tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post5667092734796992784..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: Was New Zealand Founded as a "Christian Nation?"Brad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger65125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-80052175593327367662010-08-17T08:10:28.352-06:002010-08-17T08:10:28.352-06:00Pinky,
It is all B.S. when it comes to ulterior mo...Pinky,<br />It is all B.S. when it comes to ulterior motives, IF one is focused on the material alone. But, it isn't if it is aethestics. I'm reading a book on Vision and Art. Utility can never describe the creative because they are not producing their "art" (scientific or aesthetic) because of the utility of it, but because of the joy of producing the "art", "itself".....<br /><br /><br />Technology, Statism, scientism, or religion does not allow the "creative spirit", which man desires to express.....Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-24231522927060722582010-08-09T06:44:14.048-06:002010-08-09T06:44:14.048-06:00.
Pinky,
In fact, everything is about the politic....<br /><i><br />Pinky,<br />In fact, everything is about the political, isn't it? Power is where the "action is". And those in power who are not able to define themselves apart from such power are not to be entrusted with it. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, except in the case of one-self...</i><br />.<br />It looks to me as though we are on the way back to an economy based on some super definition of piracy. The multi-nationals want to sail the high seas of trade with no regard for the laws of any nation.<br />.<br />When I consider the dilema of "nation building" it looks like someone just wants to take advantage of some potential market where their products can either be sold or manufactured for the lowest cost possible.<br />.<br />It's all b.s., Angie. It's all b.s..<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-43384339911069904032010-08-09T06:18:41.651-06:002010-08-09T06:18:41.651-06:00.
I'm having some difficulty trying to underst....<br />I'm having some difficulty trying to understand what you're meaning to put over here, Angie.<br />.<br />The idea of nation building seems ludicrous to me when we are so confused about who we are as a nation.<br /><br />Building nations for whom?<br />.<br />Someone mentioned setting examples. I think that makes sense.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-58954273808663719542010-08-09T05:39:14.956-06:002010-08-09T05:39:14.956-06:00Pinky,
In fact, everything is about the political,...Pinky,<br />In fact, everything is about the political, isn't it? Power is where the "action is". And those in power who are not able to define themselves apart from such power are not to be entrusted with it. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, except in the case of one-self...<br /><br />You mentioned alturism before, and the science/religion debate has much "discussion" and questions on what leads to selfless service. I tend to think that this is what Christianity want to believe because it furthers their interests, not the individual's.<br /><br />As we are all self-interested, why not admit the obvious and go from there in building our worlds? Negotiation is the best way to come to terms with reality. And absolute religios claims cannot be negotiated on such a basis, because their world is to be entered into by everyone.<br /><br />The philosopher king are the social constructors of the political realm. This is where the classical/ancient intersect.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-15338206706169474182010-08-08T21:33:05.013-06:002010-08-08T21:33:05.013-06:00But, of course, other religions politicize their c...But, of course, other religions politicize their convictions, too...Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-38904373072193672962010-08-08T21:31:50.420-06:002010-08-08T21:31:50.420-06:00Pinky,
On multiculturalism, some believe that the ...Pinky,<br />On multiculturalism, some believe that the mind-set of Islam is such that humans that experience what we would consider human rights violations, do not experience the se actions nor do they define them as abusive. Who are we, then, to define them as wrong?<br /><br />I have a friend who lives in Africa, and she says that America's "nation-building" is misunderstood by tribalists mentalities. And that such nation-building is an imperialistic mentality on America's part.<br /><br />There has been research done on human development that suggests that these countries function at a lower level of morality, but of course, that is according to our definitions of morality. Peaceful co-existance is not a reality in such environments, nor is it expected.<br /><br />The recent deaths of the 10 medical aid workers leads me to question whether there should be any involvment with such societies. Of course, these people were doing what they thought was important and of worth and value in their minds (and I don't want to belittle that). It just seems the loss is useless, esp. when news reports state that such "acts of mercy" will change the resistance of the Taliban...etc. Islam has been a sore adversary for many years, why do we think that change is going to come to them, when their religion is so politicized?Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-3134628007978297232010-08-08T20:15:48.184-06:002010-08-08T20:15:48.184-06:00.
