Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA17643 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 5 Feb 2002 22:37:31 GMT X-Originating-IP: [62.31.27.45] From: "Steve Drew" <srdrew_1@hotmail.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 22:31:47 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F221DvWaESn2GRgliAD0000651b@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Feb 2002 22:31:47.0499 (UTC) FILETIME=[E5AFEFB0:01C1AE94] Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 15:38:32 -0000
From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Islam's Captive Women
<Atheism. It is impossible. to my mind, to prove or disprove the
existence of god, so Atheism is a religion of sorts. This does not stop
the
>sociobiologists from from asssigning *roles* :-)>
>
>Atheism means the absence of religious belief, it is in no way
equivalent to or the same as a religion. Atheists do not share moral
and
ethical codes, do not share attitudes towards things like race and
gender
etc. as a result of their being atheists.<
I was not aware that religions had the same shared attitudes etc.
>Religions claim that it is impossible to prove or disprove the
existence of god, and that in itself is a reason to reject them- they
reject
the notion of falsifiability, and therefore their assertions are
irrational.<
Religions do reject the notion of falsifiability, but not the proof of gods
existence. "except by faith" etc is their proof, which i agree is not
scientific. If you do have a proof of gods non existance, i would love to
know as there are always god botherers around i would like to upset. What i
meant by atheism having anti women components was as i said, that those of
the reductionist sociobiological bent force roles upon males and female,
with the females copping for the worst of it.
One of my tutors pointed out that agnosticism may be the best choice - God
may or may not exist, but i will worry about it only when he knocks on my
door.
<With regard to the Swiss, they do indeed have an enviable
representative
>democracy - if you are Swiss. Untill recently, the words *Swiss bank
>account* and *annonymity* in world finances were synonymous. cf the
furore
>
>surrounding the holocaust etc.>
>
>I wasn't going to raise the Swiss question but being a country
surrounded by high mountains played a major part in its 'success' (it is
a
remarkably authoritarian and insular nation in many ways).<
This is true as i pointed out. The good point is that how many countries are
legally obliged to recognise certain referenda of their citizens. Not many
that i am aware of.
<BTW, interesting piece in the Times (UK) supplement re Iran and the
>comparison with other muslim thoecracies. The discusions on the list
do
>not have appeared to fully reflected the many nuances that relates to
>muslim
>worship (and i have to admit my own ignorance here). If i can find the
>info
>on this i will post it>
>
> Cheers.
Vincent<
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 05 2002 - 22:50:26 GMT