You must log in or register to comment.
I prefer to joke modern ideologies. Oh no… i’m a bigot now. Modern americans have the stangest godless religion now. Can i seriously joke about mlk or rosa parks or trans activists or i am a bigot?
You can make jokes about everything but if people keep calling you a bigot for making jokes about these it’s because your jokes suck or aren’t actually jokes.
Do you realise that you are reasoning exactly like the religious men that are depicted in the meme? ( talking about (god) it isn’t an actual joke )
When I said you can joke about everything, I meant every fucking thing including religions.
But if your joke repertoire is ‘lol women belong in the kitchen’s amirite?! Trans attack helicopter LOL!’, that makes you a bigoted asshole, yes.
Btw downwotes and dogma are your problem, not my problem. Dogmas stop knowledge and damage the people subject to them. No wonder that american technology have a lesser advantage against other countries.
First, I’m not american, second, please take your meds.
In the soviet union the government, in the bresnev era, sent the dissidents in psychiatric facilities. Are you at the same level of dogmatic conformism of the late soviet communism? It is so disturbing to ear different ideas?
No, I’m telling to take your meds because you are clearly unhinged
It is your religion and your morale, the downvotes tell me, even if i have made no jokes at all, that the faith in this new religion it is not only strong, but you denied that it is a faith too. An universal set of values without the minimal possibility of discussion, even ipotetical, what it is?
What the fuck are you talking about mate?
You ( and other people ) downvote me cause i’m having a different prospective about modern ideologies ( otherwise known as modern religions ). You even doesn’t recognise the religious part of your thought. That’s is interesting from a philosofical point of view.
Btw: the equivalence between religion and modern ideologies it is not my idea, you can find the same concept in a lot of ( more or less ) modern philosofical works.
Edit: in reality if you do not admit that your belief it is not a religion, you cannot have not believers, so your dogma became de facto universal.
Bruh.
You ramble nonsensically like someone off of their meds. THAT is why you get downvoted - your comments add nothing of value to the conversation.
Firstly, I didn’t downvote you, second I’m literally telling you you can joke about everything, but if your jokes are bigoted people will call you a fucking bigot. That’s how things work. Why are you rambling about dogmas and shit?
If you’re an asshole and people call you an asshole, it’s not a religious dogma. It’s because you’re an asshole.
gods are not real, I will let you believe without ridicule as long as it does not effect me. The major religions.do though and need to be shamed for trying to make governments enforce their religious laws. I don’t believe in tarot readings but I don’t shame the people that do as it has no effect on me. Hell I’ll even let someone do a reading and have fun with it. But when you say life starts at conception and that something goes against one of your gods and I need to stop them I will ridicule that belief.
Religion and gods are two different things. In this case we have a religion without gods. Religion is a natural state of humans regarding dogma and morale.
I agree religion and gods are different but very much disagree that it is a natural state. It came about from humans lack of understanding in the universe. That’s why as time goes on there are less and less religious people.
Everything is a natural state in a materialistic world. And religion is too much common.
fun fact: although shamash is a sun and light deity, he is also considered an underworld god, and serves the queen of the dead, erishkigal, as a judge in her court.
Shemesh is also the hebrew word for sun.
and shamhurish is the name for a mythical jinn king from pre islamic arabian folklore, who was also a judge.
Maybe Semitic languages are related?
it goes all the way back to proto-indo-european.
Coool
Romans when you ask them if they know about your one true god:
Is there more to why the meme references mars in particular? I always thought they just expanded by more and more gods as they conquerered other civilizations, like a marvel cinematic universe.
Because I only had to cover the letter E and I thought it was funnier if it didn’t change much
Expedience is how a lot of these things were decided, why break the habit.
Because Mars is the archetype of the conquerer.
Deist arguments do not validate your brand of theism.
But that’s before the creation!
Because religion is all about indoctrination. When I came out as atheist my dad said that all my ancestors were Christians and I’m stopping that tradition. I don’t care, if they belived that doesn’t mean that I also have to belive and just because it’s a tradition it doesn’t mean it should continue. He also said that goal of atheism is to make people lose their identity (he and many others in my country think that identity is just religious and natinoal identity, they also think that those two things are same). After that I had to explain to him what is identity, how it’s impossible to lose it and that there is no agenda behind atheism.
“because tradition” or “because that’s how i was brought up” or any other paraphrasing of “because everyone else is doing it” is the dumbest possible reason for anyone to do anything ever
“If everyone walked off a cliff…”
I agree with you, but peer pressure is real. I hated when grownups pretended it wasn’t.
it absolutely is real. and i’d argue that part of growing up is learning to make decisions based on rational consideration. instead of “everyone else is doing it,” like way too many grown ass adults still do
dad said that all my ancestors were Christians and I’m stopping that tradition
Well, your dad’s wrong. Most of your ancestors worshiped some other god or not at all. Christianity is just 2000 years young.
Not much of a tradition. The Christianity you might hear from your local minister is very different from the Christianity of the same church, fifty years earlier.
Religious doctrine is molded with the culture of the time, and recently has been influenced by propaganda efforts.
