Wokeness the Death of Science in the Western World

[LesSme]

That sentence does not make sense.

One can believe that God exists but choose not to honor nor respect Him. I.e. by not believing in the truth of his Word (male and female created He them) and refusing to obey His precepts.

 

[Larniavc]

One can believe that God exists but choose not to honor nor respect Him.

Only an idiot would believe God exists but not honour or respect him. God is very clear that for this he sends you to Hell to be burnt forever, in his mercy for not worshiping him.

Psalm 9:17 "The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God."
Mark 9:43 "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched"

 

[LesSme]

Only an idiot would believe God exists but not honour or respect him. God is very clear that for this he sends you to Hell to be burnt forever, in his mercy for not worshiping him.

Psalm 9:17 "The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God."
Mark 9:43 "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched"

Well friend, there are plenty that do exactly that. They fashion God in their image, to their liking.

But calling them idiots isn’t the best way to get them to see their error.

 

[dzheremi]

Plenty of languages don't even have gendered pronouns, including big ones we've all heard of like Finnish, Mandarin, and Hungarian. They still have words for "man" and "woman", so obviously they can still participate in discussions like this one, but asking speakers of these languages what their pronouns are wouldn't really make sense. Also, not to bring up Russian again (but I'm gonna), but it should be said that for them (and probably not only them, though that's the only language I personally know where this is the case), to use their neuter-gender pronoun to describe a person is incredibly offensive -- basically the equivalent of calling someone an "it". So I don't think we can say that one approach to this question is somehow inherently more or less compassionate than the other. For some people, asking their pronouns is not the way to go, while for others it definitely is. It depends on the person and the context of the interaction, and it seems like people on both sides of this question may take offense if something is assumed about them that they don't like (either that they should have to clarify their pronouns even though it ought to be clear from how they look, or that they should have their pronouns assumed about them based on how they look).

 

[Larniavc]

Well friend, there are plenty that do exactly that. They fashion God in their image, to their liking.

But calling them idiots isn’t the best way to get them to see their error.

Then I really don’t get it. Are you saying that there are people who believe he exists but don’t want anything to do with him?

 

[LesSme]

Then I really don’t get it. Are you saying that there are people who believe he exists but don’t want anything to do with him?

Absolutely. Many professing Christians fall into this camp. They are deceived. And knowingly or unknowingly, they often seek to deceive others as well, as in the case of false teachers. Those pushing the “woke” ideology from the pulpit are excellent examples. One cannot serve two masters and every person is either a servant of God or a servant of Satan.

 

[Larniavc]

Absolutely. Many professing Christians fall into this camp. They are deceived. And knowingly or unknowingly, they often seek to deceive others as well, as in the case of false teachers. Those pushing the “woke” ideology from the pulpit are excellent examples. One cannot serve two masters and every person is either a servant of God or a servant of Satan.

Might be best to end this conversation. I don’t want you to break any of the forum rules about who is a Christian and who is not.

 

[LesSme]

Might be best to end this conversation. I don’t want you to break any of the forum rules about who is a Christian and who is not.

Over responsibility is an ego trip and I take full ownership of my comportment on this forum.

Thank you for the opportunity to enlighten.

 

[stevevw]

Just the English dictionary identified as a slang term.

Hmmm, I never heard of it used in the context of marxism, but it makes sense. Of course, the word itself implies not asleep, but it's the subject matter and one's point of view that qualifies the term as either a positive or negative. Otherwise, it's a neutral term.

From how its been used today it comes across as some moral judgement on those who are not woke. I remember seeing the Grammys and Oscars where hollywood celebs would virtue signal how woke they were and if you weren't on board then you were insensitive to such matters. It seems more about being woke as a virtue then actually caring about such matters.

 

[Larniavc]

From how its been used today it comes across as some moral judgement on those who are not woke. I remember seeing the Grammys and Oscars where hollywood celebs would virtue signal how woke they were and if you weren't on board then you were insensitive to such matters. It seems more about being woke as a virtue then actually caring about such matters.

This is also how many Christians are seen.

