Scholarly and saintly Hypatia of Alexandria Was Murdered by a Degenerate Clique of Christian Fundamentalists. How many people remember her contributions to science? Religion and science do not mix.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyhL8FmNZHI
Scholarly and saintly Hypatia of Alexandria Was Murdered by a Degenerate Clique of Christian Fundamentalists. How many people remember her contributions to science? Religion and science do not mix.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyhL8FmNZHI
Interesting article... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypatia
Your argument (Hypatia of Alexandria Was Murdered by a Degenerate Clique of Christian Fundamentalists therefor Religion and science do not mix.) IMHO leans toward a post hoc, ergo propter hoc conclusion http://skepdic.com/posthoc.html .
The events I see in the wikipedia article appear to be spurred by politics more than anything else: "According to contemporary sources, Hypatia was murdered by a Christian mob or by Christian zealots known as Parabalani after being accused of exacerbating a conflict between two prominent figures in Alexandria, the governor, Orestes, and the bishop, Cyril of Alexandria." Note: executed by zealots similar to those who have a propensity for violence even today.
Not all followers of religion are zealots - prolly a HUGE minority based on current events; to further define the word 'zealot'... Google: "a person who is fanatical and uncompromising in pursuit of their religious, political, or other ideals."
Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY
Given the Big Bang and Quantum Physics it is more likely that science and atheism do not mix.
I watched a YouTube video by Inspiring Philosophy recently ("Is Atheism a Delusion?"). You might find it interesting for the references he gives. I've even read the one by Barrett he mentioned. (He is some sort of Christian. I don't know what kind, but his points do not depend on Christianity.): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ii-bsrHB0o
Dude, what are you taking about???? In those days there was no separation between church and state just as there was no separation between church and science. In other words, there was no separation between politics and religion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Terror
Today, atheists think there is no separation between atheism and science. But there is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Terror
It is your claim that science and religion do not mix that I am objecting to. My claim: Science and religion mix very well.
If you check the link that I provided you will see references to scientific evidence that theism is the biological default position for our species. On top of that default position the various religions and atheistic traditions formed through cultural activity.
I have noticed three overlapping problems with the various religions (including atheism) although many of these religions also enhance the default theistic position:
1) Imperialism: Claiming that followers of other religions go to hell because they have a different opinion is a form of imperialism. Also claiming that people who do not support atheism are suffering under some "viral meme" is imperialistic. They are both missionary positions to build a larger political group.
2) Dehumanization: Burning people at the stake is a form of dehumanization. Also atheistic justifications for genocide fall under this category.
3) Idolatry: This is another form of dehumanization where texts are made sacred. Those sacred texts are also mathematical texts atheists use to justify determinism. Essentially, taking what is subjective and reducing it to what is objective and then "worshiping" that object is what I mean by idolatry.
Oh, dear. First of all "scholarly Hypatia" was a Neoplatonist philosopher whose mathematics and astronomy would have reflected as mystical and ultimately as monotheistic a perspective (giving primacy to a transcendent One) as any Christian theologian--some of whom deeply admired her. RT's source on Hypatia, the 2009 film Agora, apparently includes the ahistorical information that Hypatia was persecuted for advancing a claim of heliocentrism. This seems to be an attempt to create resonance with Galileo's case more than a thousand years later (oh, those rotten Christians just never give up on that one). But I have not seen Agora (nor even watched RT's video), and I really should give it a proper gander. Heh heh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Terror
The suggestion that Hypatia was murdered by "a degenerate clique of Christian fundamentals" is also anachronistic. Hypatia was killed in the early 5th century. Christian fundamentalism (which is not the same thing as Biblical literalism) did not exist until the end of the 19th century. The term was not even coined until the 1920s. Oh wait, I know how much Red likes Wikipedia so here ya go:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chri...fundamentalism
Of course, degenerate people are never pleasant--especially the cliquey ones. But Hypatia was just not murdered by Focus on the Family. For what it's worth, though, I share your opinion that religion and science don't mix.
