How Dogma Works

[Tuathalful]

Hi, nice vid. I'm interested in the proof you refer to of "collectivization" causing millions of deaths. Please point me towards this proof, and provide a citation so it might be verified and useful academically. Thanks.

[Tuathalful]

@Tuathalful Oh, I see you've mirrored this video and may not be able to answer my query, thanx anyway =)

[MasterOhSo]

A very neat summary of the true issues at hand and not the percieved ones that most people identify with, quite impressive. I'm going to look at your other work and probably sub...you have a rational POV I share and it's so nice to encounter a likeminded "soul"....peace be with.

[Akatam0t0ma]

Thanks for your comment. However, had you read the video description, you would have known that this is just a mirror from another channel. I could never put a brilliant work like that. But feel free to check my own mediocre video nonetheless ;-)

[MasterOhSo]

I caught that after I posted...yet it doesn't change the fact that you have great taste and I appreciate the mirror. I think sometimes you can get a measure of a person by the books they read and the information they disseminate...it speaks to your character...peace buddy.

[VyckRo]

People have not died due to collectivization, in Ukraina.

Collectivization, functioned, Stalin famine was caused intentionally.

Atheist, want to kill to. They think the faithful people, will bring the "Middle Ages"And they want to save the humanity.

Atheist they imagine that they have a mission "to save the humanity.

[Akatam0t0ma]

"They think the faithful people, will bring the "Middle Ages"And they want to save the humanity."

Indeed, we do think mankind deserves better than the belief in 2000 year old books. Of course, I am not going to force anyone to not believe in their particular book of fairytales, but I am going to exercise my right to the fullest to criticize and ridicule it as I see fit without fearing to offend your "sensibilities".

[VyckRo]

--->>/watch?v=VjiiLkligTk

[Akatam0t0ma]

More of the same ridiculous "Atheism=Communism" garbage? If it is, then I'm not gonna waste my time on it. Your desperate attempt to link the lack of belief in the gods with a political ideology only serves to demonstrate inability to defend your favorite set of fairy-tale beliefs. Besides, since you seem to take people like PCS(Who is finally gone, HOORAH!) and Kent Hovind seriously, and seem to think they have ANY scientific knowledge, how can I possibly take YOU seriously?

[Stegocephalian]

Wonderful!

This has been one of my pet pevees for a long time - that the central problem is not religion, or secularity, but dogmatism. You argue this position very well!

I would stress to that dogma includes ideological positions, which dictate how the world is perceived to work, irrespective of how it does work - if evidence does not fit with the expectations of the ideology, the evidence is rejected out of hand, and will continue to be rejected until it becomes practically impossible...

[Stegocephalian]

...to ignore it anymore. This happened in the case of Lysenkoism, in that the communist ideology didn't square well with Darwinism, because of the role of chance, and historical contingencies, in it's mechanism: Darwin perceived to be saying that you were born as you were, and couldn't change your station in life by action - this was contrasted against Lamarkian evolution, which was much more in line with the ideology; Lamark's view was that the actions of the individual would cause it's...

[Stegocephalian]

...relevant abilities to improve, and these improvements were then inherited to the next generation. It's easy to see how this was much more appealing to the party ideology.

Lamarkian ideas, bolstered with communist ideals were tha basis of Lysenkoism, and so, when genes were discovered, and the rest of the world marched onward in free discovery of how things really worked, with Lamarkian evolution rejected on the basis of evidence, in the USSR, all these findings were suppressed, and the...

[Stegocephalian]

...failures of Lysenkos experiments ignored, stories of his successes made up, in an effort to hold on to the belief that reality conformed to the dogma.

This of course lead to disasterous aggricultural practices, and famine; genosidal stupidity indeed!

[Akatam0t0ma]

Thanks for all that background info on Lysenkoism, even though much of it was already known to me. I think this subject is under-discussed in the discourse when highlighting the absurdities of creationists, especially when considering the fact that stupid creationists these days desperately try to link so-called "Darwinism" with the atrocities of Stalin, when in reality the USSR under Stalin rejected Darwin's evolutionary theory for a reason similar to the reason fundie Creationists reject it.

[Stegocephalian]

Exactly, very true!

[Akatam0t0ma]

"You argue this position very well!"

Thanks, but if you read the video description you would have known that it's not my video. I just decided to mirror it on my channel because it highlights the dangers of dogma so brilliantly.

"the central problem is not religion, or secularity, but dogmatism."

Since religious faith relies on dogma, we can define religion as a "special case" of dogma. And yes, a dogma does not necessarily relies on belief in the gods.

[Stegocephalian]

Ah, didn't spot that!

Well, in that case, thank you for reposting it - it's an issue that deserves exposure! :)

[bdf2718]

I think you can boil religions and quasi-religions (Marxism, Nazism, Freudianism) down to a single cause which is both necessary and sufficient: they spout crap.

Because they spout crap (dogma) they must resort to thought control - burning at the stake for heretics, sent to gulags, or put into asylums - those who question their crap. All else follows.

If it were fact, or at least did not run counter to fact, logic and prevailing beliefs, it would not be religion.

[Akatam0t0ma]

Please explain how Freudianism is a "quasi-religion". Are you saying that Freud's works on psychology(Of which I admittedly know little about) constitute a 'quasi-religion" in the same footing with Nazism and Communism?

[bdf2718]

I hope you agree with me that any belief system which relies upon tenets that are unsupported by evidence (or, worse, are contradicted by evidence) is a religion. If evidence and logic support it then it is fact, or at least common belief (though possibly wrong).

Fraud and Junk invent crap. If you disagree you're punished. Thought control is THE defining characteristic of religion because if the dogma were true you wouldn't need to enforce it.

[Akatam0t0ma]

Yes, I pretty much agree, but I still don't understand what you mean by "Freudianism" here and why you think it's a religion.

[bdf2718]

Fraud (Freud) and Junk (Jung) are schools of psychiatry. Disagree with their tenets and you will be punished (by incarceration, electric shocks to the head, psychotropic treatments, etc).

The difference between traditional religions (Judaism, Xtianity, etc), cults of personality (Hitlerism, Maoism) and psychiatry is when the payback comes: afterlife, around the corner or now. They all promise but fail to deliver.

[Akatam0t0ma]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't so-called "Freudianism" the backbone of modern psychology, in the same way that so-called "Darwinism" the backbone of modern biology? :-/

[bdf2718]

According to the New Scientist articles I have read over the years, Fraudianism has little to commend it. But they could be wrong.

Neo-Darwinism has incredible amounts of evidence to support it; Fraudianism does not.

Over the years, 17% of those with mental problems get better by themselves. 17% of those subject to Fraudian analysis get better.

Psychology != psychiatry. Anything but.