Admitedly, I haven't read a great amount of ....<br />Admitedly, I haven't read a great amount of Strauss.<br />.<br />Maybe a few hundred pages of his writings.<br />.<br />But, I've read that over and over to get it to soak into my pea brain.<br />.<br />As far as I have seen, I haven't noticed Strauss taking a stand on any thing other than his scholarship. He thinks he is a real scholar. I think I agree that he is that.<br />.<br />I see his writing as being more expository than opinion.<br />.<br />Now, the various Straussians? That's a different story.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-66154911223213689472010-08-08T20:09:11.852-06:002010-08-08T20:09:11.852-06:00.
Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we ....<br /><i>Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?</i><br />.<br />Now, there's a can of worms if I ever saw one.<br />.<br />What liberties?<br />What nation?<br />What God?<br />.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-3858067635804648962010-08-08T20:08:22.103-06:002010-08-08T20:08:22.103-06:00From my pal David Gordon, 2003:
"Though he o...From my pal David Gordon, 2003:<br /><br />"Though he opposed Strauss, [Murray] Rothbard paid generous tribute to his insights: Strauss’s "virtue is that he is in the forefront of the fight to restore and resurrect political philosophy from the interment given it by modern positivists and adherents of scientism – in short, that he wants to restore values and political ethics to the study of politics."(All quotations are from unpublished letters by Rothbard, written in 1960.)<br /><br />Rothbard found Strauss effective in his criticism of assorted relativists and historicists: "Strauss begins [an essay on relativism] with the almost incredibly confused and overrated Isaiah Berlin, and has no trouble demolishing Berlin and exposing his confusions – Berlin trying to be at the same time an exponent of ‘positive freedom’, ‘negative freedom’, absolutism and relativism." Strauss shows that, "in denying the possibility of rational ends [as relativists do] rational means are not on a very secure basis either."<br /><br />Strauss has demolished relativism; but what does he propose to put in its place? The version of natural law that Strauss supports fails to extricate us fully from relativism. "Strauss, while favoring what he considers to be the classical and Christian concepts of natural law, is bitterly opposed to the 17th–18th Century conceptions of Locke and the rationalists, particularly to their ‘abstract’, ‘deductive’ championing of the rights of the individual: liberty, property, etc." Strauss’s own arguments against the relativists show that we must have an ethics based on reason, but the version of natural law he favors does not meet this requirement.<br /><br />As Strauss sees matters, classical and Christian natural law did not impose strict and absolute limits on state power; instead, all is left to the prudential judgment of the wise statesman. From this contention, Rothbard vigorously dissents. "In this [Straussian] reading, Hobbes and Locke are the great villains in the alleged perversion of natural law. To my mind, the ‘perversion’ was a healthy sharpening and development of the concept." In Rothbard’s view, medieval natural law thinkers fully recognized that individuals have rights. Incidentally, the foremost work of contemporary scholarship on this issue, Brian Tierney’s The Idea of Natural Rights, vindicates Rothbard’s side of the dispute."Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-73733995911870342842010-08-08T19:56:21.447-06:002010-08-08T19:56:21.447-06:00Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we ha...Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-32410497904947926362010-08-08T19:54:45.947-06:002010-08-08T19:54:45.947-06:00.
I recommend a reading of what Strauss has to say....<br />I recommend a reading of what Strauss has to say on relativism.<br />.<br />And all this talk about nation building, etc., could be left in the dust.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-87365181053872957172010-08-08T19:39:13.184-06:002010-08-08T19:39:13.184-06:00This is why I think that religious culture should ...This is why I think that religious culture should not define the nation-state.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-24626345438525956372010-08-08T19:38:17.432-06:002010-08-08T19:38:17.432-06:00The problem I have with minority rights, is; these...The problem I have with minority rights, is; these rights are still based on group boundaries. And while groups define society, the nation-state should not be about protecting tribal identities, but individual liberties, if that nation-state believes in the human being, as "the end" or universal. And I think that whenever groups are granted power under law, then it undermines individual liberty, as well as individual responsibility.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-8362324827429270372010-08-08T19:31:32.211-06:002010-08-08T19:31:32.211-06:00"Nation building and promoting a particular s..."Nation building and promoting a particular style of government aren’t necessarily the same thing. I don’t think that one country has the right to forcefully violate the sovereignty of another in order to build a nation in its own image. However, I see nothing wrong with promoting/advocating a constitutional, democratic system that is protective of human rights, including enfranchisement and opportunity for its citizens(we still struggle with this). "<br /><br />What does "opportunities" for its citizens mean? I used to tell my students that there biggest problem is, and I still believe this, that they think that an education is a right not a priviledge.<br /><br />Those that see it as a right tend to demand everything from the system and require little of themselves. It breeds and entitlement mentality that becomes dependent on government.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-25210787137021784432010-08-08T19:11:30.334-06:002010-08-08T19:11:30.334-06:00Re: "Is that the liberal view?"
