The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The age of reason > Comments

The age of reason : Comments

By David Young, published 15/1/2009

Surely if we were in fact rational beings we would learn from each other and form a human paradigm?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
I am unaware where Daviy has been living lately, but it cannot have been in Australia. Of course if he is lucky enough never to have known or needed a lawyer, never had the State Church jail him without due process of law, never had to listen to a sermon from a magistrate or judge, and simply been lucky enough to earn more than he needs after paying the compulsory church levy called PAYG, he has nothing to complain about. Another gentleman says he is lucky to be living in a secular country. Australia is a State Church run country and there are nine of these obscenities to contend with.

State and Church were separated in the Western Democracies, that is the United States of America where the State has steadily eroded the separation, in Australia until after 1949, in the United Kingdom until Atlee decided to Nationalise the courts, and make them Courts, and as a consequence crime and dishonesty became entrenched. The Jesuit Priest and lawyer selected by Robert McClelland MP to investigate the application of an already passed Act of the Parliament of the Commonwealth, the schedule 2 to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 is an example of how the New Age Priests of the Law, have merged Church and State and will brook no suggestion that it be separated again.

We were made compulsory Anglicans when we became compelled to vote on pain of penalty. Our other right, to challenge the right of Parliament to make utterly ridiculous laws, in a Ch III Constitution “court”, was then removed, and so was our right to participate as part as a college of 12 in a proceeding to review stupid legislation. To confuse and deceive us the State Church in New South Wales spends $100 million dollars on a Media Bribe, so the media will not criticize the merger of Church and State. Howard likewise spent many millions, while 100,000 homeless froze. A State Church without a basic philosophy but paying its Priests handsomely, is exactly what the Constitution was made to avoid
Posted by Peter the Believer, Friday, 16 January 2009 2:36:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Peter, you are right that although I live in a secular country...it is one that is controlled at many government levels by religion.
Thankfully us peasants don't have to live as our "masters" would have us do so. This does not mean that the rants of the self righteous religious doesn't rankle...
Their influence is waning...Jonny Howard and GW Bush do provide an excellent example of why even a little bit of religious thinking is toxic to leadership.
Listen up kiddies: Don't let any man who talks about God tell you what to do! If he helps you understand then he *might* be trustworthy. If he *knows* he is right then run!
Posted by Ozandy, Friday, 16 January 2009 3:02:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jedimaster
The state of your heart is no concern of mine, but may I offer my hopes of a speedy recover. Probability was only mentioned as a passing comment to indicate a time frame, and of no consequence to the discussion on hand. Max Plank was picked because his work on black body radiation was the beginning of quantum physics.
Heisenberg's quantum mechanics and his uncertainty theory where two separate theories, and causality is alien to quantum mechanics, as is evidenced by the Copenhagen Interpretation. But apart from throwing into doubt your understanding of quantum physics (which makes you the same as everyone else) your comments have no relevance to the article. They have simply strayed so far away from the topic as to be meaningless.

Peter the Believer. Your comments intrigue me. I think we are working along the same lines but your communication is not always clear. One of the many reasons I spoke out so often against the unholy trinity of Bush/Blair/Howard was their attempts by them to bring religion into government. That of course was on top of the treat of asylum seekers, IR laws, using retrospective legislation to overrule the high court and other issues.
On one occasion I did end up in the magistrate's court arguing for the religious freedom guaranteed in our constitution. My argument was that freedom could not be made compulsory and it was my right to choose whatever religious (or lack of) observances I followed in the context of compulsory voting. I lost. Apparently in Australia freedom can be made compulsory and, according to Makeledes, that we do not have rights, we have obligations. Reference Australia versus Young at the Fremantle magistrates court before Magistrate Makeledes.

But again, that is a side issue. I thought this discussion was on paradigms and cognitive dissonance. All I want to say on that issue is that the level of cognitive dissonance being thrown around OLO at the moment a paradigm shift seems inevitable.
Posted by Daviy, Friday, 16 January 2009 6:17:11 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Davly
It's a pity that you have resorted to sarcasm. I thought that we were getting along real friendly and with informed opinion.

Causality and physics have everything to do with cognitive dissonance. You can only have CD if you are comparing what you know with what you perceive. Resolution comes from checking the perceptions (observations in physics) and checking the knowledge base- hey! Ain't that science?

Things have moved on since Copenhagen (see Steve Weinberg) Probabilism and determinism aren't incompatible.

How does all this relate to modern politics? It could be defined as a kind of denial of CD- ie "All that evidence in front of you is an illusion- what we're saying is actually what we're doing"

Just keep to the informed opinion and away from the sarcasm- that was Bob Menzies main weapon.
Posted by Jedimaster, Friday, 16 January 2009 6:47:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David,

A very stimulating article that has led to a large number of reasoned and interesting responses. Well done.

Unfortunately the religious lot had to add their bit through same tired old arguments that are par for the course on OLO. You cannot tackle faith with reason so it is pointless responding to them.

However one post rabbited on about the drivel he is forced to endure from the loony left whoever they are. I suspect the author of this particular post believes that striving to move society towards a more sustainable path is madness. It may be an almost impossible task given human nature and the escalating fetish for growth that has fueled western society in the last number of decades but it is surely better that opting for perpetual growth of either population or per capita material wealth or both as is the case for corporate Australia and the two parties that kowtow to them.

The resources of the planet (and Australia) are finite and the loony right needs to recognize this.
Posted by kulu, Saturday, 17 January 2009 5:57:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David,
You said that ‘someone had to try and make this into a religious debate.’ I’m not sure who you are referring to if it wasn’t yourself. Your article invites this. You have quite a bit to say about religion. What are religions if they don’t involve paradigms?

If I understand what you are saying, then this means our ability to think and reason is limited and constrained within a paradigm, which perhaps includes our education, family history, geography, culture, among other things, but especially our language. With many of these things, we have no ability to change. (We could perhaps travel or learn another language).

And we may not even be able to recognise their influence. I notice within your statement of how you relate to the unknowable force being your affair alone the influence of Kierkegaardean thought. If I’m not mistaken, I think it was he who popularised in the West the notion that our understanding of God needed to be more governed by our consciences than by dogmas. Are you familiar with this guy?

So I thank OLO for helping us into a bit of conflict with each other so that we can break out of some of our paradigm restrictions. And thanks for writing one of OLO’s more interesting articles.

I look forward to the world to come where we will have endless ages to go out and learn new languages and see how the other person thinks.
Posted by Dan S de Merengue, Monday, 19 January 2009 4:59:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy