Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Hinduism

2009-05-06T00:03:45Z

LewisNewburn: /* Caste system */

[[Image:Hinduism.jpg|left|Hinduism]]
'''Hinduism''' is the fourth largest religion in the world and is the oldest among major religions.<ref>The largest being [[Christianity]], [[Islam]], Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist, and Hinduism, in that order[http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html]</ref> Historians believe that it originated more than 5000 years ago.<ref>[http://hinduism.about.com/od/hinduism101/a/origin.htm Origin of Hinduism] (About.com)</ref> Hinduism is the first [[Dharmic religion]]. It can be called "the religion of India;" about 800 million of the world's billion Hindus live in India, so about 80 percent of Hindus are Indians.<ref>[http://www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Brief_analysis.pdf Census of India, religion data, brief analysis (PDF)]; "At the national level, of 1028 million population, 828 million (80.5 percent) have returned their religion as Hindus followed by 138 million (13.4 percent) as Muslims and 24 millions (2.3 percent) Christians. 19 million (1.9 percent) persons follow Sikh religion; 8 million (0.8 percent) are Buddhists and 4.2 million (0.4 percent) are Jains as per the 2001 Census. In addition to these, 6.6 million belong to ‘Other Religions and Persuasions’ including tribal religions which are not part of the six main religions stated above. About seven lakh (or 0.7 million) persons have not stated their religion."</ref>
According to a recent American survey, Hindus are the best educated and among the richest religious groups in the [[United States]].<ref>Hanerjee, Neela, [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/us/25cnd-religion.html?ei=5124&en=1f44cce06fd2c02a&ex=1361682000&adxnnl=1&partner=digg&exprod=digg&adxnnlx=1204020358-3HkVoV4zxeYh9vTOw6Tydw Americans Change Faiths at Rising Rate, Report Finds], New York Times, 25th February, 2008.</ref>
[[Image:Hinduism..jpg|240px|right|Shiva the Cosmic Dancer]]
Hindus believe in [[reincarnation]] and eventual unity with what is known as [[Brahman]] as well as respect for all life forms. Their holy writings are known as the [[Vedas]]. The goal of Hindus in life (purusharthas) is to follow four life-long aims: dharma (righteousness), artha (material success), kama (love/pleasure), and moksha (release from reincarnation/reunification with Brahman).

== Description ==

In 1966, the Supreme Court of [[India]] defined what Hinduism is for legal purposes:

1. Belief in the authority of the Vedas (an ancient hymns to the gods, written in Sanskrit). The oldest collection of hymns in the Vedas is the Rig Veda, which was written between 1800 and 1300 B.C. The greatest Veda hymn is the “Bhagavat Gita,” a section in the Mahabharata concerning life’s never-ending spiritual journey towards perfection. Bhagavat Geeta is rendered as a dialogue between Shri [[Krishna]] (incarnation of [[Vishnu]]) and Arjuna (the great archer) in the middle of the battlefield.

2. Spirit of tolerance and willingness to understand and respect an opponent’s view.

3. Belief in world rhythms: long periods of creation, maintenance and dissolution follow each other in endless succession.

4. Belief in reincarnation (rebirth) and preexistence.

5. Belief that there are many ways to salvation.

6. Unlike most other religions, Hinduism is not defined by a specific set of philosophical concepts.

7. Belief in one god. Contrary to popular belief, Hinduism is not a [[polytheism|polytheistic]] religion. The Vedas, the primary Hindu holy scriptures states that there is only one [[God]] but can manifest in many forms. This is the reason why there are many deities. A common example used to explain this is that an individual can be called different names depending on the relationship has with another. A man can be a son to his parents, a nephew to his uncle, a father to his son, and a husband to his wife all at the same time. None of these different relationships suggest multiple people but rather different aspects of one person. The same is applied to God in Hinduism, which has no form and is infinite. Hindus may call God, Paratman (Supreme Soul), Brahmana (Eternal Spirit), or Ishvara (Supreme Lord). Deities have various names but represent aspects of God that manifest in the world. For example [[Agni]] (fire, Divine spark), Vayu (wind, or breath which could mean life force, [[Indra]] (in mythology king of gods but also refers to the senses such as vision, hearing, touch, taste), and [[Lakshmi]] (fortune).

8. Secular multiplicity and accommodating flexibility in spiritual practices.

Relations between Hinduism and Christianity have also been shaped by unequal balances of political power and cultural influence. Although communities of Christians have lived in South India since the middle of the 1st millennium, the great expansion of Indian Christianity followed the efforts of missionaries working under the protection of the British colonial government. <ref> [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-261549/Hinduism Hinduism and Christianity] Encyclopædia Britannica. </ref>

Some state governments such as Gujrat, Madhya Pradesh have passed anti-conversion laws, attempting to prevent Hindus converting to other religions such as [[Islam]] and [[Christianity]].<ref>[http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2003/24470.htm India: International Religious Freedom Report 2003] (U.S. Department of State)</ref>

For more on Hinduism, see [[World History Lecture Three]].

==Criticisms==
===Sati===
''Sati'' was a practice during the medieval period whereby Hindu widows were forcefully burned to death by family members of the husband. This practice was abolished in the 19th century by the efforts of Ram Mohan Roy and Lord William Bentinck.

===Caste system===
Hinduism also has a caste or ''varna'' system. Traditionally Hindu society is divided into four castes:
*''Brahmin'' (the priestly class)
*''Kshatriya'' (the warrior or ruling class)
*''Vaishya'' (merchants)
*''Shudra'' (unskilled laborers and servants)

The caste system used not to be hereditary. <ref>[http://western-hindu.org/2008/01/27/the-caste-system/ The Caste System]</ref>

''Shudras'' were the lowest caste and were denied of many rights in past. Apart from these four main castes, there is another group called the ''Dalit'' (Untouchables).<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/living/caste.shtml The caste system] ''BBC''</ref> Historically these ''dalits'' are the victims of discrimination by higher castes. Even today there are many reports of discrimination against ''dalits''.<ref>[http://indianchristians.in/news/content/view/1954/44/ Dalits face discrimination in southern Tamil Nadu] ''All India Christian Council''</ref><ref>[http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2007/02/13/india15303.htm India: ‘Hidden Apartheid’ of Discrimination Against Dalits] ''[[Human Rights Watch]]''</ref>

== See also ==

*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Philosophy-Hinduism-Hindu.htm Hindu Religion]
*[http://western-hindu.org/2008/01/27/the-caste-system/ The Caste System]
==Further reading==
* Johnson, W. J. ''A Dictionary of Hinduism'' (2009) [http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Hinduism-W-J-Johnson/dp/0198610254/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1238980666&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]
* Knott, Kim. ''Hinduism: A Very Short Introduction'' (2000) [http://www.questia.com/read/62971675?title=Hinduism%3a%20A%20Very%20Short%20Introduction online edition]
* Shattuck, Cybelle. ''Hinduism'' (1999) [http://www.questia.com/read/103395975?title=Hinduism online edition]
* Sullivan, Bruce M. ''Historical Dictionary of Hinduism'' (1997)
* Werner, Karel. ''A Popular Dictionary of Hinduism'' (1997) [http://www.amazon.com/Popular-Dictionary-Hinduism-Dictionaries-Religion/dp/0700710493/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1238980666&sr=1-3 excerpt and text search]
* Zaehner, R. C. ''Hinduism'' (1966) [http://www.questia.com/read/23180604?title=Hinduism online edition]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Hinduism| ]]
[[Category:Dharmic Religions]]
[[Category:India]]

Rachel Maddow

2009-05-05T23:46:51Z

LewisNewburn:

'''Rachel Maddow''' (b. 1973) is a [[left-wing]] American radio and television commentator for [[Air America]] radio and [[MSNBC]] cable television. She has a bachelors degree from [[Stanford]] University, and a doctorate from [[Oxford]]. (She went to Oxford as a [[Rhodes Scholar]].) Maddow is one of relatively few openly [[lesbian|gay]] personalities in the mainstream news media. Like many at the MSNBC network, she is a severe critic of former U.S President [[George W. Bush]], [[conservative values]] and the [[Republican Party]], as well as a staunch supporter and [[Barack Obama]].

{{DEFAULTSORT:Maddow, Rachel}}

==See also==
*[[Homosexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality_in_the_media|Homosexuality in the Media]]
*[[Hollywood values]]

[[Category:Broadcasters]]
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Liberal Activists]]

{{Liberalism}}

Jonathan Krohn

2009-03-20T21:26:58Z

LewisNewburn:

[[Image:Jonathan.jpg|right|thumb| Jonathan Krohn Conservative Author]]

'''Jonathan Krohn''' (born March 1, 1995) is a 14-year-old '''homeschooled''' student and author of the book ''Define Conservatism''. February 27, 2009, Jonathan gave a speech at [[CPAC]]. Inside Edition’s Debora Norville named him “[[Atlanta]]’s Most Talented Child” in 2006.<ref>[http://www.defineconservatism.com/index.php/authorsbio Biography] defineconservatism.com</ref> Jonathan is raised a [[Baptist]]. He lives in Duluth, GA with his parents, Doug and Marla Krohn, and his dog Spot. He has been known for his considerable acting skills. Jonathan is the principal writer for an internet radio show, “The Life Connection.”

==Book==
From his website, Jonathan in his own words

{{cquote|Define Conservatism

Past, Present, and Future

This book's title defines its contents as well as any. The words "Define Conservatism" imply that the pages of this book are filled entirely with an in-depth definition of the American political viewpoint of Conservatism. So what is the importance of this book? you may ask. For starters, this book is important because it gives a clear-cut, easy to understand definition of Conservatism. It is my belief that if people want to better understand what they believe, than they must have an easy, yet strong, way to define it. Second, if we are to effectively communicate the message of Conservatism, than we must have a way to define it. And third, if we want to understand who is a Conservative and what ideas are Conservative, than we must have a way to define it. Now your question probably is, What is a Conservative? Since this is what we are going to discuss in-depth in the book, I will give you the basic definition of a Conservative.

A Conservative is someone who believes in

1. [[Life]]
2. [[Personal Responsibility]]
3. [[Less Government]]
4. The [[Founding Principles]]

These are the basic principles of Conservatism, but they each require an individual in-depth analysis. Now that you understand what the basic definition of a Conservative is, let's discuss what this book is about a bit more.

