SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Should God be replaced?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: cosmicforce who wrote (2699)10/26/2000 12:11:17 AM
From: Dayuhan  Read Replies (4) of 28931
 
A notion that struck me:

It seems generally agreed here that while religion is not in itself necessarily reprehensible, religious fanaticism is a dangerous and destructive thing, as indeed is fanaticism in general.

Dictionary.com defines fanaticism as Excessive, irrational zeal. I would go farther, and say that the single defining characteristic of the fanatic is absolute, unquestioning belief.

Now suppose we had a belief system in which the central tenet was insistence that everything be questioned? Fanaticism would thus be impossible, since the moment a person accepted any belief without question they would violate the central doctrine of their faith.

Certainly this would be a major change from religions such as Christianity and Islam, the doctrines of which make unquestioning belief - and thus fanaticism - one of their fundamental requirements.

May I suggest, tongue in cheek (no relation there to other matters currently under discussion), that we replace God with the question mark?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News