VCavallo comments on [SEQ RERUN] Can Humanism Match Religion's Output? - Less Wrong

2 Post author: MinibearRex 04 April 2013 05:40AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (11)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: VCavallo 06 April 2013 11:03:13PM 1 point [-]

Sorry if I wasn't clear. The "source or origin" meaning the group doing the donating does matter, but the physical creation of the thing is irrelevant. A Dollar isn't a "secular thing" or a "religious thing" - it's just a thing.

Things-which-can-be-donated cannot be secular or religious, but people and organizations can, the way I see it.

I'm not sure that I am the right authority to be correcting anyone's argument - the above comments are just my, an amateur rationalist's, personal response to your argument.

Comment author: [deleted] 07 April 2013 12:20:13AM *  1 point [-]

I'm not sure that I am the right authority to be correcting anyone's argument - the above comments are just my, an amateur rationalist's, personal response to your argument.

Fortunately there are no authoritative sources of knowledge and all claims may be challenged. I've had fingers wagged my way here for quoting Karl Popper, so instead I'll suggest a few links 1 2 3 4 5 from my blog.

Comment author: VCavallo 07 April 2013 01:55:27AM *  0 points [-]

I don't have time at the moment so I'll have to check those out later.

At a very quick skim I saw:

"Tradition is – apart from inborn knowledge – by far the most important source of our knowledge."

Which I must say irks me real badly, but I'll try to keep an open mind.

At the risk of inviting bias, may I ask what the justification for the finger-wagging was? I am unfamiliar with Popper (which is sort of nice, actually. blank slate)