In this book we will look at each of these different principles through the eyes of a leading politician (or politicians) in American political history who best exhibits the principle that we are discussing for that chapter. We will analyze the principle using that politician's stories, statements, and key beliefs. By doing this we will see how some of the men who had the most influence on Conservatism saw each of these principles, and, thereby, learn from their example. At the end of each chapter we will analyze a modern American political issue using the principles that we learned throughout that chapter.

This book is all about the definition of Conservatism. It is about the values, the views, and the principles of the Conservative mindset. Conservatism is key to America because it keeps America on track in morals, in the size of government, and in the people's power. If we lose track of what we believe, than we will lose track of America's most important ideals.

For those of you who will be going to vote soon, this book means something else as well. This book is, in a way, a voting guide for Conservatives. It is my hope that you will take to heart or at least listen to the principles defined in this book. If you will take these principles with you to the voting booth, than I know for a fact that you will understand who is Conservative and what views are Conservative.

For all Americans, it is my hope that this book will be a clear basis of Conservative ideas. I personally pray that you will use this book to help you better understand the ideas, principles, and values of Conservatism. In short, it is my belief that Conservatism is important to America and all Americans individually.

Dear readers, I hope that each of you will individually learn from this book. It is my personal sentiment that America needs another Conservative revolution, and it is my prayer that that movement will begin with each of you.

May [[God]] bless the [[United States of America]]!

Jonathan}}

==External Links==
* [http://www.defineconservatism.com/ Define Conservatism Homepage]
* [http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=2969 Jonathan Krohn is Child Conservative Author]
* [http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=3837011&referralPlaylistId=c985e69916535a2170b2b18ab0ab7eb60401f9bb His March 18, 2009 participation in a Fox News Strategy Room panel discussion]

==References==
<references/>
[[Category:Conservatives]]
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:People who were Educated at Home]]

The God Delusion

2009-03-08T16:04:22Z

LewisNewburn:

'''''The God Delusion''''' is a book by the [[atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]], in which he attempts to show that belief in [[God]] is irrational.

Dawkins' main objectives are to convince his readers that the existence of [[God]] or any other [[deity]] is highly unlikely, that the Bible is incoherent and that [[morality]] does not come from [[religion]].

Critics have called the book "surprisingly intolerant".<ref>{{cite book | quote=For a scientist who criticizes religion for its intolerance, Dawkins has written a surprisingly intolerant book, full of scorn for religion and those who believe. | publisher=Publishers Weekly | title=The God Delusion | year=2006 | month=August | url=http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618680004 | }}</ref>

Dawkins also intends to teach that atheists can live happy, intelligent, lives—perhaps even happier lives than religious people. He asserts that atheists do not do evil things in the name of [[atheism]], while [[religion|religious]] people have been known to commit atrocities in the name of their religion.

==Chapters==

=== Deeply Religious Non-Believer===
Dawkins attempts to establish [[Albert Einstein]] as a non-theist, and to prove that religion is unworthy of any respect.

===The God Hypothesis===
Dawkins explains the different kinds of religion, including the divide between [[Monotheism]] and [[Polytheism]]. He also asserts viciously that the founding fathers of the [[United States of America]] were nonreligious. He continues to explain [[Secularism]], [[Agnosticism]], and some basic assertions of the religious.

===Arguments for God's Existence===
Dawkins summarizes some common [[proof]]s for God and attempts to debunk them.

===Why There Almost Certainly is No God===
Dawkins gives his 'Boeing 747 Argument', contending that we only know of intelligence as a product of extensive evolution. Since, God is supremely intelligent if we are to attribute the entire universe to him, argues Dawkins, we must explain the origins of that intelligence. God, he opines, "is unlikely".

===The Roots of Religion===
Dawkins gives and explains some thoughts about the origins of religion that have been proposed by atheists, trying to undermine the [[Christianity|church]].

===The Roots of Morality: Why are We Good?===
Dawkins explains why he believes that a moral centre is a product of evolution, and attacks the idea that religion is a necessary basis of personal morality.

===The 'Good' Book and the Changing [[Moral Zeitgeist]]===
Dawkins suggests that morality does not come from religion, but rather a changing moral ''Zeitgeist''.

===What's Wrong With Religion? Why Be So Hostile?===
Dawkins shows why he believes that religion is [[evil]] and repressive, and must be stopped.

===Childhood, Abuse and the Escape from Religion===
Dawkins explains why he believes that religion is a form of "[[child abuse]]", and that the scars from the "indoctrination" last into [[adult]]hood and even the child's entire life.

===A Much Needed Gap?===
Dawkins concludes his book on a more positive level, giving inspiration to those whom he may have convinced to "de-convert" from their religion.

==Criticism==
''The God Delusion'' has been subject to a great deal of criticisms from the religious and the non-religious alike.

===Andrew Brown: Prospect Magazine===
{{Cquote|
"It has been obvious for years that Richard Dawkins had a fat book on religion in him, but who would have thought him capable of writing one this bad? Incurious, dogmatic, rambling and self-contradictory, it has none of the style or verve of his earlier works."<ref>http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7803</ref>
}}
Andrew Brown of Prospect Magazine was unimpressed by Dawkins' book. Brown calls atheism "unnatural" and points out that many atheists were violent in their belief (or lack thereof), citing Stalin killing members of the clergy.

Brown also attacks Dawkins' argument that suicide bombers are caused by religious schools. While Dawkins states that if these children were not taught what he calls "faith without question", suicide bombings would not be an issue. Brown, however, says that religion is not a necessity in suicide bombings. He points out that it is a tactic used by Marxists in Sri Lanka.

===Marilynne Robinson: Harper's Magazine===
<blockquote>
"There is a pervasive exclusion of historical memory in Dawkins's view of science. Consider this sentence from his preface, which occurs in the context of his vision of a religion-free world: 'Imagine . . . no persecution of Jews as 'Christ-killers.'"<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref>
</blockquote>

Robinson's major complaints about ''The God Delusion'' lie in how sheerly false the book is in many aspects. Although Dawkins claims that "the majority of us believe in free speech", she points out that most countries do not, pointing out that [[China]] (population 1.3 billion<ref>http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/chinapopulation.htm</ref>) does not. In her review, Robinson basically says that Dawkins purposefully ignored important parts of history in his attempt to convince his readers. "It's a shame," she says, "to see him reduced to one long argument from professorial incredulity."

===Terry Eagleton: London Review of Books===
<blockquote>
"Card-carrying rationalists like Dawkins [...] are in one sense the least well-equipped to understand what they castigate, since they don’t believe there is anything there to be understood, or at least anything worth understanding."
</blockquote>

===Alister McGrath: The Dawkins Delusion?===
''The Dawkins Delusion?'' is a response to Dawkins' ''The God Delusion'' by [[Alister McGrath]].

== Quotes from ''The God Delusion'' ==
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
::-Chapter 2

"I am one of an increasing number of biologists who see religion as a ''by-product'' of something else."
::-Chapter 5

"By contrast, what I, as a scientist, believe (for example, [[evolution]]) I believe not because of reading a holy book but because I have studied the evidence... Books about evolution are believed because they present overwhelming quantities of mutually buttressed evidence."
::-Chapter 8

"... [Moral absolutism] rules the minds of a great number of people in the world today, most dangerously so in the Muslim world and in the incipient American theocracy... Such absolutism nearly always results from strong religious faith, and it constitutes a major reason for suggesting that religion can be a force for evil in the world."
::-Chapter 8
==See also==
*[[Atheism]]
{{Nb Atheism}}

==References==
<references/>

== External Links ==
*[http://www.richarddawkins.net RichardDawkins.net]

[[Category:Books|God Delusion, The]]

The God Delusion

2009-03-08T16:02:52Z

LewisNewburn: /* The Roots of Morality: Why are We Good? */

'''''The God Delusion''''' is a book by the [[atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]], in which he attempts to show that belief in [[God]] is irrational.

Dawkins' main objectives are to convince his readers that the existence of [[God]] or any other [[deity]] is highly unlikely, that the Bible is incoherent, that [[morality]] does not come from [[religion]], and that if religion does effect morality, it only does so negatively.

Critics have called the book "surprisingly intolerant".<ref>{{cite book | quote=For a scientist who criticizes religion for its intolerance, Dawkins has written a surprisingly intolerant book, full of scorn for religion and those who believe. | publisher=Publishers Weekly | title=The God Delusion | year=2006 | month=August | url=http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618680004 | }}</ref>

Dawkins also intends to teach that atheists can live happy, intelligent, lives—perhaps even happier lives than religious people. He asserts that atheists do not do evil things in the name of [[atheism]], while [[religion|religious]] people have been known to commit atrocities in the name of their religion.

==Chapters==

=== Deeply Religious Non-Believer===
Dawkins attempts to establish [[Albert Einstein]] as a non-theist, and to prove that religion is unworthy of any respect.

===The God Hypothesis===
Dawkins explains the different kinds of religion, including the divide between [[Monotheism]] and [[Polytheism]]. He also asserts viciously that the founding fathers of the [[United States of America]] were nonreligious. He continues to explain [[Secularism]], [[Agnosticism]], and some basic assertions of the religious.

===Arguments for God's Existence===
Dawkins summarizes some common [[proof]]s for God and attempts to debunk them.

===Why There Almost Certainly is No God===
Dawkins gives his 'Boeing 747 Argument', contending that we only know of intelligence as a product of extensive evolution. Since, God is supremely intelligent if we are to attribute the entire universe to him, argues Dawkins, we must explain the origins of that intelligence. God, he opines, "is unlikely".

===The Roots of Religion===
Dawkins gives and explains some thoughts about the origins of religion that have been proposed by atheists, trying to undermine the [[Christianity|church]].

===The Roots of Morality: Why are We Good?===
Dawkins explains why he believes that a moral centre is a product of evolution, and attacks the idea that religion is a necessary basis of personal morality.

===The 'Good' Book and the Changing [[Moral Zeitgeist]]===
Dawkins suggests that morality does not come from religion, but rather a changing moral ''Zeitgeist''.

===What's Wrong With Religion? Why Be So Hostile?===
Dawkins shows why he believes that religion is [[evil]] and repressive, and must be stopped.

===Childhood, Abuse and the Escape from Religion===
Dawkins explains why he believes that religion is a form of "[[child abuse]]", and that the scars from the "indoctrination" last into [[adult]]hood and even the child's entire life.

===A Much Needed Gap?===
Dawkins concludes his book on a more positive level, giving inspiration to those whom he may have convinced to "de-convert" from their religion.

==Criticism==
''The God Delusion'' has been subject to a great deal of criticisms from the religious and the non-religious alike.

