With regards religion, wether we think it’s right or wrong surely we have to recognise that lots of people are believers and that these belief systems have endured for millenia, we have to look to negotiate that rather than counter that,

Yes but religion is purely personal. It’s up to you what you believe and it doesn’t affect others.

With Brexit, leavers are jeopardising everyone’s future and removing our rights and privileges based on superstition. So it would be like religious people taking over government and removing our right to marry whoever we love, have sex outside marriage, or have abortions. This would be widely recognised as a bad idea by most people.

Cougar-

I prefer to stand accused of esoteric musings, than be accused of being duped by the gutter press or being a brexit apologist!

Rather than dig through he last few pages I’d rather just sat that some here have expressed convictions that to me seem beyond-beyond reasonable doubt, even the word conviction has a certain inflexibility to it, suggesting immovable positions. To a degree we could say that belief in reason is a slightly oxymoronic phrase, you could say that belief is the abandonment of reason. That’s why I referenced Critical Rationalism, because that way of thinking requires us to suspend our beliefs momentarily, in order to reconsider our own positions.

In the spirit of Critical Rationalism, If we can compare those with faith based beliefs to the cult of Brexit, surely we should also consider the possibility of a cult of remain as well. (And a cult of reason)

Reason is a product of the Enlightenment, accompanying the Scientific method and the concurrent move away from superstion based models of thinking. It also pressages the birth of the modern idea of the nation state. The French revolution was based on reason, as was communism and Fascism. Eugenics was also another by product of the Enlightenment.

Educator talks of his devotion to the European project, rightly pointing out it’s relation to humanism (which predates the enlightenment but is an idea that runs concurrent with the enlightenment) He seems to see the European project as some kind of end game in politics, ethics , democracy and suchlike, a supreme human achievement.

Consider this…
Look at a map of the Europe, what do you see? 30 or so countries which all have crinkly borders that have been established over time throgh conflict and resolution, (and it’s an on going process, even within the the confines of post war history we have seen the dissolution of the Soviet Bloc, the disintegration of the Balkans, the division of Checkoslova as well as on going issues in the Basque country, Catalonia, Ireland etc etc etc.

Now look at a map of Africa or the Middle East. What do we see There? Straight lines everywhere. All a product of the Enlightenment. All imposed (designed) by European powers beholden to the age of reason. The perfect humanist model we have created for ourselves in Europe doesn’t extend to the rest of the world does it. Then we realise that the perfect European model we live in is not so perfect after all is it? It’s actually quite messy and rather fluid. Yet we expect African and Middle eastern countries to just accept these rational models we have imposed on them. For all the turmoil in those parts of the globe their borders have actually stayed more fixed than the borders in Europe.

The relative stability we find in Europe is actually a product of human behaviours that have existed throughout history as much as they are a product of reason. Yet we expect the Africans to grow up and act more rationally.

Can’t say as I’ve given Africa much consideration if I’m honest.

I don’t think anyone has suggested that the European model (whatever that is) is “perfect,” aside from leavers accusing remainers of thinking that it is and then weaponising that – “if you love the EU so much why don’t you live there?” and many similar equally water-tight arguments.

I’d hazard that most remainers fully accept that the EU structure has plenty of room for improvement; indeed, this is a Page 2 discussion, I said right at the start that our message should have been “reform” rather than simply “remain.” It’s considerably easier to enact change from within rather than without, all the various “the EU is this and is doing that” arguments should have been reasons to stay rather than get out, so that we can control that and veto things we don’t want. We’ve just voluntarily given up that power.

Plenty of people interpreted a remain vote as “do nothing,” to maintain the status quo. That hurt us, because they were looking round going “this is all a bit shit” and wanted to try something – anything – different. With the media narrative telling people that everything wrong in their lives was all the fault of foreigners, in many cases a vote for leave was simply a vote for change.

Straight or crinkly, national borders aren’t that important other than to the people who live close to them. It allows them to be “different” – e.g. The Debatable Lands, Franco/German, Austro/Italian, etc. Those people find more in common with their “cousins” just over the border than with their nation as a whole, because as inkster said “it’s an ongoing process”.