 

[dzheremi]

Yep, everyone is equally awful, because these are human being problems, not the problems of only this or that distinct community. Everybody's a hypocrite, everybody virtue signals, blahblahblah. Can this tired non-point stop being brought up every time someone has something to say against the attempted forcing of a new metaphysics upon society to replace religion with a bunch of stuff about power dynamics, representation, cultural appropriation, and other buzz words and concepts? I'd be more than happy to cede secular society to the clowns driving that particular car (this isn't the version of secularism I would prefer, but then it's not like the West's dominant forms of Christianity are to my preference either, so who cares) if it meant that we could just stop having to have the same damn conversation over and over. There are other things going on in the world that aren't about how much you hate Christianity or however many genders there are, and they deserve our attention no matter what we think about pronouns or religion or whatever. This all has a very 'rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic' feel to it.

 

[Neutral Observer]

Can this tired non-point stop being brought up every time someone has something to say against the attempted forcing of a new metaphysics upon society to replace religion with a bunch of stuff about power dynamics, representation, cultural appropriation, and other buzz words and concepts? I'd be more than happy to cede secular society to the clowns driving that particular car (this isn't the version of secularism I would prefer, but then it's not like the West's dominant forms of Christianity are to my preference either, so who cares) if it meant that we could just stop having to have the same damn conversation over and over. There are other things going on in the world that aren't about how much you hate Christianity or however many genders there are, and they deserve our attention no matter what we think about pronouns or religion or whatever. This all has a very 'rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic' feel to it.

As a long time member of the Church of the IDM*, I agree.

* It Don't Matter

 

[childeye 2]

To be clear, as an atheist, I doubt I'll be able to say anything of substance to you on "spiritual warfare" nor you to me.

I don't believe that. It's a pretty well-known fact that what we believe to be true produces emotions both positive and negative, or neutral, according to what that belief is. That's why propaganda works to move people in one direction or another. Words carry sentiments, and sentiments are spirit. As a matter of fact, there have been several times I've witnessed atheists correcting a christian on what Jesus taught on this very forum. The Word of God means the Spiritual Light in all of mankind.

The word propaganda indicates the propagation of an idea deliberately. It isn't something that happens on its own....hence my previous mention of memos.

I would suggest if one meaning was deliberately propagated and then naturally turned into a pejorative....the pejorative is more accurate in definition.

We've been over this already, but that's okay. I understand what you mean, but you need to adjust your psycholinguistics to account for how it's unethical to take the meaning that one person used in a term as a positive, and change their meaning to a negative that they never intended, and then attack the character of that person based on the mischaracterization of what they originally meant. Hence propagating a lie about another person or group of people doesn't make it true no matter how many people believe it.

It sounds like you're asking me to try and overcome an objective viewpoint.

My apologies, I meant overcoming propaganda that is specifically designed to cause division between two subjective views. I'm just stating that objectively speaking we can observe that when two people face each other, what's on one person's left is on the other person's right in their subjective views and any decent propagandist can cause division by exploiting this circumstance to cause misunderstandings and manipulate public sentiment.

I'm at the edge of my seat to hear how you discern the two.

Actually, I've already explained this, but that's okay. There are several ways, but primarily those projecting belief in a brotherly Love that is altruistic and not vainglory are propagating the truth and unity in the common faith. Those who speak consistently out of cynicism are propagating an unbelief in the common faith (there's a such thing as a healthy skepticism). So, I will add that hypocritical judgment is the red flag that one is believing a lie, because it ends in a contradiction wherein one condemns others for things, they themselves do.

Uh huh.

Okay, let me give you a simple example of spiritual warfare.

My five-year-old granddaughter comes over and she goes upstairs to play in a playroom that we have in our house. With glee, she proceeds to open a drawer and pull out every toy, throw it on the floor and then moves on to the next drawer, and then on to the books and to the dollhouse, and soon most everything is on the floor in a huge mess. But when told it is time to pick up, the gleefulness is gone and a great dread comes upon her at the sight of the mess. She then begins to cry not wanting to clean up the mess.

So, with complete understanding having been a child myself, I will say to her, "This is a huge mess and I don't want to have to clean it up either, but I will help you, because if we don't do it, then your grandma will have to clean it up, and I don't want her to have to do it either because I Love her. So, out of Love for your grandma, let's both do this real quick and we will be done in only five minutes". Her tears then begin to subside and she begins to clean up. Her pace is slow at first but as the spirit of dread dissipates, a smile comes on her face as we race to see how fast we can clean it up. A few episodes like that and she no longer make as big of a mess and she gladly cleans it up herself without being told.

