowadays mostly because of the education system we have. Again, don't want that.

Plus Utilitarianism is what's promoted in America in all facets of life. People strive for happiness and what makes them feel good at the moment, not in the long run. I.E. people pick degrees that seem cool and don't research if it's going to get them anything.

Your idea of what makes a 'meaningful' education is also repugnant and disgusting. If 'meaningful' just means "getting money" (while ignoring at the same time everyone else WHO ACTUALLY MAKES MONEY TOO),

I find your emotional appeals very weird. So apparently employment shouldn't be about getting an income, what's needed to keep your life afloat, you know, so you don't live on the streets digging in garbage cans for food, is bad? That's what a job and a career is all about. If making money disgust you, then well, don't make it then.

then the human race has landed itself in one shit-fuck of an asshole.

Facilitating successful lives with opportunities sure is not my idea of "shit-fuck." But to each his own.

Also: read Nietzsche's "On the Genealogy of Morals" (Kaufmann translation) to see why modern atheists and atheistic scientists have become a dogmatic religion in their own right. Suffice to say: they believe in 'truth', without ever questioning what 'truth' even means. Thus, faith in an undefinable concept.

Uh, got any modern examples? Don't give me a hundred year old book to tell me what's going on in modern times. If something exist, just give the evidence for it. That's what I do.

So should atheists fight the courts for stating Atheism is a religion when in fact it isn't?

I wouldn't consider WorldNetDaily, a far right Christian news source, as an objective source on Atheism and religion. But here's what I found on that:

Legal status of atheism as a religion

In the United States, atheism is considered equivalent to religion under the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause. In August 2005 the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed previous Supreme Court precedent[7] by ruling atheism was equivalent to a religion for 1st amendment purposes.[8][9] The plaintiff in the case was a prison inmate who was blocked by prison officials from creating an inmate group to study and discuss atheism. The court ruled this violated the inmate's rights under the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_an ... a_religion

All that says is the inmate wanted his atheism acknowledged on the same level as other religions. That doesn't make atheism a specific religion. I've never put down that I'm part of any religion on any census.

Also, it's one inmate, trying to talk to a few other inmates about atheism. They were trying to end harassment just because of the fact they were atheist. Prisons are highly religious by the way.

My definition of religion doesn't quite follow the oxford dictionary

How do you mean? I'm not challenging you, I'm honestly curious on how you view religion.

I think people see a bunch of atheist buying books from Richard Dawkins and conclude that they revere someone like that as some sacred leader. Some do, no doubt I know from experience, most don't though. I'm certainly a critic of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, the trinity of big name atheist.

Anyway, I'm done for right now. I gotta do some stuff, talk to you guys later. Remember though, just calm down and think things over, don't get all angry, just discuss it in a calm and friendly manner. I'm just trying to have a discussion. I've always enjoyed the input people have here.

I'm really surprised this thread hasn't been locked yet...

Oh and canceling Firefly and Arrested Development was a dick move by humanity.

I never got a chance to see Firefly (I did see Serenity though), but I really wanted to see it, and I rather liked Arrested Development.

[IMB706]

I watched Serenity and I didn't think it was that great of a film. Never saw the tv show though.

[mental]

Yep, that's all true. It should be noted that Joseph Gobbels was religious, but anti Christian. It's believed by some that he was molested by catholic priest, as he helped head Nazi programs against Catholic child sex abuse. Still, Nazis, christian or not, were religious, and many were Christian.

As far as I know there's no evidence that Goebbels was himself a victim. The programme was short-lived and initiated as a propaganda campaign on the heels of Mit brennender Sorge in order to de-fuse its impact, and failed to uncover very many cases of abuse -- fewer than were uncovered in secular education, or to the embarassment of the party, the Hitler Youth. (This was before the collapse of vetting/formation in the seminaries in the mid-20th century gave rise to the wave of abuses that subsequently crested about 25 years ago in the US.)

Positive Christianity depicts Jesus as an Aryan, Jew killing fighter. Which you can't call actual Christianity. If the Bible says "Thou shall not kill", anyone who disobeys this can't be considered Christian.

That's the typical "they aren't REAL christians, I am." I won't bother with that, because it's pointless. They aren't anti-Christian if they believed in Christianity (whether it's your brand or not) and justified their actions through Christianity.

Agreed. It's an instance of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. Besides which, if failing to keep the Ten Commandments disqualified anyone from being Christian, there wouldn't be any Christians left.

But we probably should try to define "Christian"; I'm not sure everyone means the same thing by it.

[Emperor Ing]

Education needs to be more than just training for a career, though. Because if it is just career training, you have brain-dead people who know computer programming, but little else, because they don't care about anything than making money. And that's where I see your ultimate view of education leading, to a bunch of brain-dead people concerned ONLY with making money, without any concern in actual humanity.


Another problem is that you are constantly saying that "these solutions work for me in MY experience, though" and at the same time are shooting down the other 'solutions' as lesser solutions, which makes no logical sense, because you are ultimately saying, DESPITE your placating attempts, that 'My way is the only right way because X' and that is what is so immensely frustrating, no matter how much you try to deny that you are NOT saying that.

And:
IMB, just because a book was written one hundred years ago, does make it inaccurate. The reason old books are still read is BECAUSE they still resonate with people.

Denying that is saying you are ignorant.

Also considering the fact that Mr. N. has largely shaped modern thought single-handedly speaks that what he says has a lot of weight.

The book IS evidence, because it provides a logical and cohesive argument for its case, leading to recognizing said argument in your own modern environment. And I already told you the cliff-notes version in the same sentence, so I don't know what more you want. Absence of evidence is not evidence etc etc etc.

Like I said, in regards to the atheism as a religion:
1) Scientists/atheistic materialists say they don't believe in undefinable concept "God"
2) Instead they say they believe and strive for concept of 'truth' or "scientific truth"
3) Such points are undefinable concepts that they have faith in existing
4) Atheistic scientists/atheistic materialists believe in undefinable concept "truth"

In the book, N. says that this is the reason that for all of their posturing, this is why atheists were no different than ascetic religious people (he hates both groups), they just couch the ideology in a different terminology and call it a day. You can see this in people like Carl Sagan or Richard Dawkins, vehement atheists couching ascetic religious principles in scientific terminology. N. says they THINK they are being the great opposition to 'big bad religion' but are in fact working hand-in-hand to crush the human spirit together.

[Steamlord]

I watched Serenity and I didn't think it was that great of a film. Never saw the tv show though.

Just trust me when I say that Firefly is a different beast entirely. From what I understand, the only reason they even made Serenity is because the fans were clamoring for something, anything, that continued the Firefly plot and tied up loose ends. And Serenity did that, but it lost a lot of what made the show great. The entire "western in space" aspect, for instance. So please don't let the movie turn you off of watching the show.

[sharonlover]

it hasn't been locked because no ones flamed anyone and it's stayed civil...why would it be locked?

Anyhow, I don't discuss my personal view on religion, it's not for the masses that's it from me in regards to that subject, this really needs to get back to the topic title and religion really isn't one of the worst things introduced to man, in my opinion