I think the EU is a part of process demonstrating the futility of an obsession with national borders.

He seems to see the European project as some kind of end game in politics

I most difinitely don’t and you need to quote me rather than invent stuff. In fact you need to quote everbody because I’m not the only one you’re putting words in the mouth of, Inkster.

All a product of the Enlightenment

Nope, Jepherson and his mates staked out USA on the basis of what they’d studies in Europe as part of the enlightenment. Middle East and African boundaries are the result of squabbling between the various colonial powers rather than any intellectual exercise.

Couger-

If reason had a map it would be the map of Africa, the map of Europe is a map of human Impulses and human histories, not a map created by Reason. Reason cuts things up into bite sized pieces, there is nothing reasonable about the map of Europe.

Educator suggests I work on making the gap between Language and reality invisibly small, that my message isn’t clear. The only way I can think of doing that is to put a blindfold on.

Reason is an ideology as much as any other ideology, it can fly in the face of human nature and what it is to be human. To be reasonable is not to be ideological, reasonable entertains the notion of doubt, acknowledging that reason and reality (human nature and nature itself) are intertwined, co conspirators.

Back on edukators’ theme of the gap between language and reality I’ll return to the map of Africa. By and large, in Europe we find people speak Spanish in Spain, French in France, German in Germany etc etc. That sounds to me to be pretty reasonable, relatively organic, natural even. When I look at the map of Africa, the correlation between language and national borders seems somewhat unreasonable, whilst Africa has about 1500 spoken languages, there’s about 15-20 major languages across a continent of 55 countries. As I’ve posited, I see the map of Africa as a map designed by the forces of reason, to me a reasonable map of that continent would correlate more closely to which language was spoken where. Such a map would close the gap between language and reality.

I guess I’m putting the Cult of Reason in the dock, not to be judged by 12 angry men, just one sceptical one.

The relative stability we find in Europe is actually a product of human behaviours that have existed throughout history as much as they are a product of reason.

No, it’s largely as a result of the formation of the EU. If we’d followed the historical pattern we’d still be beating the shit out of each other. That’s kind of the point.

Yet we expect the Africans to grow up and act more rationally.

Really? I don’t. I wish we could help them solve their problems, many of which were created by Englishmen with rulers.

Similarly your point regarding Corbyn and his failure to get elected. I totally expected Labour to get creamed, as did a lot of the others who’ve posted on this thread, because Corbyn had already demonstrated he could fail against a pitiful opponent. No charisma, anyone who doesn’t understand the value of that in politics is doomed to failure, and I think pretty much everyone posting on this thread recognises the failure of the remain campaign (if you can call it that) and the various reasons for it.

Your comments regarding the validity of the religious mindset versus the scientific approach I’m afraid I don’t really know where to start with.

Most of your points have been covered in this thread at length. I’m not sure what’s prompted you to chip in at this stage? Sadly it’s now all moot. They won. I just wish they’d get over it.

There is no reason in the lines on the map in africa. Purely arbitrary as it is what suited colonialists. Tribes were split, obvious geographical features where ignored. It breaks your case not makes it

He also posits that religion can be seen as more rational than reason,

Science flies people to the moon, religion flies people into buildings.

You sound like Major Charles Emerson Winchester.

Reason is an ideology as much as any other ideology, it can fly in the face of human nature and what it is to be human. To be reasonable is not to be ideological, reasonable entertains the notion of doubt, acknowledging that reason and reality (human nature and nature itself) are intertwined, co conspirators.

Hence it was called the Enlightenment – murder and rape are a natural human condition as well. Doesn’t mean we should advocating against reason and suggesting we should pick up the nearest drums and start sacrificing slaves to the god of Ra.

I thought this thread couldn’t get any worse.

. All imposed (designed) by European powers beholden to the age of reason

It was reason that eventually undermined racialism.

As others stated, Europeans were beholden to colonialism – and their arrogance was probably more derived from Christianity than lessons from the Enlightenment.

Slowoldman

I get what your saying, the EU being part of a process demonstrating the futility of an obsession with national borders.

