That's great. You probably have a local humanist organisation depending on which country you live in. Try Googling for it.

I am listing to a professor's lectures on the Renaissance and Reformation, times of big changes. I think we come to another period of big changes. Is there anything from the past that might help us today? — Athena

I am going to be giving classes on those topics next term, Could you send me the info the give you. :lol: Just joking about the info.

I think that you have touched upon a topic here that is current in society today when you ask if we can learn anything from the past. We can learn lots of things, but unfortunately much of the past that we need to learn from is being erased under the pretext of racism.

Fantasies are helpful in creating the future. What would have happened if there was no Renaissance? What if Martin Luther had not caused the loss of Catholic authority and a new way of seeing the Bible? — Athena

Fantasies are the base of future realities, but they must be based in reality to be of any use. As has been mentioned, I am a hard science fiction person.
The Renaissance was a long process that came about because of curiosity and the unwillingness of people to keep on blaming god for everything, not because of peoples fantasies.
If Martin Luther had not caused the loss of Catholic authority someone else would have, the situation was ripe for the things that happened. And there were already different ways of seeing the bible, the Jews and the Orthodox amongst others church disagreed with the Catholics on many things.

The Renaissance was a long process that came about because of curiosity and the unwillingness of people to keep on blaming god for everything, not because of peoples fantasies.
If Martin Luther had not caused the loss of Catholic authority someone else would have, the situation was ripe for the things that happened. And there were already different ways of seeing the bible, the Jews and the Orthodox amongst others church disagreed with the Catholics on many things. — Sir2u

I want to work with what I am learning about the Renaissance and the Reformation so that I can gain a better understanding of it. Working with the topic of this thread, what would have happened if there had been no Black Plague in the autumn of 1347? Did that plague lead to the weakening of the Catholic church and the rise of Protestantism? What could have happened if the "Anabaptist dominion of Münster" had been allowed to continue?

Especially the "Anabaptist dominion of Münster" should appeal to @Truth Seeker wish for love and peace without government suppression. The anarchy following the weakening of Catholic power and control is a lesson for us, isn't it?

And if a being could only make the perfect choice, would there ever be any option or choice to make? Wouldn’t that mean such beings had no reason to ever choose, as each “choice” was really just a seeking of the knowing the one way to act?

And if you didn’t already know the right way to act, knowing the perfect choice (as when you pause to consider options), how can you say you are all-knowing?

But that said, people are so damn intolerant, willing to act unreasonably, self-centered, and just plain hurtful, it’s worth thinking about how to change this without losing the real circumstances that beg us to tolerate differences, to be patient enough to find reasonableness, to consider others before ourselves and seek to help others instead of hurt them.

I wouldn’t change the world. If I could change myself, and we all could, this world could be good enough. — Fire Ologist

"God's law is 'right reason.' When perfectly understood it is called 'wisdom.' When applied by government in regulating human relations it is called 'justice." Cicero

I agree with your final statement, but we need to extend our desire for the good life to all people because we are in this swimming pool together and what one does affects another. :grimace: I grimace because while that is true, when it lacks the liberty of all, attempting to have the perfect world can be a terrible experience. The "Anabaptist dominion of Münster" and tyranny of Calvin and his followers began with good intentions and I am not sure all would have gone well even if they were allowed to continue.

Perfection demands balance and that makes imperfection possible but it is a whole lot better than tyranny. While we have negative qualities as you listed, I must argue your point because we also have so many good qualities. Circumstances can bring out the best in us or the worst in us. Again to agreeing with your final statement, I don't think anything could be better than what we have because we have not reached our full potential and if we don't exterminate ourselves we may achieve a better better. :grin:

That's great. You probably have a local humanist organisation depending on which country you live in. Try Googling for it. — Truth Seeker

The closet organization is in another state. There is nothing in the northwest of the US. I need to look into the organization very carefully because if it is what I am looking for I will contribute money and my time and energy. I would have to attract like minded people and develop an organization that is part of the larger organization. That would be a great way to use my Toastmistress training.

I think, I would like to devote myself to bringing Jerusalem under international control and an international historic site. And how about moving on to creating Athens as an international historic site, and what other places should be added to the international historic sites?

