Active Users:480 Time:24/12/2024 04:58:23 AM
Would you include the iconoclasm that Joel cites in the canonical Judeo-Christian tradition as well? Dan Send a noteboard - 11/03/2012 12:44:49 PM

On the other hand, some philosopher I read somewhere claimed there is nothing new under the sun. :P Note: NOT trying to proselytize; just thought it might make an interesting discussion.


I pretty much had this thought in disgust in the climactic scene of The Grey, where in a move that Hollywood seems to think is so profound, the main character starts bellowing demands of God and going to the asinine argument that "God is not Aladdin's genie, therefore there is no such thing as god!" These ideas are usually presented as some sort of rebellious individualistic statement or free thinking, when all it is is mindless adolescent drivel, that old religious and philosophical traditions dealt with and dismissed ages ago. But in the current era, mainstream culture has preferred to cut itself off from tradition, so they think they are coming up with something new, because they are too ignorant to realize how old, tired and sad their "new" thing really is.

In "Small Gods" Terry Pratchett has his religious character start questioning his beliefs, but in the narrative frankly admits the character is merely reiterating the same old Gnostic mindset. As a Christian heresy, it was first widely promulgated by Cerinthus during the lifetime of St John the Apostle. Or maybe I'm thinking of another heresy. But the point is, the same ideas keep recurring, and from my perspective they're all a form of lowercase 'i' iconoclasm - lashing out at traditional or widely held beliefs.

So even if that is not the point you were making, I think we more or less agree on a certain operating principle, even if we perceive it differently. Or at least what you are describing, would appear to me to be a accurate summation of a recurring philosophical concept, in slightly different guises. Kind of like the Zoroastrians to the Manicheans to the Bogomils to the Albigensians. New time, new place, same general idea. The Iconoclasm of the Greeks or the iconoclasm of the modern humanist = all the same thing in spirit.
Reply to message
Atheism: The Iconoclasm of the West? - 10/03/2012 05:42:56 AM 1308 Views
I think about as highly of athiesm as I do of christianity. *NM* - 10/03/2012 05:54:20 AM 360 Views
I would chide you on that basis for having a love/hate relationship with God, but who does not? - 10/03/2012 06:05:11 AM 536 Views
If the divine made men... - 10/03/2012 06:27:42 AM 527 Views
True, but by the same token, in denying our nature we deny the divine. - 10/03/2012 06:57:40 AM 545 Views
I was actually just saying in Skype this is the first post you've made in a long time I've enjoyed. - 10/03/2012 07:02:56 AM 563 Views
Thanks? It is all Dans fault, really. - 10/03/2012 07:21:19 AM 830 Views
But you do comparable things all the time! - 10/03/2012 08:35:31 AM 759 Views
You've made this analogy before and it's still a bad one, those aren't comparable - 10/03/2012 03:43:08 PM 647 Views
You said what I was thinking far more respectfully than I probably would have. - 11/03/2012 12:14:55 AM 610 Views
... and apparently it was a waste of time - 11/03/2012 03:27:04 AM 548 Views
Perhaps he just missed it in all my spam? - 11/03/2012 04:59:31 AM 620 Views
Basically what Isaac said. *NM* - 10/03/2012 07:22:07 PM 311 Views
who? *NM* - 11/03/2012 12:00:13 AM 292 Views
Me - 11/03/2012 03:31:51 AM 579 Views
You're right and wrong. - 10/03/2012 05:09:32 PM 954 Views
Re: You're right and wrong. - 11/03/2012 12:28:25 AM 866 Views
Nope, Buddhists are explicitly atheist and also explicitly Ontologically engaged - 11/03/2012 01:39:20 AM 861 Views
Actually, Buddhists are not explicitly atheist in the conventional sense of the world. - 11/03/2012 02:42:36 AM 666 Views
Yeah, that's very true. - 11/03/2012 03:27:09 PM 757 Views
My Buddhist readings are definitely Tibet-focused. - 11/03/2012 04:00:17 PM 810 Views
Duplicate post *NM* - 11/03/2012 03:28:58 PM 378 Views
What exactly do you mean by "The irreparable damage it inflicted in the Great Schism"? - 10/03/2012 07:57:59 PM 733 Views
That Byzantiums iconoclasm was one of the many wedges between it and Rome that led to the Schism. - 11/03/2012 12:27:05 AM 652 Views
Bull. Shit. - 11/03/2012 01:54:07 AM 729 Views
I did not say it was decisive, but that it did irreparable damage to the relationship. - 11/03/2012 04:23:43 AM 741 Views
Bull. Shit. - 11/03/2012 04:30:08 AM 609 Views
It is not like I just pulled it out of my rear, any more than my HS history text or Wikipedia did. - 11/03/2012 04:57:31 AM 686 Views
Bull. Shit. - 11/03/2012 05:14:01 AM 760 Views
Irreparable damage is damage that cannot be repaired, not necessarily serious or fatal. - 11/03/2012 10:34:57 AM 829 Views
ο κοπρος. του ταυρου. - 11/03/2012 02:19:11 PM 793 Views
Very edifying; can you do Mandarin or Swahili next? - 12/03/2012 05:47:23 PM 695 Views
No. Even English seems to be beyond your grasp. - 12/03/2012 06:29:50 PM 604 Views
Citing scripture does not justify telling me to kill myself. - 13/03/2012 12:08:02 AM 739 Views
I'm not telling you to; God is. - 13/03/2012 12:35:45 AM 522 Views
Or can only you use that sort of specious logic? *NM* - 13/03/2012 03:50:20 PM 267 Views
And re: particular bullshit - 11/03/2012 02:33:15 PM 714 Views
Re: And re: particular bullshit - 13/03/2012 12:07:42 AM 621 Views
Give it up already. You are wrong. - 12/03/2012 12:53:37 AM 912 Views
More or less your last line - 11/03/2012 01:37:42 AM 629 Views
Would you include the iconoclasm that Joel cites in the canonical Judeo-Christian tradition as well? - 11/03/2012 12:44:49 PM 611 Views

Reply to Message