I must admit that I’ve lurked on this site for a little while, reading the various posts and getting familiar with the various personalities on this board. For the most part, it’s a fairly knowledgeable bunch of people involved in the age old discussions of morality, freedom, religion and societal issues in general.
The thing on my mind these days is this:
If old ways are the best ways according to many of you, how come it’s the individuals, the free thinkers, the radicals that are most often credited with the greatest advances in our known (human) history?
Now, not all radicalism is good, I reconize that (Nazi Germany to name an obvious one). But by enlarge, aren’t the shit-disturbers really the ones that get the blood boiling and the gears turning and the changes rolling?
If this is not a completely false premis (and I’m sure more than one of you will tell me if it is - in no uncertain terms) then why such lack of recognition from the conservative side after all these years?
Is it that human life is so short and we are therefore doomed to repeat the mistakes of our ancestors, that we are predesposed to fail to recognize significant cultural/scientific advances until we have no choice in the matter? Is that why we cling to old habits so readily and bitterly against the changing tides?
Or perhaps it’s the conservative forces among us that tether the radicals to a slower pace of advancement so that the new ideas never overshoot what the majority can, in their lifetime, absorb and rationalize with their more traditional views?
Finally, do the atheists ever hope to convince the theists of the absurdity of their unfounded beliefs, or, do the theists pray nightly for the salvation of these tortured and lost souls, hoping that one day they too will see the light?
In short, does anybody here expect to convince the other guy of their opposing point of view or is this all an exercise in mental masturbation? (hope no-one is offended by this last one)
