Dear csteele,

You wrote: "Jews have murdered us and caused great death and suffering in the name of Zionism' is also a legitimate call from a Palestinian. However does this completely de-legitimise the notion of a Jewish homeland?"

Yes, it does. I favour countries that make no difference among their citizens on the basis of ethnicity and religion. If Australian became an officially Christian state I would become a second-class citizen. Since I do not support a Christian state I cannot support a Jewish state where non-Jews are second-class citizens. I think it better to work for countries that do not discriminate.

You also wrote: Would it be more accurate to say that the followers of Christ inspire that fear rather than the bloke himself?

Jesus is a mythic figure. I know Jesus by the bloody record of his followers. Inquisition, Wars of the Reformation, Witch burning, Holocaust etc. It is a judgment advocated by the New Testament - Matthew 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

The Dark Ages began on 27 February 380 when Theodosius declared "Catholic Christianity" the only legitimate imperial religion. "The Closing of the Western Mind" by Freeman tells how the spirit of enquiry that existed in the classical world was criminalised at that point. In 384 Theodosius prohibited haruspicy on pain of death.

“Constantine’s Sword” tells how the adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire changed Christianity to a religion of war and Jew hatred. Then followed a period of great violence as Christianity imposed its religion on most of Europe. Except for Ireland it was by bloodshed. eg. Charlemagne gave the pagan Gauls the choice between beheading and Christianity. "The Conversion of Europe from Paganism to Christianity: 371-1386" describes that bloody process.

Hitler followed Christian tradition.

Dear David f,
Obviously Euclidean axioms was not a good example on which to explain to you what I mean by the irreducibility of the ethic to the aesthetic, and I agree that independence of value-criteria is a different thing from independence of formal axioms, or, say the political independence of countries.

It is also clear that we read differently what Plato (and his philosophical successors) had to say about these abstract things, although I hasten to add that I am not a professional philosopher. Neither am I an ethicist but I still maintain that an ethical system based on pure subjectivity of moral criteria is not very practicable, to say the least.

>>Goodness may have no moral connotation ... a good bomb-maker <<
I think this is as relevant as the observation that space in mathematics is different from space in physics and both are different from a space you are looking for when parking your car.

So just let us just agree to disagree on how to understand and interpret the classical ideals of beauty, truth and goodness.

Nevertheless, thank you for bringing up the philosophical (ethical) concept of evil - although most people see it only in its psychological context - since it made me think over my own views and values, often only subconsciously held.

Dear George,

Irreligious people with whom I have discussed the notion of subjective morality generally have the same opinion that you have.

What is the basic rule of objective morality?

csteele wrote: "Sometimes we just need to stand back and feel justifiable pride in the substantial progressive narrative of the human race in recent centuries."

Twentieth century: Boer War where British held Boer families in concentration camps, Philippine-American War where several hundred thousand Filipinos were slaughtered. Slaughter of approximately 100,000,000 by various Marxist entities.

USSR 20 million
China 65 million
Vietnam 1 million
North Korea 2 million
Cambodia 2 million
Eastern Europe 1 million
Africa 1.7 million
Afghanistan 1.5 million
Latin America 150,000
The International Communist movement and parties not in power 10,000

Two World Wars. Two genocidal slaughters in Indonesia. Genocides Bosnia-Herzegovina: 1992-1995 - 200,000 deaths, Rwanda: 1994 - 800,000 Deaths, Pol Pot in Cambodia: 1975-1979 - 2,000,000 Deaths, Nazi Holocaust: 1938-1945 - 6,000,000 Jewish Deaths, 5,000,000 slavs, Gypsies and other untermenschen murdered, Rape of Nanking: 1937-1938 - 300,000 Deaths, Stalin's Forced Famine: 1932-1933 - 7,000,000 Deaths, Armenians in Turkey: 1915-1918 - 1,500,000 Deaths. Ongoing slaughters in Darfur and southern Sudan.

