Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Problem here is "racism" (Score 1) 915

by DaCentaur (#39024153) Attached to: Journalist Arrested By Interpol For Tweet

Oh but being "the God of Abraham" is the absolute fundamental property. Check this reference out:

Exodus 3:15 Moreover God said to Moses, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: 'The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.'

There are three peoples descended from Abraham:

  • 1. Israel - through Isaac
  • 2. "Arabia" - through Ishmael
  • 3. "Christendom" - through Jesus

Comment: Re:Problem here is "racism" (Score 1) 915

by DaCentaur (#39023891) Attached to: Journalist Arrested By Interpol For Tweet

I'm from India and a Christian. Here, this is a hard fact for many "staunch" Christians to accept. I'd like to be absolutely clear that I'm not one of them staunch ones.

According to Scriptural evidence (what is left to us - supposedly) of ALL three religions (Islam, Christianity, & Judaism), the God is the same. Yet, strangely, I have yet to observe an explicit attempt by either religious or political leaders to help the masses understand this.

Open acknowledgement of this fundamental truth by religious leaders of ALL THREE religions would do a lot to improve relations and understanding. So why is it not being done? Or am I not aware of such efforts? Do correct me if I'm wrong.

Am I being too paranoid when I assume that most leaders are using religion quite conveniently to herd people about?

Comment: Re:Problem here is "racism" (Score 1) 915

by DaCentaur (#39023603) Attached to: Journalist Arrested By Interpol For Tweet

Some of my feelings, exactly.

To which a person who is a "believer" would immediately say, "Easy, God wants to test those humans to see if they are willing to obey his commands."

Faith is beyond logic. So it is very difficult to reason with it. Rather, the only thing that works is either of two things: Being aggressive (though not overly) OR being non-aggressive. If you're being aggressive, you better be sure that you really have strength because it's going to be sorely tested. Extremism likes to "swarm". If you're going to be non-aggressive, you have to be ready to prove that too by being very "correct".

What IS respected is the "right" mixture of being "strong" YET "correct". "Strong" can also mean "capable" as well as "savvy". "Correct" just means what is "acceptable" to each group. Each group has its own version of "correct". From what I have read of scientists, it is pretty much the same. Each group lobbying away, clamoring that theirs is the "correct" version. It's the same with politicians.

What I'm trying to say is that it seems to be innate (though inane) and inevitable for any group of humans to start the "pissing wars" - as another commenter has put it - with one or more groups of humans. Country-wise, race-wise, region-wise, religion-wise, street-wise, class-wise, family-wise, any-wise and every-wise, no matter which way we humans group together, we'll have dissentions and further factions.

We, humans, have to change ourselves at a fundamental level. If we're not careful, some sort of crazy population inversion could occur where we're all drawn into partaking of the battle lust no matter who we are, what we look like, where we're from, and what we stand for. There's nothing good down that path.

Comment: Re:just your basic setup... (Score 1) 330

Whitelisting is indeed much nicer and more straightforward. Allow access only to certain sites. Since Wikipedia is generally not acceptable (as of now), access should instead be given to reputed sites such as that of WileyInterscience, Nature, Popular Science, HowStuffWorks, etc.

Comment: Re:Sometime the old ways (Score 1) 330

Universities WOULD have a good record educating people because they mostly take well-educated, disciplined, & hardworking students - in other words, students who have already learnt to be successful - at least in certain areas. The hardest work is in Primary education where it is now recognized that much of the foundation for later life is laid. They are bound to attract criticism. Though, I believe, that there are too many factors involved and too many things to do for just one type of institution to shoulder the entire burden. Parenthood, Religion, Government, Commerce & Industry, Citizens Action Groups, Seniors Groups, etc should all pitch in to shoulder the responsibility for the all-round growth of every new born right from the moment of birth till the age of 15 or so. This needs to include giving worthy Primary teachers the same salaries as their colleagues in Universities with the same qualifications. I contend that when a person is shown how and then facilitated to be successful on their own, they would rather not cheat. The requirements are for people who are as skilled as those who are teaching at University. In fact, teachers at University should ONLY be part-timers who love facilitating young adults so much that they will do it for free. These teachers must necessarily possess expertise and experience in either Research or Application. Society must instead devote its funds and concentration on a person's life from birth to age 15 or 18. That's it. After that, the person, now a young adult, hopefully having been made strong, courageous, disciplined and wise, can now fend for themselves - first in the academic and then in the professional world.

The meta-Turing test counts a thing as intelligent if it seeks to devise and apply Turing tests to objects of its own creation. -- Lew Mammel, Jr.

Working...