more deaths in Germany...

[Stranger]

Or you could take a rational view, and not try and use the term 'pedantically' as an attempted well poisoning.

It's not like saying that an ideology is responsible for things is exactly uncommon in human discourse, so I don't see how you dismissing an instance of it because it's a "human creation" is anything but pedantic.

The point about religious beliefs is that they specifically claim an outside influence, if you argue that they actually have responsibility then you are buying into that approach.

How the hell do you come to that conclusion? How is it that saying a belief is responsible for something, somehow buys into the belief itself?

[Nearly Sane]

It's not like saying that an ideology is responsible for things is exactly uncommon in human discourse, so I don't see how you dismissing an instance of it because it's a "human creation" is anything but pedantic.

How the hell do you come to that conclusion? How is it that saying a belief is responsible for something, somehow buys into the belief itself?

How is the belief itself in any sense responsible?  That you can't see the argument as being anything other than 'pedantic' has no use in the question. You are using the term 'pedantic' as some form of charge to make it questionable without actually questioning it logically. Hence the charge of poisoning the well.

[Rhiannon]

Beliefs can do nothing. Do we have photos of beliefs? Can we touch them? Sample their dna? What weapons do beliefs have?

[Stranger]

How is the belief itself in any sense responsible?  That you can't see the argument as being anything other than 'pedantic' has no use in the question. You are using the term 'pedantic' as some form of charge to make it questionable without actually questioning it logically. Hence the charge of poisoning the well.

Firstly, it's debatable to what extent we might say that beliefs themselves are responsible for things - they certainly have a big role in human behaviour.

Secondly, when somebody says that Nazism or communism or whatever is responsible for certain things, it's quite obvious that they mean those people who subscribe to the relevant belief are the ones who actually carried out the actions - which brings us back to pointing that out being pedantry.

Thirdly, you didn't answer my question: how is saying that a belief is responsible for somehow buying into the belief?

[Nearly Sane]

Firstly, it's debatable to what extent we might say that beliefs themselves are responsible for things - they certainly have a big role in human behaviour.

Secondly, when somebody says that Nazism or communism or whatever is responsible for certain things, it's quite obvious that they mean those people who subscribe to the relevant belief are the ones who actually carried out the actions - which brings us back to pointing that out being pedantry.

Thirdly, you didn't answer my question: how is saying that a belief is responsible for somehow buying into the belief?

No, if you don't think there are external things such as gods causing beliefs, then it is not debatable about how much beliefs themselves are responsible for things. They have no agency. And stating that they have a big role in what happens is a truism here unless you are arguing for agency.

And again, if it is about the individuals then the beliefs are merely expressions of the individuals. The problem with the use of the beliefs themselves as being in any sense responsible is that it views things as being 'leadership's because they are external!


As to your question, it's not about buying into the belief itself, but about buying into the idea that beliefs are externally responsible.

[Grace of God]

The bit where you said it was the religion of peace.

And you've gone downhill since then. Quite an achievement given the nature of your OP.

it is quite true and obvious, islam is not a religion of peace..

[Nearly Sane]

it is quite true and obvious, islam is not a religion of peace..

Strawman and irrelevant to the case.

[Stranger]

No, if you don't think there are external things such as gods causing beliefs, then it is not debatable about how much beliefs themselves are responsible for things. They have no agency.

Neither would an empty mind. There is much that could be debated about beliefs, memetics, responsibility, and agency but, leaving such esoteric debates aside, the point is this: is anybody really likely to be confused into thinking that phrases such as "Christianity is has been responsible...", "racism is responsible for..." and the like, actually meant anything but that the people who subscribe to those beliefs (possibly under the direction of organisations relating to said beliefs) are the ones who had carried out the actions?

If so, you had a point - if not, you were being pedantic.

[Robbie]

it is quite true and obvious, islam is not a religion of peace..

In your opinion. I wonder how many Muslim friends/acquaintances/colleagues you have. All religions preach 'peace', not all members of those religions practice it.

What that has to do with the recent German atrocity I don't know.

You and Trippymonkey should form a coalition.

[Steve H]

Neither would an empty mind. There is much that could be debated about beliefs, memetics, responsibility, and agency but, leaving such esoteric debates aside, the point is this: is anybody really likely to be confused into thinking that phrases such as "Christianity is has been responsible...", "racism is responsible for..." and the like, actually meant anything but that the people who subscribe to those beliefs (possibly under the direction of organisations relating to said beliefs) are the ones who had carried out the actions?

If so, you had a point - if not, you were being pedantic.

Metonymy.

[Nearly Sane]

Neither would an empty mind. There is much that could be debated about beliefs, memetics, responsibility, and agency but, leaving such esoteric debates aside, the point is this: is anybody really likely to be confused into thinking that phrases such as "Christianity is has been responsible...", "racism is responsible for..." and the like, actually meant anything but that the people who subscribe to those beliefs (possibly under the direction of organisations relating to said beliefs) are the ones who had carried out the actions?

If so, you had a point - if not, you were being pedantic.

Since much of the argument in favour of Christianity and the like is precisely about some form of agency of the belief, then I would suggest yes. Indeed the argument that Littleroses is responding to, is as a pro Christian argument, already doing that.

[Robbie]

Metonymy.

Very good for a postie  .

[Rhiannon]

I’m still not sure what Jens the mentally unwell German has to do with Islam.

[Steve H]

Very good for a postie  .

Watch it, sunshine - this postie's got a 1st-class BA Hons! 

[Grace of God]

Strawman and irrelevant to the case.

the media must lie every day then, as there seems to be a wealth of proof for islam being no peaceful religion..

[Stranger]

Indeed the argument that Littleroses is responding to, is as a pro Christian argument, already doing that.

No - it was an anti-Islam argument - a religion I'm assuming GoG does not believe in - and LR's response was clearly from the point of view of disbelief.

[Nearly Sane]

I’m still not sure what Jens the mentally unwell German has to do with Islam.

Jens, that is mentally ill, is as mad as your IS, when it comes to driving your car at mild green Germans.

[Rhiannon]

the media must lie every day then, as there seems to be a wealth of proof for islam being no peaceful religion..

There’s also a lot of stuff in the media about Christianity being a religion of ignorant, prejudiced bigots. Would you say that is accurate?

[Nearly Sane]

No - it was an anti-Islam argument - a religion I'm assuming GoG does not believe in - and LR's response was clearly from the point of view of disbelief.

But GoG does believe in Christianity. And it doesn't matter if you argue from disbelief if you validate the idea that beliefs are somehow external which is GoG's position. You are then inconsistent

[Steve H]

Jens, that is mentally ill, is as mad as your IS, when it comes to driving your car at mild green Germans.

https://youtu.be/-taEaSfPtbY

[Stranger]

By t GoG does believe in Christianity. And it doesn't matter if you argue from fisbelyeg if you validate the idea that beliefs arevsomehow external which is GoG's position. You are then inconsistent

Eh? I assume GoG only thinks his god is real. Where did you get the idea that anybody thinks beliefs themselves are external?

[Nearly Sane]

Eh? I assume GoG only thinks his god is real. Where did you get the idea that anybody thinks beliefs themselves are external?

Well it's clear in most Christian thought that belief in the Christian god is caused by there being a god in the first place. The belief is not something that is caused by humanity.

[Stranger]

Well it's clear in most Christian thought that belief in the Christian god is caused by there being a god in the first place. The belief is not something that is caused by humanity.

What's that got to do with the price of fish? You appear to have gone off on some strange tangent.

GoG was arguing about Islam which he doesn't think is true - LR responded about Christianity which she doesn't think is true. Both then, were talking about what they consider to be untrue beliefs.

[Nearly Sane]

What's that got to do with the price of fish? You appear to have gone off on some strange tangent.

GoG was arguing about Islam which he doesn't think is true - LR responded about Christianity which she doesn't think is true. Both then, were talking about what they consider to be untrue beliefs.

You asked about where did I get the idea that beliefs are themselves external - I pointed out that GoG who is framing the debate and, LR isx responding to, sees those beliefs as forming objective decisions.

[Robbie]

Watch it, sunshine - this postie's got a 1st-class BA Hons! 

Kudos to you Mr H (I did know that - if not that you got a 'first' - 'cos you mentioned it on the thread about Jennie Lee), but I wasn't doing down a 'postie'.