Orthodox, Christians, Catholics and Muslims conflict in the former Yugoslavia. Muslims and Jews conflict in the Middle East. Catholics and Protestants conflict in Northern Ireland. Buddhists and Hindus conflict in Sri Lanka. Muslims and Christians conflict in Indonesia and East Timor.

Twentieth century also developed nuclear weapons, poison gas, cluster bombs, depleted uranium etc.

Nineteenth century: Opium wars so England could continue selling opium to China, European imperialism in the Pacific, Belgians in Congo killed around 10,000,000, Napoleonic Wars extending from Russia to Spain, American Civil War, etc.

Substantial progress in science and technology. However, what other substantial progress have we had?

In the last two hundred years we have produced no composers equal to Bach and Mozart, no writers equal to Shakespeare and no artists equal to Michelangelo and Rembrandt. A much greater and more literate population with the same genes as their ancestors has not exhibited the same creativity.

What do you feel justifiable pride about?

Dear davidf,

I think your last post has made my case.

Both Hitler and Theodosius were nothing without their followers.

As examinator puts it "Deciding to over ride the conscience defines evil". I would go further and say the evil lies in those of us willing to give up our autonomy to others or, to stifle our natural empathy for other humans, to create a lack or a void within ourselves, to let others decide for us what our conscience is.

That is why I found Cronulla so disturbing. Here were the echoes of pogroms, of mob rule, of people giving themselves over to collective violence.

Unquestioning obedience to others, or ideals, or Gods, leaves us less than human and open to our capacity for evil deeds.

Standing on the outside we can often instinctively recognise this in others. The sad thing is we rarely seem to recognise it in ourselves.

From Watkin Tench's journal at the settlement at Port Jackson;
May, 1791. “Had their marauding career terminated here, humanity would have been anxious to plead in their defence; but the natives continued to complain of being robbed of spears and fishing tackle. A convict was at length taken in the fact of stealing fishing-tackle from Daringa, the wife of Colbee. The governor ordered that he should be severely flogged in the presence of as many natives as could be assembled, to whom the cause of punishment should be explained. Many of them, of both sexes, accordingly attended. Arabanoo’s aversion to a similar sight has been noticed; and if the behaviour of those now collected be found to correspond with it, it is, I think, fair to conclude that these people are not of a sanguinary and implacable temper. Quick indeed of resentment, but not unforgiving of injury. There was not one of them that did not testify strong abhorrence of the punishment and equal sympathy with the sufferer. The women were particularly affected; Daringa shed tears, and Barangaroo, kindling into anger, snatched a stick and menaced the executioner.”

Evil and empathy.

csteele wrote: Both Hitler and Theodosius were nothing without their followers.

Unquestioning obedience to others, or ideals, or Gods, leaves us less than human and open to our capacity for evil deeds.

Dear csteele,

I agree. Jesus is also nothing without his followers. Unquestioning obedience to others, or ideals, or Gods, leaves us less than human and open to our capacity for evil deeds. Hitler and Theodosius were followers of Jesus.

davidf wrote; I agree. Jesus is also nothing without his followers. Unquestioning obedience to others, or ideals, or Gods, leaves us less than human and open to our capacity for evil deeds. Hitler and Theodosius were followers of Jesus.

Dear davidf,

So was Ghandi, at least of his teachings. To him "Jesus represents not a person, but the principle of nonviolence".

Ghandi, in an answer to the question of why he appeared to reject becoming Jesus' follower answered "Oh, I don't reject your Christ. I love your Christ. It's just that so many of you Christians are so unlike your Christ."

He went on to say;

"I rebel against orthodox Christianity"

He was intent on formally becoming a Christian until he tried entering a Church in South Africa and was told by an elder "There's no room for kaffirs in this church. Get out of here or I'll have my assistants throw you down the steps."

One of the gatekeepers I referred to earlier.

In your earlier post you quoted from Matthew 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

A timely quote.

This was actually a warning against the teachings of false prophets, not licence to go out and burn witches. Surely Theodosius could be regarded as a kind of false prophet and Hitler was Hitler. If these words in Matthew had been taken more to heart by the German population they might have averted the murderous results.

I think your argument might be with them rather than Jesus.