[Vision2020] Are you enabling extremism?

[lfalen]

Good statement. Dawkins make some good points, but is too extreme. Let every one believe what thet will as long as no harm is done to anyone.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: "Kai Eiselein, editor" editor at lataheagle.com
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:13:22 -0700
To: "Andreas Schou" ophite at gmail.com, "Paul Rumelhart" godshatter at yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Are you enabling extremism?

> I think Dawkins is focusing his energy on just one point rather than looking 
> at human nature as a whole.
> Whenever dogma, be it religious or political, is taken to the extreme, it is 
> a dangerous thing.
> There are polical groups on both the left and right that are willing to 
> kill, yet have no religious motivation. Most notably on the left are 
> extremist environmental groups that engage in eco-terrorism. Using Dawkins 
> line of reasoning, anyone who is environmentaly friendly could be seen as 
> supportive of eco-terrorism.
> Any belief, taken too far, can result in fanatical zealots willing to kill 
> anyone opposed to their viewpoint.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
> To: "Paul Rumelhart" <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "Vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2007 11:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Are you enabling extremism?
> 
> 
> >> So by treating faith as if it was a good ideal, it enables extremists to
> >> use it for almost any purpose they care to name.  So, are you enabling
> >> extremism?
> >
> > In terms of what I actually believe to be objectively true, I'm more
> > in line with Dawkins than I am, for instance, with Keely. However, in
> > terms of what I believe to be *correct*, in terms of ethics, I'm far
> > more in line with Keely than I am with Dawkins.
> >
> > Dawkins doesn't believe he has to prove that reasonable ethics are
> > better than unreasonable ethics. That may seem like a flip
> > observation, but I've seen no indication that it's better to construct
> > your ethical system based on reasonable, rather than unreasonable
> > principles. Either way, most people seem to get to roughly the same
> > answers.
> >
> > If ethics were a function of reason, rather than some deeper, more
> > automatic function of the human mind, then one would expect that a
> > greater capacity for reason would correlate strongly with a greater
> > capacity for ethical behavior. I haven't ever seen that to be the
> > case.
> >
> > -- ACS
> >
> > =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >               http://www.fsr.net
> >          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > =======================================================
> > 
> 
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================