I have to respectfully disagree with your approach, tailor. Hypatia's assassins cannot be written off as mere zealots. Zealots they were, of course, and a dangerous mob, but they were also the means by which the Christian political elite got rid of this influential Neoplatonist thinker. And that was part of a wider, longer, deliberate, mainstream crackdown on other religions (including Hellenism and Neoplatonism) in the late 4th and early 5th centuries. I cite Oxford professor Diarmaid MacCulloch's Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years:Quote:
Originally Posted by tailor STATELY
"The Council of Constantinople...radically narrowed the boundaries of acceptable belief in the Church, creating a single Imperial Christianity backed up by military force. It was one half of a profound transformation in of Christian status in the empire in the 380s. The declaration of Constantine and Licinius at Milan back in 313 had proclaimed general toleration. That had been a reaffirmation of traditional Roman practice, with the one great exception of Christianity, which had leapt from persecuted to favoured religion. Now 'Catholic' Christianity was given monopoly status, not just against its own Christian rivals but against all traditional religion: ancient priesthoods lost all privileges and temples were ordered to be closed even in the most remote districts. The process began with a decree in Constantinople in 380, but politics intervened to accelerate the new situation. In 392 a barbarian general of the Roman army named Arbogast backed a coup d'etat against the legitimate Western emperor, Valentinian II, who was murdered and replaced with a modest and competent academic of traditionalist [that is Hellenic pagan] sympathies named Eugenius.
"Moves to restore honour and equal treatment to the old religion had not got very far when, in 394, Theodosius intervened from the East and destroyed the usurping regime. His conclusion, naturally enough, was that his policy, already launched in the East, should be extended throughout the empire. The Olympic Games were no longer celebrated after 393. Further decrees after his death banned non-Christians from service in the army, imperial administration or at court. This was backed up by ruthless action: some of the most beautiful and famous sacred places of antiquity went up in flames together with a host of lesser shrines. Monks were prominent agitators in the crowds which exulted in the destruction, and dire consequences are always likely to follow rampaging mobs. Perhaps the most repulsive case was the death in 415 of the Neoplatonist philosopher Hypatia, so well respected for her learning that she had overcome the normal prejudices of men to earn pre-eminence in the Alexandrian schools. Christian mobs were persuaded that she was instrumental in preventing the Prefect of Egypt from ending a quarrel with Bishop Cyril of Alexandria, so she was dragged from her carriage, publicly humiliated, tortured and murdered. The perpetrators went unpunished. It was a permanent stain on the episcopate of Cyril and few Christian historians have had the heart to excuse it. Nearly fifteen hundred years later, the breezy Anglican clerical novelist Charles Kingsley used Hypatia's story to annoy Roman Catholics, casting them in a none-too-veiled parallel in the role of the intolerant Alexandrian killers."
Thus the murder of Hypatia cannot be dismissed as the action of a few fanatics. By the start of the 5th century century, intolerance had become a matter of policy. Violent mobs--in this case drawn from the urban poor--simply became a handy weapon for bringing the policy to innocent victims like Hypatia. The perversion of Christianity was not incidental. It was institutional.
Hey PB: My leap is from a present view. I agree with your analysis on faith, will read more when I can, that in the time of Hypatia: Religion and science did not mix... but that times have changed.
MT: Ok, you agree with PB, cool. The original argument, at least to me, was all too general and is therefor false. "In those days there was no separation between church and state just as there was no separation between church and science. In other words, there was no separation between politics and religion." I have no problem with the analysis that in the past things were different. IMHO a more proper analysis for today would be religion and politics do not mix... which I would agree with whole heartedly. I disagree that for today that religion and science do not mix. Again the original argument is too general IMHO.
Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY
Oh, no. You were quite right that RT's logic was specious, and for exactly the reasons you said. In my view religion and science do not mix, but that has nothing to do with what RT thinks he knows about Hypatia. In fact, I imagine that if he really thought it through, RT would decide (as an atheist and a communist) that science must replace religion, and therefore they must interact polemically. I cannot read YN's posts anymore, but I know his philosophical paganism requires him to marry the two. My own belief is that religion makes lousy science and science makes lousy religion. Best to keep them apart for now. But again, I'd be very surprised if that's what RT meant. I'm pretty sure we only agree on paper.
That was very informative, thanks Pompey. I'm glad history did not forget this terrible incident. Clearly the state and religion do not mix, nor religion and science, nor religion or anything else. Or the State and anything else, for that matter. Religion should be practiced by the individual, for spiritual purposes only. I wonder if RT will agree with this, or whether he only wants religion to be vanquished from the face of the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pompey Bum
Bullocks!!!!! Calling everything by its rightful name is the beginning of wisdom. These degenerates were fundamentalists avant la lettre. Ditto for the degenerates who threatenedQuote:
Originally Posted by Pompey Bum
Galileo with the stake if he did not renounce his scientific discoveries. The people who persecuted Galileo cited:
1 Chronicles 16:30, Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, Psalm 104:5, Ecclesiastes 1:5 (but see varied interpretations of Job 26:7). Heliocentrism, the theory that the Earth was a planet, which along with all the others revolved around the Sun, contradicted both geocentrism and the prevailing theological support of the theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair
There you go, Pompey Bum. Sweet trolling though.
You're welcome, Mona. Somehow truth survives all the barbarity.Quote:
Originally Posted by mona amon
Oh, I see. Galileo, you say? Mmmmm, yes, fascinating. Well, I'll just wait here then while you bring me the evidence that Hypatia advanced an argument for heliocentrism. No, no, do take your time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Terror
You know the movie I liked? Doctor Dolittle. I don't know, I just always wanted to talk with animals.
Found anything yet?
In Hypatia's case they called her a witch --- straight from the case of Samuel and the witch of Endor. It is pure misogyny. I'm sure they had the case of Eve in mind when they persecuted her. They were just envious and jealous fellows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pompey Bum
Well, true enough, Red Terror, but since that happened in the 7th century it didn't affect her murder in 415, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Terror
Anything on heliocentrism yet?
Hypatia also investigates the heliocentric model of the solar system proposed by Aristarchus of Samos; by having an object dropped from the mast of a moving ship she demonstrates to Orestes that a possible motion of the Earth would not affect the motion, relative to Earth, of a falling object on Earth. However, due to religious objections against heliocentrism, the Christians have now forbidden Hypatia to teach at the school. The Christians and the Jews come into conflict, committing violent acts against each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pompey Bum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agora_(film)
She also worked with the concept of ellipse --- that the earth did not revolve around the sun in a perfect circle but in an elliptical revolution. That last scene where she is being suffocated by her former slave, the movie had her looking at the ellipse on the ceiling or a skylight ... whatever you want to call it.
Heh heh heh. Right, Red Terror, but that is from a description of THE FILM. My contention is that the film was ahistorical in suggesting that very thing. But I will gladly stand corrected if you can provide evidence that the above story is true, or that Hypatia of Alexandria ever advanced the idea of heliocentrism. If you can't, I call on your integrity to admit that you have given undue credence to the historicity of this movie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Terror
In the meantime, happy hunting! :)
So atheist amateur historian Tim O'Niell wrote a whole post about this topic and the film Agora that many of you might find interesting: link.
Thank you, Drkshadow03. Very much appreciated.
"And, as usual, bigots and anti-theistic zealots will ignore the evidence, the sources and rational analysis and believe Hollywood's appeal to their prejudices. It makes you wonder who the real enemies of reason actually are."
Part of my problem with the Hypatia example is that it happened too long ago. The same with Galileo. We have changed since then.
What is more interesting is what has happened in the past 100 years or our attitudes now towards events that happened long ago.
