Penn & Teller barbecue the Bible

[stillthinkin]

That's what I believed until the evidence showed otherwise.
Propaganda.

I liked the quotes from MT on the Huntster link. The first thing i ever read about MT was by a non-Catholic, Malcolm Muggeridge. I think Hutchins and Penn might just as easily be considered propaganda? Where is "fair treatment"? Where is the truth? These guys seem too heavy handed... they seem to make her more evil than any dictator she visited? I mean, come on... a necrophilia fetish?

 

[Huntster]

...The fingers in the ears is the best defense for ones world view.

When the kind of noise you're making is in the air, you're damned right. Earplugs are appropriate.

Don't view the facts about Mother Teresa because you already know the truth. Facts? Who needs facts, right?

You're an idiot.

Your sorry ass is sitting in a suburban home in Orange County, you're generating drivel that is difficult to believe, then you have the audacity to render such judgement on Teresa of Calcutta?

 

[stillthinkin]

Ummmmmmmmmmmm................
Now, can you refer me to a moral guide that fits your criteria?

According to Michael Shermer in the Penn video, the bible is a valid moral guide:
"it is a mistake to link faith to actual factual tenets - these are not factual stories to be taken as historical events, they are really stories about how we should live our lives, they're moral homilies, what can i personally get out of the bible for me today - thats what these stories are about... to try to think literally about them is, you are missing the point of the bible" (my transcription)

I am not sure what criteria people have for a moral guide... I really caught on to the Platonic records of Socrates, and even more so to Aristotle's Ethics.

RandFan, i dont think you can seriously believe "we dont need one"?

 

[Huntster]

RandFan, i dont think you can seriously believe "we dont need one"?

Today, yeah. He/she believes that.

Tomorrow, he/she will be seeking "the perfect guide."

Where he/she will find it, I haven't a clue.

Neither does he/she.

 

[stillthinkin]

I want to live in a just society and I want to be treated with respect, dignity and compassion. It turns out that the best way for that to happen is if I treat others with respect, dignity and compassion.

It does not seem to me that Penn lives by that, while Shermer does. I am speaking based on my viewing the video, and on what i have read that Penn said about MT.
I am not sure a "just society" has ever existed, or is likely to... but some people have made excellent attempts at being just.

 

[RandFan]

I liked the quotes from MT on the Huntster link. The first thing i ever read about MT was by a non-Catholic, Malcolm Muggeridge. I think Hutchins and Penn might just as easily be considered propaganda? Where is "fair treatment"? Where is the truth? These guys seem too heavy handed... they seem to make her more evil than any dictator she visited? I mean, come on... a necrophilia fetish?

Perhaps but this is just rhetoric. We won't find truth this way. We have to be willing to question our assumptions. I'm willing to be skeptical of Hitchens and Penn, are you willing to be skeptical of positive spin of Mother Teressa?

 

[RandFan]

When the kind of noise you're making is in the air, you're damned right. Earplugs are appropriate.

That's what I said. Head in the sand never hurt's a world view.

You're an idiot.

And you are an emotional child.

Your sorry ass is sitting in a suburban home in Orange County, you're generating drivel that is difficult to believe, then you have the audacity to render such judgement on Teresa of Calcutta?

Los Angeles County. The facts often are difficult to believe.

 

[RandFan]

It does not seem to me that Penn lives by that, while Shermer does. I am speaking based on my viewing the video, and on what i have read that Penn said about MT.

Having watched every single video and having heard Penn live in person I have no doubt what soever that is what Penn lives by.

I am not sure a "just society" has ever existed, or is likely to... but some people have made excellent attempts at being just.

Ok, I'd rather live in society like America than under the Stalin or Mao regimes. I think America is a more just society but not necassarily the most just. If I want to live in a more just society then I should be more just.

Cool?

 

[stillthinkin]

Perhaps but this is just rhetoric. We won't find truth this way. We have to be willing to question our assumptions. I'm willing to be skeptical of Hitchens and Penn, are you willing to be skeptical of positive spin of Mother Teressa?

I havent really heard any "positive spin" on MT, not for many years. She was criticized a lot as well as praised when she was alive. I have studied and read a lot of history, and I know every view can be skewed - but I like to read assessments which try to be balanced. As a philosophy student I was obsessed with questioning my assumptions, I dont do it as much any more. It's good to hear the challenge! I am certainly willing to be skeptical of "positive spin".

 

[stillthinkin]

Having watched every single video and having heard Penn live in person I have no doubt what soever that is what Penn lives by.

treat others with respect, dignity and compassion.

I have only watched the one video, and I find him quite the opposite of respectful. Thats all the evidence I have. Shermer was respectful.

Ok, I'd rather live in society like America than under the Stalin or Mao regimes. I think America is a more just society but not necassarily the most just. If I want to live in a more just society then I should be more just.

I am a Canadian. We have a truly just society. [ARGH i put a smiley face here so people would know i was JOKING - and i lost the post because that is a link and I am a newbie]
Justice might be in the eye of the beholder. You are right though, most people would rather live in America (or Canada) than in a dictatorship... the exception being the dictator and those in his favour.

