- #1
heusdens
- 1,738
- 0
http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/wpnz/howdoweknow.htm"
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm ... Communism. Now I see.Originally posted by heusdens
http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/wpnz/howdoweknow.htm"
Originally posted by Iacchus32
Hmm ... Communism. Now I see.
Wouldn't it be fair to say that Communism is anti-religion?
I'm beginning to see why you have such an inherent need to witness its demise.
It never really occurred to me how much Communism embraced materialism, but now I can see that it does.
While there's no doubt Communism has had a hand in the demoralization of western culture, through it's promotion of materialism.
And perhaps it's one reason why people think that science, through its promotion of materialism, is also anti-religious?
Originally posted by Iacchus32
Wouldn't it be fair to say that Communism is anti-religion?
Originally posted by heusdens
(they need the point of view of materialism to be abe to perform science) irrespective of their own personal beliefs and convictions. [/B]
Originally posted by FZ+
Strange... I remember the opposite. LG was saying that assumption of an external reality is unjustified and a hinderance to looking for knowledge, and people were disagreeing.
Originally posted by FZ+
Strange... I remember the opposite. LG was saying that assumption of an external reality is unjustified and a hinderance to looking for knowledge, and people were disagreeing.
Originally posted by Royce
"If you are not a socialist when your ninteen, you have no heart. If you are still a socialist when you are thirtnine you have no brain." Bismark
Question: How can anyone give any credability to an economic philosopher who let his wife and children starve to death because he couldn't or wouldn't get a job?
Communism does not take into account the nature of human beings and what motivates them. It is at best idealistic and has no relevencey in the real world of Man as he is. In an idealistic world with perfect human beings any and all forms of government and economics would work.
Isn't this pretty much what Communism entails? In fact it's probably where "modern determinism" originates ...Originally posted by Iacchus32
Are you sure it's not just a matter of put up or shut up? Where those who hold the "prevaling view," are empowered over those who don't? By which it becomes a means to "take liberties" over those who are unable to speak for themselves?Originally posted by Mistress Lilith
It has been argued that determinism is essential for psychology... the 'free' (or self-generated) kind of behaviour does not exist. So.. is our behaviour determined or is it free? How can we chose one over the other? On what basis can you chose one over the other? Are there implications of this question for the science of psychology?
Originally posted by Iacchus32
Isn't this pretty much what Communism entails? In fact it's probably where "modern determinism" originates ...
What do you say comrades, shall we take another meeting? ... that we might "impose" upon your views?
Originally posted by kyle_soule
Could religion even be considered idealism? Doesn't idealism require that you have actual physical proof sometime or another?
In religions origin it would appear, to me, that it was based on materialism; they observed the world and everything in it, saw supernatural phenomena and had no explanation for the observations, so they created god(s). Today we have explained these observations and therefore have no use for god(s) and might label religion under idealism, but this would be crediting religion with real physical proof, which they don't have.
So, unless I'm terribly wrong in my assumptions, where does religion actually fall into in light of materialism and idealism?
Originally posted by wuliheron
Stalinist-Leninist communism is, by its own definition, the dialectical opposite capitalism. Both are forms of fundamentalism with roots stretching back to Aristotelian logic. Although notably useful in the historical development of the sciences, their days are numbered as modern science is not founded upon fundamentalism and, in fact, is slowly sweeping fundamentalism under the carpet in favor of more useful, flexible paradymes. Likewise, the capitalistic world is becoming more socialist while the communist world becomes more capitalistic as the realities of life continue to contradict both extreme theories.
Originally posted by wuliheron
Modern Idealism, Materialism, and mainstream religions all evolved out fundamentalist dialectical, true or false, Aristotelian logic. The paradox of existence is often cited as proof positive for God using this true or false fundamentalism of Aristotle. From the materialistic viewpoint, God is used to explain the existence, validity, and authenticity of the material world. From an idealistic viewpoint, God is used to explain the existence, validity, and authenticity of our emotions and general cognition. Thus fundamentalist western religion can both embrace and reject fundamentalist Idealism and Materialism and vice versa.
Originally posted by kyle_soule
Could religion even be considered idealism? Doesn't idealism require that you have actual physical proof sometime or another?
In religions origin it would appear, to me, that it was based on materialism; they observed the world and everything in it, saw supernatural phenomena and had no explanation for the observations, so they created god(s). Today we have explained these observations and therefore have no use for god(s) and might label religion under idealism, but this would be crediting religion with real physical proof, which they don't have.
So, unless I'm terribly wrong in my assumptions, where does religion actually fall into in light of materialism and idealism?
[/b]
Originally posted by heusdens
The above just shows that you have a dogmatic fundamentalist opinion on communism, and the theory upon which communism is built. I can just state that one of the pillars of marxism-leninism is dialectical materialism. One important dialectical law, that just explains your observation, is the "interprenation of opposites".
