Monopoly is the opposite of capitalism. It is so predictable that whenever some complains about capitalism, they are actually complaining about the lack of capitalism.
Also I can't quite understand all these people who apparently feel that all the money from succesful series en movies should only go to non creative types.
This is equivalent to asking why Ford workers don't get a royalty on every car sold. They're paid a wage to do their job. If the writers want more royalties, they can set up their own movie studios.
I fail to see why so many Atheists feel the need to point out to religious folks why they are "wrong"
I think people have a natural tendency to want to correct errors. Suppose that schools started teaching children that 2 + 2 = 5. Would the parents be okay with this or would they raise a big stink about not wanting these children to grow up to be engineers who design bridges according to this principle? Atheists see religious faith as inherently dangerous, and I'm sure that Theists see Atheism as dangerous, too.
If you put it in a bottom-up order, it would be more like: (1) supernatural, (2) gods, (3) soul, (4) afterlife, (5) priesthood, (6) moral code. You can't have anything without accepting the supernatural. Gods are always the root of the system. Then you accept that there is some supernatural component to your existence. Then you accept that the priesthood (including the prophets) have the answers delivered to you from your gods. Then you accept the answers of the priesthood. You could combine soul and afterlife, though mention afterlife explicitly, since this is the practical basis of the system: there is no obedience without fear.
Atheism is the actual conviction that God does NOT exist. It's the difference between "I don't know" and "I know God doesn't exist".
How about "I know that religious faith is self-deluded fantasy"? Also, words are defined by how people actually use them, not by what you think they should be. All -isms are spectrums.
I think atheism is more properly defined as a belief in the non-existence of god or gods.
Atheism is a spectrum. On the "soft" end, it is a lot like Agnosticism in that it asserts these things are unknown or unknowable. On the "hard" end, it is a lot like Theism and asserts that gods do not exist.
I would consider myself a "moderate" and assert that religious faith is lunacy. I draw conclusions from objective reality and am extremely skeptical of any claims of supernaturalism. I understand human nature, history, and the evolution of mythology, and recognize religion as just another mythology, though with a more cynical purpose than mere entertainment. Some people assert that religious beliefs cannot be examined objectively, but they forget that we can back-trace the entire history and evolution of specific religious beliefs and canons. And objectively, this history is reveals it to be a big pile of horseshit.
As an Atheist, I would say that you are mixing incompatible versions of the word "belief". I "believe" there is no God in the same way that I believe there is no tea pot orbiting Pluto. I cannot prove that there isn't and for all I know, maybe some alien race or clandestine human operation put one there. But, it would be ludicrous to accept this proposition. "Belief" in this sense is a thoroughly reasoned conclusion about objective reality.
Religious "belief", OTOH, is faith — blind, absolute, unquestioned, and infallible. It is something that a religious person accepts as an axiom.
"Ten cubits from the one rim to the other it was round all about". If the rim points are variable, the first part describes a perfect circle. If they are fixed, it seems to me that ovals and ellipses have a larger circumference than a circle, since circles and spheres are optimizations of edge/surface materials, so the error is even greater.
Computer Programmer: Pi is 3.141592653589 in double precision.
For double precision, you need 17 decimal digits to represent an arbitrary number uniquely in binary. Of course, good programmers will use M_PI, but I've seen many instances of "3.14159". I'm still looking for someone to use "22/7" (note: integer division).
Slashdot Mirror
Another problem is that most of what is written is garbage.
Monopoly is the opposite of capitalism. It is so predictable that whenever some complains about capitalism, they are actually complaining about the lack of capitalism.
Microsoft has learned that it will never be punished.
This is equivalent to asking why Ford workers don't get a royalty on every car sold. They're paid a wage to do their job. If the writers want more royalties, they can set up their own movie studios.
I can't think of a problem that is simpler to solve. Just stop serving these documents. The offending programs will be fixed very quickly.
Well, they could limit it to just two:
Look up 'work for hire'. They don't deserve a damned thing.
That your perceptions are colored by your biases.
I think people have a natural tendency to want to correct errors. Suppose that schools started teaching children that 2 + 2 = 5. Would the parents be okay with this or would they raise a big stink about not wanting these children to grow up to be engineers who design bridges according to this principle? Atheists see religious faith as inherently dangerous, and I'm sure that Theists see Atheism as dangerous, too.
If you put it in a bottom-up order, it would be more like: (1) supernatural, (2) gods, (3) soul, (4) afterlife, (5) priesthood, (6) moral code. You can't have anything without accepting the supernatural. Gods are always the root of the system. Then you accept that there is some supernatural component to your existence. Then you accept that the priesthood (including the prophets) have the answers delivered to you from your gods. Then you accept the answers of the priesthood. You could combine soul and afterlife, though mention afterlife explicitly, since this is the practical basis of the system: there is no obedience without fear.
A + theist = without god
Anti + theist = against god (Websters: "A disbeliever in the existence of God.")
Like "asocial" = "not sociable or gregarious; withdrawn from society"; "antisocial" = "antagonistic, hostile, or unfriendly toward others".
How about "I know that religious faith is self-deluded fantasy"? Also, words are defined by how people actually use them, not by what you think they should be. All -isms are spectrums.
And I'd expect you to have the opposite conclusion if you were an Atheist.
Atheism is a spectrum. On the "soft" end, it is a lot like Agnosticism in that it asserts these things are unknown or unknowable. On the "hard" end, it is a lot like Theism and asserts that gods do not exist.
I would consider myself a "moderate" and assert that religious faith is lunacy. I draw conclusions from objective reality and am extremely skeptical of any claims of supernaturalism. I understand human nature, history, and the evolution of mythology, and recognize religion as just another mythology, though with a more cynical purpose than mere entertainment. Some people assert that religious beliefs cannot be examined objectively, but they forget that we can back-trace the entire history and evolution of specific religious beliefs and canons. And objectively, this history is reveals it to be a big pile of horseshit.
As an Atheist, I would say that you are mixing incompatible versions of the word "belief". I "believe" there is no God in the same way that I believe there is no tea pot orbiting Pluto. I cannot prove that there isn't and for all I know, maybe some alien race or clandestine human operation put one there. But, it would be ludicrous to accept this proposition. "Belief" in this sense is a thoroughly reasoned conclusion about objective reality.
Religious "belief", OTOH, is faith — blind, absolute, unquestioned, and infallible. It is something that a religious person accepts as an axiom.
I think it should be every day with a 'Y' in it.
Slashdot should have a poll asking users what their religion is.
Amen, brother. I don't go anywhere without my mutated anthrax... for duck huntin'.
Notwithstanding your rubber & glue counterargument, I would say that accepting observable reality as-is is the very definition of Atheism.
Comic books can have stories that parallel real events. Lots of fiction does, like war movies.
The sixth option is much more likely: The Bible is horseshit that is no more accurate of a description of reality than a comic book.
"Ten cubits from the one rim to the other it was round all about". If the rim points are variable, the first part describes a perfect circle. If they are fixed, it seems to me that ovals and ellipses have a larger circumference than a circle, since circles and spheres are optimizations of edge/surface materials, so the error is even greater.
Let's not rule out what they will do to you 30 years in the future.
'God' is "close enough" if you are working with a primitive understanding of the world and the universe and have no interest in actual reality.
For double precision, you need 17 decimal digits to represent an arbitrary number uniquely in binary. Of course, good programmers will use M_PI, but I've seen many instances of "3.14159". I'm still looking for someone to use "22/7" (note: integer division).
How about the circumference of the earth being about 40,000 km? Or Alabama and Mississippi resembling Bart and Marge Simpson's profiles?