===Andrew Brown: Prospect Magazine===
{{Cquote|
"It has been obvious for years that Richard Dawkins had a fat book on religion in him, but who would have thought him capable of writing one this bad? Incurious, dogmatic, rambling and self-contradictory, it has none of the style or verve of his earlier works."<ref>http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7803</ref>
}}
Andrew Brown of Prospect Magazine was unimpressed by Dawkins' book. Brown calls atheism "unnatural" and points out that many atheists were violent in their belief (or lack thereof), citing Stalin killing members of the clergy.

Brown also attacks Dawkins' argument that suicide bombers are caused by religious schools. While Dawkins states that if these children were not taught what he calls "faith without question", suicide bombings would not be an issue. Brown, however, says that religion is not a necessity in suicide bombings. He points out that it is a tactic used by Marxists in Sri Lanka.

===Marilynne Robinson: Harper's Magazine===
<blockquote>
"There is a pervasive exclusion of historical memory in Dawkins's view of science. Consider this sentence from his preface, which occurs in the context of his vision of a religion-free world: 'Imagine . . . no persecution of Jews as 'Christ-killers.'"<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref>
</blockquote>

Robinson's major complaints about ''The God Delusion'' lie in how sheerly false the book is in many aspects. Although Dawkins claims that "the majority of us believe in free speech", she points out that most countries do not, pointing out that [[China]] (population 1.3 billion<ref>http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/chinapopulation.htm</ref>) does not. In her review, Robinson basically says that Dawkins purposefully ignored important parts of history in his attempt to convince his readers. "It's a shame," she says, "to see him reduced to one long argument from professorial incredulity."

===Terry Eagleton: London Review of Books===
<blockquote>
"Card-carrying rationalists like Dawkins [...] are in one sense the least well-equipped to understand what they castigate, since they don’t believe there is anything there to be understood, or at least anything worth understanding."
</blockquote>

===Alister McGrath: The Dawkins Delusion?===
''The Dawkins Delusion?'' is a response to Dawkins' ''The God Delusion'' by [[Alister McGrath]].

== Quotes from ''The God Delusion'' ==
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
::-Chapter 2

"I am one of an increasing number of biologists who see religion as a ''by-product'' of something else."
::-Chapter 5

"By contrast, what I, as a scientist, believe (for example, [[evolution]]) I believe not because of reading a holy book but because I have studied the evidence... Books about evolution are believed because they present overwhelming quantities of mutually buttressed evidence."
::-Chapter 8

"... [Moral absolutism] rules the minds of a great number of people in the world today, most dangerously so in the Muslim world and in the incipient American theocracy... Such absolutism nearly always results from strong religious faith, and it constitutes a major reason for suggesting that religion can be a force for evil in the world."
::-Chapter 8
==See also==
*[[Atheism]]
{{Nb Atheism}}

==References==
<references/>

== External Links ==
*[http://www.richarddawkins.net RichardDawkins.net]

[[Category:Books|God Delusion, The]]

The God Delusion

2009-03-08T16:00:37Z

LewisNewburn: /* Why There Almost Certainly is No God */

'''''The God Delusion''''' is a book by the [[atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]], in which he attempts to show that belief in [[God]] is irrational.

Dawkins' main objectives are to convince his readers that the existence of [[God]] or any other [[deity]] is highly unlikely, that the Bible is incoherent, that [[morality]] does not come from [[religion]], and that if religion does effect morality, it only does so negatively.

Critics have called the book "surprisingly intolerant".<ref>{{cite book | quote=For a scientist who criticizes religion for its intolerance, Dawkins has written a surprisingly intolerant book, full of scorn for religion and those who believe. | publisher=Publishers Weekly | title=The God Delusion | year=2006 | month=August | url=http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618680004 | }}</ref>

Dawkins also intends to teach that atheists can live happy, intelligent, lives—perhaps even happier lives than religious people. He asserts that atheists do not do evil things in the name of [[atheism]], while [[religion|religious]] people have been known to commit atrocities in the name of their religion.

==Chapters==

=== Deeply Religious Non-Believer===
Dawkins attempts to establish [[Albert Einstein]] as a non-theist, and to prove that religion is unworthy of any respect.

===The God Hypothesis===
Dawkins explains the different kinds of religion, including the divide between [[Monotheism]] and [[Polytheism]]. He also asserts viciously that the founding fathers of the [[United States of America]] were nonreligious. He continues to explain [[Secularism]], [[Agnosticism]], and some basic assertions of the religious.

===Arguments for God's Existence===
Dawkins summarizes some common [[proof]]s for God and attempts to debunk them.

===Why There Almost Certainly is No God===
Dawkins gives his 'Boeing 747 Argument', contending that we only know of intelligence as a product of extensive evolution. Since, God is supremely intelligent if we are to attribute the entire universe to him, argues Dawkins, we must explain the origins of that intelligence. God, he opines, "is unlikely".

===The Roots of Religion===
Dawkins gives and explains some thoughts about the origins of religion that have been proposed by atheists, trying to undermine the [[Christianity|church]].

===The Roots of Morality: Why are We Good?===
Dawkins explains why he believes that morality "evolved" from [[animal]]s.

===The 'Good' Book and the Changing [[Moral Zeitgeist]]===
Dawkins suggests that morality does not come from religion, but rather a changing moral ''Zeitgeist''.

===What's Wrong With Religion? Why Be So Hostile?===
Dawkins shows why he believes that religion is [[evil]] and repressive, and must be stopped.

===Childhood, Abuse and the Escape from Religion===
Dawkins explains why he believes that religion is a form of "[[child abuse]]", and that the scars from the "indoctrination" last into [[adult]]hood and even the child's entire life.

===A Much Needed Gap?===
Dawkins concludes his book on a more positive level, giving inspiration to those whom he may have convinced to "de-convert" from their religion.

==Criticism==
''The God Delusion'' has been subject to a great deal of criticisms from the religious and the non-religious alike.

===Andrew Brown: Prospect Magazine===
{{Cquote|
"It has been obvious for years that Richard Dawkins had a fat book on religion in him, but who would have thought him capable of writing one this bad? Incurious, dogmatic, rambling and self-contradictory, it has none of the style or verve of his earlier works."<ref>http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7803</ref>
}}
Andrew Brown of Prospect Magazine was unimpressed by Dawkins' book. Brown calls atheism "unnatural" and points out that many atheists were violent in their belief (or lack thereof), citing Stalin killing members of the clergy.

Brown also attacks Dawkins' argument that suicide bombers are caused by religious schools. While Dawkins states that if these children were not taught what he calls "faith without question", suicide bombings would not be an issue. Brown, however, says that religion is not a necessity in suicide bombings. He points out that it is a tactic used by Marxists in Sri Lanka.

===Marilynne Robinson: Harper's Magazine===
<blockquote>
"There is a pervasive exclusion of historical memory in Dawkins's view of science. Consider this sentence from his preface, which occurs in the context of his vision of a religion-free world: 'Imagine . . . no persecution of Jews as 'Christ-killers.'"<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref>
</blockquote>

Robinson's major complaints about ''The God Delusion'' lie in how sheerly false the book is in many aspects. Although Dawkins claims that "the majority of us believe in free speech", she points out that most countries do not, pointing out that [[China]] (population 1.3 billion<ref>http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/chinapopulation.htm</ref>) does not. In her review, Robinson basically says that Dawkins purposefully ignored important parts of history in his attempt to convince his readers. "It's a shame," she says, "to see him reduced to one long argument from professorial incredulity."

===Terry Eagleton: London Review of Books===
<blockquote>
"Card-carrying rationalists like Dawkins [...] are in one sense the least well-equipped to understand what they castigate, since they don’t believe there is anything there to be understood, or at least anything worth understanding."
</blockquote>

===Alister McGrath: The Dawkins Delusion?===
''The Dawkins Delusion?'' is a response to Dawkins' ''The God Delusion'' by [[Alister McGrath]].

== Quotes from ''The God Delusion'' ==
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
::-Chapter 2

"I am one of an increasing number of biologists who see religion as a ''by-product'' of something else."
::-Chapter 5

"By contrast, what I, as a scientist, believe (for example, [[evolution]]) I believe not because of reading a holy book but because I have studied the evidence... Books about evolution are believed because they present overwhelming quantities of mutually buttressed evidence."
::-Chapter 8

"... [Moral absolutism] rules the minds of a great number of people in the world today, most dangerously so in the Muslim world and in the incipient American theocracy... Such absolutism nearly always results from strong religious faith, and it constitutes a major reason for suggesting that religion can be a force for evil in the world."
::-Chapter 8
==See also==
*[[Atheism]]
{{Nb Atheism}}

==References==
<references/>

== External Links ==
*[http://www.richarddawkins.net RichardDawkins.net]

[[Category:Books|God Delusion, The]]

The God Delusion

2009-03-08T16:00:24Z

LewisNewburn: /* Why There Almost Certainly is No God */

'''''The God Delusion''''' is a book by the [[atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]], in which he attempts to show that belief in [[God]] is irrational.

Dawkins' main objectives are to convince his readers that the existence of [[God]] or any other [[deity]] is highly unlikely, that the Bible is incoherent, that [[morality]] does not come from [[religion]], and that if religion does effect morality, it only does so negatively.

Critics have called the book "surprisingly intolerant".<ref>{{cite book | quote=For a scientist who criticizes religion for its intolerance, Dawkins has written a surprisingly intolerant book, full of scorn for religion and those who believe. | publisher=Publishers Weekly | title=The God Delusion | year=2006 | month=August | url=http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618680004 | }}</ref>

Dawkins also intends to teach that atheists can live happy, intelligent, lives—perhaps even happier lives than religious people. He asserts that atheists do not do evil things in the name of [[atheism]], while [[religion|religious]] people have been known to commit atrocities in the name of their religion.

==Chapters==

=== Deeply Religious Non-Believer===
Dawkins attempts to establish [[Albert Einstein]] as a non-theist, and to prove that religion is unworthy of any respect.

===The God Hypothesis===
Dawkins explains the different kinds of religion, including the divide between [[Monotheism]] and [[Polytheism]]. He also asserts viciously that the founding fathers of the [[United States of America]] were nonreligious. He continues to explain [[Secularism]], [[Agnosticism]], and some basic assertions of the religious.

===Arguments for God's Existence===
Dawkins summarizes some common [[proof]]s for God and attempts to debunk them.