Did that plague lead to the weakening of the Catholic church and the rise of Protestantism? — Athena

It might have had some effect on it but plain ordinary greed and corruption were the biggest problem with the church back then. Abbots with private armies and whore houses can be a kings worst enemy.

The anarchy following the weakening of Catholic power and control is a lesson for us, isn't it? — Athena

The only ones that really behaved themselves while the church had power were the poor peasants. And even they got to the point where enough was enough and revolted against the church.

You could create a local branch of the Humanist International in your location.

I think, I would like to devote myself to bringing Jerusalem under international control and an international historic site. And how about moving on to creating Athens as an international historic site, and what other places should be added to the international historic sites? — Athena

I think the whole world should be one egalitarian country.

The only ones that really behaved themselves while the church had power were the poor peasants. And even they got to the point where enough was enough and revolted against the church. — Sir2u

Yes and what is that enough, of which you speak?
Who started the peasants' rebellion? Might the trouble have begun with people with a degree of wealth and education who riled up the peasants? Might that rebellion have begun with Scholasticism?

Scholasticism is the term given to a medieval philosophical movement that combined Catholic theology with the philosophies of more ancient writers such as Augustine and Aristotle. During what is called the Carolingian Renaissance, Charlemagne set up schools in every church throughout the Holy Roman Empire. The monks began to study and learn in these schools, and the schools attracted learners from all over Europe. The word scholasticism comes from the word for “school” because the movement began in Charlemagne’s schools.

Plato’s and Aristotle’s ideas and traditional Catholic dogma were influences on Scholasticism. Scholars sought to apply logic and reason to theology and to create a “web” of distinct truths that, when compared to one another, show truth to be an internally consistent whole. The same process can be seen in many academic systematic theologies today. https://www.gotquestions.org/Scholasticism.html

Is transubstantiated bread and wine real? :chin:

According to the eucharistic doctrine of Roman Catholicism, the elements of the consecrated bread and wine are transubstantiated into the body and blood of Christ: their substance is converted into the substance of the body and blood, although the outward appearances of the elements, their “accidents,” remain.Apr 17, 2024
Eucharist | Definition, Symbols, Meaning, Significance, & Facts

I think the whole world should be one egalitarian country. — Truth Seeker

And how is that organized?

It should be democratic and there should be a separation between the government and religions. Policies should promote environmental sustainability, the elimination of pollution and promote the equal rights of all sentient beings. Everyone should receive according to their needs and contribute according to their abilities. Everyone should have equal social status from conception to death. We should all be vegans. Everyone should have equal standards of living. Money should be banned. All means of production should be owned by everyone equally.

It should be democratic and there should be a separation between the government and religions. Policies should promote environmental sustainability, the elimination of pollution and promote the equal rights of all sentient beings. Everyone should receive according to their needs and contribute according to their abilities. Everyone should have equal social status from conception to death. We should all be vegans. Everyone should have equal standards of living. Money should be banned. All means of production should be owned by everyone equally. — Truth Seeker

Why would people want that?

How does an economy without money work?

Have you watched "Star Trek: The Next Generation"? They don't have any money. Humans didn't have any money when we were hunter-gatherers. There are still tribes in remote parts of the world where they live without any money. Look at the world and its history. It's full of suffering, inequality, injustice, and death. The system I proposed will minimise suffering, inequality, injustice, and death. We will share everything instead of the divisive system we now have. Look what non-vegans do to sentient animals every second: https://www.anonymousforthevoiceless.org/kill-counter If we all live by this motto: "One for all and all for one." we would be better off as a collective.

Have you watched "Star Trek: The Next Generation"? They don't have any money. Look at the world and its history. It's full of suffering, inequality, injustice, and death. The system I proposed will minimise suffering, inequality, injustice, and death. We will share everything instead of the divisive system we now have. Look what non-vegans do to sentient animals every second: — Truth Seeker

Star Trek is a fantasy. On a ship, all things are provided by the shipping company. This was so for Star Trek and the three ships Columbus led across the ocean. However, when reaching the new planet there must be a means of exchange. Hopefully, this exchange is better than "Give me everything I want and we let you live".

