Sunday School January 19th 2020
January 19, 2020 at 11:03 am #29777
Raif Badawi in isolation, 5 years after his first 50 lashes.
Donald Trump is promising to ignore the Constitution to rally Evangelical voters. Do these Evangelicals even know that one of the Iranian cultural sites that Trump might want to destroy is that of King Cyrus, apart from the fact that doing so would be considered a crime against humanity?
Can people who are plagued with doubt feel welcomed by a church that is filled with those who are certain about what they believe?
Brazil’s Supreme Court overturns the ban on Netflix’s gay Jesus film.
Court reverses $35M verdict against Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Christians in Kenya thanks their god for atheists.
Muslim women talk about sex abuse by the religious. Check out the song too, min fadlak.
Ron Reagan: “My father would have been ashamed of this Republican Party”.
Climate Crisis: Antarctica’s melting ice sheet.
Do you agree that we have an ethical duty to care for all animal life on Earth?
The new ion carbon therapy facility in Florida is a major advance in cancer treatment.
The meaning of life – a psychologist’s view.
Long Read: The curse of Psychic Joe.
This week I am reading this book: How To: Absurd Scientific Advice for Common Real-World Problems.
Some photographs taken last week.
While you are waiting for the kettle to boil…..January 19, 2020 at 11:04 am #29779
Have a great week everyone!
“We have barely emerged from centuries of barbarism. It’s not a surprise that there are shocking inequities in this world. It is hard work to climb down out of the trees and walk upright and build a viable global civilization when you start with technology that is made of rocks and sticks and fur. This is a project, and progress is difficult.”
Sam Harris.January 19, 2020 at 6:52 pm #29780
I was going to ask what was wrong with this article by a Liar for Jesus
The original article, in “Answers in Genesis”, is ridiculous. For example, we’re back to this:
Many atheists (e.g., Richard Dawkins) spend much of their time railing against the Creator they believe doesn’t exist
I imagine that Dawkins is railing against the Biblical God, and the Biblical God exists in the Bible.
Basically, the atheist world view is just not developed enough to call it a religion. We can call Buddhism a religion, even though it doesn’t have a god. We can possibly call Humanism a religion, since Humanists officiate at weddings and funerals, and have a set of moral beliefs to live by. That seems like a minimal religion to me. It’s hard to make atheism per se represent anything beyond non-belief in God.January 19, 2020 at 7:13 pm #29781
Muslim women talk about sex abuse by the religious.
What an interesting article. Why do the abusers always seem to be men? Maybe because they’re the ones in positions of power. But it seems that patriarchy and sexual abuse are inextricably linked. I put this down to the idea that the Patriarchy is a social, cooperativised continuation of the primate habit of male mate-guarding: dominating, secluding and protecting females for sexual purposes.January 19, 2020 at 8:00 pm #29782
We’re terribly lacking in data on the topic of sexual assault. It does happen by women but its so uncommon each case is very notable. The problem is rape is barely even reported in many societies (and is even partially serialized in a couple cultures like in a tribe in Papua New Guinea where boys felate adults to “gain the essence of manhood”. We can guess that the rate of sexual assault is as high as it is in places where people do report (or should I say under-report). I can only guess its probably the same? What is it like in untouched cultures? What about pre-civilization humans? Patriarchy tends to dominate world cultures but not entirely and male domination and control is not universal. Though it is very much the case in all cultures derrived from Judaism, Christinity and Islam. .Brutally visciously barbarically patriarchal. But I think answers like “because it fits in with the protective warrior alpha male who wants to spread his seed vs. the submissive female who needs protection” doesn’t fit in too well with primitive cultures we’ve contacted nor the little we know about pre-civilization humans. It’s only a vague description of part of it and that explanation is also a highly oversimplified projection of the behaviour of some mammals onto humans. It can be found to some extent in modern cultures but to what extent it is inherant vs. a cultural product…we are terribly ignorant. We just don’t have the information we need to make conclusions.January 19, 2020 at 9:31 pm #29783
Evil doesn’t care about arbitrary religious divisions and it wears many collars. What makes it evil is the fact that is exists in the midst of what normal people see a good. All religions are the same. The stories have been incessant over the last 25 years.
Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Religion is so easily warped that its followers can quickly become depraved. Here is a recent terrible (evil) act from Panama. In Europe, not so long ago it burnt over 100,00o women to death,January 19, 2020 at 11:58 pm #29784
“because it fits in with the protective warrior alpha male who wants to spread his seed vs. the submissive female who needs protection”
the behaviour of some mammals
I don’t think the females have much say in the matter. The mammals are our closest relatives, the great apes. We evolved from the same recent stock as them. If you think about it, domination, seclusion and protection of females pretty much sums up the patriarchy. It’s just that we achieve it through social norms.
I can only guess its probably the same? What is it like in untouched cultures? What about pre-civilization humans?
I’ve read that in egalitarian, “simple” hunter gatherer societies (nomadic, few possessions, no stored capital etc.) then there is more or less equal relations between the sexes. But the same source states that as soon as there is a power structure in society, the men grab that power for themselves.
Presumably, this is the situation where religion provides a power structure that males can dominate. So, at least the Abrahamic religions (as you say) institutionalise patriarchy – but where does that patriarchal instinct come from in the first place? It is remarkably similar to our close primate relatives.January 20, 2020 at 2:33 am #29785
Thanks Reg! (Bit of local snowmageddon took out the WiFi for a bit)January 20, 2020 at 10:37 am #29786
@regthefronkeyfarmer – how does religion warp otherwise good people into doing bad things? Maybe it’s false to call people good or bad, since there’s probably a bit of good and bad, or light and dark, in all of us.
I think that the big fault of religion is that it gives people reasons to judge, exclude, and hate others.
Apart from this, it supplies power structures that unscrupulous people can abuse.
Another problem is that “God told me to do it” – God agrees with whatever I want to do.January 20, 2020 at 2:39 pm #29787
“because it fits in with the protective warrior alpha male who wants to spread his seed vs. the submissive female who needs protection” doesn’t fit in too well with primitive cultures we’ve contacted nor the little we know about pre-civilization humans.
I would be interested to see that data because it seems counterintuitive. Despite all the “wokeness” that prevails these days I still observe that women are still attracted to tall, dark and strong men while the simp guys get to play with their superhero action figures. We have a male model in the family and frankly the amount of female attention he gets is ridiculous. The nice guy engineer, not so much.January 20, 2020 at 5:11 pm #29788
This might be of interest:
Karen Lampell Endicott – “The Conditions of Egalitarian Male-Female Relationships in Foraging Societies”; Canberra Anthropology 1981 vol. 4, no. 2, p.1-10January 20, 2020 at 9:48 pm #29792
This might be of interest: Karen Lampell Endicott – “The Conditions of Egalitarian Male-Female Relationships in Foraging Societies”; Canberra Anthropology 1981 vol. 4, no. 2, p.1-10 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233095485_The_conditions_of_egalitarian_male-female
Paper concludes that immediate return foragers who consume their food within a day or two after they procure it are the only societies where male dominance cannot get a foothold. We just need to get rid of our refrigerators.January 20, 2020 at 10:29 pm #29793
I have known a few men called Hunter but never have I met a gal called Gatherer.January 22, 2020 at 7:05 pm #29812
For the sources I’ll have to look them up next time I’m at the philosophy library in Leuven, Belgium. One was a book by Desmond Morris and another was a book by Dennis Dutton. If you’re seriously interested in reading these titles (covering early humans) I’ll look up the titles for you.January 22, 2020 at 7:15 pm #29813
I must read The Naked Ape again. I should have it somewhere if I did not “lend” it to another ape.
From the Goodreads review:
The Naked Ape takes its place alongside Darwin’s Origin of the Species, presenting man not as a fallen angel, but as a risen ape, remarkable in his resilience, energy and imagination, yet an animal nonetheless, in danger of forgetting his origins.
I am not familiar with Dutton’s written work but had this video of his in an old Sunday School.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.