Now suppose I took the authoritarian approach and forced her to do it against her will. It then projects that doing what is right only happens if one is forced out of fear of punishment rather than out of love for others, and cynicism is the byproduct.

This assumes I would ever need my fellow man to tell me how to speak for myself.

In the context you originally used, yes the memo would amount to telling you what to say which is a negative connotation of telling someone what to say. But in the context I gave of a memo telling someone to be aware of projecting a false premise it's a positive connotation. So I would say that in the positive context it assumes that those who serve the altruistic spirit have the humility to listen to sound wisdom and it does not qualify as a demand for allegiance towards someone else's opinions. So please consider how it is that I would think that surely you would want to be corrected if you were spreading a lie about someone else, since I know I would.

It's an idea so completely repulsive, so deliberately insulting, that the moment someone does this in my presence they have named themselves as foolish forever in my eyes. To demand it of me makes them a kind of petty tyrant.

I understand that, but I am talking about a positive connotation of a memo, not the negative connotation you presented.

If I need to know what a word means....I'll ask.

The memo example I gave is not even about knowing what a word means but being aware of how it is being used and changed to mean something other than what was intended by the original user. We should always ask what a person means (seek to understand them) lest we misrepresent them, and we shouldn't just take someone else's word for it. I can't even tell you how many times I've seen gossip create animosity because of a misunderstanding. Nowadays it seems more common than not as people tend to return evil for evil on social media.

I did not intend to project faith in my fellow man....I did intend to project cynicism of his motives. I know a power struggle when I see people insist upon my silence or allegiance. They can have neither.

I know, but we should reason upon facts and where there isn't enough information, we should avoid the negative prejudice. Certainly, there is nothing wrong with an allegiance to the Altruistic Spirit.

I'm not equating success with righteousness. I'm equating righteousness or rather, righteous struggle with a struggle that is undertaken on behalf of another and of no personal benefit. We all struggle for ourselves....that's the nature of humanity. To struggle righteously though...is to put aside your struggle and help with someone else's.

Would you not agree?

Whole-heartedly. So also let us agree that the altruistic love for others does exist as a Spiritual mover in mankind that cares for the poor and suffering, but that we can be misguided by disinformation and misinformation. And let us agree that being successful means nothing if others are left behind.

We aren't pulling an infinite amount of resources out of the ground....nor are we ever going to. I don't know what you think is sustainable.

I don't want to write a long post, but using recyclable materials is a wise course to begin with. Supporting ideas such as Building affordable self-sufficient housing using 3d printing etc..

Faith and hope doesn't put food on the table.

I beg to differ. Despair and cynicism certainly doesn't put food on the table. When seeking employment one must have a hope of finding it and faith that God will provide. Seek and ye shall find. Knock and the door will be open. Seek ye first the Kingdom of God.

Ahhh...and here we have it. Who does that?

Everyone led by the Spirit of Altruism.

I'm not certain what you mean by this.

It simply means that objective facts are learned while subjective opinions form in the imagination.

I think it's clear your route to "truth" is different from mine.

I would think everyone has their own unique path to the Truth. But Truth is learned and not imagined.

It's a sad thing when I have to side with few and powerful against the many and weak....but regardless, before anything else, I must consider the wisdom of each side and what it claims to pursue and by what means. As to the many abd weak....I don't see any plan beyond a degrading slide into tribalistic racism, sexism, and "othering" of one's fellow man. I don't have to help the mighty and few....but I reject notions I should lower myself to such degradation for nothing.

I hear you. I believe in higher powers in terms of Light and darkness, as in opposite directions that are only perceived clearly by knowing from which direction the Light is shining. I find myself in a circumstance where I must either sacrifice myself to save others or sacrifice others to save myself. The tribalism, racism, sexism and 'othering' of one's fellow man is contrary to Christ. But the irony is that Jesus was crucified by those he came to save, and he persevered the ultimate shame only to forgive those whose grievances he endured.

Again, you're welcome to your views regarding spiritual warfare but I don't think people who demand a change in definition through shaming, memo, ostracization, humiliation, reputation damage, or character smears are good people.

You would need to qualify who you are referring to, because I don't see woke to a plutocracy the same as being woke to Marxism, or woke to white racism as woke to black racism, or woke to gender confused as any of those things. I just know that I am woke to the term being used for propaganda that undermines unity in the common faith.

