Posted Oct 6, 2012, 6:58 AM UTC
cool and all, but i would have liked to hear a lot more from the guy at the end who seemed to have a much more nuanced view of all this.
[deleted]
[deleted]
This was in reference to the entirety of the lands of Earth.
[deleted]
This project of this video bothers me for some reason, but I can't exactly pin it down.
Maybe because comparing Santa Claus to Hinduism is just...wrong. Applying western notions of truth and empiricism in order to "invalidate" an eastern religion(s) that stretches back thousands of years not only seems dogmatic, but (more importantly) irrelevant.
Truth is a western notion now?
the way it's presented in the episode, yes. Truth as a clear dichotomy between truth/false is entirely western.
Ah yes because facts that are false can also be true definitively.
The characterization of things into "facts" and "nonfacts" is itself a western characterization (not that it's evil or wrong), so I'm not sure what your point is.
[deleted]
No one was putting them on a pedestal. It's also clear that the "project" of Hinduism--if it can even be said to have one--is much different than the project of science. So simply treating Hinduism as if it had the same goals of science is a big assumption. Though I agree the people were being exploited.
[deleted]
Just because its an ancient belief does not mean it has value. These people are exploiting people quite simply.
aww again this bullshit of authority from antiquity...
not authority...you just have to take into account the religion came about way before most ideas of science or Enlightment era modern understandings of truth. So characterizing it entirely in terms of its failure to meet the specific goals of science--which it was never intended to meet in the first place--seems a bit pointless.
A reasonable expectation of truth of a proposition is not specifically a scientific criterion. Religion, in all likelihood, is the result of a desire for answers to questions about our fate and how the world works. We now know those answers to be false, yes partly because of science, but the notion that the truth value of a proposition is relevant is a philosophical standard rather than a purely scientific one.
Just be aware that 60 minutes in Australia used to be a good program but is now a tabloid trash program.
This is not why TrueAtheism exists, please go back to r/atheism.
It would be interesting if, with all these dime-a-dozen profits, that 80 years from now someone will say there was one very special guy who did a lot of incredible things but surprisingly no one from that time ever wrote about him...