Bit like the Soviet Union then. That worked out well didn’t it.

The borders in those debatable lands you talk about came about through conflict and resolution. Borders are important to some people and not to others. The smaller a country the easier it is to manage, the larger the country the more there is the opportunity for discord, that can only be managed via more authoritarian means,- China, Soviet Union, modern day Russia as well when you look at the Caucasses. USA different, that’s why it remains a confederation of partly autonomous states. Yugoslavia banished differences but needed an authoritarian state to manage it self, when it collapsed there was chaos for a few years then it settled down into individual states, it’s all pretty random and unpredictable in the medium and long term.

I mentioned the belief of many that Europe was heading towards a super state, many on here said that’s nonsense, propaganda from the right wing media etc. How does that sit with your perspective regarding the futility of Nation States?

For some people localism is important. That’s why I called out the false equivalence some were making between local elections and EU elections. Localism isn’t the same as Nationalism by the way, it’s about accountability, feeling engaged, having some sort of agency etc. The re establishment of mayorships in the UK is an example of localism. The EU project (I know you all hate that phrase) runs counter to the idea of localism.

You have to love reason behind The Gambia’s borders. Go Team GB!

the correlation between language and national borders seems somewhat unreasonable

Around here every mountain valley had its own dialect in the 19th century and the main ones persist to this day. People speak French, Basque, Occitan and Spanish within 70km of where I live. The linguistic boundaries bear little relation to the onlyline on the map which is between France and Spain, and thatfollows the mountain high points rather than any enlightened imposed grid.

Raybanwomble-

You think colonialism no longer exists? I guarantee there are many Africans who would disagree with you there and they very much see the EU as a colonial power still

The EU project (I know you all hate that phrase) runs counter to the idea of localism.

I for one don’t hate the term “EU project”.

The project most certainly doesn’t not exclude localism and provides funding to encourage it.

Linguistically, culturally, through protection of regional products, through investment in local patrimoine. The project set out to be a union and it’s just that, a union not a super state.

Edukator-

I did say there are over 1500 African languages but maybe 15-20 major ones. (And numerous dialects beyond these)

Theres a far far correlation between language spoken and national borders in Europe than Africa.

I recognise you are the one here who most embraces the idea of the EU project.

You think colonialism no longer exists? I guarantee there are many Africans who would disagree with you there and they very much see the EU as a colonial power still

I don’t disagree with this but, but that has nothing to do with rationalism.

Eddiebaby-

Yep….. one big flood and your Waterworld .

Raybanwomble-

I’m sure most of the astronauts who flew to the mood believed in God and they managed to avoid hitting any buildings on their way there.

And some of them believed in God even more once they’d come back.

The Enlightenment gave us eugenics (as well as some good s**t)

The re establishment of mayorships in the UK is an example of localism. The EU project (I know you all hate that phrase) runs counter to the idea of localism.

Gonna call bobbins on that

EU regional development fund & investment bank and cultural projects & has filled in many times when the national government isn’t interested
7 stanes was part funded by the eu

I’m also confused how the EU is somehow anti mayor !?!

So you claim 15- 20 major languages in Africa which is quite big. The EU has 24 offical languages and well over 100 spoken languages. French, German and English (through I suspect that’ll have to be renamed Amirish) are the procedural languages (so stop maonaing about me using them till next Decemeber). Spain has large numbers speaking Basque and Catalan; Switzerland 4 offical languages; Belgium 3 of which one spills over from the Low Countries which in turn is close enough to German for me to understand a lot of what’s said (like Danish).

And then there’s Amirish, which a lot of people speak quite well, in the same way as a lot of Africans speak French, because it’s handy when you have 24 languages to have one that a lot of people speak, especially as a lot of other people around the world speak it too. Normally it all works fine though I’ve found people unwilling to speak Spanish in parts of Spain and refusing point blank to speak French is one village in Belgium.

Kimbers-

Don’t be silly, I’m not for a minute saying the EU is anti mayor.

As to your point about EU development fund I’m not denying what you say and further to that we know many of the areas who received the most funding voted overwhelmingly for brexit.