All social animals organize themselves around a leader and family order. Under the sun we are the same, but in relation to each other, we are not. A technological society is not as ordered around family as we once were. In the past, the whole family could determine our opportunities, such as getting a job with the railways because one's father worked for the railway, or getting the job of dog father because your uncle is the major. Technology has changed that old order and the New World Order is based on individual abilities. Today we are specialized and our job depends on our merit. This is very so in Star Trek.

There are good and bad things about this New World Order. If you want to resolve problems you must first identify what the problems are and then what the solution is. Or we can just jump to assuming the world you imagine does exist. Why does anyone do anything? How do individuals gain the ability to do anything? What values do they learn and how do they learn them? What motivates them to do anything?

I agree that "Star Trek: The Next Generation" is a work of fiction but it still shows a society free from money. The food, the drinks, the clothing, the equipments are synthesised by the replicators on the starships, space stations, homes and offices on planets and moons. I know we don't have such technology yet. 3D printers are the closest we have reached to replicators.

Don't you feel horrified and upset about all the suffering, inequality, injustice, and death in the world? 99.9% of all the species to evolve so far on Earth are already extinct. Surely, an egalitarian system would be far better than what we had in the past and what we currently have?

Why does anyone do anything? How do individuals gain the ability to do anything? What values do they learn and how do they learn them? What motivates them to do anything? — Athena

We do because we care about every sentient organism. How would you like it if you were boiled alive the way lobsters are boiled alive by non-vegans or are slaughtered like cows, chickens, ducks and pigs? Our empathy and compassion motivate us to live in a better way that minimises suffering, inequality, injustice, and death. Just look at the current statistics on inequality: https://inequality.org/facts/global-inequality We shouldn't keep the capitalist system that has produced such inequality and injustice. Did you know that companies have used and continue to use planned obsolescence in their products? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence This is what you get with the profit motive. This is why we need to remove the profit motive by changing the ownership of everything to everyone equally and banning money.

We could teach children at school about empathy and compassion and how to share what we have instead of cut-throat competition, cruelty and murder. In this egalitarian system, everyone would contribute according to their abilities and receive according to their needs. Children would develop skills based on their interests and aptitudes at schools that reward empathy and cooperation instead of competition, exploitation and backstabbing. They should be taught core values such as "Live and help live, live and love. Help all, harm none. One for all and all for one."

Who started the peasants' rebellion? Might the trouble have begun with people with a degree of wealth and education who riled up the peasants? — Athena

The people with a degree of wealth and education had the most to lose from it actually. They were at least responsible for the peasants being able to enact the revolt. Because the lords having were to busy fighting or partying the estates were left for the peasants to run. With the help of the church some of them learned to read and they found out how the legal system worked. They used this to their advantage to try and get things like servitude and land laws changed. Unfortunately there were too few of them and the lords killed all of the ringleaders after the king promised to look into making the changes.

Might that rebellion have begun with Scholasticism? — Athena

Nope, it started well before Scholasticism reached maturity.

Is transubstantiated bread and wine real? :chin: — Athena

What has that got to do with the price of Polish cod? But I have no idea and I doubt you do either.

What has that got to do with the price of Polish cod? But I have no idea and I doubt you do either. — Sir2u

I love your post. I strongly disagree with you about the importance of Scholasticism, but everything else is moving in the right direction. Something that is not well known is HOW we think is as important as WHAT we think and Scholasticism taught people to think critically.



In our age of technology we are taking critical thinking for granted BUT by that I do not mean people are thinking critically. A conspiracy thinker thinks s/he is being rational but in fact they are not. They are NOT questioning the nutty ideas they believe. They are adding a new belief to the beliefs they have lived with for years and think they are being rational. What is important here is before Schalisticism people were not critical thinkers AND- :grin: I get so excited when a discussion is going well---

"Is transubstantiated bread and wine real?" Is a critical question!!! It demands questioning what is believed and it demands empirical information. Now believers believed, if it is said in the Bible that is the word of God. That doesn't really qualify as critical thinking, but no matter. The transubstantiated bread and wine are not in the Bible. :scream: It is a lie! Carrying around images of saints for their protection is also a superstitious lie.

