587
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MooseBoys@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

He’s not wrong in the sense that everyone has their own worldview, and humans need a worldview to process the immense amount of information we are exposed to on a daily basis. Some people incorporate organized religion into their worldview, while others do not.

[-] kaffiene@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Agreed. Where he is wrong is in equating “having a world-view” with “having a religion”. The two are not the same and it’s foolish in the extreme to suggest that they are.

[-] MooseBoys@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

the two are not the same

The dictionary lists this for use #3 for religion:

”a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith”

In this sense of the word, many people, including atheists, do have a religion deeply rooted in their worldview.

A concrete example is people who fervently believe that FOSS is the only good way to make software, and that proprietary software is evil. Many of those people are unwilling to even consider the merits of the latter. In this sense, those beliefs very much qualify as “religious” in this sense of the word.

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

No, this is bullshit. FOSS advocates don't have faith in the one true RMS or whatever you're trying to peddle here. They have a principled stance derived from logic. You're free to disagree with them, but you can't just paint them as religious because they have a stance you disagree with!

[-] MooseBoys@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

principled stance derived from logic

Those logical conclusions must inherently flow from philosophical axioms that comprise the person’s world view. Two of the most fundamental axioms that lead to supporting FOSS are not supported by everyone. Namely:

  1. What is “good” exists independent of human convention (i.e. Kantian vs. Utilitarian ethical belief system)
  2. Humans should endeavor to be morally good (i.e. Altruism vs. Egoism)

Those axioms cannot be logically derived from some fundamental truth - they must come from one’s own personal belief system, i.e. their “religion” (definition 3).

Someone following Kantian ethics and Altruism morality (whether or not they’re aware of the names) will probably end up favoring FOSS. Someone who has a more Utilitarian and Egoistic world view will probably be okay with proprietary software.

This is all kind of a moot point because I don’t think this sense of the word is what Musk was referring to - he was probably using it as sense 1 sarcastically and mockingly.

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Those axioms cannot be logically derived from some fundamental truth - they must come from one’s own personal belief system, i.e. their “religion” (definition 3).

You're re-defining religion here, because even if fundamental axioms are arbitrarily chosen, it doesn't mean they are adhered to based on faith. I don't have faith in my principles. I think they are good due to the evidence I've seen for them, but if I saw evidence for problems with my fundamental axioms, I'd adopt new axioms. This is fundamentally different from believing in something due to faith.

[-] MooseBoys@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

it doesn't mean they are adhered to based on faith

If not “faith” then what? Note that “faith” doesn’t need to mean some higher power; it just needs to be something you believe without evidence. Any “evidence” you claim to have experienced to support your worldview must inherently be interpreted through an existing lens of one’s own world view, which circularly depends on one’s axioms. You fundamentally cannot have a worldview without some amount of faith in something.

More concretely, the only thing one can prove a priori is “cogito ergo sum” (“I think, therefore I am”). Any further cognitive reasoning requires faith in one or more axioms about the world, e.g. “the world exists independent of my own perception”.

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If not “faith” then what?

Because I haven't been convinced by something better. That's it.

Note that “faith” doesn’t need to mean some higher power; it just needs to be something you believe without evidence.

According to what definition? Let's look at Merriam Webster, since you're basing your whole argument around their definitions:

1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY lost faith in the company's president b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions acted in good faith

2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof clinging to the faith that her missing son would one day return (2) : complete trust

3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction especially : a system of religious beliefs the Protestant faith

None of these apply to me, or other FOSS advocates I know. I don't have a strong conviction towards my basic axioms, since as I said, I simply haven't come across better ones.

More concretely, the only thing one can prove a priori is “cogito ergo sum” (“I think, therefore I am”). Any further cognitive reasoning requires faith in one or more axioms about the world, e.g. “the world exists independent of my own perception”.

And thus you completely devalue the terms "faith", "religion" etc., because according to you literally everything past "Cogito ergo sum" is faith. Every word you wrote is faith. Everything you think beyond your basic capability to think is faith. It's fine if you want to decide for yourself that this is how you view these words, but it's not how other people use them, because they simply have no utility the way you use them.

[-] MooseBoys@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It's fine if you want to decide for yourself that this is how you view these words, but it's not how other people use them

Oxford English Dictionary:

faith: …. a strongly held belief or theory. "the faith that life will expand until it fills the universe"

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Once again: my axioms are not strongly held beliefs. How often do I have to repeat this?

[-] kaffiene@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I have a degree in Philosophy. You are redefining words to make your argument. That's not how good arguments work.

[-] zeppo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I view it more like: don’t let proprietary software manufacturers fuck you over, not something about morality.

[-] zeppo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

It’s conceivable but a stretch to say that some people have those beliefs to the extent of a religion. However to say they’re actually a religion would be simply bizarre… nobody thinks Richard Stallman created the earth or something.

this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
587 points (100.0% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35746 readers
150 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS