The Religion word
- This topic has 527 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
northern light wrote:When I opened this discussion, I had an agenda, ( nothing sinister, I assure you ), and I think all of my questions have been answered, quite eloquently, by the parcipients. From my perspective, nothing has changed. I can not, will not apply to join the SPGB., even though our goals and aspirations are the same.One might say it is of little importance. I would say the membership issue is more relevant now, than any other time in the Party’s existence, not just for people who have a religious slant, but per se. Global Warming…………. is it, or isn’t it ?The war crimes of Bush and Blair, and their croniesThe world-widw recessionThe corruption of elected politiciansCorporate greedThe errosion of care for the agedThe sabotage of the N.H.S.The meddling with children’s educationThe savage repugnant attacks on the sick and vunerableThe deliberate attacks on the Muslem societyThe attempts to fragment the Public sector, by restructuring payMoving capital and jobs to the Far East, then calling our workers, lazy spongers on the State, for not finding jobsRestricting Internet freedom. These are a sample of issues in the public domain, and the Working Class, is looking for answers, and not finding them in main-stream politics.But the SPGB is not connecting with the Working Class. Why is that? This needs to be addressed.One huge turn off that SPGB members parcipitate in, is the use of archaic language, when talking politics. This sort of speech may be fine for the debating platform, but try it in the pub, and see what happens. I think the SPGB needs a new Public Relations makeover.If the SPGB wants to take part in the emancipation of the Working Class, membership has to increase, or as ALB said, “we’re so small, we are esentially a debating group…….” and that is the way you will stay. Surely members must see, that after 108 years, with only 332 members to show, there has to be something amis.How you come by new members is your business, but it seems to me, that with most organisations, the more members you have, the more you can attract. For the sake of Humanity (and we may not have much time left ) you need to increase the membership.
My list is even longer! And it is obvious to me that you suggest SOCIALISM as the solution
robbo203 wrote:And the reason for doing so according to you? To ensure that those who join are “!rational” . Give us a break. Are you 100% rational? Is anyone 100% rational?.No, but that’s not what I said. I said have a rational approach to things, ie history, society, solving problems, etc. You’re just making a cheap debating point by playing on words.
Quote:You say something needs to be asked along the lines of whether an applicant believes in some spiritual being intervening in the lives of human beings. From this I gather that your particular gripe with religion is not with religion per se but with a particular kind of religion called theism.But what is religion without the idea of a god that intervenes in the lives of human beings? The Epicureans didn’t contest that the gods existed somewhere in the ether but denied that they had any influence on human affairs and so didn’t need worshipping or placating. Were they religious?
Quote:Do I take it then that you accept this suggestion and we can reasonably expect your branch to put forward a conference resolution to that effect?I don’t think a Conference resolution would be required to admit Lucretius to the party. His reputation as a metaphysical materialist precedes him.
Quote:Of course I’m not opposed to the scientific method but am opposed to what is called “scientism”. There a big difference, you knowThat’s what they say, but “scientism” is a perjorative term which nobody would claim for themselves. Looking it up I see it’s said to reject all “metaphysical” claims. You can’t have it both ways: we can’t be metaphysical materialists and scientists. And, since we’re having a pub debate (at the moment still inside it), what other sources of knowledge do you think there is apart from empirically-based science? Religion perhaps?
Quote:My impression is that the materialism touted by the SPGB is still very much trapped within the old way of thinking represented by identity theory in the cognitive sciences.Don’t know where you get that from. I imagine that SPGB members comprise a wide variety of non-theistic views. Maybe there even some “nonreductive physicalists”. Even some “metaphysical materialists”. Personally, apart from Joseph Dietzgen, I’ve always liked AJ Ayer’s Language, Truth and Logic.
Having read all of the posts on this thread, I find myself unable to find an instance where northern light lied about their views! Nor misrepresented them for ulterior motives.
Nor can I find where NL advocates reforms or reformism.