We are dealing with superstition here and the power of the Church. If you believe the creation story, you also believe in heaven and that a person must be saved to get to heaven. How we handle our sins is vital to if we go to heaven or not, and if you are Catholic, the only way to heaven is through the Church and the Church has magic powers, such as turning bread and wine into the essence of Jesus himself. We are really talking about cannibalism here. Anyway, if you don't believe that superstitious stuff the Church is like "The King With No Clothes". Protestants thought science would reveal God as it already exposed the lie of needing the Church to go to heaven.

Through Scholasticism, people learned HOW to think. Martin Luther believed God decided who would be a master and who would be a slave/serf. That belief gave not only the Church power but also the King! When Protestants began questioning the social order that also put the whole organization of society into question!

For the modestly rich knight class, yes, they had the most to lose. Changes in the technology of war put them out of business so they depended on their land for an income and it was rumored the Catholics shouldn't even own land. Certainly not the lying Church. This was an opportunity for them to get more land and return to the higher standard of living they wanted. These educated people used their education for a war that would increase their wealth and no one would benefit more from the change in social order than the peasants.

I think the whole world should be one egalitarian country. — Truth Seeker

Heck, many wives can't even get their husbands to help with housework and child care. I do not see egalitarianism coming any time soon. Also, I work a lot and I don't others willing to do that. I don't think a free ride brings out the best in people. A better society means every child is well cared for and has the advantages that enable him/her to be the best s/he can be. I am willing to focus on that, but that is not making people equal.

Heck, many wives can't even get their husbands to help with housework and child care. I do not see egalitarianism coming any time soon. Also, I work a lot and I don't others willing to do that. I don't think a free ride brings out the best in people. A better society means every child is well cared for and has the advantages that enable him/her to be the best s/he can be. I am willing to focus on that, but that is not making people equal. — Athena

I see your point. In that case, how do we solve the problems of suffering, inequality, injustice, and death?

I love your post. I strongly disagree with you about the importance of Scholasticism, but everything else is moving in the right direction. Something that is not well known is HOW we think is as important as WHAT we think and Scholasticism taught people to think critically. — Athena

Thank you.
Could you tell me what language the video you posted uses, I am pretty sure that it is Hindi. And if there is an English version of it.

What is important here is before Schalisticism people were not critical thinkers AND — Athena

And your wrong. Plato and Socrates were wayyy ahead of those people. And the actual term "critical thinking" in education circles is credited to John Dewey in the early 1900's.

Through Scholasticism, people learned HOW to think. — Athena

Do you really think that no one came up with any good ideas about anything until the Dark Ages?

For the modestly rich knight class, yes, they had the most to lose. — Athena

Nope, they had a lot less that the dukes, counts or barons to which they were vassals.

Changes in the technology of war put them out of business so they depended on their land for an income — Athena

Knight never owned land, just as their lords, baron or duke, did not own land. The land was owned by the king and he gave it or took as he saw fit. If someone failed to uphold their oath of loyalty to him, he would just take away the duchy or county. And lots of them had no idea how to run the land the were granted, because they were always away fighting the job fell to the peasants to do it themselves.

and it was rumored the Catholics shouldn't even own land. Certainly not the lying Church. — Athena

The churches actually had plenty of land that had been granted by the kings. Churches were very important in the Middle Ages. because of the churches blessings upon the warlord kings they became more powerful and gave great gifts to the church. There were abbeys and monasteries all over the place, and they even granted some of the land to others after an oath of loyalty had been given. Some abbeys even had their own armies and fought for the kings.

This was an opportunity for them to get more land and return to the higher standard of living they wanted. — Athena

Some stayed in Europe after the wars with the French ended and became rich. But not all knights had a high standard of living to begin with. Some of them came from peasant families and were awarded the title because of some special service to their lord.

These educated people used their education for a war that would increase their wealth and no one would benefit more from the change in social order than the peasants. — Athena

Which educated people are you referring to here? Because most knights were not very educated at all.

