The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Yanks better convert to Islam, or bad things will happen (AlQaeda)
O.k., now you're simply degenerating into being boorish, insulting, rude and ignorant.
How very Christian of you.
When you try to criticise me for generalistaions about people which I do not make , it is fair and justified . And now you go and make generalisations about the adherents of one of the world's largest and most varied faiths . How very much like . . . . . . . . typical you .
When you try to criticise me for generalistaions about people which I do not make , it is fair and justified . And now you go and make generalisations about the adherents of one of the world's largest and most varied faiths . How very much like . . . . . . . . typical you .
Except of course I wasn't being entirely serious.
After all, you don't see ol' godless atheist me starting off the posting week or day with yet another anti-Christian or anti-Christianity thread or poll, based on the supposed utter wickedness of either the faith as a whole or its most extreme adherents and proponents.
I'm sure one day you may be able to start a thread that doesn't contain pointlessly anti-Muslim or anti-Islamic sentiments, but I shan't expect miracles.
Don't be too sure about that - dialectic materialism comes pretty close to a semi-religious theory of everything .
Yeah, right!
You and Cybershy ought to get together and redefine the Oxford English Dictionary, so that for the purposes of your arguments, supernatural and religion can mean anything you want them to mean, as can a whole horde of other words.
Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.
...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915
"Which dogmas are atheists supposed to believe in ? "
Im not going to engage in generalization about dogmas atheists are supposed to believe in, any more than I would about theists.
"Given that there is no set text or collection of scriptures or compendium of principles for all or most atheists, this still doesn't make any sense to me."
Just as there is not set text or collection of scriptures for all or most to theists.
"Religion will do that to you, I've observed. "
Nice troll.
"Perhaps he was on the verge of a psychotic break, or as some credulous folk might see it, a religious experience..... "
Another nice troll.
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber
Im not going to engage in generalization about dogmas atheists are supposed to believe in, any more than I would about theists.
You already have indulged in a generalization, given that you've called me a 'Reform atheist', implying that there are other 'Reform atheists' and that there are dogmas which some atheists believe in and which some do not.
Just as there is not set text or collection of scriptures for all or most to theists.
Noone has indicated that ALL religious faiths believe in the same dogmas. I have had a religious education and a better than average grounding in history, thanks.
It's actually incredibly simple to indicate which dogmas various religious groups, cults and sects are meant to believe in, since theologians, rabbis, mullahs, pundits and so on, go to such lengths to expound or elaborate them, indicating in the various sacred scriptures or collected texts the supposed divine support or decrees behind them.
Handily for me, the Roman Catholic Church even entitles one of its compendiums 'Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma'. Can't get much clearer than that, can you ?
Recognized as the greatest summary of Catholic dogma ever put between two covers. A one-volume encyclopedia of Catholic doctrines. Tells exactly what the Church teaches on any particular topic. Tells when the pronouncement was made and gives the sources from Scripture, Church Councils, Papal statements and the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. Essential for priests, seminarians, parents and teachers. Easily one of our most important books. 560 pgs, PB
Traditional Catholic book publisher of Saints lives, liturgical and devotional works, and classic titles on dogmatic, ascetical and mystical theology. Bibles, books, booklets and calendars. Jesus Christ, Blessed Virgin Mary, history, afterlife, miracles.
Traditional Catholic book publisher of Saints lives, liturgical and devotional works, and classic titles on dogmatic, ascetical and mystical theology. Bibles, books, booklets and calendars. Jesus Christ, Blessed Virgin Mary, history, afterlife, miracles.
I'd have thought the reasoning behind any faith having dogmas is fairly obvious- to show the 'true believers' the RIGHT way, the ONLY way, and to set a benchmark against which heretical and heterodox thought can be judged and exposed.
Another nice troll.
Gee, d'ya think ?
I've always found it amazing what extremes of behaviour, public or private, are allowed once you give them the imprimatur of religion or faith.
Self abuse, mass slaughter, psychotic behaviour, starvation, privation, imprisonment, censorship, abolition of human rights- there's no end of what you can justify doing, if only you describe it as a religious act or part of one's faith.
Nice troll.
Not really. If more of the world's major religions and their followers were wholly or mostly quietist, then the world would be a much better place.
Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.
...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915
"You already have indulged in a generalization, given that you've called me a 'Reform atheist', implying that there are other 'Reform atheists' and that there are dogmas which some atheists believe in and which some do not."
I implied there are SOME dogmas that SOME atheists believe in. Unless you have defined dogma so that any dogma is necessarily theist, Id say thats true. And, no, Im not interested in along battle about the word dogma, in which I cite a common use, and you cite how the word was used in the 17th c, and we cite competing dictionary definitions.
"Noone has indicated that ALL religious faiths believe in the same dogmas. I have had a religious education and a better than average grounding in history, thanks."
Well when you attack someone for equating religion and atheism, because atheists dont all beleive the same things, you IMPLY that religions do. Now I know you know the minutae of the distinctions between 17th English Protestant sects, so I can only assume your rhetoric was sloppy, and was largely driven by it being directly in response to Cybershy. However I find it inconvenient to try parse a post based on what I recall about a poster, so I respond to the words of the post on their own terms.
"It's actually incredibly simple to indicate which dogmas various religious groups, cults and sects are meant to believe in, since theologians, rabbis, mullahs, pundits and so on, go to such lengths to expound or elaborate them, indicating in the various sacred scriptures or collected texts the supposed divine support or decrees behind them."
OK = fine. Tell me. Does Conservative Judaism believe
A. That there is a supernatural God who performs miracles
B. That the Torah was written by God
C. That homosexuality is a sin.
Yes, individual rabbis expound on faith, and cite prooftexts. But that doesnt make ANY such position standard for Judaism. Within Judaism ONLY the Orthodox movement, among the major movements, asserts that there are requirements to hold certain beliefs, and even within Orthodoxy there is still considerable diversity on key questions of belief.
"Handily for me, the Roman Catholic Church even entitles one of its compendiums 'Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma'. Can't get much clearer than that, can you ?"
Yup, and as I know you know, the Roman Catholic Church is not the only approach to faith, and few faith traditions are quite like the RCC in such matters.
"I'd have thought the reasoning behind any faith having dogmas is fairly obvious- to show the 'true believers' the RIGHT way, the ONLY way, and to set a benchmark against which heretical and heterodox thought can be judged and exposed."
Which is why the arguement within Judaism that there ARE NO dogmas, goes hand in hand with the notion that Halacha, Jewish law, does not regulate thought, but only regulates actions. And why the counter argument looks to show that thought has been regulated in the halacha. Its a very interesting argument, and at the heart of many disagreements between Conservative and Orthodox Judaism.
"Self abuse, mass slaughter, psychotic behaviour, starvation, privation, imprisonment, censorship, abolition of human rights- there's no end of what you can justify doing, if only you describe it as a religious act or part of one's faith."
Is Stalinism a form of religious faith? All you describe has been justified by it. None of what you describe has been justified by Conservative Judaism. I would say that your statement would be just as true, and less misleading, if you substituted "if you are a fanatic about your belief system" . All fanatics can justify those things, few moderates can. Thats the important distinction in behavior, not that between theists and atheists.
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber
Uh, yes, it is, by any reasonable person's definition.
Ok, so I googled religious naturalism, expecting to find refs to R. Mordechai Kaplan, and perhaps non-Jewish parallels, but instead I find a movement led by someone named Ursula Goodenough, which is fine, but they dont seem to mention Rabbi Kaplan anywhere on their website.
Which proves that at least some religious naturalists are either
A. Plagiarists
or
B. Goyim who are completely ignorant of 20th century Jewish philosophy.
note googling on Kaplan Religious Naturalism produces lots of very interesting links.
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber
I implied there are SOME dogmas that SOME atheists believe in. Unless you have defined dogma so that any dogma is necessarily theist, Id say thats true. And, no, Im not interested in along battle about the word dogma, in which I cite a common use, and you cite how the word was used in the 17th c, and we cite competing dictionary definitions.
No, you stated it, by calling me a Reform atheist. If you state it as fact, then back it up with evidence.
You can say it's true that all or some or most atheists believe in a dogma or some dogmas, but that is because you and others persist in using a religious comparison, when atheism is not a religion, nor an organised faith.
I cite a perfectly common use of the word dogma, indeed a modern day one, unless you think the book of Catholic dogma I cited is an ancient tome, 'cos it ain't.
I do not imply nor do I state that ALL religious faiths believe the same thing, nor even that ALL members of individual religions ALL now believe the same thing- what an absolutely preposterous and insupportable interpretation of what I stated.
You're really reaching there, I'm afraid.
My 'rhetoric' is not sloppy- your reading and logic are.
As for recycling my words with regards the Roman Catholic Church, a quick search through several works on 16th and 17th Century history reveals phrases such as 'Lutheran dogma', 'rejected the strictures of Calvinist dogma', 'Presbyterian dogma'.
A quick google search revealed also 'Jewish dogma' and 'Muslim' and 'Islamic' dogma.
So that's a few more Christian sects covered, and the other two monotheistic traditions too. The authors also cited which aspects of dogma to which they, or the people they were writing about were referring, a parallel with the Catholic aspect of dogmatism (which I used because it is the one in which I was brought up, and therefore am most familiar with).
" All fanatics can justify those things, few moderates can. Thats the important distinction in behavior, not that between theists and atheists."
Again, and most crucially, you're missing the point- what is 'fanatical' atheism meant to be ?
Stalinism was one man's way of controlling a country and shoring up his dictatorship- what did it have to do with not accepting the proposition that there is a god ?
Unless of course you're going to mention Stalin's
training for the priesthood...
That's all that atheism is. Plain and simple.
Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.
...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915
As for recycling my words with regards the Roman Catholic Church, a quick search through several works on 16th and 17th Century history reveals phrases such as 'Lutheran dogma', 'rejected the strictures of Calvinist dogma', 'Presbyterian dogma'.
A quick google search revealed also 'Jewish dogma' and 'Muslim' and 'Islamic' dogma.
googgle searchs reveal massive numbers of hits for "marxist dogma" and "Stalinist dogma"
I never said whether or no Stalinism had a view on God. Im not defining dogma as a view on God. The word has evolved since the 17th century.
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber
NOUN:
pl. dog·mas or dog·ma·ta (-m-t) KEY
A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.
An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine.
A principle or belief or a group of them: "The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present" (Abraham Lincoln).
So do you think Lincoln was referring to religious dogmas when he said that?
BTW, googling "abolitionist dogma" "confederate dogma" and "neoliberal dogma" gets plenty of hits also.
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber
Dogma
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other senses of this word, see dogma (disambiguation).
Dogma (the plural is either dogmata or dogmas, Greek äüãìá, plural äüãìáôá) is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization to be authoritative and not to be disputed or doubted. While in the context of religion the term is largely descriptive, outside of religion its current usage tends to carry a pejorative connotation — referring to concepts as being "established" only according to a particular point of view, and thus one of doubtful foundation.
[edit]
Dogma in religion
Religious dogmata, properly conceived, reach back to proofs other than themselves, and ultimately to faith. Perhaps the pinnacle of organized exposition of theological dogma is the Summa Theologiae by Thomas Aquinas, who proposed this relationship between faith and objection: "If our opponent believes nothing of divine revelation, there is no longer any means of proving the articles of faith by reasoning, but only of answering his objections — if he has any — against faith" (I 1 8)..
Dogmata are found in many religions such as Christianity and Islam, where they are considered core principles that must be upheld by all followers of that religion. As a fundamental element of religion, the term "dogma" is assigned to those theological tenets which are considered to be well demonstrated, such that their proposed disputation or revision effectively means that a person no longer accepts the given religion as his or her own, or has entered into a period of personal doubt. Dogma is distinguished from theological opinion regarding those things considered less well-known. Dogmata may be clarified and elaborated but not contradicted in novel teachings (e.g., Galatians 1:8-9). Rejection of dogma is considered heresy in certain religions, and may lead to expulsion from the religious group, although in the Christian Gospels this is not done rashly (e.g. Mt 18:15-17).