Sweet trolling, Pompey Bum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pompey Bum
Man is quite insane. He wouldn't know how to create a maggot, and yet he creates Gods by the dozen.
Michel de Montaigne
We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.
Richard Dawkins
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Christopher Hitchens
Jesus Christ—who, as it turns out, was born of a virgin, cheated death and rose bodily into the heavens—can now be eaten in the form of a cracker. A few Latin words spoken over your favorite Burgundy, and you can drink his blood as well. Is there any doubt that a lone subscriber to these beliefs would be considered mad? The danger of religious faith is that it allows otherwise normal human beings to reap the fruits of madness and consider them holy.
Sam Harris, The End of Faith
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
Do not indoctrinate your children. Teach them how to think for themselves, how to evaluate evidence, and how to disagree with you.
Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
Many of us saw religion as harmless nonsense. Beliefs might lack all supporting evidence but, we thought, if people needed a crutch for consolation, where's the harm? September 11th changed all that.”
Richard Dawkins
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816
Priests...dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subversions of the duperies on which they live.
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Correa de Serra, April 11, 1820
And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse of St. John], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
The religion of one age is the literary entertainment of the next.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
The god who presides over the Judeo-Christian belief system bears a disquieting resemblance to those imperfect creations known as human beings. This suggests that either he really did fashion us in his own image or we fashioned him in ours.
Michael Parenti
It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. What will we do if an Islamist regime, which grows dewy-eyed at the mere mention of paradise, ever acquires long-range nuclear weaponry? If history is any guide, we will not be sure about where the offending warheads are or what their state of readiness is, and so we will be unable to rely on targeted, conventional weapons to destroy them. In such a situation, the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime—as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day—but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe.
Sam Harris, End of Faith
Evolution sceptic: "Professor Haldane, even given the billions of years that you say were available for evolution, I simply cannot believe it is possible to go from a single cell to a complicated human body, with its trillions of cells organized into bones and muscles and nerves, a heart that pumps without ceasing for decades, miles and miles of blood vessels and kidney tubules, and a brain capable of thinking and talking and feeling."
Professor John Burdon Sanderson Haldane: "But madam, you did it yourself. And it only took you nine months.”
Richard Dawkins, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution
Lighthouses are more helpful than churches.
Benjamin Franklin
I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I absented myself from Christian assemblies.
Benjamin Franklin
In those parts of the world where learning and science have prevailed, miracles have ceased; but in those parts of it as are barbarous and ignorant, miracles are still in vogue.
Ethan Allen, Reason the Only Oracle of Man, pamphlet, 1784
As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?
John Adams, letter to FA Van der Kamp, December 27, 1816
I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!
John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, from George Seldes
"As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] ... it is declared ... that no pretext arising from religious opinion shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries....
"The United States is not a Christian nation any more than it is a Jewish or a Mohammedan nation."
Treaty of Tripoli (1797), carried unanimously by the Senate and signed into law by John Adams (the original language is by Joel Barlow, US Consul)
Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded project.
James Madison
During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.
James Madison
The Spaniards in Mexico and Peru used to baptize Indian infants and then immediately dash their brains out: by this means they secured that these infants went to Heaven. No orthodox Christian can find any logical reason for condemning their action, although all nowadays do so. In countless ways the doctrine of personal immortality in its Christian form has had disastrous effects upon morals ...
Bertrand Russell
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
Stephen Roberts
I'll take that as a panicked surrender. ;-)
So many spells. Too little time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Terror
It is the people who think they have found that privileged frame of reference, that higher ground, where they think they no longer worship any gods who are the most bedeviled.
Thanks for introducing me to this interesting historical figure, Red.
I think that when we stop querelling about our different gods or faiths, we will have advanced considerably in our human evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Is irreligious bigotry so common now that it's become invisible?