Maybe t...Re: "<i>Is that the liberal view?</i>"<br /><br />Maybe the view of a few, but I don't recognize it as representative of any particular ideological viewpoint.bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-5575107904136400382010-08-08T18:43:54.957-06:002010-08-08T18:43:54.957-06:00Do minority rights go back to the liberal position...<i>Do minority rights go back to the liberal position of not defining society by the law?</i><br /><br />Is that the liberal view? It's certainly not Leviathan's, anyway: there is no difference between law and society.<br /><br />As for the other issues you're touching on, they're in some of the other current discussions about Strauss, Tom West vs. Zuckert on Locke, etc. If you could grab onto the framework of such discussions, many of your comments would be more intelligible to the common reader.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-47784745041645651242010-08-08T18:24:25.332-06:002010-08-08T18:24:25.332-06:00This is where "God' is useful to justify ...This is where "God' is useful to justify such a position of virtuous "ends' with humans being the means to that end...Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-21632051330282001062010-08-08T18:22:36.441-06:002010-08-08T18:22:36.441-06:00and how in the world did the research determine th...and how in the world did the research determine that brains differ as to philosophical pre-dispositions?<br /><br />Utility is economic and deontology is a reasoned universal...and the "virtue" are those that are "useful" for utility's end's of the "universal"...how then, can the "reasoned universalist" stand back and watch the utility of "ends" justify the usefulness of virtue...the person, being a means... to the ends of virtue and not an end in himself?Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-84355768904352898112010-08-08T17:55:05.386-06:002010-08-08T17:55:05.386-06:00Our national identity is based on Constitutional g...Our national identity is based on Constitutional government which garuantees the individual right to expression, etc...this is not a right that cultural traditions necessarily embrace.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-38712456559573384672010-08-08T17:52:01.572-06:002010-08-08T17:52:01.572-06:00Tom,
Do minority rights go back to the liberal pos...Tom,<br />Do minority rights go back to the liberal position of not defining society by the law...minority rights means that the minority view is to represented as well as the majority...which is what the ACLU stands for, right?<br /><br />I fear that Shairia law will be that minority "right", where it concerns Islam's "cultural norm".... We can't stand for those norms, and stand for human rights, as well...Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-44595715811879967742010-08-08T17:27:13.078-06:002010-08-08T17:27:13.078-06:00Maybe it is similar to Post Traumatic Stress syndr...<i>Maybe it is similar to Post Traumatic Stress syndrome</i><br /><br />Yes, we see that a lot around here. And I don't mean to be glib; it's just that some of the anger is clearly more than just disagreements about religion and the Founding.<br /><br />When ben wrote <i>Which may also be described as promoting minority rights at the expense of cultural tradition / ethos.</i><br /><br />I suppose wryly or even snarkily, the fact remains that there are many [to my mind sensible] Jews and Muslims and agnostics who are quite happy that this country has some level of Christian ethos. It's safer than the persecution and murder they or their ancestors fled from in their home countries, and if Christians want to believe liberty is God-given and all men have rights, all the better for minorities like themselves.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-89555938304689809782010-08-08T15:48:14.353-06:002010-08-08T15:48:14.353-06:00Tom,
I read the article by Haidt on social psychol...Tom,<br />I read the article by Haidt on social psychology....and moral psychology.<br /><br />I understand the "tastes" of morality, as a social norm of group behavior...and that behavior being experienced as a "taste".(and yes, Pinky, any old "dog" or commoner, can understand such a subject!)...<br /><br />Group behavior is tribalistic, in that it has "guards at the door" to maintain its definitions, and distinctions. This is what happened to Spinoza in his Jewish community or happens all the time to those that DARE to question, resist or re-evaluate their group's understanding of 'life".<br /><br />Religious communities are guarded doored, or walled communities, which bring a "bad taste" in my mouth. And I believe it has impacted my brain, literally! Maybe it is similar to Post Traumatic Stress syndrome...Haidt used Asperger's syndrome and Autism as "one type of brain", the utilillitarian, or deontological...the emotive brain is a 'religious brain"? And what does that mean, but "virtue ethics"?