For most of Eastern Christianity, the dogmata are contained in the Nicene Creed and the canons of two, three, or seven ecumenical councils (depending on whether one is Nestorian, Oriental Orthodox, or Eastern Orthodox). Roman Catholics also hold as dogma the decisions of 14 later councils and two decrees promulgated by popes exercising papal infallibility (see, e.g., immaculate conception). Protestants to differing degrees affirm portions of these dogmata, and often rely on sect-specific 'Statements of Faith' which summarize their chosen dogmata (see, e.g., Eucharist).
In Islam, the dogmatic principles are contained in the aqidah.
Dogma is referred to as Doctrine inside many Christian religions.
[edit]
Dogma outside of religion
Many non-religious beliefs are often described as dogmata, for example in the fields of politics or philosophy, as well as within society itself. The term dogmatism carries the implication that people are upholding their beliefs in an unthinking and conformist fashion. Dogmas are thought to be anathema to science and scientific analysis, though some small groups may argue that the scientific method itself is somewhat dogmatic. In a similar way in philosophies such as rationalism and skepticism, although metaphysical considerations are normally not explicit in those fields, traditional religious dogmas tend to be rejected while unexamined presuppositions are sometimes upheld.
Since the Enlightenment, the word 'dogma' has typically been used in a negative and derogatory manner, for example, when employees talk about unpopular company policies. Other examples often come from political or national statements, an example would be article 1 section 3 of the United Nations Declaration of Principles on Tolerance:
1.3 Tolerance is the responsibility that upholds human rights, pluralism (including cultural pluralism), democracy and the rule of law. It involves the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism and affirms the standards set out in international human rights instruments. [Bold added for emphasis]
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber
Aldous Huxley:
At least two thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity, idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religious or political idols.
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber
Im not defining dogma as a view on God. The word has evolved since the 17th century.
Neither am I.
I'm attempting to show how people like Cybershy seek to equate atheism with a religion or religious faiths in general.
So far, he's managed to completely obfuscate the issue by making definitions that are so wideranging in scope that they have no particular or necessary relationship to atheism.
The word has evolved since the 17th century.
A fact of which I'm keenly aware, and which I've pointed out. Good grief....
So do you think Lincoln was referring to religious dogmas when he said that?
Place the quote in context. When did he say it, and why ?
On its own, I can hardly comment on what he was thinking when he said it.
In any case I have asked both you and Cybershy to explain which dogmas atheists, as atheists, necessarily or exclusively hold as a consequence of their not accepting the proposition that there is a god or gods.
As for your link to the definitions of dogma, dogmatism, et cetera, you're still not telling me anything I don't already know.
So- which dogmas do atheists believe in ?
What supposedly separates a 'Reform' atheist from an 'unreformed' atheist ?
These are all questions, which despite posting definitions of dogma, you have deftly avoiding answering.
Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.
...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915
In any case I have asked both you and Cybershy to explain which dogmas atheists, as atheists, necessarily or exclusively hold as a consequence of their not accepting the proposition that there is a god or gods.
.
You seem to have completely missed the point of my "reform" analogy. Reform Judaism holds nothing that could be called a dogma in the Jewish context - IE a belief that you are obliged by Jewish law to hold. Ergo a Reform Jew holds NO dogmas, yet is still a Jew. SOME Jews DO hold dogmas. They DONT all believe in the same dogmas. For example Hasidic Jews in general hold certain dogmas that are denied by non-Hasidic Orthodox Jews, and Satmar Hasidim and Lubavitch Hasidim hold dogmas that conflict. Ergo, there are NO dogmas that are held necessarily by all Jews, not even by those who share a belief in dogmas.
By analogy, there are no dogmas necessarily held by all atheists. SOME atheists hold dogmas, though not all atheists who hold dogmas agree on their dogmas. Some Atheists hold no dogmas, and I used the word "Reform Atheists" to refer to them, (and to you).
Are there dogmas which while not held necessarily by atheists, are held exclusively by atheists? Im not sure. Are there theists or agnostics who affirm dialectical materialism?
I wonder if I was too sloppy in my wording. On reflection I recall that in the UK the movement I call "Reform Judaism" is more often called Liberal or Progressive Judaism, and that for someone as steeped in 17th C Christian religious history as you seem to be, you might have read "Reformed Atheist" with Protestant connotations. Luther and Calvin rather than Geiger, Einhorn, and Isaac Meyer Wise.
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber
Tweet
.
Comment