Diana Eck - Globalization & Religious Pluralism

[thegreeensky]

nice lecture..

[katheryncruz24]

great!!

[smileythegnome]

I read Eck's "A New Religious America" for a course on American theology. Just the Introduction alone made me want to hurl. She is drunk on the "multicultural/diversity" punch doled out at the "cultural Marxism" party that so-called "intellectuals" love to tout as the new "progressive" ideology.

[SorryBeeinLate]

Pluralism is not that opposed to inclusivism. It is just that the base for inclusion is secular culture conceding the notion of homo religiosus and incorporating all the diverse practices with an appeal to common decencies. 

[TomFynn]

Why is there a need for religious pluralism? After all, religions are all the same. They are all made up.

[xGloryxFadingx]

It's nice of her to take time away from Hogwarts.

[socrates856]

I'm sad to hear that scholars cannot actually discuss secularism as it came out of the enlightenment on its proper terms. It actually is/was pluralism, of the kind where everybody can be theirs. The unofficial motto of the US was e pluribus unum, before theocrats turned it into "in god we trust", making it less pluralistic than it was.

[userek69]

Is it right for anybody to claim that they are in possession of revelation from god and from position of authority lie to children? scaring them? building societal systems based on religious lies? all religions are lies! for anybody to prefer to be delusional is to be an idiot. to coerce others into delusion is a crime by an idiot.

[disgracious23]

theistic crap!

[noobler9]

SOME people, learn VERY well just seeing all the facts lined up, because for some reason, before they went to school or before they got those bad teachers, they already learned that sort of curiousity + studiousness + judgement capability

so when I say the worst teachers in the world, I don't mean they can't teach anyone, they just teach only a few, and this leads us to another thing, some people "get it" really easily, and some don't, I think this is generally known as intelligence

[noobler9]

as an explanation, I will give you this, what is school for in the first place?

well it's actually not just for learning, it's to teach work ethic as well, however... ignoring this half for a moment, and focusing on education...

the worst teachers in the world are the ones that line out all the facts to the students, and expect them to figure everything out for themselves

the best ones, (judging from success after school that is, which is what school is for)

suggest ways of thinking, and testing

[noobler9]

what makes it confusing is everyone does a bit of both, however I suspect that people who are not theists generally consciously avoid, or fix their assumptions that philosophy can tell us something about reality instead of vice versa, me of course assuming that philosophy telling us something about the real world is silly in the first place

rather, philosophy suggesting zany new ideas and precepts to test, would be the preference, that's what I do anyways

[noobler9]

the religions are a bunch of storybooks passed on by word or by book, for quite some time, that combine philosophical and real world ideas in a certain form or manner

what I suspect is that those who are atheistic also have a combination of real world ideas and philosophical level ideas, which is what makes religious people think they're alike, however with the proper/true atheist, the relationship is reversed, they change philosophy based on facts, not the other way around

[noobler9]

why? because if science continues to go on, it'll eventually approach infinity, or 100% or whatever it was, 100% of infinity... in a simplistic viewpoint of the expansion of knowledge that is... which I don't hold, but for the moment it's convenient to treat it like that sine none of you will make the mistake of holding that I do believe this

we can take the model of "looking for ourselves" from science, and apply it to every day life, I would argue, that if we are in fact free, we will do this

[noobler9]

of course this is mostly a personal philosophy, being that I accept that science tells us specific facts far better than religions do, that being known by everyone who knows how a rocket works or whatever complex machine and so on, however I do also accept that it does not give us a broad framework to work with, but rather lots of little specifics that are beginning to fan out into a broad framework, and pure ethics and values thought up with experience instead of religion is the best I think

[noobler9]

but even minimization doesn't mean reduction to a level less than 5%, 1 in 20 people and so on, and the study of those things, with genuine understanding of their meaning, which is fine I think

I'm of the belief that ethics and morals are most often formed by contact with religion, however they are entirely able to be formed without, and even better off being done so, however with it being such a rarity there is no convincing mainstream evidence of this, ethics + morals just takes some thought

[noobler9]

to explain my last comment about "religious truth" just being ethics, I was running out of space, anyways, perhaps I should say morals and/or ethics

and as I have the knowledge that they are not necessary, as someone who has NOT used religious truths as any guideline, to say that they are even probably harmful in many respects still, as they are currently tied with things that taken literally, are immoral, and people DO take them literally

you will NOT stop that, and so it should be minimized

[noobler9]

her celebration of religious pluralism makes me kind of feel ill, I say kind of because she says some stuff that makes sense, however within the past 2-3 days, I bothered to read some of science tology's books

I have to say I understand now HOW it is different from science, despite trying to hump it's leg, and this ties in with why her speech makes me ill

mostly true, is not truly truth, 90% =/= 100%

constantly approaching 100% even if it never gets there, is way better! = science

RT is ethics

[hmavjee]

yh man, i didnt know they could put like movies on youtube! :P

[Schneider10101]

The fuck? An hour?