===Why There Almost Certainly is No God===
Dawkins gives his 'Boeing 747 Argument', contending that we only know of intelligence as a product of extensive evolution. Since, God is supremely intelligent if we are to attribute the entire universe to him, argues Dawkins, we mu explain the origins of that intelligence. God, he opines, "is unlikely".

===The Roots of Religion===
Dawkins gives and explains some thoughts about the origins of religion that have been proposed by atheists, trying to undermine the [[Christianity|church]].

===The Roots of Morality: Why are We Good?===
Dawkins explains why he believes that morality "evolved" from [[animal]]s.

===The 'Good' Book and the Changing [[Moral Zeitgeist]]===
Dawkins suggests that morality does not come from religion, but rather a changing moral ''Zeitgeist''.

===What's Wrong With Religion? Why Be So Hostile?===
Dawkins shows why he believes that religion is [[evil]] and repressive, and must be stopped.

===Childhood, Abuse and the Escape from Religion===
Dawkins explains why he believes that religion is a form of "[[child abuse]]", and that the scars from the "indoctrination" last into [[adult]]hood and even the child's entire life.

===A Much Needed Gap?===
Dawkins concludes his book on a more positive level, giving inspiration to those whom he may have convinced to "de-convert" from their religion.

==Criticism==
''The God Delusion'' has been subject to a great deal of criticisms from the religious and the non-religious alike.

===Andrew Brown: Prospect Magazine===
{{Cquote|
"It has been obvious for years that Richard Dawkins had a fat book on religion in him, but who would have thought him capable of writing one this bad? Incurious, dogmatic, rambling and self-contradictory, it has none of the style or verve of his earlier works."<ref>http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7803</ref>
}}
Andrew Brown of Prospect Magazine was unimpressed by Dawkins' book. Brown calls atheism "unnatural" and points out that many atheists were violent in their belief (or lack thereof), citing Stalin killing members of the clergy.

Brown also attacks Dawkins' argument that suicide bombers are caused by religious schools. While Dawkins states that if these children were not taught what he calls "faith without question", suicide bombings would not be an issue. Brown, however, says that religion is not a necessity in suicide bombings. He points out that it is a tactic used by Marxists in Sri Lanka.

===Marilynne Robinson: Harper's Magazine===
<blockquote>
"There is a pervasive exclusion of historical memory in Dawkins's view of science. Consider this sentence from his preface, which occurs in the context of his vision of a religion-free world: 'Imagine . . . no persecution of Jews as 'Christ-killers.'"<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref>
</blockquote>

Robinson's major complaints about ''The God Delusion'' lie in how sheerly false the book is in many aspects. Although Dawkins claims that "the majority of us believe in free speech", she points out that most countries do not, pointing out that [[China]] (population 1.3 billion<ref>http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/chinapopulation.htm</ref>) does not. In her review, Robinson basically says that Dawkins purposefully ignored important parts of history in his attempt to convince his readers. "It's a shame," she says, "to see him reduced to one long argument from professorial incredulity."

===Terry Eagleton: London Review of Books===
<blockquote>
"Card-carrying rationalists like Dawkins [...] are in one sense the least well-equipped to understand what they castigate, since they don’t believe there is anything there to be understood, or at least anything worth understanding."
</blockquote>

===Alister McGrath: The Dawkins Delusion?===
''The Dawkins Delusion?'' is a response to Dawkins' ''The God Delusion'' by [[Alister McGrath]].

== Quotes from ''The God Delusion'' ==
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
::-Chapter 2

"I am one of an increasing number of biologists who see religion as a ''by-product'' of something else."
::-Chapter 5

"By contrast, what I, as a scientist, believe (for example, [[evolution]]) I believe not because of reading a holy book but because I have studied the evidence... Books about evolution are believed because they present overwhelming quantities of mutually buttressed evidence."
::-Chapter 8

"... [Moral absolutism] rules the minds of a great number of people in the world today, most dangerously so in the Muslim world and in the incipient American theocracy... Such absolutism nearly always results from strong religious faith, and it constitutes a major reason for suggesting that religion can be a force for evil in the world."
::-Chapter 8
==See also==
*[[Atheism]]
{{Nb Atheism}}

==References==
<references/>

== External Links ==
*[http://www.richarddawkins.net RichardDawkins.net]

[[Category:Books|God Delusion, The]]

The God Delusion

2009-03-08T15:56:40Z

LewisNewburn: /* Deeply Religious Non-Believer */

'''''The God Delusion''''' is a book by the [[atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]], in which he attempts to show that belief in [[God]] is irrational.

Dawkins' main objectives are to convince his readers that the existence of [[God]] or any other [[deity]] is highly unlikely, that the Bible is incoherent, that [[morality]] does not come from [[religion]], and that if religion does effect morality, it only does so negatively.

Critics have called the book "surprisingly intolerant".<ref>{{cite book | quote=For a scientist who criticizes religion for its intolerance, Dawkins has written a surprisingly intolerant book, full of scorn for religion and those who believe. | publisher=Publishers Weekly | title=The God Delusion | year=2006 | month=August | url=http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618680004 | }}</ref>

Dawkins also intends to teach that atheists can live happy, intelligent, lives—perhaps even happier lives than religious people. He asserts that atheists do not do evil things in the name of [[atheism]], while [[religion|religious]] people have been known to commit atrocities in the name of their religion.

==Chapters==

=== Deeply Religious Non-Believer===
Dawkins attempts to establish [[Albert Einstein]] as a non-theist, and to prove that religion is unworthy of any respect.

===The God Hypothesis===
Dawkins explains the different kinds of religion, including the divide between [[Monotheism]] and [[Polytheism]]. He also asserts viciously that the founding fathers of the [[United States of America]] were nonreligious. He continues to explain [[Secularism]], [[Agnosticism]], and some basic assertions of the religious.

===Arguments for God's Existence===
Dawkins summarizes some common [[proof]]s for God and attempts to debunk them.

===Why There Almost Certainly is No God===
Dawkins gives his reasons for believing that God is about as likely as "[[fairy|fairies]] living under his garden", and asks the fallacious question of where God came from.

===The Roots of Religion===
Dawkins gives and explains some thoughts about the origins of religion that have been proposed by atheists, trying to undermine the [[Christianity|church]].

===The Roots of Morality: Why are We Good?===
Dawkins explains why he believes that morality "evolved" from [[animal]]s.

===The 'Good' Book and the Changing [[Moral Zeitgeist]]===
Dawkins suggests that morality does not come from religion, but rather a changing moral ''Zeitgeist''.

===What's Wrong With Religion? Why Be So Hostile?===
Dawkins shows why he believes that religion is [[evil]] and repressive, and must be stopped.

===Childhood, Abuse and the Escape from Religion===
Dawkins explains why he believes that religion is a form of "[[child abuse]]", and that the scars from the "indoctrination" last into [[adult]]hood and even the child's entire life.

===A Much Needed Gap?===
Dawkins concludes his book on a more positive level, giving inspiration to those whom he may have convinced to "de-convert" from their religion.

==Criticism==
''The God Delusion'' has been subject to a great deal of criticisms from the religious and the non-religious alike.

===Andrew Brown: Prospect Magazine===
{{Cquote|
"It has been obvious for years that Richard Dawkins had a fat book on religion in him, but who would have thought him capable of writing one this bad? Incurious, dogmatic, rambling and self-contradictory, it has none of the style or verve of his earlier works."<ref>http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7803</ref>
}}
Andrew Brown of Prospect Magazine was unimpressed by Dawkins' book. Brown calls atheism "unnatural" and points out that many atheists were violent in their belief (or lack thereof), citing Stalin killing members of the clergy.

Brown also attacks Dawkins' argument that suicide bombers are caused by religious schools. While Dawkins states that if these children were not taught what he calls "faith without question", suicide bombings would not be an issue. Brown, however, says that religion is not a necessity in suicide bombings. He points out that it is a tactic used by Marxists in Sri Lanka.

===Marilynne Robinson: Harper's Magazine===
<blockquote>
"There is a pervasive exclusion of historical memory in Dawkins's view of science. Consider this sentence from his preface, which occurs in the context of his vision of a religion-free world: 'Imagine . . . no persecution of Jews as 'Christ-killers.'"<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref>
</blockquote>

Robinson's major complaints about ''The God Delusion'' lie in how sheerly false the book is in many aspects. Although Dawkins claims that "the majority of us believe in free speech", she points out that most countries do not, pointing out that [[China]] (population 1.3 billion<ref>http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/chinapopulation.htm</ref>) does not. In her review, Robinson basically says that Dawkins purposefully ignored important parts of history in his attempt to convince his readers. "It's a shame," she says, "to see him reduced to one long argument from professorial incredulity."

===Terry Eagleton: London Review of Books===
<blockquote>
"Card-carrying rationalists like Dawkins [...] are in one sense the least well-equipped to understand what they castigate, since they don’t believe there is anything there to be understood, or at least anything worth understanding."
</blockquote>

===Alister McGrath: The Dawkins Delusion?===
''The Dawkins Delusion?'' is a response to Dawkins' ''The God Delusion'' by [[Alister McGrath]].

== Quotes from ''The God Delusion'' ==
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
::-Chapter 2

"I am one of an increasing number of biologists who see religion as a ''by-product'' of something else."
::-Chapter 5

"By contrast, what I, as a scientist, believe (for example, [[evolution]]) I believe not because of reading a holy book but because I have studied the evidence... Books about evolution are believed because they present overwhelming quantities of mutually buttressed evidence."
::-Chapter 8

"... [Moral absolutism] rules the minds of a great number of people in the world today, most dangerously so in the Muslim world and in the incipient American theocracy... Such absolutism nearly always results from strong religious faith, and it constitutes a major reason for suggesting that religion can be a force for evil in the world."
::-Chapter 8
==See also==
*[[Atheism]]
{{Nb Atheism}}

==References==
<references/>

== External Links ==
*[http://www.richarddawkins.net RichardDawkins.net]

[[Category:Books|God Delusion, The]]

Sam Harris

2009-03-08T15:53:03Z

LewisNewburn:

'''Sam Harris''' is an [[American]] [[author]] and [[atheist]]. He wrote two controversial, but NY best seller books, ''The End of Faith'' and ''Letter to a Christian Nation''. He has written essays such as "Science must destroy religion"<ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/science-must-destroy-reli_b_13153.html Huffington Post article]</ref>.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

==See also==
*[[Sam Harris - Myth Buster or Myth Maker?]]
==External Links==
[http://www.tektonics.org/gk/harrisletter.html Letter to a Maladjusted Misotheist]

[[Category:Atheists|Harris, Sam]]

Alister McGrath

2009-02-27T13:50:09Z

LewisNewburn:

'''Alister McGrath''' (born 1953) is a [[Northern Ireland|Northern Irish]] biologist and Christian apologist. He is a Professor of Historical Theology at [[Oxford]] University. He was a previous head of Wycliffe Hall, one of Oxford's religious Permanent Private Halls.

