Slashdot Mirror
Idle: File-Sharing Is Not a Religion, Says Swedish Government
Dangerous_Minds writes "ZeroPaid is reporting on an attempt in Sweden to recognize filesharing as a religion. The religion's website calls this 'Kopimism' and says that sharing of knowledge is sacred. Apparently, Swedish authorities were not convinced. A recent report shows that the attempt failed to convince the authorities to recognize Kopimism as a religion."
Well asking for that is a bit of a catch 22. It's kind of like trying to be President of the USA and be an atheist. It's not that it can't happen, it's that the majority of people wont allow it to happen (or at least hasn't). A mental health professional who could make such a claim is likely to not be in the profession much longer.
However, I did come across a report somewhere a while back that did make such a claim. I wish I could recall the specifics or find a link for you to support that.
But when you really get down to it - is faith any different than believing in any other supernatural item? An adult who earnestly still believes in Santa is pretty much in the same boat. At least that was my thoughts on the idea of faith after I learned Santa wasn't real. If that could be fabricated on such a large scale - why not anything else?
Mind you - I'm not saying there is or isn't any higher being or whatnot. But I'm certainly in no position to claim any factual knowledge of the existence or lack thereof of such a being.
"This religion doesn't rely on needless superstition and blind faith."
"Doesn't fit the criteria, then."
religion is a mockery of rational thought.
if you want to tell me about this jesus character, I'll tell you and equally bizzarre story. are you setting yourself up as JUDGE, here?
my, my. what WOULD your church elders say?
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
A rational response in a religious debate by an AC - this cannot be the Slashdot I know.
Hah! But it's only a "rational response" to the degree that trying to avoid answering hard questions is a rational goal -- that is, if you don't have a good answer and are trying to lead the debate off in another direction entirely. To recap, OP asked:
But when you really get down to it - is faith any different than believing in any other supernatural item?
and AC replied:
The debate of belief and disbelief in God is a key part of the Western philosophical tradition.
This is kind of like answering the question "Did you steal that money?" with "People like having money." It's a dodge, a retreat into generality. I find it hard to believe that AC (or you, or anyone else in the discussion) doesn't have a pretty specific opinion on the answer to OP's question.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
If you really, truly, genuinely believe that accepting the theory of relativity is equivalent to believing in the power of prayer, you are simply incapable of understanding or contributing to rational debate on this or any subject.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Biases: Atheist, Ex-Christian, 12 years of denominational school, PhD philosopher father, many friends who are psychologists...
- Santa and Supernatural Jesus are both ridiculous since they make extraordinary claims without any evidence. The claim that I am a wizard would have equally ridiculous basis.
- Santa and God are not. There is equal empirical evidence that there was a creator of the universe as that there wasn't, which is to say 0 evidence. But in this case we know the universe exists and we know it came into being somehow so dividing it up into either "Random" or "Divinely Crafted" isn't a terribly ridiculous way to divide the two theories.
- It could, however, be logically and philosophically argued though that if there is a God that created our universe he's been proven to be an asshole and not a loving or caring all powerful entity.
- Mental Illness though is recognizing as abnormal human thought processes that are outside of normal reason and logic. It's not outside of normal reason and logic to find causation where none exists (Belief in the Supernatural). It's not mental illness to attribute meaning or purpose to actions which have none--in fact, quite the contrary, we're hardwired to find patterns in noise. If you find an abnormal number of patterns in noise to the degree that you ability to find real patterns in data through the noise of false-positives then you have a mental illness. The centuries of philosophical tradition prove that the notion of a divine being is within the normal threshold of an average 'healthy' human mind.
Now that's not to say that it's rational. You could also use the exact same argument to say that Racism is also not a mental illness (I would agree with that statement) based on the fact that it's a seemingly 'normal' part of the human condition. That's not to say it's a belief system that should be encouraged but it's also not a "disease" since it's within the design-spec of the experience.
Yes, I believe that supernatural beliefs are the product of irrational thought. But there is plenty of irrational thought in the average, well functioning individual. Similarly while it would be great if we all had 150+ IQs it doesn't lead to follow that everyone with a 100 IQ is mentally ill.
Also from my experience most Christians think they're using sound logic to found their beliefs. It's like solving a physics question with the wrong equation. You might be great at math, but if you think gravity is -8m/s^2 you're always going to come up with the wrong answer.
Religion isn't a defect of the mind, it's a defect of education. Proof being that your upbringing is by far the largest predictor of your religiosity. That goes to show it isn't mental illness, it's just bad parenting.
No. Seriously! We ARE knowledge sharing beings to the core; This fundamental capability IS the very essence of human nature. Without our ability to communicate and thus share knowledge, information and culture we would be no different than any other primate -- even LESS than apes. Face it: We are not truly human unless we share knowledge. Vast amounts of our existence IS our external culture that we are not born with and that we only acquire through the sharing of information.
We owe our very rule of this planet, our place in the food chain, and EVERY social, technological or other advancement of value to humanity's capability to share our thoughts and culture. Now, for the first time in history, in the Information Age, many humans willingly allow large amounts of our RELEVANT culture to be withheld and actually fight to protect the right of the greedy to DESTROY the public domain -- The very thing that makes us human!
Copyrights are now utterly evil -- They are a plague upon man. These restrictions now last for THREE GENERATIONS: 70 years beyond my life. That's my life, the life of my children (ending 30 years after I die), and the life of my GRANDCHILDREN, 70 years after I die. By the time anyone can LEGALLY duplicate ANY new piece of our culture ( song, books, software, games, photos, paintings ), freely they will be DEAD, and their kids will be DEAD, and their children's children WILL BE DEAD! -- No one who enjoyed the short-lived success of my books and games will even be alive to remember them when they become part of our public domain!
There was another age where the flow of knowledge met such great barriers -- The Dark Ages.
This evil legal idea of Copyright is now designed to ROBS US of our public domain, and ensure that the free common knowledge remains IRRELEVANT! The founding father's of the US granted copyrights for the betterment of society as a whole, and thought that the duplication monopoly should last about 12 to 14 years -- This was in a time when copies were expensive and only a select few could make duplications. These words have been duplicated over TWENTY times before you read them due to the routers between us. We all have duplication machines, we do not need to be protected from those that would hold the printing presses in hostage! The duplications are in INFINITE supply! To merely use information now is to duplicate it many times.
The strict laws designed to keep greedy publishers in line have now been turned against the common man because we all now own information sharing tools capable of creating duplications at essentially zero cost. The copy restrictions harm society as a whole! Down with copyright! Copyright is a law; Jim Crow was a law. Rosa Parks sat at the front of a bus, and none were harmed by her doing so; Ignoring unjust laws is an act of civil protest. I shall share ANY knowledge I desire freely and none shall be harmed by my doing so.
Additionally: Economics 101 -- Regardless of value or demand, if supply is infinite the price is ZERO. Silicon has great value! Would you like to buy some expensive sand?
Outlawing the free sharing of culture is to outlaw human nature -- The very definition of creating a police state.
How dare anyone scoff at the most sane, obvious and basic belief to date: Sharing Knowledge is Sacred.
To each who has, I charge you to isolate yourself and neither give nor take any information form any others! No books, no Internet, no music, NONE of OUR culture -- just solitude! Do not speak to another living human or hear what they say. Try to function this way for JUST ONE WEEK as less than an ape. Otherwise, you must admit your hypocrisy! I would like you to remove yourself from our free sea of culture permanently, but I am not so harsh or foolish to even request someone do such a thing!
Sure