straits time (mon) atheist woman wants euthanasia
-
china:
just a news i come across where the woman is atheist. she was suffering from muscle disease, could not move and is in great pain, was able to do blogging using mouth to type and has garner support to let her die.
btw, i read that china state is quite a supporter of atheism. -
China is a communist country. Part of their ideology includes a belief that religion is obsolete.
http://atheism.about.com/library/world/AJ/bl_ChinaIndex.htm
I think banning religion goes too far though. You cannot control people's thoughts. -
i often heard about cultural revolution of china. what is it briefly?Originally posted by Phaze:China is a communist country. Part of their ideology includes a belief that religion is obsolete.
http://atheism.about.com/library/world/AJ/bl_ChinaIndex.htm
I think banning religion goes too far though. You cannot control people's thoughts. -
It was basically an internal struggle for power within the Communist Party of China.Originally posted by january:i often heard about cultural revolution of china. what is it briefly?
From 1958-1960, Mao Zedong attempted to implement the Great Leap Forward. This was an attempt to quickly industrialize China and make it into a modern communist country. This was a huge economic disaster for China.
Mao became a 'dead ancestor' after that. He still retained a high post in the Communist Party, but was never consulted on anything important.
In 1966, faced with mounting opposition, Mao launched the cultural revolution to eliminate 'old ideas'.
The Central Committee of the China Communist Party published the following:
"Although the bourgeoisie has been overthrown, it is still trying
to use the old ideas, culture, customs and habits of the exploiting
classes to corrupt the masses, capture their minds and endeavour to
stage a comeback. The proletariat must do the exact opposite: it must
meet head-on every challenge of the bourgeoisie in the ideological
field and use the new ideas, culture, customs and habits of the
proletariat to change the mental outlook of the whole of society. At
present, our objective is to struggle against and overthrow those
persons in authority who are taking the capitalist road, to criticize
and repudiate the reactionary bourgeois academic 'authorities' and
the ideology of the bourgeoisie and all other exploiting classes and
to transform education, literature and art and all other parts of the
superstructure not in correspondence with the socialist economic base,
so as to facilitate the consolidation and development of the
socialist system."
http://www.rrojasdatabank.org/16points.htm
In 1968, a massive campaign was conducted to creat a personality cult to elevate Mao to godlike status (like the personality cult of Kim Jong Il of North Korea).
I don't really know much beyond this. Haven't really studied China history. -
This is from my two tears of studying sceondary school history, so forgive me if I make errors.Originally posted by Phaze:It was basically an internal struggle for power within the Communist Party of China.
From 1958-1960, Mao Zedong attempted to implement the Great Leap Forward. This was an attempt to quickly industrialize China and make it into a modern communist country. This was a huge economic disaster for China.
Mao became a 'dead ancestor' after that. He still retained a high post in the Communist Party, but was never consulted on anything important.
In 1966, faced with mounting opposition, Mao launched the cultural revolution to eliminate 'old ideas'.
The Central Committee of the China Communist Party published the following:
"Although the bourgeoisie has been overthrown, it is still trying
to use the old ideas, culture, customs and habits of the exploiting
classes to corrupt the masses, capture their minds and endeavour to
stage a comeback. The proletariat must do the exact opposite: it must
meet head-on every challenge of the bourgeoisie in the ideological
field and use the new ideas, culture, customs and habits of the
proletariat to change the mental outlook of the whole of society. At
present, our objective is to struggle against and overthrow those
persons in authority who are taking the capitalist road, to criticize
and repudiate the reactionary bourgeois academic 'authorities' and
the ideology of the bourgeoisie and all other exploiting classes and
to transform education, literature and art and all other parts of the
superstructure not in correspondence with the socialist economic base,
so as to facilitate the consolidation and development of the
socialist system."
http://www.rrojasdatabank.org/16points.htm
In 1968, a massive campaign was conducted to creat a personality cult to elevate Mao to godlike status (like the personality cult of Kim Jong Il of North Korea).
I don't really know much beyond this. Haven't really studied China history.
The Cultural Revolution was to consolidate the power base of Mao. Because of the fiasco of the Great Leap Forward (which Mao came up with and supported with great fervour), Mao's reputation had been soiled, and for the first time, it was shown that he was not the infallible Chairman so respected by the Chinese.