McGrath, a former [[atheist]], is one of the world's leading critics of [[Richard Dawkins]]. He published a critique of Dawkins' book ''[[The God Delusion]]'' titled ''The Dawkins Delusion?''. Another book of McGrath's is called ''The Twilight of Atheism'', which chronicles the fluctuation of atheism throughout history.

{{DEFAULTSORT: McGrath, Alister}}
[[Category: Authors]]
[[Category: Christian Apologists]]
[[Category:Former Atheists]]

Christopher Hitchens

2009-02-25T13:52:59Z

LewisNewburn:

[[Image:Hitchens,_Stanford.jpg‎ |right|thumb|200px|Christopher Hitchens]]
'''Christopher Eric Hitchens''' (born April 13, 1949, in [[Portsmouth]], [[England]]) is a journalist, author and literary critic. Hitchens received degrees in philosophy, politics and economics from [[Oxford University|Balliol College]], [[Oxford]], in 1970. From 1971-1981, he worked in [[Britain]] as book reviewer for ''The Times'' newspaper. He emigrated to the United States in 1981, and has written regularly, or been a contributing editor for ''Harper's'', ''Vanity Fair'' and [[Nation (magazine)|''The Nation'']]. He is [[Judaism|Jewish]] by matrilineal descent, although he did not discover this until he was 38 years old. He is an avowed [[Atheism|atheist]] and [[Antitheism|antitheist]]. Hitchens has a younger brother, [[Peter Hitchens]], who is also a very prominent journalist, author and critic.

Christopher Hitchens was a member of the International Socialists and an active [[Trotskyist]] during his youth. Today he is "on the same side as the neo-conservatives," but does not consider himself a conservative. He supports George W. Bush's foreign policy, but has a negative attitude towards the president's support of [[intelligent design]].

He is a harsh critic of [[Ronald Reagan]] and [[Henry Kissinger]], the latter of whom he considers a [[war criminal]].

==Opposition to Islam and Support of the War on Terror==

Christopher Hitchens became an activist against Islam when Ayatullah Kohmeini declared a [[fatwa]] against his personal friend [[Salman Rushdie]]. The event has led him to become very vocal in his support of the war in Iraq and heavily critical of Muslim society and ethics.

==Select bibliography ==
*''Callaghan: The Road to Number Ten'' (Cassell, 1976)
*''Hostage to History: Cyprus From the Ottomans to Kissinger'' (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1989)
*''Imperial Spoils: The Case of the Parthenon Marbles'' (Hill and Wang, 1989)
*''Blood, Class and Nostalgia: Anglo-American Ironies'' (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1990)
*''The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice'' (Verso, 1995)
*''Prepared for the Worst'' (Hill and Wang, 1989)
*''For the Sake of Argument: Essays & Minority Reports'' (Verso, 1993)
*''No One Left to Lie To: The Values of the Worst Family'' (Verso, 2000)
*''God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything'' - outside the US, published with the alternate subtitle ''The Case Against Religion'' (Atlantic, 2007)

==External links==
*[http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1662757,00.html "Why Christopher Hitchens Is Wrong About Billy Graham"], Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy, ''[[Time magazine]]'' Tuesday, Sep. 18, 2007

{{DEFAULTSORT:Hitchens, Christopher}}
[[Category:Authors|Hitchens, Christopher]]

[[Category:Journalists]]

[[Category:Atheists]]

Christopher Hitchens

2009-02-25T13:49:20Z

LewisNewburn: Corrected grammar.

[[Image:Hitchens,_Stanford.jpg‎ |right|thumb|200px|Christopher Hitchens]]
'''Christopher Eric Hitchens''' (born April 13, 1949, in [[Portsmouth]], [[England]]) is a journalist, author and literary critic. Hitchens received degrees in philosophy, politics and economics from [[Oxford University|Balliol College]], [[Oxford]], in 1970. From 1971-1981, he worked in [[Britain]] as book reviewer for ''The Times'' newspaper. He emigrated to the United States in 1981, and has written regularly, or been a contributing editor for ''Harper's'', ''Vanity Fair'' and [[Nation (magazine)|''The Nation'']]. He is [[Judaism|Jewish]] by matrilineal descent, although he did not discover this until he was 38 years old. He is an avowed [[Atheism|atheist]]. Hitchens has a younger brother, [[Peter Hitchens]], who is also a very prominent journalist, author and critic.

Christopher Hitchens was a member of the International Socialists and an active [[Trotskyist]] during his youth. Today he is "on the same side as the neo-conservatives," but does not consider himself a conservative. He supports George W. Bush's foreign policy, but has a negative attitude towards the president's support of [[intelligent design]].

He is a harsh critic of [[Ronald Reagan]] and [[Henry Kissinger]], the latter of whom he considers a [[war criminal]].

==Opposition to Islam and Support of the War on Terror==

Christopher Hitchens became an activist against Islam when Ayatullah Kohmeini declared a [[fatwa]] against his personal friend [[Salman Rushdie]]. The event has led him to become very vocal in his support of the war in Iraq and heavily critical of Muslim society and ethics.

==Select bibliography ==
*''Callaghan: The Road to Number Ten'' (Cassell, 1976)
*''Hostage to History: Cyprus From the Ottomans to Kissinger'' (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1989)
*''Imperial Spoils: The Case of the Parthenon Marbles'' (Hill and Wang, 1989)
*''Blood, Class and Nostalgia: Anglo-American Ironies'' (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1990)
*''The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice'' (Verso, 1995)
*''Prepared for the Worst'' (Hill and Wang, 1989)
*''For the Sake of Argument: Essays & Minority Reports'' (Verso, 1993)
*''No One Left to Lie To: The Values of the Worst Family'' (Verso, 2000)
*''God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything'' - outside the US, published with the alternate subtitle ''The Case Against Religion'' (Atlantic, 2007)

==External links==
*[http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1662757,00.html "Why Christopher Hitchens Is Wrong About Billy Graham"], Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy, ''[[Time magazine]]'' Tuesday, Sep. 18, 2007

{{DEFAULTSORT:Hitchens, Christopher}}
[[Category:Authors|Hitchens, Christopher]]

[[Category:Journalists]]

[[Category:Atheists]]

Theism

2009-02-25T13:46:51Z

LewisNewburn:

'''Theism''' is a general term used to acknowledge the belief in a [[Deity]] or deities. According to the ''[[Catholic Encyclopedia]]'', theism more narrowly means belief in a deity that is both [[immanence|immanent]] in the world, but also [[transcendence|transcendent]], and is also [[omniscient]], [[omnipotent]] and [[omnipresent]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04679b.htm</ref>

The opposite of theism is [[atheism]], which rejects and often actively opposes belief in God. There is also [[agnosticism]], which is a denial of any possibility of spiritual proof, leaving belief open to either side.
The most common form of theism today is [[monotheism]], the belief in one God as the creator.

Variations of theism include:
* [[polytheism]] (many gods, contrasted to [[monotheism]], one god)
* [[pantheism]] (all is God)
* [[panentheism]] (all is in God)
* [[deism]] (one God made the Universe but then ceased to interact with it)
* [[polydeism]] (many Gods made the Universe but then abandoned it)
* [[pandeism]] (God made the Universe by becoming it)
* [[panendeism]] (God made the Universe by partially becoming it)

Some do not consider the deistic variations to relate to theism at all because they refer to an absent God (although the God of pandeism and panendeism is immanent, but non-interfering).

Variations of polytheism include:
* [[monolatry]] (belief in many Gods, but worship of only one)
* [[henotheism]] (belief in many Gods of which one is supreme)
* [[kathenotheism]] (belief in many Gods, but worship of only one at a time, because one is supreme at a time).

==References==

<References/>

[[Category:Religion]]

User:CPalmer

2009-02-25T13:45:17Z

LewisNewburn:

I'm (still fairly) new. I'm intending initially to concentrate mainly on improving the articles on the [[Divine Comedy]] and related topics. As a continuation of this, I've added to some pages relating to [[sin]], other aspects of Christianity, literature, and Greek and Roman [[mythology]]. I've also written a reasonably informative entry on the fine sport of [[weightlifting]].

Recently I've got keen on tidying up categories as well as editing article contents. The links on [[User:Interiot|Interiot]]'s user page are very helpful for this eccentric pastime.

Any suggestions, comments and contributions are very welcome.

== Thanks! ==
Cheers! Good to know there's another Classicist on CP. I'm still getting used to editing!

== Page I can never find ==
*[[Conservapedia:Image upload requests|Upload requests]]

== My writings ==
I've written an essay on Jesus' relative emphasis on Heaven and Hell, based on Mark's Gospel. You can read it [[Essay:Jesus'_emphasis_on_Heaven_and_Hell|here]].

Continuing the theme, I've also posted a [[Mystery:Where is Hell?|mystery]] about the exact nature of Hell. All parties are invited to respond.

== Backslapping below==
I continue to enjoy interacting with the other users on Conservapedia. Accordingly, here is a list of ten of my current favourite Conservapedia editors:
*[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] - Welcomed me, and has sparked some fruitful discussions
*[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] - Has flattered his way back onto the list
*[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] - Incredibly patient in debates, and an attentive sysop
*[[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]] - Herding cats
*[[User:Interiot|Interiot]] - A technical titan
*[[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]] - A pleasure to have around
*[[User:ETrundel|ETrundel]] - A pleasant fellow
*[[User:DeanS|DeanS]] - A hardworking and courteous administrator
*[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]] - Plays the clarinet, but not to excess
*[[User:TagoPagdaluhong|TagoPagdaluhong]] - Crazy name, crazy guy!

Please don't be put out if you're not on the list - if there is any unpleasantness I shall take it down straight away.

==Bible references==
One of the best things about this site is that Bible references automatically show the text when you put the mouse over them. Example: Ezra 10:22.

== Praise for CPalmer ==
"I hope we can create a Conservapedia:Writer of the Year award, just so we can give it to you." - [[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]], Nov 2008

"I am declaring you an honourary WikiGnome for all your efforts in doing the fiddly things no-one else seems to do." - [[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]], Jan 2009

==Also==
Please excuse British spelling on this page.