There is after all, a natural telos to words. They exist to convey meaning. Meaning that is clear creates understanding. Meaning that is unclear obfuscates understanding. While I can understand times when vague concepts can fail to convey clear meaning....the deliberate obfuscation of a definition by moving from a clear definition of great utility to a definition without any clear meaning or even less utility is an attempt at control of power of expression.

I see no reason to concede to it.

I don't want to concede to a lie, but I want to concede to the Truth. So, to take a side according to a spirit that works both ends against the middle using a left/right or east/west dichotomy is to be tricked into conceding to a lie. Which is why I said that I see the devil working both ends against the middle in these left/right dichotomies Democracy/Autocracy and Socialism/Capitalism. The cultural leanings pertaining to character flaws in the context of carnal vanity does not belong in a political left/right dichotomy. These carnal flaws fit better in a North/South Dichotomy, the positive being an Altruistic Spirit in terms of glory and honor that is not carnal, and the negative being a spirit of vainglory in terms of glory and honor that actually is carnal vanity.

I think our posts are way to long. But I have appreciated the discourse.

 

[coffee4u]

Then I really don’t get it. Are you saying that there are people who believe he exists but don’t want anything to do with him?

Yes.
James 2:19
You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble!

It is part of a passage talking about how professing faith but not showing it in anyway is not faith. People do this for all sorts of things. For example we know we should exercise, know its benefits, but do we do so? Some do and some don't.

 

[coffee4u]

I don't know if it's circumstance or luck that I've been able to recognize dogmatic views so easily....but I'm still able to. I have multiple coworkers who bought into crypto before the crash and while easy money is tempting....no matter how many crypto experts could explain the "blockchain" to me...they never really answered how value was being created or assessed. In the end, while I couldn't see how the con worked....I didn't get taken on it. Now I understand it.

Anything that is easy money is going to be a con.

We're literally importing cheap illegal labor...and diluting opportunities up the economic ladder by driving down wages and letting these companies do it.

There is no labor party, no workers party, and the amount of fraud and corruption leads me to think we are in the later stage of corporate capture and beginning of institutional collapse.

I still have hope society can get its act together. I have seen more push back lately.

Who would have thought sophistry would make a comeback? Science and reasoning? Forget it....let's go whole hog on emotional appeals.

The result of a public continually dumbed down.

Watching videos of Gen Z failing to answer even the most rudimentary questions such as "Can you name one country on this map?" Yet they can real off the Kardashian sisters speaks volumes.

Do they have a plan for disposal of solar panels where you're at? Because it's an extremely toxic substance as it breaks down naturally. California is realizing they sort of screwed that up badly. Regardless, the minerals used in said panels are themselves a finite resource and not renewable. I have high hopes for this sudden and I'm certain coincidental breakthrough in fusion tech....but that seems years away from helping.

Very good question. I don't know. Australia is very rich in minerals so I doubt anyone is thinking about the end of those resources, but of course there would be an end just as coal will have an end.
Many of us do supplement with solar already including my own family. Solar panels on roof tops is common here. Perhaps wind would be a better way to go or maybe they could figure out a less toxic way or making solar panels. I think right now the thought is more about lowering the carbon footprint.

Do you know what sort of pollution is caused by refrigerators and other air conditioning machines?

I am sure it does.

Eh...there's some evidence of that. You see what children in China do on TikTok abd it's engineering or learning robotics. Our children are doing stupid dances and eating Tide Pods. If I'm being totally honest....I don't know if that's deliberate. This is a very infantile generation. What I do know is that it was originally an American app that the Chinese bought, and it collects a vast amount of data to their ends.

Yes I have seen. China collecting data, who would have thought. *sarcasm*
The last few years we have had many issues with China, spying that we know about, but how much do we not know about?

Oh I have very little hope in our 10-20 year old generation. This is very much like a sinking ship. They have been looking up for so long they would rather aspire to a greatness they cannot reach and fail...living the rest of their short days in poverty and scorn....than have a reasonable aspiration and average comfortable life of struggles and victories.

My kids are young adults and both have their heads screwed on, which is about as much as you can do - try and raise your own kids with some common sense.

