Friday, October 31, 2008

Another great video by Pat Condell:


Gareth said...


Never heard of this guy. I now have a new hero.

Mac said...

I'm a fan. Condell's videos are thoughtful and nuanced, and he doesn't hold any punches.

Anonymous said...

Preaching to the converted.

Anonymous said...

Pat wants to "live in a free world full of free people who can say whatever they want to say and who can be whoever they want to be, one-thousand percent of the time", huh? If only things were that simple.
Has it occurred to Pat that there may be an undesirable flip side to such a free world? That society which is deprived of a gravitational center becomes a mad society. I'm neither a communist or an Islamofascist. I just don't sport the naive optimism of secular humanists like Pat Condell.

Ken Y.

an agnostic intense said...

I think it may be more accurate to characterize Condell's position as one where individuals are or should be free to express their viewpoints and philosophical orientation without fear or social pressure from the mainstream (or other) religious or spiritual belief systems of others, especially if they're in the majority in any particular society, being brought to bear on or to negatively influence the freedom of thought and association of those in the minority, whether they be of a different faith, agnostic, or none.

A more realistic and productive "gravitational center" in fact, in the future, may be one that does focus on and more realistically explores simply what it means to be human, and the responsibility for self-governance in an ethical and moral way, without the excuse or dependence on any particular, non-logical or simply faith-based belief hierarchy or dogma that would otherwise not be able to be questioned or challenged to rationally or coherently establish or allow its' bases to be logically and evidentially explored or investigated.

One does not require, nor should one be restricted to, belief in any particular spiritual or religious philosopy, in order to be a responsible, ethical, and moral human or to live productively and coherently in a more just and balanced society or culture--in fact, imho, without such illogical mythic faith-based assumptions, a more healthy, democratic, and progressive human multi-culture is not just possible, but more likely required by thus enhancing tolerance for others by such a less biased, more flexible approach or process.

I have, for example, no problem with secular humanism, and the individual responsibility for self and others that entails, and it does provide a better and more genuine "grounding" and appropriate choice of or way of being than the speculative, dogmatic traditional or institutional belief systems currently in the mainstream, which are both unable and unwilling to adapt or change to reflect reality and objective, empirical fact, because they are simplistically and erroneously rigid and based largely on myth created and derived largely from elitist, patriarchal systems of ancient, obsolete beliefs passed down inter-generationally. As such, they represent differing kinds of relatively inflexible control systems or hierarchal belief assumptions that do not stand up well to intelligent examination.

Condell may seem and is to some degree strident in his expression, seemingly saying he is intolerant of intolerance, but generally he makes good, useful, and honest points in his video screeds.

Political, religious, ethnic, tribal, or nationalistic beliefs and assumptions have historically long been at the heart of most intolerance and conflict, like war, and it is long past time for our species to grow up and mature out of such childish or adolescent presumptions such beliefs are based on and seek new and more humanely tolerant ways of being, for the benefit of all, not just any one's particular biased perspective or orientation. Nothing less is either fair, equitable, or just.

To each their own, without restriction on belief or freedom of thought and action, and as long as one does no harm to others, is a more accurate definition of what I think Condell is really talking about, imho. Get used to it--this more nuanced and sophisticated point of view is growing, due to its more legitimate, realistic basis in fact. And that is neither "mad" nor "naive"--it's more real, practical, and ethical than the mythic alternatives.