[giants2128]

@Schneider10101 seriously an hour and 22 minutes is rediculous i can't beleive people actually sit there and watch her talk for a SERIES of lectures. this was borderline torture of an assignment.

[Schneider10101]

You have my sympathy. The fact that you can take any of what he's saying in amazes me. He has a dull drone of a voice. If I had to spend an hour in that lecture, I'd probably resort to drinking large quantities of whiskey.

[fctchk]

A lifetime of marinating in Methodism and schoolmarmery has left Ms. Eck oblivious or in denial of the fact that worldviews based on superstition, illogic and unreason held without and in the face of contrary evidence e.g. religions, are compatible with neither science nor each other.

[TheTubeMouse]

Great! Finally some Uni lectures on You Tube. It's great that they've started these You Tube Education uploads; long may it continue.

[blakesguitartuition]

I agree with you there chum, I look forward to a jolly long Youtube Lecture in the future!

[nickas123]

OMG i cant believe this video is a hour long

[npc223]

and I can't believe you were expecting a <10 minute university lecture.

[nickas123]

well i dont go to uni, im doing a levels, im just doing globalisation, so i fought id click to see what its all about,

and when they put movies on here, they have to do it shitty little parts, i just thought they would do the same and split the lecture into differnet parts

[searchingplaintruth]

religion has given us some of the most important advancements in civilization, religions were responsible for the creation of hospitals and universities and the concepts of law and justice.

Please proof those points. I know dozens of examples where religion slowed down the development of science, medical techniques, destroyed historical documents, art and literature, burned and killed people trying to advance justice and law.

[semsodida]

vvvv

[semsodida]

bbb

[mus916]

=حموككج

[ukmaxi]

Don't mean to be picky but..... Globalisation?

[Melaisis]

Ere, its a yank. Whaddya expect?

[washingliquid]

give it a rest !

[missarabia]

idiot

[gerard1875]

Can you prove these allegations please

Big G

[zeb120]

well they are quite stingy bastards about giving admission in medicine

[1allinone1]

is any1 atuly watchin this the ful vid for 1 hour and 20 mins

[atbee]

which scientific theory are you referring to, that of probability in quantum systems? That may be true, but in other regards science or logic can, with the right questions, answer yes or no, right or wrong.

[atbee]

The way the human brain works, it becomes naturally harder to adapt to cultural change. This is why cultures resist it. Pluralism, which encourages such change, brings changes over time that potentiate moral dissagreements between subsets. Change brought by pluralism is fundamentally ageist, due to the reduced cultural adaptability in mature brains. Cultures that are inclusive, are difficult for mature people who migrate into the group, but are not harmful to the young who adapt well.

[atbee]

There is no science in this boring pretentious lecture, and there is a terrible understanding of how culture works or why. Being aversive to change is a behavioural approach that has evolved for some reason. A world that changes too much becomes too complicated to understand, and discriminates against those who find it harder to adapt, such as the elderly. It also ceases to operate efficiently and becomes harder for groups to project politically. There are lots of costs as well as benefits,

[tyuru2]

booorrrring... i thought it was a organ video :L

[bimaxncako]

hello..

[thespacialone]

Lol @ those who'd make Darwinism their religion. Religion should not be opposed to Darwin; he provides some good insight into the world and our place in it. All truth is relative to the context in which it's understood, and Darwinism is a piece of the puzzle, nothing more, nothing less. True religion isn't a doctrinal crutch but a call to action. Be informed by science and spirituality, but don't try to see the world through either; at the highest level of understanding they are one and the same

[LukeAir2008]

Its ironic that, unknown to the public at large, the theory of evolution, and its definately a theory and not a fact, came from Theosophy and Luciferianism. HP Blavatsky taught that human spirits were divine but that their physical bodies had evolved from the animal kingdom. This is why this theory is promoted with such vigour. The ruling Elite are luciferians.

[gerryboy3699]

there is only 1 god. She's called mother nature. All other religions are man made.

[666norton420]

religion is for the weak minded and the easily fooled.

for the brain washed and the ignorant.

for the bigoted and the fearful.

it has no place in our advanced civilization!

what a shame it;s still around.