==Oh, no it isn't!==
[[Image:DamePerrieWinkle.jpg|right|200px|thumb|I have a feeling that the [[evolution]] versus [[atheism]] [[pantomime]] will continue on for some time yet! Both sides are sticking to their guns, so I have a feeling that cries of 'Oh no it isn't' and 'Oh yes it is!' will likely continue on for some time yet in regards to [[atheism]] and [[evolution]]! (Pic: Crowthorne Amateur Theatrical Society)]]
I have a feeling that the [[evolution]] versus [[atheism]] pantomime will continue on for some time yet! Both sides are [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0 sticking to their guns], so I have a feeling that cries of 'Oh no it isn't' and 'Oh yes it is!' will likely continue on for some time yet in regards to [[atheism]] and [[evolution]]!

User:CPalmer

2009-02-25T13:44:11Z

LewisNewburn:

I'm (still fairly) new. I'm intending initially to concentrate mainly on improving the articles on the [[Divine Comedy]] and related topics. As a continuation of this, I've added to some pages relating to [[sin]], other aspects of Christianity, literature, and Greek and Roman [[mythology]]. I've also written a reasonably informative entry on the fine sport of [[weightlifting]].

Recently I've got keen on tidying up categories as well as editing article contents. The links on [[User:Interiot|Interiot]]'s user page are very helpful for this eccentric pastime.

Any suggestions, comments and contributions are very welcome.

== Thanks! Good to know there's another Classicist on CP! ==

== Page I can never find ==
*[[Conservapedia:Image upload requests|Upload requests]]

== My writings ==
I've written an essay on Jesus' relative emphasis on Heaven and Hell, based on Mark's Gospel. You can read it [[Essay:Jesus'_emphasis_on_Heaven_and_Hell|here]].

Continuing the theme, I've also posted a [[Mystery:Where is Hell?|mystery]] about the exact nature of Hell. All parties are invited to respond.

== Backslapping below==
I continue to enjoy interacting with the other users on Conservapedia. Accordingly, here is a list of ten of my current favourite Conservapedia editors:
*[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] - Welcomed me, and has sparked some fruitful discussions
*[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] - Has flattered his way back onto the list
*[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] - Incredibly patient in debates, and an attentive sysop
*[[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]] - Herding cats
*[[User:Interiot|Interiot]] - A technical titan
*[[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]] - A pleasure to have around
*[[User:ETrundel|ETrundel]] - A pleasant fellow
*[[User:DeanS|DeanS]] - A hardworking and courteous administrator
*[[User:PhilipV|PhilipV]] - Plays the clarinet, but not to excess
*[[User:TagoPagdaluhong|TagoPagdaluhong]] - Crazy name, crazy guy!

Please don't be put out if you're not on the list - if there is any unpleasantness I shall take it down straight away.

==Bible references==
One of the best things about this site is that Bible references automatically show the text when you put the mouse over them. Example: Ezra 10:22.

== Praise for CPalmer ==
"I hope we can create a Conservapedia:Writer of the Year award, just so we can give it to you." - [[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]], Nov 2008

"I am declaring you an honourary WikiGnome for all your efforts in doing the fiddly things no-one else seems to do." - [[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]], Jan 2009

==Also==
Please excuse British spelling on this page.

==Oh, no it isn't!==
[[Image:DamePerrieWinkle.jpg|right|200px|thumb|I have a feeling that the [[evolution]] versus [[atheism]] [[pantomime]] will continue on for some time yet! Both sides are sticking to their guns, so I have a feeling that cries of 'Oh no it isn't' and 'Oh yes it is!' will likely continue on for some time yet in regards to [[atheism]] and [[evolution]]! (Pic: Crowthorne Amateur Theatrical Society)]]
I have a feeling that the [[evolution]] versus [[atheism]] pantomime will continue on for some time yet! Both sides are [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0 sticking to their guns], so I have a feeling that cries of 'Oh no it isn't' and 'Oh yes it is!' will likely continue on for some time yet in regards to [[atheism]] and [[evolution]]!

User:LewisNewburn

2009-02-25T13:41:22Z

LewisNewburn:

Hey, hey. I am a student living in London, England. I am currently in my last year of study at Hampton School in Middlesex and I shall be off to University next year. I have an offer to read Classics at St Hugh's College, Oxford, for which (inshallah) I shall get the required grades. I am an atheist.

Ancient Greece

2009-02-25T13:39:00Z

LewisNewburn: Corrected spelling.

[[Image:Greek empire.jpg|left]]
'''Ancient Greece''' was the area of the world similar to modern day [[Greece]] but also had Greek colonies in the modern nations of [[Turkey]], and [[Macedonia]].

Greece was responsible for much of modern [[democracy]], [[philosophy]], [[mathematics]], and [[science]], as well as a great deal of art and the introduction of the [[Olympic Games]]. Ancient Greek works had a great influence on the [[Rome|Romans]]. By the time of [[Christ]], Greek was the dominant language and literary form of the day even though Greece itself had been conquered by Rome. Many of the early missionary journies were into Greek areas and all of the epistles that [[Paul]] wrote were to churches set up in Greek lands. Paul's philosophical discussions in [[Athens]] and the belief of the people that he was [[Zeus]], all tied into the Greek culture of the day as well as the [[New Testament]] books themselves being written in [[Greek language|Greek]] and using a Greek translated [[Old Testament]] ([[Septuagint]]). Ancient Church Fathers were careful to draw a distinction between Greek culture and the unique message of [[Christianity]] that was meant for all.<ref>As [[Tertullian]] said, "What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?"</ref>

The ancient Greek consciousness made a common reference to the [[Trojan War]] as the point of cultural origin, and self-awareness as a society in works such as the [[Iliad]] and the [[Odyssey]].

While it was independent, the ancient Greek world never unified into a central polity. Rather, individual city-states fought for dominion over many centuries, fighting with one another as to who would be prominent. This was especially true between Athens and [[Sparta]]. But while they fought amongst themselves, when a foreign entity sought to invade, such as the [[Persian Empire]], the Greeks would come together in a unity seldom rivaled in history. [[Alexander the Great]] of [[Macedonia]] would eventually subdue Greece along with almost the entire known world at the time, but that would only lead to the spreading of Greek culture as Macedon was Hellenistic in nature and Greece was once again "free" after his death. Rome eventually put an end to ancient Greek independence, but not its influence.

== References ==
<references/>

[[category:Ancient History]]
[[Category:Ancient Greece]]

Ancient Greece

2009-02-25T13:38:22Z

LewisNewburn:

[[Image:Greek empire.jpg|left]]
'''Ancient Greece''' was the area of the world similar to modern day [[Greece]] but also had Greek colonies in the modern nations of [[Turkey]], and [[Macedonia]].

Greece was responsible for much of modern [[democracy]], [[philosophy]], [[mathematics]], and [[science]], as well as a great deal of art and the introduction of the [[Olympic Games]]. Ancient Greek works had a great influence on the [[Rome|Romans]]. By the time of [[Christ]], Greek was the dominant language and literary form of the day even though Greece itself had been conquered by Rome. Many of the early missionary journies were into Greek areas and all of the epistles that [[Paul]] wrote were to churches set up in Greek lands. Paul's philosophical discussions in [[Athens]] and the belief of the people that he was [[Zeus]], all tied into the Greek culture of the day as well as the [[New Testament]] books themselves being written in [[Greek language|Greek]] and using a Greek translated [[Old Testament]] ([[Septuagint]]). Ancient Church Fathers were careful to draw a distinction between Greek culture and the unique message of [[Christianity]] that was meant for all.<ref>As [[Tertullian]] said, "What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?"</ref>

The ancient Greek consciousness made a common reference to the [[Trojan War]] as the point of cultural origin, and self-awareness as a society in works such as the [[Illiad]] and the [[Odyssey]].

While it was independent, the ancient Greek world never unified into a central polity. Rather, individual city-states fought for dominion over many centuries, fighting with one another as to who would be prominent. This was especially true between Athens and [[Sparta]]. But while they fought amongst themselves, when a foreign entity sought to invade, such as the [[Persian Empire]], the Greeks would come together in a unity seldom rivaled in history. [[Alexander the Great]] of [[Macedonia]] would eventually subdue Greece along with almost the entire known world at the time, but that would only lead to the spreading of Greek culture as Macedon was Hellenistic in nature and Greece was once again "free" after his death. Rome eventually put an end to ancient Greek independence, but not its influence.

== References ==
<references/>

[[category:Ancient History]]
[[Category:Ancient Greece]]

Cicero

2009-02-25T13:37:09Z

LewisNewburn:

'''Cicero''' (106-43 BC) (full name '''Marcus Tullius Cicero''') was a [[Roman Empire|Roman]] consul, orator, statesman, lawyer, philosopher, as well as being a prolific writer of books. In the time after the assassination of [[Julius Caesar]], Cicero became one of the most powerful politicians in Rome, and a rival to [[Mark Antony]]. Cicero's attempts to rid himself of Antony failed leading to his death while fleeing the Roman heartland due to the alliance of Antony and [[Octavian]]. What is particularly spectacular about Cicero is that he was a 'new man'. At that time, the Senate was dominated by the same old, noble families, who were often prejudiced against what they viewed as new, unexperienced upstarts. Cicero, depsite being from a poor unknown family, managed to attain the rank of consul, the highest rank in the Republic at that time.

Cicero is considered to be one of the greatest orators and speech writers the world has ever known and a father to modern legalists and barristers.

Cicero was also responsible for unveiling a plot to overthrow the Republic, and his consulship in particular, masterminded by [[Catiline]] among others. In his defeat of the conspirators, however, he set a dangerous precedent; he allowed the conspirators captured in the city of Rome to be executed without a trial. Caesar, among others, was reported to have argued against this by the historian Sallust.

== Selected Works of Cicero ==

''De Oratore''
''In Catilinam''

''Brutus''

''De Inventione''

''De Re Publica''

''De officiis''

''De Legibus''

== Quotes of Cicero ==
<blockquote>"Where is there dignity unless there is honesty?" - Cicero</blockquote>

<blockquote>"Nature herself has imprinted upon the minds of all, the idea of God." - Cicero</blockquote>

[[category:philosophers]]
[[Category:Romans]]

Humanism

2009-02-25T13:36:05Z

LewisNewburn:

{{Bias}}
 

'''Humanism''' is a philosophy from the European [[Renaissance]] (based on classical philosophy). It places humanity and the material at the center of philosophical inquiry and downplays the need for religion. It had a major impact in shaping modern art and ways of thought.

