[ExI] Religions and violence. and EP

[Stefano Vaj]

2010/8/2 samantha <sjatkins at mac.com>:
> Please explain how a belief that the Non-Agression Principle is the basis of
> any reasonable ethics leads to extermination.  I could an agree more about
> the inherent evil and violence of States as the have a legal monopoly on the
> initiation of force.

Easy. It is enough that its supporters accept a high enough degree of
ideological inconsistency to allow for the extermination of those who
do not support it. See for that matter buddhist Sri Lanka, etc. :-)

Conversely, Vikings, e.g., had no real qualms about violence, and were
certainly not too peaceful, but as a society were not especially more
violent than the middle-age christians preaching the "gospel of love".

>> The real issue, IMHO, is that while a "heathen/pagan" may or may not
>> really care upon the fact that a bordering culture lives according to
>> different values or beliefs, monotheism *requires* conversion or
>> destruction of the unfaithful.

> No, it doesn't.  Many monotheists could care less if others go straight to
> whatever version of hell or if they do care understand the importance of
> free choice.

Sure, as many could not care less about chastity, etc. My contention
is that monotheism *philosophically* requires and implies it.
Something which is not of the essence to other worldviews.
Transhumanism, for instance... ;-)

-- 
Stefano Vaj