Originally posted by heusdens
Materialism goes without any reference to God, as far as materialism is concerned, there is no God. Dialectical materialism is far from Aristotelian logic. This post just shows, you have not much knowledge about dialectical materialism.
Originally posted by wuliheron
No, it just shows that I know the definition of words. Dialectical Materialism is based on the Fundamentalist views of black and white, true and false, and, most pointedly, that change is the only constant (sic) --the fundamental belief that this is the ultimate truth or reality.
A religious scientist, for example, might adopt a Materialist view while working or paying their bills, but at other times such as when contemplating the meaning of life adopt a religious view. This is characteristic of fundamentalist western civilization as well which loves to draw neat lines between church and state, real and imagined, thoughts and feelings, etc. Again, what defines each persuit as fundamentalist is not the particulars, but the assertion of absolutes... of ultimate truth and the rejection of the alternative.
Originally posted by heusdens
No. Dialectics is about contradictions, that happen to reside within anything in nature. Black vs. White is not really a contradiction.
You should do your homework again on dialectics.
Yeah. But let's keep the debate healthy, I was talking about science not about scientists. Of course a scientist can have personal judgements and opinions and or beliefs, that are not in any way sceintific or materialistic.
Yet the occupation of science is not about introducing the supernatural, God, or Santa Clause, cause it might help to work out some very profound problems in physics, for example.
That's not science.
What happens in a few years when there is economic recovery, and the war is over? And the economies WILL recovery. They always do. Recessions are not necessarily signs of a flawed economic system. Recessions are normal occurrences in capitalism. And why would the current combination of recession and war mark the peak of capitalism when this combination has been experienced many times in the past without necessitating communism? Is the sky falling? Again? sigh.Originally posted by heusdens
The world wide recession, the war, and downfall of the capitalist economy, are clear signs that imperialism/capitalism meets it's deepest crisis today, and necessitates us to take another route for the progress of humanity. [/B]
Originally posted by heusdens
Is that to blame on his philosophic work or the social/economic conditions of that time.
Originally posted by steppenwolf
more then fair, seeing as marx labeled religion as the opiate of the masses or whatever it was exactly.
Originally posted by wuliheron
No, it just shows that I know the definition of words. Dialectical Materialism is based on the Fundamentalist views of black and white, true and false, and, most pointedly, that change is the only constant (sic) --the fundamental belief that this is the ultimate truth or reality.
by Heusdens
... the occupation of science is not about introducing the supernatural, God, or Santa Clause, cause it might help to work out some very profound problems in physics, for example.
That's not science. [/B]
Originally posted by Alexander
Looks like you don't know what is dialectic meterialism. I studied it, so i can tell you your mistake here. By the way, "dialectic" simply means logical, or argumentative.
There is no such thing in dialectic materializm as fundamental view of world in black and white, true and false, etc. One of laws of dialectic materialism is called "unity of oppositions" - meaning that things are NOT black and white, but rather BOTH black AND white at the same time so to speak - things and phenomena have DUAL nature and this dualities are non-separable. Say, 911 hijackers are plain "black" (villians, bad, false, etc.) for americans but plain "white" (heroes, good, true, etc) for their own religion leaders. An atom (or a proton, photon, graviton, etc) is a particle and a wave at the SAME time. Ceiling of one man is floor of another, and on and on.
So don't be too fundamental in ignorance. Be flexible, acknoledge that Marxism is NOT your of expertise. Simply because you did not study it.
dialectics (used with a sing. verb) A method of argument or exposition that systematically weighs contradictory facts or ideas with a view to the resolution of their real or apparent contradictions.
Didn’t this thread begin with this questions, prior to taking a swing into economics?Originally posted by heusdens
How do we know?
Originally posted by M. Gaspar
Perhaps the "problem" lies with our fairy tale concept of "God" which keeps "getting in the way" of seeing the Universe as a living, conscious Being whose NATURAL FORCES -- on every plane (physical, mental, spiritual (if the last exists) -- which keep the wheels in motion...rather than a "Great Outsider".
Originally posted by Alexander
Looks like you don't know what is dialectic meterialism. I studied it, so i can tell you your mistake here. By the way, "dialectic" simply means logical, or argumentative.
There is no such thing in dialectic materializm as fundamental view of world in black and white, true and false, etc. One of laws of dialectic materialism is called "unity of oppositions" - meaning that things are NOT black and white, but rather BOTH black AND white at the same time so to speak - things and phenomena have DUAL nature and this dualities are non-separable. Say, 911 hijackers are plain "black" (villians, bad, false, etc.) for americans but plain "white" (heroes, good, true, etc) for their own religion leaders. An atom (or a proton, photon, graviton, etc) is a particle and a wave at the SAME time. Ceiling of one man is floor of another, and on and on.
So don't be too fundamental in ignorance. Be flexible, acknoledge that Marxism is NOT your of expertise. Simply because you did not study it.