People will always want to express and justify their views. It helps clarify their position for themselves, but I tend to agree with this. If people don't think someone else is going to hell for having a different opinion or that they are suffering from some "viral meme" and just accept the differing opinion as different, that looks to me like a form of social improvement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danik 2016
People who have positive near death experiences hold all sorts of opinions ranging from atheist to fundamentalist whatever. So I am not worried about hell.
Having a viral meme suggests that holding a different opinion or behaving differently could help someone live a healthier or happier life. That might be true. One could do research on such questions. A book I read by Will Johnson, "The Posture of Meditation", makes me suspect that just aligning oneself with gravity can clarify one's mind. It has worked for me, but I don't think it should be something everyone is forced to do.
Oh gee, looks like I left the heat shield down for a sec. My bad. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
I didn´t quite grasp this idea of "viral meme" Yes/No probably because I don´t go in the social nets.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Oh, this one as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
You know, Danik, I was having a hard time grasping that one myself. ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Danik 2016
I´m sure there will be an explanation, Pompey.
...........
Well, I'm dying to hear it Danik.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danik 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
The "viral meme" is a view of religious belief as a harmful "meme". A "meme" would be the way some hope to model our cultural interactions. It is similar to a gene viewed as an unconscious and random object that tries to "selfishly" propagate itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danik 2016
I don't actually believe in the meme model. It is based on too much unconsciousness. I also don't believe in the hell concept as a place to put people who don't believe according to some orthodoxy. That is not to say that there are no hellish afterlife experiences. People have reported them in near death experiences and so I have to take that into account.
Thanks, Yes/No,
I may be wrong but I see it as an attempt to addapt discussions about religion to the current internet pattern of interactions.
I am glad to see that you are still reading my posts, Pompey Bum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pompey Bum
I am interested in religious expression based on three aspects: (1) imperialism, (2) dehumanization and (3) idolatry. Although I consider atheism a religion, it is not the only religion that has problems with those three aspects.
How on earth can you classify atheism as a religion since there is no deity to genuflect to???Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.
---- Tom Paine The Age of Reason
Religion: (other than the obvious) Google - a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance. Atheist have their gods: Themselves (first and foremost), Dawkins, Tom Paine, etc. of whom they quote and espouse as voraciously as any Bible thumper I've known, or as Dorothy Rowe eloquently said: "Many people believe that, because they hold certain ideas, they are morally superior to those who do not hold these ideas. In believing this they commit the deadliest of the deadly sins, namely pride, but they do this willingly because they believe that their moral superiority entitles them to patronise, proselytise, and, under certain conditions, maim and kill those they despise." I think YesNo has covered the last quite well in this and other posts. Theists and non-theists have the same divine potential; we are equal in that respect. My faith's Article of Faith #11: "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."... I would hope that ideal would be a universal clarion call.Quote:
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.
Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY
Atheism is religion without God. All of the defects, none of the benefits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjr_7mxH3Rs
(litnet teaches a course on atheism)
Agnostics are some of the finest folk on the planet. Atheists are our radical brothers, theists are our radical brothers.
I will say this for atheists, very few atheists are robbers and burgulars. Their jobs as mathematical physicists and chemists allow them very little time to be militant about something as silly as religious beliefs. Still, they purport to know something which they do not.
When christians and moslems and hindus are acting like monkeys, blowing things up, throwing acid on women or insisting the world is only 8,000 years old, atheists are there to point out that the whole spectacle is silly, without seeing themselves as part of that spectacle, of course.
Atheism is the only doctrine I can think of that overtly challenges the ancient claims and nonsense of religionists.
I do not wish to stamp out atheism or religion. I am allowed to hope they will eventually stamp themselves out in favor of true rationalism, which is agnosticism.
If religionists were not so dogmatically certain, I have a suspicion most atheists would show their true colors. I believe most atheists are merely fed up, reactive agnostics!
I think tailor STATELY answered the question. Also mortalterror brought up a good point about atheism having all the defects but none of the benefits of a religion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Terror