The purposes of the Cultural Revolution were as such:
1. To rid China of the old ways of thinking. What are the old ways of thinking? Well, they were the schools of thought of Confucius (Kong Zi) and Mencius (Meng Zi). To the CCP, these ways of thinking were dangerous for their communist ideals, because the old ways of thinking violated the Communist insistence on equality. Therefore, they had to purge China of her old 'culture' and start a new paradigm. An
2. To eliminate 'dangerous' political opponents. The word 'dangerous' here is used very liberally, as anyone considered an intellectual was a danger to Mao. These included teachers, scholars, scientists, monks, religious teachers and even students of universities. The doctrine then was to swiftly prevent these 'corrupt' people from influencing the young (and uneducated) minds of China. Some were sent to labour in industrial compounds. A great number were shot and executed in various means. To add insult to injury, they were often tried before 'The People's Court', where the common people would accuse them of mostly 'phoney' crimes such as planning to revolt against the Chairman and spreading the 'corrupt, Western' ideology to the people.
3. Return power to Mao, as I've mentioned earlier on. Actions taken were to heap enormous praise onto Mao, such as praising him for the simplest of things (e.g. for a successful performance, for a good showing at a sports event, even for a surplus of food) Sounds a lot like a monothestic religion, doesn't it? In fact, there was this thing called a 'Little Red Book' containg the 'Great Thoughts of the Great and Infallible Chairman Mao Ze Dong'. That's your equivalent of the Bible or the Q'uran.
The Cultural Revolution can be summed up in one simple sentence: Mao violated his own communist ideals and turned himself into the Emperor's equivalent, or even worse, a god.
This is one example of how atheism can get the better of a society. Now, I'm not saying that atheism is bad or evil; what I'm saying is, that one man utilized the lack of faith of the people to turn himself into an all powerful entity. Perhaps, belief in the deities and gods (which is commonplace in China) would have led the people to be less convinced that Mao was as great as he proclaimed: the equivalent of a messiah. We will never know. -
But the problem wasn't atheism.Originally posted by SturmDerSchatten:This is one example of how atheism can get the better of a society. Now, I'm not saying that atheism is bad or evil; what I'm saying is, that one man utilized the lack of faith of the people to turn himself into an all powerful entity. Perhaps, belief in the deities and gods (which is commonplace in China) would have led the people to be less convinced that Mao was as great as he proclaimed: the equivalent of a messiah. We will never know.
The problem was that Mao tried to create a religion around himself.
If the people were more educated in critical thinking skills, they would be able to reason that no one is infallable and that no one should be venerated to that level.
A man stands up and says, "I am perfect. I am never wrong."
We all look at him and go "Yeah right."
Another man stands up and says, "God is perfect. I speak for God so my words are perfect."
Atheists look at him and go "Yeah right." The religious accept it. -
Hmm. I could be wrong.Originally posted by Phaze:But the problem wasn't atheism.
The problem was that Mao tried to create a religion around himself.
If the people were more educated in critical thinking skills, they would be able to reason that no one is infallable and that no one should be venerated to that level.
A man stands up and says, "I am perfect. I am never wrong."
We all look at him and go "Yeah right."
Another man stands up and says, "God is perfect. I speak for God so my words are perfect."
Atheists look at him and go "Yeah right." The religious accept it.
On another note, religion and critical thinking are not mutually exclusive. There's always a time for each.
As for the last part, I wouldn't think that all religious people are meek sheep who follow whoever claims he bears the word of God. He's going to have to prove himself, and besides, The False Prophet is destined to suffer eternally in Hell. -
Originally posted by SturmDerSchatten:
But how does one prove himself and what is your standard of evidence? Joseph Smith,the founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day saints claims to have received divine revelation. How do you determine if what he claims is true? When I attended City Harvest, I heard many people say, "God speaks through Pastor Kong."
Hmm. I could be wrong.
On another note, religion and critical thinking are not mutually exclusive. There's always a time for each.
As for the last part, I wouldn't think that all religious people are meek sheep who follow whoever claims he bears the word of God. He's going to have to prove himself, and besides, in Christianity, if you read carefully, only three suffer eternally (and I really mean eternally) in Hell. The Devil, the Beast and [b]The False Prophet. All others may be have a stint in Hell, but will be denied entrance to the Kingdom of Heaven.[/b]
And that really is my fundamental point. Even if you accept religion, which religion? Even within the umbrella term "Christianity", there are many denominations that are basically incompatible with one another. How does one determine what the truth is without evidence and reason? -
That is a measure of how much you trust the pastor, my friend, and sometimes I find it hard to believe as well. Oh, and the "God speaking through people" part, I believe it isn't meant to be taken literally. More like, it means that Pastor Kong speaks the word of God.
Evidence and reason... Well, they don't really work very well here, because you're talking about the basic human psyche, which is in fact a thing of the abstract and irrational. Logic and reason are more of social constructs created by humans to make sense of the often chaotic world around them. Evidence, which brings about knowledge, can be said to be the antithesis to faith. Lack of evidence brings about a need for faith. Lack of faith brings about a need for evidence. Evidence leads to knowledge. Knowledge destroys faith. -
And perhaps that is why God forbade Adam and Eve from eating the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge?Originally posted by SturmDerSchatten:Evidence, which brings about knowledge, can be said to be the antithesis to faith. Lack of evidence brings about a need for faith. Lack of faith brings about a need for evidence. Evidence leads to knowledge. Knowledge destroys faith.
