Anything that happens in life, or questions about life that I can think of. Please feel free to comment on any of the topics I bring up. I enjoy reading other perspectives. Now stop reading the header you loser.

Monday, September 24, 2012

Intellectual Suicide

Do you have to commit intellectual suicide to be religious? Although I would very much like to say you do have to hand over any license to be intelligent when you choose the path of blind faith, I just don’t think it’s fair to say that. My objective side tells me that truth is power, and because truth is power, I’ve chosen not to be a theist. To claim that religious people are committing intellectual suicide just on “gut-feeling” would put me into the same pool as those who practice blind faith. Can you be a theist and also have a great progressive mind? I think it certainly is possible, but I do feel that having the burden of being a theist does create unnecessary barriers. This is a shame because what if these barriers hinder a great mind from changing the course of history. Imagine how many great ideas and inventions we might have missed out on. We do need to be very careful when mixing blind faith and intellect. When we throw blind faith and evidence into the same pot, we are creating a mess. Mixing the two together gives faith credibility it doesn’t deserve. I’ve heard some argue that being intolerant of religion is just as dogmatic as religious folk. I used to agree with this sentiment, but now I think there is a rebuttal to be made. I watched Sam Harris give a speech at TED that really opened up a new perspective for me. I thought being completely tolerant and open minded was a great thing, but Sam Harris suggested that being too open minded and too liberal is actually harmful. Instead of trying to sum up Harris’ great speech, I’ll just provide the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj9oB4zpHww. For me to even attempt summarizing his insights would be shameful. The part that stood out to me was when he talked about Saudi Arabia and continued to explain that when we know something is just plain wrong, it isn’t intolerance to be firmly suggest a correction.

The 47%

By now anyone who follows politics, and probably many who don’t, have heard about the comments presidential hopeful Mitt Romney made about 47% of Americans at a $50,000 a plate fundraiser. I’m not here to straighten out the facts, try to convince you one way or the other, or try to use Romney’s comment as a way to smear or defend Romney’s campaign. As an independent, these last few months have been a headache. However, I want to write about the reaction Romney’s comments received. Although I can understand why people reacted the way they did, I am shocked that people were shocked. A lot can be said without going too deep into the numbers. I was surprised that people were shocked by Romney’s statements because it’s not surprising he said those words. In fact, when asked about his comments after the public and media had a chance to dissect his words, Romney stated that he stands by his comments. Of course he does, and good for Romney for not backing down and standing up for what he believes in despite the outrage and even if his ideals are horrible. Did people actually not know this was Romney and the Republican’s stance on social programs? No matter how we spin it, the Republicans are not in favor of social programs. That is their platform and this is no secret. This leads me to believe that people are either playing dumb or they aren’t paying attention. I hope most people are just playing dumb because it would be horrible for a mostly ignorant electorate to fill the booths this November.