 

[childeye 2]

From how its been used today it comes across as some moral judgement on those who are not woke. I remember seeing the Grammys and Oscars where hollywood celebs would virtue signal how woke they were and if you weren't on board then you were insensitive to such matters. It seems more about being woke as a virtue then actually caring about such matters.

Yeah, I've seen that, but then I've even seen woke meaning pro drag queens grooming children, and they're not the same thing. The woke social justice movement is political.

 

[stevevw]

This is also how many Christians are seen.

Yes the old saying someone is acting "holier than thou". But I think the difference is the basis for Christainity is Christ whereas the basis for woke ideology is humans. Christ is sinless and worthy as the standared we should strive for whereas humans are fallible and will chop and change their standards according to human ideas. So Christains are not trying to promote themselves as being virtuious but are promoting Christ. Though some perhaps many Christains do use belief as a way of promoting self.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Anything that is easy money is going to be a con.

I don't know if I'd go that far. Knowing what I know now, I'd certainly advise my younger self better.

I still have hope society can get its act together. I have seen more push back lately.

There has been pushback. Disillusionment seems to have taken hold in some places.

However I think one has to consider what caused this shift in the first place. One has to ask why it was promoted and by whom. It's not difficult to see the corporations lining up behind it, it's not hard to see why they want it....a large dumb mass that is easily manipulated through media is useful.

Watching videos of Gen Z failing to answer even the most rudimentary questions such as "Can you name one country on this map?" Yet they can real off the Kardashian sisters speaks volumes.

Those are scary videos. Worse when you see them head to college campuses. I watched a girl once explain that these native American figurines were "living beings" because that's how the natives saw them. Not metaphorically....literally. I thought oh...we may as well just burn this place down.

Very good question. I don't know. Australia is very rich in minerals so I doubt anyone is thinking about the end of those resources, but of course there would be an end just as coal will have an end.

Well I think cobalt is the really tricky one....no one really seems to talk about how much their is, and it seems necessary for energy storage. 60% of the entire world's supply is in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Many of us do supplement with solar already including my own family. Solar panels on roof tops is common here. Perhaps wind would be a better way to go or maybe they could figure out a less toxic way or making solar panels. I think right now the thought is more about lowering the carbon footprint.

Sure I mean...I understand. If the UK sank into the sea tomorrow it would only reduce the carbon worldwide by 2%. What you essentially have to do is convince the poor of the world to stay put....and stay poor. There's millions of people all over the world getting a job to get their first car....which was your used car 10+ years ago....and it's not something they see as a priority. Since nations like ours have already done it....they feel entitled to do the same. I can't think of a reason why someone without plumbing or a air conditioner would care about their car polluting.

I am sure it does.

Yes I have seen. China collecting data, who would have thought. *sarcasm*
The last few years we have had many issues with China, spying that we know about, but how much do we not know about?

A lot. If China could easily innovate I don't know why they'd risk so much corporate espionage but hey...it's working for them.

My kids are young adults and both have their heads screwed on, which is about as much as you can do - try and raise your own kids with some common sense.

Well I hope things are less flammable down there than recent years.

 

[LesSme]

Simply engaging in the game is validating and thus furthering the agenda. Therefore I am going to select my response to the question of my “pronouns” accordingly—anything from “I don’t participate in such nonsense,” “I don’t play games” or “it goes against my religion to answer.”

The woke agenda is straight from the Father of Lies and we are to have nothing to do with his works of darkness, period.

 

[Neutral Observer]

But I think the difference is the basis for Christainity is Christ

Or at least that's what Christians would like non-christians to believe, but their actions would suggest otherwise. I much prefer judging their intentions by what they do, rather than by the claims to divine authority by which they justify them.

Personally I've yet to decide which I disdain more wokeism or theism, it seems that within each it's the most vocal among them that does the greatest disservice to either of them. From their supporters actions it's hard to distinguish their merits from the acerbic rhetoric of their proponents.

So Christains are not trying to promote themselves as being virtuious but are promoting Christ.

I rarely find that to be the case. Almost without exception Christians use Christ to justify why they're right and everyone else is wrong. Not because they feel some deep seated need to defend the inerrancy of God, but because they feel a deep seated need to defend the inerrancy of themselves.

To me the bible isn't a window into God's heart, it's a window into yours. And how you choose to use it tells me a whole lot more about you, than it does about Him.