I've been to Africa too, I know how much it sucks there. But your anger is creating *personal attacks*. You are not just saying, "Ive seen the horror Christian churches do today, so I know that morality is not limited to religion." You said "Wtf are you doing with your life?! Nothing!" It's very, very different.
It's provocative, and vastly different from what you've experienced. But like I said. It is *the way you said it* that sort of put you off track. You can be passionate about a subject without attacking the dude.
My dear kyuuei,
I fear you're making a mistake. You seem to assume I'm stuck into some kind of Ego trip, you seem to assume that most of my answers are here to speak about myself only. The truth is that who I really am is not important.
Yes, I've worked in Africa and *tried* to save lives. It's my job, I work in urbanism, in sustainable development in the context of emerging countries, I even teach it. But if it makes you feel bad, that's not my fault, and I don't think you should put the blame on me.
If I make a testimony here, it's not because I want to be admired or revered like a saint or a kind of mother Theresa.
It would be indecent.
Rather, I would prefer to put the emphasis on:
1/ How hypocritical many conservative preachers behave here, and Lark is one of these, if not the most painful to read sometimes. Lark seems to think he's a kind of holy crusader whose mission is to save the world. Fine. Perhaps I tried to mimick his condescending tone and posture in return, but believe me: that is a joke. Lark seems to have an opinion about everything, and spend most of his time here judging people. That's why I asked him what he has really done, since he said here that
"doctrines should be a lived reality". I agree both with him and Hegel on this, I'm interested in reality too, and that's why I posted here.
All I did was trying to show a contradiction between what he says, and what he's doing. And it's the same contradiction I see between what the majority of Christians say, and what they really do. And this contradiction is interesting.
So the paradox is here: yes, I am a totally amoral, materialistic atheist. But, according to the Christian definition of morality (or the Nietzschean
moraline, if you prefer), are my acts less moral than those of the common believer? What do you think? What do Kyuuei think?
I am not here to preach about the so-called superiority of my absence of faith. I'm just asking questions, and I have no immediate answers.
Sometimes, as Blaise Pascal once remarked: True morality makes light of morality.
2/ The current fate of the majority of mankind. Sometimes, I'm fed up to read discussions here about insignificant, shallow events that nobody but only Americans would care about. Sometimes, I'm fed up to hear Byzantine discussions about the sex of angels while in the same time, the Ottoman army (figuratively speaking) is at our gates.
I'm wondering if people here are aware of what is going on outside of the confines of their televisions, their cars and the (rich) Western world, if they understand what it means to be human in 2013.
I'm not a preacher of doom: all I can do is testify, is sharing occasional stories with you.
You can do whatever you want with these testimonies: they do not belong to me and, once again, who I am is not important. Because yes, I think that in many contexts, the acts are more important than the person.