==Origins==

A movement that developed in [[Renaissance]] Europe, with the rediscovery of classical Greek and Latin works that had been thought lost, Humanism sought to return to "original sources". It argued that the height of western civilization had been in the classical period, and with the fall of Rome, most knowledge had been lost, and the much of the knowledge that remained had been corrupted by false traditions. It was the responsibility of the scholar, therefore, to rediscover the original Greek and Latin texts, and separate real wisdom from false interpretation.

This movement had a profound effect on society, and, with its emphasis on classical texts and the rejection of much of the [[Roman Catholic]] religious tradition that developed in the Middle Ages, helped lead to the [[Protestantism|Protestant]] [[Reformation]], and, in fact, some of the new humanist Bibles, such as [[Erasmus]]'s Greek New Testament, were important sources for both [[Martin Luther]]'s translation of the Bible and the King James Version of the Bible.

Humanists also looked to Ancient Greece and Rome for inspiration as to how to develop society and political structures. The poet [[Petrarch]] rediscovered writings by the ancient Roman orator and politician [[Cicero]], and Cicero's ideas about the role and structure of government inspired the humanists to reconsider established views about society and call for expanded civic participation in the state. In addition to Cicero, other classical sources were also consulted and referred to. [[Niccolo Machiavelli]] wrote his "Discourses on Livy", in which he commented on the history of ancient Rome written by the Roman historian [[Livy]], and used Livy's history to show the virtues of the Roman Republic and how a republican state should behave.

==Secular Humanism==

Secular humanism is a 20th century [[Atheism|atheistic]] philosophy that relies entirely on reason without religion. Humanism rejects the idea that there is a supernatural being responsible for the creation of the universe. Humanists believe instead that people are responsible for their actions and that purpose in the universe is far more complicated than a faith in a God. The IHEU has a Minimum Statement on Humanism:
<blockquote>"Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. It is not theistic, and it does not accept supernatural views of reality."</blockquote>

A principal element of secular humanism is the assumption of fundamental human rights - which may include a right to life, to liberty, freedom of speech, the right to pursue happiness, a right to a family life, and similar things. Humanism does not claim these rights are given by a God, but are an inherent property of human intelligence and worthy of defending, although the exact definition of rights is not universally agreed upon by humanists. Humanists encourage self will and independent thought in all matters, which can include [[Judeo-Christian]] as well as Humanist principles.

It was originally created as a religion by the Unitarian clergyman Charles Francis Potter<ref>[http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0914FB3458137A93C7A9178BD95F468685F9"CHARLES POTTER, CLERGYMAN, DEAD"], ''New York Times'', October 5, 1962, </ref> and offered up as a substitute for Christian [[fundamentalism]]. In the early 1980's media controversies involving secular humanism as a religion emerged<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=ZcVSiD1BU3EC ''Making the Manifesto: The Birth of Religious Humanism''], William F. Schulz, [[Unitarian Universalist Association]] of Congregations, 2002, ISBN 1558964290, 9781558964297, 148 pages </ref>.

==Criticism==
[[Image:Lahaye-family-01.jpg|right|400px|thumb|from Tim LaHaye, ''The Battle for the Family'', 1982.]]
Critics of secular humanism have charged secular humanist advocates "have made `socialization' of the child the main purpose of American education." Humanistic education does not focus on "the traditional and generally accepted virtues" stressed by the "Judeo-Christian principles taught by most families at home," but on theories of "[[moral relativism]] and situation ethics" which are "based on predominantly [[Dialectical materialism|materialist]]ic values found only in man's nature itself" and "without regard for the Judeo-Christian moral order, which is based on the existence and fatherhood of a personal God." <ref>Onalee McGraw, ''Secular Humanism and the Schools: The Issue Whose Time has Come''. (Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation, 1976).</ref>

==See also==
*[[Humanistic Psychology]]
*[[Thomas More]]
*[[Christian Humanism]]

==References==
<references/>

[[category:philosophy]]
[[Category:Worldviews]]
[[Category:Renaissance]]

Bertrand Russell

2009-02-25T13:33:08Z

LewisNewburn: removed bias

[[Image:998086u.jpg|right|thumb]]
'''Bertrand Russell,''' 3rd Earl Russell (1872–1970) was a 20th century [[philosopher]], [[mathematician]] and [[atheist]]<ref>His own characterization: "I never know whether I should say '[[Agnostic]]' or whether I should say 'Atheist'.... As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one [can] prove that there is not a God. On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods." Russell, Bertrand (1947) "Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?"[http://www.luminary.us/russell/atheist_agnostic.html] Most online sources say "by which one prove," probably a mistake.</ref> and was awarded the [[Nobel Prize]] in Literature in 1950 for his writings.

The evidence points to Bertrand Russell being a "[[Weak atheism|weak atheist]]" or there is a small possibility that he was an [[agnosticism|agnostic]] (Bertrand Russell wrote an essay entitled ''Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?'').<ref>http://www.luminary.us/russell/atheist_agnostic.html</ref> In 1927, Bertrand Russell wrote an essay entitled "''Why I am not a Christian''" which was based on a lecture Russell gave the same year.<ref>http://gregbahnsen.blogspot.com/2007/06/interlude-why-bertrand-russell-should.html</ref><ref>http://gregbahnsen.blogspot.com/2007/06/interlude-why-bertrand-russell-should.html</ref> Below are some works by [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologists]] which show the inconsistencies and logical fallacies of Bertrand Russell's essay:

*[http://gregbahnsen.blogspot.com/2007/06/interlude-why-bertrand-russell-should.html Critique of Bertrand Russell's essay "Why I am not a Christian"] by Dr. Greg Bahnsen

*[http://www.berith.org/pdf/Why_Bertrand_Russell_Was_Not_A_Christian.pdf Why Bertrand Russell was not a Christian] by Rev. Ralph Allan Smith (1996)

*[http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/10-bertrand-russell-and-christianity-part-1 Bertrand Russell and Christianity] by the Christian Courier

Russell visited the [[Soviet Union]] and met [[Lenin]] in 1920. In a tract, ''The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism'', he wrote "I believe that [[Communism]] is necessary to the world, and I believe ... [[Bolshevik|Bolshevism]] deserves the gratitude and admiration of all the [[Progressivism|progressive]] part of mankind. But the method by which [[Moscow]] aims at establishing Communism is a pioneer method, rough and dangerous, too heroic to count the cost of the opposition it arouses. I do not believe that by this method a stable or desirable form of Communism can be established. Three issues seem to me possible from the present situation:
* The ultimate defeat of Bolshevism by the forces of [[capitalism]]
* The victory of the Bolshevists accompanied by a complete loss of their ideals and a régime of [[Napoleon]]ic [[imperialism]]
* A prolonged world-war, in which civilization will go under, and all its manifestations (including Communism) will be forgotten.

Russell wrote further:

:"To understand Bolshevism it is not sufficient to know facts; it is necessary also to enter with sympathy or imagination into a new spirit. The chief thing that the Bolsheviks have done is to create a hope, or at any rate to make strong and widespread a hope which was formerly confined to a few... I cannot share the hopes of the Bolsheviks any more than those of the Egyptian anchorites; I regard both as tragic delusions, destined to bring upon the world centuries of darkness and futile violence... I do not know whether Bolshevism can be prevented from acquiring universal power. But even if it cannot, I am persuaded that those who stand out against it, not from love of ancient injustice, but in the name of the free spirit of Man, will be the bearers of the seeds of progress, from which, when the world's gestation is accomplished, new life will be born."

Russell's most significant early work was a three-volume attempt to derive all mathematical principles from a well-defined set of axioms and inference rules in symbolic logic, entitled ''Principia Mathematica'' (1910-1913). He published this work with [[Alfred North Whitehead]]. Although the ''Principia'' is widely considered by one of the most important and seminal works in logic and philosophy, part of its success was in inspiring others to question its propositions. In 1931, [[Kurt Godel]] proved that what Russell attempted could not possibly be both consistent and complete.

During the [[Cold War]] he advocated nuclear disarmament, even if it were unilateral on the part of Western powers, a stance mocked as "better Red than dead."<ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=uIRi0BOvTi4C&pg=PA391&lpg=PA391&dq=%22better+red+than+dead%22+%22Bertrand+Russell%22&source=web&ots=WwFRaEaAmY&sig=h5XEKBrZOQidfBaca9EqJySsISM&hl=en</ref>

A member of British nobility with the title of "Earl", Russell remained a hero to those on the political left, particularly in the English-speaking world, throughout his life. In his 1929 book ''Marriage and Morals'', he argued that that sex between a man and woman who are not married to each other is not necessarily immoral if they truly love one another. In the 1960's he became a vocal critic of the [[Vietnam War]].

Russell also famously encapsulated the dilemma faced by all those seeking objective moral truths in the face of almost overwhelming logical evidence to the contrary:

:''"I cannot see how to refute the arguments for the subjectivity of ethical values, but I find myself incapable of believing that all that is wrong with wanton cruelty is that I don't like it."'' <ref>[http://uk.encarta.msn.com/quote_1861989747/Ethics_I_cannot_see_how_to_refute_the_arguments_for_the.html]</ref>

Philosophy, 1960, "Notes on Philosophy"

==Contributions to Mathematics and Philosophy==

Bertrand Russell was particularly known for the famous "[[Russell's Paradox]]", which wrecked havoc on intuitivistic set theory. The basic restatement of the paradox is the following: suppose there is a predicate "x is a set that does not contain itself", does the set that is the extension of that predicate contain itself. To solve this, Russell came up with the incomprehensibly complex [[theory of types]], which was later abandoned in favour of the [[Zermelo-Fraenkel]] axioms.

Russell's numerous writings had a significant influence on mathematical logic and philosophy. His works contributed to the many branches of science even though he discredited some of his earlier writings.

The Principles of Mathematics (1902)
Principia Mathematica (1910-13)
The ABC of Relativity (1925)
Education and the Social Order (1932)
A History of Western Philosophy (1945)
The Impact of Science upon Society (1952)
My Philosophical Development (1959)
War Crimes in Vietnam (1967)
Our Knowledge of the External World (1926)
Inquiry into Meaning and Truth (1962) <ref> http://www.nndb.com/people/954/000044822/ </ref>

==Notes and references==
<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Russell, Bertrand}}

[[Category:Atheists]]
[[Category:Nobel laureates in Literature]]
[[Category:Philosophers]]
[[Category:Mathematicians]]
[[Category:Communists]]

Latin

2009-02-25T13:23:06Z

LewisNewburn: /* Nouns */

'''Latin''' is an [[Indo-European language]] of the [[Italic language]] family. Its closest relative was [[Umbric]], which is now extinct. Latin was the most widely spoken language in the [[Roman Empire]], and is the language from which all the [[Romance languages]] are derived. These languages include [[Spanish]], [[Romanian]], [[Portuguese]], [[Italian]], [[French]] and [[Catalan]], among others. '''Latin''' may also refer to people who speak Romance languages, particularly those in the Caribbean, Central and South America who speak either Spanish or Portuguese.

