Thaelman Urgelles I'm surprised how much more you are talking about science in your articles, as if science is a religion, or somehow the door to real truth. This is equivalent to both idolatry and unscientific thinking. First, because the only form of truth in the absolute sense is God, and second, because all science is subject to numerous methodological problems you never mention. No, for you if a study of some people-we-have-no-clue-who-they-are-says-something, it must be true, must be revelation or something like that. Science is just an approach to reality, never a road toward truth. You make it look like a caricature. You guys and you scientology-like secular religion.
Thaelman Urgelles Well said Clayton. People needs to open their eyes on these issues. An evil and satanic agenda enemy of the good, justice and righteusness has conquered many people's minds by pretending being good. They want to convince people so that they are turned against God and ultimately send them to hell. They might be joking but that's what they are accomplishing.
Thaelman Urgelles And you think Satan is a btter ally than God on this? This is how ugly your society have become. I agree that, taken to its limits, free thinking and self respect are evil and satanic, hence they should not be allowed in a free healthy society. I like this, I like the way liberals are taking off their masks and showing their true taste for evil, rapacity and crime. It will end one day.
Thaelman Urgelles Maybe their making a joke our of it, but they really worship Satan and evil in general, because everything they advocate is evil. I like the cynicism with which some liberals admit that their agenda is totally in enmity with good, justice and righteousness, all good reasons why their arguments and agenda should eventually be banned from the public sphere. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but all this liberal society will one day come to an end.
Thaelman Urgelles I like your argument: when taking to the extreme, free thinking and self respect turns into satanic, evil tendencies. Such level of freedom can only lead people to hell. I totally agree.
Thaelman Urgelles I like this kind of news. It questions human's control over nature, it questions the entire worldview of the Enlightenment. It humbles us. It puts us in perspective. I like more a world where humans pay heed to nature than the other way around.
Thaelman Urgelles Let me tell you something about history. The Romans thought that they had reached the peak of civilization. They were wrong. So did the Arabs, the Chinese and the Aztecs in their own times. The Europeans and Americans of today think that they have reached (or about to reach) the peak of civilization, and let me tell you something: history will prove them (you) wrong. Worse, a future civilization, when liberalism be nothing but a historical datum, will develop the same hubris, and history will prove it wrong. Being deluded by this sense of progress is a typical ideological construct of societies that have reached supremacy. But time and entropy are irreversible forces. Your country and its values will one day disappear.
Thaelman Urgelles What tells you that liberalism was right and feudalism was wrong? Just because we happen to live in liberal times? What if one thousand years from now our cities lay waste and we return to slavery or feudalism? What would you make of that? You speak as if history is moving in one direction, which is an old fashioned view of history that doesn't stand critical analysis, a European-centered worldview. You just have to go into detail in order to see that our historical moment is not worse nor better than any other time in the past. That's the bias that clouds your judgment.
Thaelman Urgelles Yes. In fact I would only criticize you on one point. In fact everyone else only works for the US and some European countries which are a small minority of the world's population. If you take humanity as a whole, include India, Muslim countries and Latin America, you will see religion and tradition still in the center of people's lives. It is in the US where all the good and virtue is going hell in favor of a hedonist and licentious way of life. Liberals are trying hard to make everyone else feel like a minority. You just have to cross the southern frontier and see how much religion is lived in Mexico. It's a beautiful country. I don't know why some risk their lives to go up north, seriously.
Thaelman Urgelles Well said Patrick and Nicolas. This site has become somekind of a nest of liberal absolutism. What does that mean? Anyone with a religious form of thinking, or that takes religion seriously and not as a new age, self-help discourse, is condemned as a heretic. I'm a millenial (technically speaking), I try to be a moderate conservative like a good Catholic, but eveytime I come across PolicyMic, I cannot but feel aggravated by what these people claim millenials to be.
Thaelman Urgelles You are sharing with us so much hatred and intolerance toward what's different from you that I must almost thank you for remembering all of us that liberalism is about murdering the past and excluding all who like it. Good and evil are shared equally between liberals and conservatives, and between every social stratum whatsoever. You are among the evil ones of liberalism.
