2. Moreover, we forbid the teaching of any doctrine by those who labor under the insanity of paganism, so that they may not in that manner pretend to instruct those coming to see them in a way to excite pity, while in fact they corrupt the souls of their disciples. Nor shall they receive any salary (annona) in as much as they are not permitted to claim anything of the kind pursuant to a rescript or pragmatic sanction.
3. If there shall be any approved men here or in the provinces who shall not hasten to our holy churches with wife and children, as above mentioned, he shall undergo the aforesaid punishment, the fisc shall receive his property, and he himself shall be sent into exile
What goes around comes around.
Just one more execution, or exclusion will bring about utopia?
It's never worked, yet ideologues continue to try. They now worship the politically correct deity". "She" is surely fierce in defence of her dogma.
When identities and beliefs clash in this way, not every individual or group will be satisfied with the outcome of University administrative decisions, as some people will feel less secure in some of their identities than others. However, when Harvard must restrict one aspect of diversity to promote another, it should do so alongside clear reasoning as to which values the University has decided to prioritize and why it has done so.
Furthermore, when Harvard is challenged with choosing which priorities should take precedence, we have held that issues of nondiscrimination should generally be prioritized. We said that HCFA’s freedom of religion in the context of the College does not extend to authority to pressure a woman to resign her leadership position over her decision to date another woman. The goal of expanding the conversation to include more aspects of diversity is to be inclusive of more identities in the aggregate.
That said, much more work is needed in expanding the conversation and prioritizing ideological diversity on campus. Startlingly, just around 1.5 percent of respondents to The Crimson news staff’s survey of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences identify as conservative or very conservative, compared to 83.2 percent who identify as liberal or very liberal.
But when we turn to subjects infinitely more complicated, to morals, religion, politics, social relations, and the business of life, three-fourths of the arguments for every disputed opinion consist in dispelling the appearances which favour some opinion different from it. The greatest orator, save one, of antiquity, has left it on record that he always studied his adversary's case with as great, if not with still greater, intensity than even his own. What Cicero practised as the means of forensic success, requires to be imitated by all who study any subject in order to arrive at the truth. He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side; if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion. The rational position for him would be suspension of judgment, and unless he contents himself with that, he is either [Pg 68] led by authority, or adopts, like the generality of the world, the side to which he feels most inclination. Nor is it enough that he should hear the arguments of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. That is not the way to do justice to the arguments, or bring them into real contact with his own mind. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them; who defend them in earnest, and do their very utmost for them. He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form; he must feel the whole force of the difficulty which the true view of the subject has to encounter and dispose of; else he will never really possess himself of the portion of truth which meets and removes that difficulty.
I have been reading the A.C.'s (authoritarian- collective) articles the past few days. Attacking Christianity, and the right to believe as the individual chooses. I did not comment on said articles as personal attacks (slander, as opposed to dialogue, is the response most often given in such circumstance) Beliefs, often called 'religious" in nature are part and parcel of the human condition. All humans are susceptible to this "delusion" as it is in our DNA. (pagan belief)
Our community suffered greatly as Emperors often changed the dominant "Deity" to suit their particular political agenda and or personal system of belief. Constantine was only the most well known example of this phenomenon.
Reading David Haidt's book "The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom" lead me to write this article 7 or 8 years ago. I have always been intrigued with replacement religions and how they upsert the previous system of belief. One of the reasons I am so fond of the Jewish people is their ability and willingness to preserve the beliefs of their community despite the murderous opposition they faced. While both Christianity and Islam could not exist without the beliefs of the Jewish people, both have viewed themselves as replacement theologies. One now more so than the other.
Recently, Mr. Haidt and Mr. Peterson have drawn the same conclusion I have.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
"Belief"........ In my right to believe.
kpr37 with a pagan's perspective.
When identities and beliefs clash in this way, not every individual or group will be satisfied with the outcome of University administrative decisions, as some people will feel less secure in some of their identities than others. However, when Harvard must restrict one aspect of diversity to promote another, it should do so alongside clear reasoning as to which values the University has decided to prioritize and why it has done so.
Furthermore, when Harvard is challenged with choosing which priorities should take precedence, we have held that issues of nondiscrimination should generally be prioritized. We said that HCFA’s freedom of religion in the context of the College does not extend to authority to pressure a woman to resign her leadership position over her decision to date another woman. The goal of expanding the conversation to include more aspects of diversity is to be inclusive of more identities in the aggregate.
That said, much more work is needed in expanding the conversation and prioritizing ideological diversity on campus. Startlingly, just around 1.5 percent of respondents to The Crimson news staff’s survey of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences identify as conservative or very conservative, compared to 83.2 percent who identify as liberal or very liberal.
From page 68 John Stuart Mill's "On liberty"
But when we turn to subjects infinitely more complicated, to morals, religion, politics, social relations, and the business of life, three-fourths of the arguments for every disputed opinion consist in dispelling the appearances which favour some opinion different from it. The greatest orator, save one, of antiquity, has left it on record that he always studied his adversary's case with as great, if not with still greater, intensity than even his own. What Cicero practised as the means of forensic success, requires to be imitated by all who study any subject in order to arrive at the truth. He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side; if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion. The rational position for him would be suspension of judgment, and unless he contents himself with that, he is either [Pg 68] led by authority, or adopts, like the generality of the world, the side to which he feels most inclination. Nor is it enough that he should hear the arguments of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. That is not the way to do justice to the arguments, or bring them into real contact with his own mind. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them; who defend them in earnest, and do their very utmost for them. He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form; he must feel the whole force of the difficulty which the true view of the subject has to encounter and dispose of; else he will never really possess himself of the portion of truth which meets and removes that difficulty.
Dear Friend KPR37: Food for thought.
Thank you for an engaging and idea provoking article.
Peace and Abundant Blessings Always.
Enoch.
Thank you for the comment.
I have been reading the A.C.'s (authoritarian- collective) articles the past few days. Attacking Christianity, and the right to believe as the individual chooses. I did not comment on said articles as personal attacks (slander, as opposed to dialogue, is the response most often given in such circumstance) Beliefs, often called 'religious" in nature are part and parcel of the human condition. All humans are susceptible to this "delusion" as it is in our DNA. (pagan belief)
Our community suffered greatly as Emperors often changed the dominant "Deity" to suit their particular political agenda and or personal system of belief. Constantine was only the most well known example of this phenomenon.
Reading David Haidt's book "The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom" lead me to write this article 7 or 8 years ago. I have always been intrigued with replacement religions and how they upsert the previous system of belief. One of the reasons I am so fond of the Jewish people is their ability and willingness to preserve the beliefs of their community despite the murderous opposition they faced. While both Christianity and Islam could not exist without the beliefs of the Jewish people, both have viewed themselves as replacement theologies. One now more so than the other.
Recently, Mr. Haidt and Mr. Peterson have drawn the same conclusion I have.