So they’re either stupid or they took other factors into consideration. Wage supression? housing? Maybe they didn’t see that money going into their pocket? As well as other more nasty reasons I’ll concede.

Look at the map mate, straight lines versus crinkly ones. Simples.

Africa and ME have had their borders imposed upon them. Simples.

Ignoring ethnic, tribal and cultural differences. Simples.

Africa very much sees EU as a colonial force. Simples.

Rwanda, genocide orchestrated by EU member states. Simples.

S**t kicking off in CA Republic. Simples.

Friend just sent a link to story titled ‘The silent war, how Britain and Europe support slavery and sex abuse in Libiya.’

Won’t post it here because you’d probably have to check the Intel on that one first wouldn’t you?

And before you say whats this got to do with your humanist EU project remember this bit of the thread is about how ‘rational European States imposed artificial borders in another continent. Blame colonialism not rationalism if you like, or reflect that maybe it’s rationalism for us and colonialism for them still. What’s good for the goose is definitely not good for the gander in this instance.

You could also look at how your beloved France controls the finances / banking in West and Central Africa as well. Literally controlling the purse strings.

Keep rational buddy,.

I’m sure most of the astronauts who flew to the mood believed in God and they managed to avoid hitting any buildings on their way there.

And some of them believed in God even more once they’d come back.

The Enlightenment gave us eugenics (as well as some good s**t)

It was the scientists who got us to the moon, the astronauts were jumped up pilots.

And on eugenics…..not so much to do with rationalism and much more to do with prejudice with some religious excuse making thrown in….

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4001825/

Oops

The big difference is that science also recognises when it’s wrong. Religion and prejudice quite often doesn’t.

Raybanwomble-

Picking up on your earlier point. If you think reason alone can solve any problem then I think in that case you can call it an ideology.

The world moves to the beat of many drums, not reason alone. If you think that then I’d say you are a member of the Cult of Reason.

The world moves to the beat of many drums, not reason alone

I’m well aware of that.

But just because humans are prone to irrationality doesn’t mean that we should be advocating for a return to our most base instincts.

The world needs more rationality in Putins/Vladislav Surkovs/Trumps post-truth, postmodern, stranger things world.

I’m sure most of the astronauts who flew to the mood believed in God and they managed to avoid hitting any buildings on their way there.

Neil Armstrong – parents were devout but Neil himself didn’t have any particular religious beliefs.

Buzz Aldrin – Presbyterian.

Michael Collins – “nominally” Episcopalian so Religious In Name Only I guess.

So that’s about 50:50 so far. Are you “sure” enough for me to google the others and check?

And some of them believed in God even more once they’d come back.

Which ones?

It was the scientists who got us to the moon

You’ve no idea how many of them were religious. You talk big but you have no idea what you’re on about and you look a tit.

And you’re way off topic so please take it somewhere else.

You’ve no idea how many of them were religious. You talk big but you have no idea what you’re on about and you look a tit.

Doesn’t matter if they were personally, what matters is that it was the scientific method that got us there, not a religious structure of belief.

“mate”, “buddy”. I’m neither when they’re used as condescending insults.

Look at the map mate, straight lines versus crinkly ones. Simples.

There are lots of “crinkly” lines in wet populated Africa and straight line where there’s nothing and nobody, Just desert. Frontiers often follow rivers or watersheds which are crinkly but in desserts there are next to no natural or man-made features to follow. If it’s simple it’s not the same simple explanation as your complicated one, Inkster

You could also look at how your beloved France controls the finances / banking in West and Central Africa as well. Literally controlling the purse strings.

Tiens, c’est l’hôpital qui se moque de la Charité.

For some people localism is important.

Are we no longer using voter turn out to determine what is of importance to people?

I’d point out more of your inconsistencies, but I strongly suspect they are deliberate.

what matters is that it was the scientific method that got us there, not a religious structure of belief.

No, it doesn’t matter – you’re the one who’s pitching religion against science and engineering. They aren’t exclusive. Therefore, you can stop banging on about it now on the EU thread.

No, that was Inkster when he started banging on about “scientism” and blaming rationalism for human stupidity.