Thaelman Urgelles Are you Catholic by any chance? Maybe you are not. If that's the case you can start by criticizing your own "modern-like" worldview. The best disguise of the devil is to make everyone think he doesn't exist. The Church still practices exorcism because Jesus himself practiced it. If we think he is God, he wouldn't have lied to us (if you believe Jesus is God). The Church protects that knowledge from the feeble-minded moral character of our age. Why would the Church exist if it doesn't believe and hold that what is said in the Bible is true? The virtue of the Church is in holding both science and revelation, without sacrificing one to the other. That's why pope Francis can be both liberal and conservative at the same time.
Thaelman Urgelles Bert, the army of biases you are deploying in your comment is surprising. I think this biases obstructed you from seeing the point, which is that "sweet reason" doesn't exist, and that all poitical opinions are mediated by neurological structures that we cannot choose. Maybe we can shape it in the long run through a hard self-conscious effort, but in the end we take it where we want it to go. There is no "reason" guiding anything. All political opinions are biased and arbitrary, all are guided by self-interest, egoism and the desire to rule and dominate. The fact that you consider your personal opinion the truth guided by "sweet reason" only shows your insurmountable political prejudices (like mine, by the way).
Thaelman Urgelles Interesting tautological title: "conservatives are different from everyone else [that are not conservative]." I like this science. I think it proves the point of the irrationality of politics and the futility of rational debate. However I ask myself if these scientists are not putting the problem upside down. What is first? our neurological structure that determines our decisions, or the decisions that determine our neurological structure (what the scientists see)? Bottom line, these are only statistical approaches. For all practical purposes my character and lifestyle matches the liberal personality, but I think like a conservative. Does that make me a hypocrite?
Thaelman Urgelles This is an interesting topic. I trust in historic rigorous research though. Maybe Menzie's thesis is not so well received because it doesn't match research standards. But I think this article misses the point. The discovery of America by Columbus means the discovery of this continent for what matters to Europeans. If we want to be purely logical, America was discovered by the first migrants who crossed the Bering Straight in the Pleistocene 50,000 years ago. Chinese and Viking expeditions didn't mean a radical change in those cultures' world outlooks. However, for Europe it meant a profound change in politics, economics and thought. European civilization was dramatically changed by Columbus voyages. That's what we celebrate.
Thaelman Urgelles I follow you, but it's a maladise suffered by all great empires. The Brits thought they were spreading civilization by throwing tribes of africans into concentration camps. The French would subdue all Europe in the name of freedom, the Russians in the name of Christianity.The Romans would enslave entire nations in the name of law and order, the Chinise in the name of peace, the caliphate in the name of God. I mean, that's how empires behave. Hipocrisy or not, pointing out the inevitable is unhelpful, like asking the ostrich to fly.
Thaelman Urgelles Let me see if I get this straight. Are you suggesting that the US should cut all diplomatic relations with all other governments that are undemocratic? Is that even feasable with a world which is mostly undemocratic? Are you suggesting that the US should interfere in every country of the world to enforce democracy the way you see it? The way neocons saw it? The president of the US meets with some dictators. So what? Is in the interests of your country to keep friendly relations with as much governments as possible, especially in times of war. This article is a call for empire. It's unrealistic, especially de FDR-Stalin and Nixon-Mao pictures. You don't understand how foreign relations work. Give me a break.
Thaelman Urgelles Everyone pretend to agree on this issue, and the media is helping this bias. Unfortunately, it's not so common sense as this article shows http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2013/03/9432/
Thaelman Urgelles This is why I like to set the difference between liberty and license. I don't see how people are entitled for self destruction. The right to sodomy and the right to consume cocaine and the right to kill the unborn are not deduced from the rights of political participation, religious freedom and private property. You can't have a right that damages the moral and physical stature of the holder. That is license: the deranged desire to experience something that damages the person experiencing it. Enjoy freedom as freedom goes. When you want to take the step of liberty to self destruct, we can't agree, and I favor a paternalist state that tells people where they can't go for their own good.
Thaelman Urgelles 1) the Church condemns the death penalty under all circumstances. Besides, reading the Bible literally and out of context like you are doing it is something that is not practiced in the Church. 2) the Church has a policy of helping the suffering, not to punish them. It includes gays. Russia is an Orthodox Christian country, not Catholic. 3) It's part of the Church's debate whether gays are more easilu pedophiles than not. Benedict was worried about it, Francis is more skeptic. There is no doctrinal standard. 4) if you dislike Catholic doctrine, then don't be a Catholic. Chastity is the true moral way. 5) read humanae vitae and John Paul II' tjeology of the body.