I said that to him but he doesn’t care because ancestors that lived closer to current time are more important to him.
Who said your ancestors actually practiced Christianity? It’s only hearsay, he didn’t talk with his ancestors, they might have been atheist and just kept up appearances for all others. If he just believes whatever he’s told, he’s just a sheep following the wolf. Good on you for thinking for yourself. It’s the start of a beautiful fulfilling life.
I have nothing against practicing your own religion, you do you, but it should never be forced onto others. That’s brainwashing.
Tradition is peer pressure from dead people.
“Identity” is a trap that makes you a slave.
Ugh I’m so disgusted by people who automatically value tradition. Haven’t they noticed that people were filthy, uneducated, murderous slavers in the past and only recently have we even thought about evolving out of that? Why in the hell would you assume that the way things have been done in the past must be good. I assume the opposite until I see evidence otherwise. My view is that we need to be investing a better future as far as possible. LOL @ holding on to the mystical grunts of our ape like grandfathers. WTF is the point of that?
Religion is a control mechanism. It helps people feel better about things they can’t control, mysterious ways and all that, but it is always about control and power. Ea is gonna get you, be scared
It’s weird to me that some atheists here are seeing this as evidence that religious people are dumb. What makes anyone think that they wouldn’t also be worshipping whatever god their parents and culture taught them to worship if they grew up in Babylonia 6000 years ago? This meme points out that we are the product of our upbringing. Calling religious folks stupid in this thread lacks the very self awareness that it criticises, and isn’t going to win any arguments anyway.
Many of us here know what it’s like to be religious. To grow up not knowing better. We know how short-sighted, guillible and hypocritical religion makes people.
Well at least the sun actually exists and you can see and feel it and measure it with many different devices. It’s nice when people appreciate an actual physical body and this one certainly has forces at work that far exceed ones imagination. Considering humans are “stardust” and we need sunlight, it even makes sense to call stars creators of life.
Some people worship cookies, others worship smartphones, animals or a person of the opposite sex, hell even nowadays many non-religious people worship singers, politicians, influencers or what have you. I wonder if any culture worships galaxies or black holes or some other objects in space that are not a big ball of hot plasma, a planet or a moon.
I bet “But who moves the sun around if there is no Shamash” seemed like a very solid reasoning at the time.
I argued that exact same way with someone very close to me. Their answer was:
But those gods aren’t real!
Nothing you can do if that last conclusion isn’t there.
But those gods aren’t real!
Far be it for me to question your religious doctrine, but even the fucking Old Testament recognizes rival gods.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
-Stephen Roberts
Dope.
You disbelieve in those other Gods because your God explicitly tells you to?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou_shalt_have_no_other_gods_before_me
Or do you treat Science as a religion and see adherence to atheism as an article of faith? If so, “Thou shalt have no other Gods before me” leads to a strong conviction that there are no “Gods”. Like any other good religion, this is often paired with intolerance of and hostility towards other beliefs.
If you see the Scientific Method as less of a religious creed and more simply as a best practice for evaluating explanations in the context of evidence, you may be more of an agnostic.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
Agnosticism suggests that we do not know if there are Gods or not. At a deeper level, it is about having a balanced view about drawing conclusions from evidence.
Thomas Huxley had this to say: “Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed, but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a single principle … Positively the principle may be expressed: In matters of the intellect, follow your reason as far as it will take you, without regard to any other consideration. And negatively: In matters of the intellect do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable.”
The scientific method strives to propose explanations that can be tested by the acquisition of new evidence. That is, it promotes the practice of forming explanations that have predictive power. Acceptance of an idea is based on the validated success of those predictions. That is, scientific ideas can be demonstrated.
Based on science alone, if the only choice is between believing in Gods or not believing in Gods, the atheism seems an easier choice as absence of evidence at least justifies Occams Razor. Agnosticism, reminds us however that these are not the only two choices.
Having a “conviction” in atheism or a belief ( let’s be honest and call that faith ) that atheists “conclusions are certain” despite not being “demonstrated or demonstrable” is not a “scientific” position. It does not result from the Scientific Method. At least not in my view.
I am a bit of an atheist but I recognize that saying this is an admission of faith, not evidence of my intellect or knowledge. It is a belief—not a proven fact. I should be cautious about my level of conviction.
Agnosticism and the Scientific Method are two very complimentary methods of evaluating evidence. Regardless of my beliefs ( because like all humans, I have them ), when it comes to making statements on the existence of Gods, I think it is a much better demonstration of my intellect to admit “I don’t know”.
Again, this is all just like, my opinion man.
So, a couple of points:
Primarily, Roberts is poking fun at the religious people that insist all gods but theirs aren’t real, whatever the reason.
After all, it is a bit silly to say ‘these gods, whose only proof of existence is this collection of ancient stories, are totally made-up, but my god, whose only proof of existence is this collection of ancient stories, is totally 100% real’.
Second, I don’t know that I would call Atheism or Agnosticism a religion. A system of belief in scientific rigors and facts is not really the same thing. While it’s true that you cannot prove a negative, we have no real evidence of any god existing.