<br /><br />If brains can change due to experiences, then how do we know whether one is pre-disposed or genetically inclined in a given area, or not? Or if their brains have been "programmed" by the many experiences that happed in a person's life? There are so many varibles to consider...<br /><br />Systems and emergent properties sounds like a theory based on biological science to unify the science/religion debate...<br /><br />Does education change the brain? Not if we believe in confirmation bias...But, what about those who leave the religious/emotive arena? What brought about the desire of Hirshi Ayaan Ali to pursue escape from Somalia and pursue an education in the West, at great costs and sacrifice? <br /><br />Humans in Haidt's view "live" within a certain paradigm, which it true, but don't all people? This is how they interpret their life. Ph.D.'s "live" in their bias, or chosen field, and argue over the specificities in their fields. Has anyone thought about how complex the "human" is when one looks at the interdisciplinary areas that touch upon the "human"...?Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-83738042912551769392010-08-08T14:42:14.146-06:002010-08-08T14:42:14.146-06:00As to the state becoming god, we are where we are ...As to the state becoming god, we are where we are beacause the national government has stepped in to attempt to erradicate human/civil rights abuses and diseases and to provide equal protections for citizens and uniform education of its citizens. <br /><br />It is largely due to the ability of government to step up to provide for the equitable distribution of citizen's rights and to protect eqaul access to opportunity and to act against abuse that we have developed a national ethos as opposed to a multitude of minor competing and warring principalities.<br /><br />So it's not perfect. What would be?jimmiraybobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-4494849112154277742010-08-08T14:29:36.775-06:002010-08-08T14:29:36.775-06:00Angie,
Is a third or fourth generation American t...Angie,<br /><br />Is a third or fourth generation American that converts to Islam, Hinduism or Mormonism a threat to society? Did the gradual inclusion on a national level of Catholics or Jews or the Irish sink the Union?<br /><br />Has the inclusion of blacks and women and Latinos destroyed a common national bond?<br /><br />When you say that it was the Puritan work ethic that made the country prosperous you are only recognizing a fraction of the story. Great nations and societies have managed to emerge before the Puritans - we could speak of the Roman work ethic. As to America, it didn't hurt the bottom line that we built a great deal of prosperity on the backs of free/cheap labor (slaves/children) with very little to no protections and in the forceful acquisition of abundant land wealth from the indiginous inhabitants. <br /><br />Looking at the history of the nation at the larger scale I have a hard time seeing anything but multiculturalism and a continuing struggle to define national identity.jimmiraybobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-2478532536274522272010-08-08T13:20:18.693-06:002010-08-08T13:20:18.693-06:00I do not believe that all governments are equal. R...I do not believe that all governments are equal. Representative Republics seek to uphold the value of the 'rule of law' and value of individual liberty.<br /><br />Our laws protect the rights of individual liberty such that the individual is valued and has the right to "own his own life" and choose where and how he will prioritize his values. This is nothing other than "human rights".<br /><br />I do not believe in multiculturalism, because it has set us up to tolerate what cannot be tolerated, unless we do so at our own demise. We must discriminate against radicals of any kind, because they seek to undermine the very stability of our culture and change our society so that our values are changed. <br /><br />We cannot change our values to be a Religious State, otherwise we will be oppressed by some form of religious tradition and its understanding of law, which does not allow individual liberty of choice and value.This is what Shairia does wherever it is implemented.<br /><br />We cannot change our values where the STate becomes "god", either, because otherwise, we will serve social interests at the costs of individual liberty and value. And Tom is right, Leviathan is what we will get...<br /><br />I am afraid for our future if those that have the power to speak and do something to protect our nation, do not do so. At least the "Tea Parties" care to speak about abuses of power.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.com