In that case, how do we solve the problems of suffering, inequality, injustice, and death? — Truth Seeker

No big deal, just find a way so that everyone has the same as everyone else when it comes to resources, opportunities to work and develop, health care, security and a few other things.
Not going to happen until they actually build a device that can transform anything that is useless into something else that is useful. Can you imagine what the world would be like if you could put your garbage into the device and get a loaf of bread out or put a broken piece of an army tank in and get some medicine back. That would get rid of a lot of guns.

Hey, wait a minute. Don't they have one of those devices on the Enterprise?

Yes, the Replicators in Star Trek can make almost everything. Sadly, it's fiction. We don't have an implementable solution to the problems of suffering, inequality, injustice, and death.

We don't have an implementable solution to the problems of suffering, inequality, injustice, and death. — Truth Seeker

Actually a lot of suffering and death could be avoided, except that no one really wants to foot the bill for it. There are mas reserves of vital grains and other food stocks around the world, but it costs a lot of money that the tax payers would bitch about to take it where it is needed.

Those who have, do not want to share with those who do not have. So sad.

Those who have, do not want to share with those who do not have. So sad — Truth Seeker

It might not be that they do not want to share, it is just too damned expensive to move the stuff and no on wants to pay. :sad:

I see your point. In that case, how do we solve the problems of suffering, inequality, injustice, and death? — Truth Seeker

We can not end death and we may not want to. I have heard the gods think we are better off because we are not immortal. :chin: Perhaps we should start a thread asking why do we want life?

The other problems of suffering. inequality and injustice, are a matter of technology and education. I am sure if the people living 300 years ago saw what we can achieve today, they would be amazed by how far we come. For a better discussion, you might start a thread for each factor, one at a time.

Those who have, do not want to share with those who do not have. So sad — Truth Seeker

That is not true!

Here are the billionaires who give away the most money, according to Forbes
Warren Buffett. Warren Buffett has a lifetime giving of $56.7 billion. ...
Bill Gates and Melinda French Gates. ...
George Soros. ...
Michael Bloomberg. ...
MacKenzie Scott. ...
Jim and Marilyn Simons. ...
Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan. ...
Steve and Connie Ballmer.

We are biologically programmed to care about others. That comes with being a social animal.

Actually a lot of suffering and death could be avoided, except that no one really wants to foot the bill for it. There are mas reserves of vital grains and other food stocks around the world, but it costs a lot of money that the tax payers would bitch about to take it where it is needed. — Sir2u

Come on, people around the world are very involved with saving those suffering from famine and war.

30 Organizations Working to End Hunger

Human Rights Careers
https://www.humanrightscareers.com › magazine › orga...
Rise Against Hunger. Rise Against Hunger is a global organization the recognizes that ending hunger is more than just feeding people. The organization is driven ...
Missing: afflicted ‎| Show results with: afflicted

What the hell is going on? A few hundred years ago people didn't name their children until they were 3 years old because they were not expected to live. Today most children in modern countries live at least 70 years. What we have accomplished and continue to accomplish is amazing and everyone is writing the Christain myth that humans are miserable, self-centered pieces of shit. Something is really wrong with this upside-down mentality. How do you all justify the denial of good and caring?

Could you tell me what language the video you posted uses, I am pretty sure that it is Hindi. And if there is an English version of it. — Sir2u

Good grief that was unexpected! Here it is in English.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqXVAo7dVRU

The other problems of suffering. inequality and injustice, are a matter of technology and education. — Athena

Did you look at https://www.anonymousforthevoiceless.org/kill-counter and https://inequality.org/facts/global-inequality ? We slaughter more sentient organisms than ever before. Global inequality keeps growing. The rich get richer and the poor die out.

Here are the billionaires who give away the most money, according to Forbes
Warren Buffett. Warren Buffett has a lifetime giving of $56.7 billion. ...
Bill Gates and Melinda French Gates. ...
George Soros. ...
Michael Bloomberg. ...
MacKenzie Scott. ...
Jim and Marilyn Simons. ...
Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan. ...
Steve and Connie Ballmer.

We are biologically programmed to care about others. That comes with being a social animal. — Athena

Have you looked at https://inequality.org/facts/wealth-inequality ? I know that some billionaires are generous but most are not. If they were so generous from the beginning they wouldn't get to be billionaires in the first place.