And you’d think that a god that could split the seas and turn people into salt, or turn people into dolphins or flowers or whathaveyou, would be somewhat noticeable. If only in the bulls and swans obsessed with courting young ladies.
Great comment. I am tempted to continue the conversation.
Instead, I will finish by saying that, in my view, any system of belief seeking to describe the nature of reality that relies primarily on faith to provide certainty is a religion. Favouring faith over evidence is especially qualifying.
I would consider many of the atheists I have spoken to or read about to be religious by the above definition.
Many of those famous for being atheist certainly meet the criteria. Richard Dawkins has said that he “believes” science can answer any question despite science itself saying that it cannot ( Bell’s Theorem and Godel’s Incompleteness Theorum for example ). PZ Meyers has gone as far as to say that there is no evidence possible that would convince him that God exists ( even Jesus appearing before him I recall ). If that is not religion, I do not know what is. It is certainly not science.
Hey man, the sun exists and you can see it. I’d pray to it before I prayed to any of the others.
The sun… OF GOD! OOOOOOHHH
Also considering:
Older than recorded history; was here longer than any of us and will be here long after we leave. Has a finite beginning and end but is still incomprehensibly ancient
Burns itself into your vision instantly and can blind you if you look for too long
Further prolonged exposure can cause cancerous growths
Non-humanoid shape floating through space; colossal flaming tentacles angrily lash out on occasion
Sort of just appeared one day and is now surrounded by the corpses of its stillborn children
People used to sacrifice other people to appease it
Pretty sure it screams at us sometimes
From this post
In 4.5 billion years, the sun will begin the fusion of iron.
At this time, the sun will become a red dwarf, swelling in size, and swallowing the earth.
Or at least, burning us to a crisp.
Even a built-in apocalypse conclusion!
Unless we could escape the Sun before then!
Like if we flew away in a rocket.
Like if we invested in NASA!?
-edit-
And by funding NASA, you mean defying our lord and savior? THE SUN?!?!? /S
Yes. We can already build simple rockets. We just need to encode more data in similar ways.
We actually have only have 0.5 billion years left before the earth becomes uninhabitable for life.
I think this is relevant, because evolution thus doesn’t have that much time left. Sure, 0.5 billion years ago there were no real land-dwellers, but still. As a layperson, I’m sceptical that evolution could create a spacefaring species in that timespan again.
I leave you with the wisdom of the late great philosopher, George Carlin:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Kmo8sh77G6Y
TLDW: The Earth wanted plastic. The Earth made Humans. Now that the Earth has plastic, it doesn’t need Humans!
(not) ok boomer
! [ placeholder text ] ( url )
Poe’s Law + evenwithcontext + forwardsfromgrandma
It’s important to keep in mind that religion explained a lot of stuff, especially regarding health and wellbeing (you’re sick = evil spirits), before we managed to figure out the actual workings of some natural laws. I mean, hygiene was only “invented” in the late 1800s and the mere idea of washing your hands before coming in contact with a hospital patient was considered preposterous.
Nowadays, although we have amazing instruments that help us keep track of stellar bodies, we still can’t quite correctly predict the weather past 1 week. Might as well say that’s up to the gods.
More on topic, back on those times, each city had its patron god and it was common for conquered cities to lose their god, having the statue moved to the conqueror’s temple.
I recently realized why some things like salt and garlic are so prominent in folklore for dealing with evil spirits, demons, vampires, etc.
It’s probably because at some point people noticed that salt preserves foods. And since they didn’t understand why foods rotted, evil spirits were blamed and thus salt must have properties that wards off evil spirits. Garlic also has anti-microbial properties (though I can only guess as to why it’s specifically associated with vampires, though hanging garlic is also considered a general “ward” against evil spirits iirc).
Holy water could have gotten its reputation because people believed priest blessings had meaning, but it could also be that the rituals involved in “blessing” water actually reduced the harmful microbes. I was only able to find modern guides for making it (though I didn’t look very hard and skimmed over what I did find), but I saw things like using salt, finding a clean source of water, and filtering it in this guides.
It’s fascinating to me, going from what looks like random associations to understanding how those associations might have come about in the first place. Sucks that we’re still dealing with a lot of the fallout of all that, though.
Faith begins, where science ends.
God of the Gaps theory?
No, this may seem true, but no, if you read Lucian, adepts of many of those polytheistic religions would treat their deities like some piece of magic or even like a good aesthetic.
There were cults which required “defending the faith”, but, well, not all of them.
many of those polytheistic religions would treat their deities like some piece of magic or even like a good aesthetic
Just like today’s believers in Allah, Vishnu, Jesus, or Yahweh. Your observation doesn’t really contradict the meme. At its simplest, a reader of the meme could expect to have the same degree of faith they have today just directed towards Shamash. This would include the “good aestheticians” you mention as well as today’s true believers.
No, I don’t mean that. I mean - like Krishnaites, or Star Wars fans, or Star Trek fans, or superstitious people with plenty of amulets, or hippies, or UFO believers.
It was a more competitive and free religious ecosystem, so to say.
For real, read Lucian, you won’t regret it.