Why can’t we take a fellow worker at his word? Lets get back on topic.Ed wrote:northern light wrote:Hi Ed,I thought this had been put to bed by ALB. I was a naughty, attention seeking girl, who made the whole thing up. ( sorry ALB, just couldn’t resist it. ) Anyway, I reckon my story is of no importance, the debate has reached it’s climax.Are you serious, Ed? Northern Light is referring to ALB’s reference to the people who lied about ghosts . Sarcasm??As for the list of capitalisms problems! Don’t you have a list? I think Northern Light missed a lot out
gnome wrote:Ed wrote:Northern Light has admitted that she has no intention of joining the party and lied about her views in order to test our reaction. She then goes on to criticise us for not campaigning for reforms. I think that closes the case on whether a form A is required.As some of us had suspected from the outset. But here’s the sting in the tail………
northern light wrote:If the SPGB wants to take part in the emancipation of the Working Class, membership has to increase, or as ALB said, “we’re so small, we are essentially a debating group…….” and that is the way you will stay. Surely members must see, that after 108 years, with only 332 members to show, there has to be something amiss.How you come by new members is your business, but it seems to me, that with most organisations, the more members you have, the more you can attract.For the sake of Humanity (and we may not have much time left) you need to increase the membership.Something is amiss alright; could it remotely have something to do with her reluctance and that of millions of other workers to abandon the reformist road? No prizes for quessing that one. We “need to increase the membership” but they’re buggered if they’ll do anything to assist the process.
Listing some of capitalism’s problems is not reformist! If that were the case then the SS is reformist. Apologies?
TheOldGreyWhistle wrote:Ed wrote:northern light wrote:Hi Ed,I thought this had been put to bed by ALB. I was a naughty, attention seeking girl, who made the whole thing up. ( sorry ALB, just couldn’t resist it. ) Anyway, I reckon my story is of no importance, the debate has reached it’s climax.Are you serious, Ed? Northern Light is referring to ALB’s reference to the people who lied about ghosts . Sarcasm??As for the list of capitalisms problems! Don’t you have a list? I think Northern Light missed a lot out
Which in no way relates to the context of the question I asked.
Ed wrote:Hey guys did you know that apparently we’re a part of the New World Order? Personally I had no idea (that our secret was out.)In this article our publishing of the pamphlet Socialism and Religion is noted as a major step in the establishment of the NWO.scroll down to 1911http://metaexistence.org/nwo.htmAny publicity is good publicity right?Now perhaps Robbo will read it !
I think it is absolutely appalling and an embarrassment to our party, how both Gnome and Ed have attacked Northern Light, calling her a reformist and a liar without any foundation. And you wonder why the party is small! It is not the religious question that is important here.
TheOldGreyWhistle wrote:I think it is absolutely appalling and an embarrassment to our party, how both Gnome and Ed have attacked Northern Light, calling her a reformist and a liar without any foundation. And you wonder why the party is small! It is not the religious question that is important here.I suggest that if you feel that strongly about it you should make a complaint through the official channels rather than whining like a baby all over the forum.
Ed wrote:TheOldGreyWhistle wrote:I think it is absolutely appalling and an embarrassment to our party, how both Gnome and Ed have attacked Northern Light, calling her a reformist and a liar without any foundation. And you wonder why the party is small! It is not the religious question that is important here.I suggest that if you feel that strongly about it you should make a complaint through the official channels rather than whining like a baby all over the forum.
You make up lies about people and when you are found out you do not have the balls or the dignity to admit it and apologise. We all make mistakes but it takes a man to admit it.I think you are the baby and you need to grow up.
I think you should answer my last point. If your interpretation is correct then in what context does it fit with my question.
MODERATION NOTICE The forum rules state that “Personal abuse, flaming and trolling will not be tolerated”. If any complaints about a post are to be made they should be to a moderator by pressing the “report” button at the bottom of each post.Also as far as possible please keep discussion on topic.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.