You’ve no idea how many of them were religious.

That’s not what he was saying though. He’s right that religion didn’t get us to the moon. They didn’t make the Saturn V lift off by the power of hopes and prayers, I didn’t hear mission control going “T-minus 30 seconds, Kumbaya is a go.” After Kennedy’s speech, step 1 wasn’t “assemble an army of priests, they’ll get us to low Earth orbit at least.”

Of course some, all or none of them may have been religious. This might well have given some the courage to climb on board a glorified ICBM but it was immaterial in getting us there.

I’m more than happy for my surgeon to be motivated by their faith, but I want any work they perform on me to be based on science.

He’s right that religion didn’t get us to the moon.

Of course not, but neither did art or strawberries. They’re different and fairly unrelated concepts.

Anyway. IMO the ultimate cause of Brexit is probably the post-restoration settlement. The British constitution, with both monarch and parliament sharing power created a stable country for hundreds of years, which resulted in military power, defeating enemies and ultimately an empire, which is where the inflated British ego and exceptionalism comes from.

Other nations in Europe are attached to their language and culture, but their actual nation states less so because they have come and gone over the last few hundred years. They appreciate that actual statehood is a fluid thing even when cultural identity is still strong.

Inkster attempts to point out that they speak Spanish in Spain and French in France. But they speak German in Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Luxembourg, and related langauges in the Netherlands, Frisia, the UK, they speak Swedish in Sweden but a similar dialect in Norway and Denmark, they speak Italian in Switzerland as well as Italy, which is similar to Spanish – etc etc etc.

The point is we are all cousins, we all share history. This is why I think national borders are bollocks. So to me, the European project makes a lot of sense.

Last post from me on this thread.

It seems to have taken on a direction all of it’s own and I feel largely responsible for that.

I love the philosophical debate but this is a thread about brexit after all and with only a few days to go feelings are pretty strong and I completely understand that. There’s probably people dropping in wanting to talk about brexit having seen it at the top of the page pretty much constantly over the last couple of days who and are thinking wtf? when they touch down!

I think it best I start an new thread some time soon, dunno what it’ll be called but probably something polemic like, “The cult of reason” or something on those lines.

Certainly it would be along the lines of Critical Rationalism or counterfactualism. Seeing as we seem to have taken this one to the moon it might be time to lift off.

Nothing would be out of bounds, even brexit. Sometimes it’s felt like spinning plates in a Greek restaurant, posting a reply only to see it’s already moved on a page whilst ive been typing! It’s all good though.

Edukator, we’ve both been a bit passive aggressive with and condescending to each other though we’ve obviously enjoyed the experience, coming back at each other like two drunks in a bar! It would be nicer to have a thread where we could go gloves off with each other, maybe go in even harder without any bad feeling (not that I think there is really, otherwise we’d have opted out a couple of pages back. Same goes to you rayban, kimbers, cougar, slowoldman and the rest of you.

I miss some of the old philosophical debates as politics has come front and centre over the last 3 years and I’m sure I’m not alone.

Adios, au revoir, ciao, aufuiderzein and toodle pip……for now!

I’ll still be popping in here for a peep though!

The EU project (I know you all hate that phrase) runs counter to the idea of localism.

No it doesn’t. Quite the opposite, the EU has in place any number of measures to protect and enhance local cultures. Cornish Pasties are protected by EU law. You can’t make a pasty in Belgium and call it a Cornish Pasty:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/protected-food-name-cornish-pasty-pgi

Protected Geographical Indication – loads of countries have them for products specific to one region. EU is protecting the rights / traditions of local people to make and market their products without being undercut by inferior products from elsewhere passed off under the same name. Yorkshire Wensleydale and Welsh Caerphily cheeses both have the same protection. Localism in action.

The EU (contrary to popular belief) allows individual countries to set their own laws, its not trying to create some super-state where everyone is living under the same conditions.

Of course not, but neither did art or strawberries. They’re different and fairly unrelated concepts.

Exactly my point, yes.

I think it best I start an new thread some time soon

I think that’s a very good idea.