;d

[pookiehohn]

YEAH!!!!!!

[ray1351]

lol well you cant say that there is no devinity either unless you are a aiethiest but then what came b4 the big bang and why are humans evolved in this way? religion has a place in our "advanced civilization" because as long as there is death, there are people who wounder about whats next.

[666norton420]

"well you cant say that there is no devinity" yes, i can. myself, unlike many others, have paid attention to history. "unless you are a aiethiest" i am an atheist; it's theist with an a. "then what came b4 the big bang" i don't know. i don't need to to know that a "god" didn't create it all for us. "why are humans evolved in this way?" that's about 10 million years of bipedal evolution you're asking at a whim; read about these topics and maybe you won't ask such dumb questions. ...

[ray1351]

darwins theory of evolution was proven wrong a few years ago and "not knowing" is unacceptable to some people so thats why beliving in god will always have a place.

[666norton420]

"darwins theory of evolution was proven wrong a few years ago"

oh... silly me; here i thought it was a theory with millions of pieces of supporting evidence, including the fact that modern biology couldn't function without.

of course, i wouldn't mind if you sited some evidence before i discard actual facts for your nonsense.

"and "not knowing" is unacceptable to some people"

the idea that religious ramblings is knowledge of anything but the extent of the human imagination is ridiculous.

;d

[ray1351]

/watch?v=zIhC6C_39Yg&feature=r­elated x

here u go =D was too lazy to find it earlier

[ray1351]

well the video proves that even dawrins theory is not perfect. it has holes just like every other theory. for one thing dawrin thought that cells were lumps of carbon and for another thing he thought that evolution was random but DNA contradicts that

[bundlesofmsg]

Darwin's theory of evolution is just that, a theory. There is compelling evidence that it is true, but we don't know for certain, we didn't witness it take place.

[ishtarg8]

Isn't that the point of the scientific method? That nothing is ever a certainty, just somewhere on a sliding scale of probability? As far as I know, the hundred years or so of investigation into this theory has produced a great deal of evidence that seems to support it.

And approaching something without certainty is the best way. Otherwise you end up with the ossified pathways of religious dogma, which produces no useful knowledge.

[666norton420]

you know what else is a theory?

the THEORY of gravity.

the atomic THEORY.

the special and general THEORIES of relativity.

and while we didn't "witness it take place" for all of biological history, again, modern biology couldn't function without it.

that's good enough for me.

;d

[bundlesofmsg]

religion has given us some of the most important advancements in civilization, religions were responsible for the creation of hospitals and universities and the concepts of law and justice. You believe religion is a crutch for the mentally weak. Everyone has a crutch, what's yours? 420 hmm do you like to escape reality?

[666norton420]

"religions were responsible for the creation of hospitals and universities and the concepts of law and justice."

the old "the jews didn't know not to kill each other before moses told them not to" argument. very convincing....

"You believe religion is a crutch for the mentally weak."

when someone's crutch consumes their life as much as religion does, we send them to rehab.

"420 hmm do you like to escape reality?"

not sure what you've heard, but i don't leave this universe after smoking pot.

;d

[leostomicek]

Yet you still have that number taken from a religious text (Apocalypse of St. John) in your user name. Shame on you Mr. Secularist :-)))

[666norton420]

explaining my username:

/watch?v=spC_mfT5AgY&feature=c­hannel_page

;d

[bundlesofmsg]

lets replace religion with scientific doctrines

like eugenics, euthanasia, and population control mechanisms. mentally handicapped? abort it, hereditary disease? abort it. Morals and ethics are restricting our corporate expasion and capitalization of natural resources, lets give them the boot to and we'll finally have eutopia. 666 your conclusions are as weak as ur mind this advanced civilization you speak of was brought about by colleges,universities and hospitals started by religions

[666norton420]

"lets replace religion with scientific doctrines" not sure what "doctrines" you speak of... The steps of the Scientific Method are: Observation/Research Hypothesis Prediction Experimentation Conclusion Everything else is human behavior. "Morals and ethics are restricting our corporate expasion and capitalization of natural resources" i thought we were speaking about science, not greedy business men and fascists. you seem to be all over the place! ...

[666norton420]

"666 your conclusions are as weak as ur mind"

1) they're not my conclusions, they're pathetic strawmen you just threw together.

2) schools are what they are do to the accumulation of knowledge, which is the only point of science.

3)hospitals are on the front line of benefiting from scientific advancement.

you appear have this weird anti-science mindset. science has no motives. it is only a tool us humans use.

;d