I would agree that lack of evidence brings about a need for faith. I mean that in the sense that we are all searching for answers.
But I feel that ultimately, we cannot just make up the answers. We have to continue searching for the evidence, or just accept that we do not know. In my opinion, that is the most honest path to take. -
How about we quit talking about communism and talk about euthanasia?
First, there is a person suffering in pain and indignity for the rest of her life and is requesting for release from the suffering.
Secondly, there is no legal precendent for euthanasia in China, so there will be legal and social consequences. This may affect global requests for euthanasia. -
But they are mutally exclusive.Originally posted by SturmDerSchatten:Hmm. I could be wrong.
On another note, religion and critical thinking are not mutually exclusive. There's always a time for each.
The definition of critical thinking is as follows.
An essential tool of inquiry; purposeful, self-regulatory judgment that results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based. The ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit.
The key words here are 'reason' and 'evidence'.
Faith is:
Aceptance of ideals, beliefs, etc., which are not necessarily demonstrable through experimentation or reason.
A convinced belief; a condition of mind fully satisfied; next to actual knowledge. We have faith the sun will rise to-morrow morning, but the knowledge can not be actual until after sunrise. -
And why not ban religion for a limited time if it's too destructive to society?Originally posted by Phaze:China is a communist country. Part of their ideology includes a belief that religion is obsolete.
http://atheism.about.com/library/world/AJ/bl_ChinaIndex.htm
I think banning religion goes too far though. You cannot control people's thoughts. -
My view is:Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:How about we quit talking about communism and talk about euthanasia?
First, there is a person suffering in pain and indignity for the rest of her life and is requesting for release from the suffering.
Secondly, there is no legal precendent for euthanasia in China, so there will be legal and social consequences. This may affect global requests for euthanasia.
It's the person's life. The person has the right to do what he or she wants with it, including ending it. -
Can you expect a maniac depressive not to try to end his or her life?Originally posted by Phaze:My view is:
It's the person's life. The person has the right to do what he or she wants with it, including ending it.
-
That is quite impossible to do. u can torture ppl upside down left right center. But if they strongly believe in their faith, they might just pay lip service say i dont believe niaOriginally posted by Herzog_Zwei:And why not ban religion for a limited time if it's too destructive to society? -
yup, dats correct. religions have been oppressed many times throughout in history but only came out stronger than before. they simply went underground, much like prostitution.Originally posted by Your_Father:That is quite impossible to do. u can torture ppl upside down left right center. But if they strongly believe in their faith, they might just pay lip service say i dont believe nia -
based on size of universe and amount of data, human will always have alot of things to search and understand.Originally posted by Phaze:And perhaps that is why God forbade Adam and Eve from eating the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge?
I would agree that lack of evidence brings about a need for faith. I mean that in the sense that we are all searching for answers.
But I feel that ultimately, we cannot just make up the answers. We have to continue searching for the evidence, or just accept that we do not know. In my opinion, that is the most honest path to take.
"don't know" means 'don't know' for the moment until we are able to find good evidence and natural explanation with existing knowledge and it is a common situation for science.
for religion "don't know" means therefore there is a god based on the arguments i have seen before.
the common idea i observe for god believers is
"there is so many things that human do not know and cannot explain"
somehow, they will then infer that there has to be a god as a result of this. -
so me. there are so many things that human do not understand and cannot explain because the universe has many things and is very big as compared to the amount of humans and size of humans we have.
that is it. there is not a need to bring in god at all. -
Ahhh... but in this case, the person is mentally ill. We generally do not allow people who are mentally ill total freedom to make their own decisions. Their freedom is restricted based on the level of impairment.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Can you expect a maniac depressive not to try to end his or her life?
Most of the time, we only restrict non-reversible actions. Eg. Suicide, amputation, disfigurement.
I do agree this is a judgment call at times. However, increasingly we allow people to do whatever they want with their bodies as long as we are convinced they are sure of their decision. So there's counseling, cooling-off periods, and other mechanisms to make sure the person is not making a rash decision.
There's an interesting disorder called Body Integrity Identity Disorder. People who suffer from this condition only feel 'whole' if they amputate their limbs. Every effort is made to discourage this but ultimately, if all other treatment fails, we allow the amputation to occur.
An article about this disorder can be found at http://www.slate.com/id/2085402/ -
This is known as the God of the Gaps argument, a form of the Argument from Ignorance.Originally posted by january:for religion "don't know" means therefore there is a god based on the arguments i have seen before.