 

[stillthinkin]

What's interesting is that we can actually track the evolution of morals, laws (the legal codification of morals) and ethics just like you said only we didn't need a guide or a god. We figured it out all on our own.

Who is this "we"? And what have we figured out exactly?

 

[Tony]

I have only watched the one video, and I find him quite the opposite of respectful. Thats all the evidence I have. Shermer was respectful.

Toward whom was he not respectful?

 

[RandFan]

Today, yeah. He/she believes that.

Tomorrow, he/she will be seeking "the perfect guide."

Where he/she will find it, I haven't a clue.

Neither does he/she.

Tell me why we need a moral guide? Don't you know how to be moral? Do you really need some book? How do you even know the book is right? So please tell me why we need one and why anyone would seek "the perfect guide"? What the hell is that all about?

 

[T'ai Chi]

It is typical, almost expected now, in the organized skeptical movement, that when a person makes a huge contribution to society, vindictive others, who dislike their 'irrational' viewpoint, are embarassed because they haven't accomplished anywhere near as much with their 'rational' viewpoint, to come out saying that person was really a meanie, did horrible things, etc.

We see it with Ghandi, Mother Teresa, and many others.

 

[RandFan]

Who is this "we"? And what have we figured out exactly?

"We"? Social anthropologists, sociologists, behaviorists, philosophers, evolutionary psychologists, etc (we is loosely defined to mean group conscious).

"Exactly"? I'm not sure how much has been figured out exactly. To the extent that any thing has I hardly have the time or wherewithal to tell you exactly. You say you are a "philosophy student" perhaps I read too much into that. I have a bit of a difficult time reconciling that statement with your question. In the interest of time can you tell me what it means to you to be a "philosophy student"?

Are you familiar with Friedrich Nietzsche? Emanuel Kant? Peter Singer? B.F. Skinner? John Watson? (to name but a few and no, not all philosophers.) Do you know the difference between utilitarianism and the categorical imperative.

Forgive me for being presumptuous and assuming that you are unfamiliar with the scientific breadth of our understanding of morals based on your question and would like to learn more. If so then let me make some recommendations. Since you like Shermer I would recommend The Science of Good and Evil. I would also highly recommend Darwin's The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. We've come a long way since but it is amazing how well so many of Darwin's ideas have passed the test of time. I have just recently received Daniel Dennett's Darwin's Dangerous Idea and have not read it but based on the reviews it looks promising and Dennett has recently become one of my favorite philosophers. I'm currently reading Nietzsche's Antichrist and thoroughly enjoying it so I plan to order Beyond Good and Evil so you might want to add that to your list.

If I have been too presumptuous and you are familiar with much or most of the work and history of morality then please accept my apology and get me up to speed with your current understanding and I will try and answer your question.

Thanks,

RandFan

 

[davefoc]

Hitchens on Mother Teresa:
http://www.salon.com/sept97/news/news3.html

Wikipedia on Mother Teresa:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa

davefoc uninformed comment:
Randfan goes too far. MT founded organizations that in net help people.

Huntster misses the point. MT is not the perfect example of self sacrifice that is often portrayed in the popular media. She acted hypocritically at times and some of her apparent good works were less good than most of the public believes.

I was at one of the TAM's where Hitchens talked about MT and I was lucky enough to spend a little time with him when I met him at a P & T show. My cut it was that some of Hitchens criticism against MT was really the same kind of criticism that could be made of Catholicism in general and singling out MT for this seemed unfair to me. It seems like his criticism is on a stronger footing when he points out the hypocrisy of her acceptance of the foibles of her wealthy benefactors while criticizing the same behaviors in the poor and when he criticizes the quality of care provided in MT's clinics.

 

[RandFan]

I have only watched the one video, and I find him quite the opposite of respectful. Thats all the evidence I have. Shermer was respectful.

First I would say that Penn reserves his respect for people who legitimately earn it. There is legitimate criticism of MT and I think he has good reason to not be respectful. Not all that glitters is gold. Just because a large segment of the society thinks a person is good doesn't mean that it is so. The examples are legion.

Second I would say that if that is the sum total of your evidence then you are not very critical in your thinking.

 

[T'ai Chi]

And what positive contributions has Hitchens made? Especially when compared to Mother Teresa.

 

[Marc L]

That's what I said. Head in the sand never hurt's a world view.

And you are an emotional child.

Los Angeles County. The facts often are difficult to believe.

Ok. This has been going on long enough, and it looks like it'll get worse from here. To forestall all the name calling, sniping, and other stuff. I hereby refer to you both as Nazi's, and invoke Godwin.

Marc

 

[stillthinkin]

Toward whom was he not respectful?

He was not respectful towards those he is criticizing.
Referring to "evangelical ********" for example. Is this respectful?
Referring to the "goddamn bible" as "******** myths", saying that the people of ancient egypt were normally completely covered with lice and boils (I was waiting to hear about camel jockeys).

There are the instances of throwing, kicking, and burning bibles [yes on second viewing that DOES happen - Teller is holding a bible when it bursts into flames]... try that with the Quran...

Shermer stated his position very respectfully. Penn states his position very disrespectfully.