== Latin Grammar ==

Latin [[grammar]] is marked by an extensive system of [[noun]] [[Grammatical case|cases]] and [[verb]]al inflection. Like nouns, [[adjective]]s also decline and must agree with the nouns they modify in terms of gender, number and case. In addition, Latin also has the full range of other parts of speech, including [[adverb]]s and [[pronoun]]s.

=== Nouns ===

Noun cases are used to indicate the grammatical function of the noun within the sentence. By contrast, English and most other modern Romance languages mostly use the noun's position within the sentence to denote its grammatical function.

Nouns all have grammatical [[grammar|gender]] (either masculine, feminine or neuter). While nouns the correspond to people will generally match the logical gender (for example, ''puella'', meaning "girl" is feminine, while ''puer'', meaning "boy" is masculine), other nouns which do not have a natural gender will still have a grammatical gender (for example, ''arbor'', meaning "tree" is feminine, ''portus'', "harbor" is masculine, and ''bellum'', "war" is neuter).

Each Latin noun falls into one of five declensions, which will determine the endings used to indicate case. Latin has six major grammatical cases as indicated below:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Case
! Grammatical Function
! Example Paradigm (1st Declension Singular)
|-
| '''Nominative'''
| Subject
| Puella
|-
| '''Vocative'''
| Object of Direct Address
| Puella
|-

| '''Accusative'''
| Direct Object; also used with certain prepositions, mostly concerning motion
| Puellam
|-
| '''Genitive'''
| Possessive; also used with certain prepositions; translated 'of the ...'
| Puellae
|-
| '''Dative'''
| Indirect Object; also used with certain prepositions; translated 'to/for the...'
| Puellae
|-
| '''Ablative'''
| Used with certain prepositions, mostly concerning location; also indicates agency in passive constructions; translated 'by/with/from the...'
| Puellā
|-
|}

Note that certain cases are identical to others (they may vary in other declensions); in situations where there is more than one possible case for a particular noun, the case must be determined from the context of the sentence. In Latin dictionaries, nouns listed will indicate the nominative and the genitive singular forms of the noun; this enables an experienced reader to determine the rest of that noun's declension, even if he or she has not encountered it before. Thus the verb in the example above would be listed ''puella, -ae'' in a Latin dictionary.

=== Verbs ===

Verbal morphology distinguishes [[voice]] (active and passive), time (past, present, future), [[mood (grammar)|mood]] (indicative, imperative, subjunctive, infinitive), [[aspect (grammar)|aspect]] (simple, perfective, imperfective), and person (first, second, and third person in singular and plural numbers). Time and aspect are normally combined into the verb's tense. Unlike English, which uses auxiliary verbs to create a wide variety of tenses, Latin just has six (four in the subjunctive mood).

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Tense
! Time
! Aspect
! Grammatical Function
! Example Paradigm (3rd Conjugation, first person singular active indicative)
|-
| Present
| Present
| Simple or Imperfective
| Used to indicate both the present simple and present progressive.
| dico
|-
| Imperfect
| Past
| Imperfective
| Used to indicate ongoing actions in the past (which may or may not continue to the present).
| dicebam
|-
| Perfect
| Past
| Simple or Perfective
| Used to indicate both the past simple and specifically completed actions in the past.
| dixi
|-
| Pluperfect
| Past
| Perfective
| Used to indicate actions completed prior to other actions in the past.
| dixeram
|-
| Future
| Future
| Simple
| Used to indicate actions that will occur in the future.
| dicam
|-
| Future Perfect
| Future
| Perfective
| Used to indicate actions that are not complete now, but will be in the future. Usually this means actions that occur after the present but prior to other actions in the future tense.
| dixero
|}

Like nouns, the morphology of verbs in Latin is mostly indicated by regular changes in how the verb is formed, rather than through the use of auxiliary verbs, as is common in English. Most verbs fall into one of four conjugations which determine the form and the endings used to indicate the various aspects of morphology. Unlike nouns however, there are a number of irregular verbs that do not fall into any conjugation.

Latin verbs in the dictionary customarily show their four principal parts, the first person singular present active, the infinitive, the first person singular perfect active, and the supine (a form of verbal noun). Thus, the verb meaning "to say" would be listed in the dictionary as ''dico, dicere, dixi, dictum''. Using this information, an experienced Latinist can derive all of the other forms of the verb.

Latin verbs also have specialized forms including [[gerund]]s (verbal nouns mostly found only in earlier Latin), gerundives (verbal adjectives used to express necessity or obligation), [[participle]]s, and others.

== Syntax ==

Because Latin is so highly inflected, in simple sentences, word order is irrelevant. Thus ''Canis puerum mordet'' (The dog bites the boy) has exactly the same meaning as ''Mordet canis puerum'' or ''Puerum mordet canis''. Nevertheless, Latin did have the tendency to settle into customary word orders, generally with the verb at the end of the sentence. It was this tendency that led to the change from an inflected language to a more analytic one in the case of the Romance languages.

When translating, it is always important to pay close attention to the words at the beginning and end of a sentence. This position connotes the importance of the word to the writer's thought, if not the actual meaning as in English.

Latin poetry, in particular, takes advantage of the flexibility of the word position in order to create pleasing minglings of grammatically unrelated words as word play or to provide secondary meanings. The flexibility of the word position also made it easier for Latin poets to conform to a particular metre.

== Linguistic Descendants ==

The modern Romance languages are descended from Vulgar Latin, which is Latin that was spoken by the common people in the later centuries of the Roman Empire. Changes from Classical to Vulgar Latin included the merger of long /e:/ and /o:/ with short /i/ and /u/, respectively, the loss of /h/ and the accusative nasalisation, and the replacement of cases, tenses, and voices with periphrastic constructions (this change occurred across western Europe). Latin has also given us the alphabet used to write most Western European languages, including English.

Direct modern descendants of Latin include French, Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Romanian, Italian and a variety of less well known languages. Collectively, these are known as Romance languages. In addition, many other languages, such as English and German, have large numbers of Latin loanwords that have been absorbed into the language.

Latin was also the language used by educated elites throughout the [[Middle Ages]] and [[the Renaissance]] in Western Europe. Thus a wide variety of medieval literature, ranging from theological works to histories to scientific works to legal records to literature were all written in Latin, not the author's mother tongue. This had the advantage of facilitating communication between educated people throughout Europe.

Until 1962, Latin was the language in which all Roman [[Catholic]] masses were conducted. A number of Roman Catholics still conduct masses in Latin, and Latin is still the official language of the Roman Catholic Church. Phonologically, Latin is generally similar to other western languages of the Indo-European family.

== Contemporary Latin Use ==

Much of the Latin read nowadays is [[literature]] written during the latter days of the [[Roman Republic]] and during the [[Roman Empire]]. In particular, the first century BC is considered a golden age of Latin literature, with such notable poets as [[Catullus]], [[Horace]] and [[Virgil]], historians such as [[Livy]] and other writers such as [[Cicero]]. Many other Roman writers outside of the first century BC, such as [[Plautus]], [[Seneca]], [[Juvenal]] and [[Tacitus]], are important authors whose works continue to be influential in modern culture and literature. In addition to being enjoyed in their own right, they are also important for the study of Roman history and culture.

In addition, many of the Fathers of the Church, such as [[Augustine]] and [[Gregory the Great]], wrote in Latin. One of the most important translations of the Bible was the Latin [[Vulgate]] by [[Jerome]], which was completed in the fourth century AD and allowed the common people (Lat. ''vulgus'') to understand the Bible in their native language instead of Hebrew or Greek.

Today, Latin remains the official language of the Catholic church although the Vatican II council removed the requirement for services to be conducted in Latin. Ecclesiastical latin, as it is known, is pronounced similar to modern Italian as opposed to classic Roman pronunciation. In the main, however, Latin is not spoken anymore; and as such oral Latin is not taught in most schools; the emphasis is on translation.

Latin was also highly important in the development of law, both because of the highly influential [[Justinian Code|Civil Code of Justinian]] and because of the use of Latin in the composition of the writs used in English [[Common Law]]. The persistence of Latin may be seen in legal terms such as "[[certiorari|writ of certiorari]]" or "[[Adjournment Sine Die|adjournment sine die]]".

Latin (along with Greek) is also used by scientists of all kinds, from biologists to chemists. Latin is particularly used when naming things such as biological species or chemical elements. Latin terms are also used extensively in medicine, recognizing the significance of medieval medical schools.

For many, however, the attractiveness of learning Latin comes from the fact that it shows intellectual ability; many of those who study the language will not enter a field directly related to it.

== Further reading ==

* John F. Collins, ''A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin'', Catholic University of America Press (1985), ISBN 0-8132-0667-7 An introductory Latin text based mainly on medieval ecclesiastical sources.
* Nicholas Ostler, '' Ad Infinitum: a Biography of Latin'', Walker and Company, New York (2007) ISBN 0-8027-1515-X A history of the Latin language.
* Bob Moore and Maxine Moore, '' Dictionary of Latin and Greek Origins: a Comprehensive Guide to the Classical Origins of English Words'', Barnes and Noble, Inc, New York (2000) ISBN 0-7607-2082-7

[[Category:Latin| ]]
[[Category:Romance languages]]
[[Category:Latin Terms/Phrases]]

Latin

2009-02-25T13:22:23Z

LewisNewburn: /* Nouns */

'''Latin''' is an [[Indo-European language]] of the [[Italic language]] family. Its closest relative was [[Umbric]], which is now extinct. Latin was the most widely spoken language in the [[Roman Empire]], and is the language from which all the [[Romance languages]] are derived. These languages include [[Spanish]], [[Romanian]], [[Portuguese]], [[Italian]], [[French]] and [[Catalan]], among others. '''Latin''' may also refer to people who speak Romance languages, particularly those in the Caribbean, Central and South America who speak either Spanish or Portuguese.

== Latin Grammar ==

Latin [[grammar]] is marked by an extensive system of [[noun]] [[Grammatical case|cases]] and [[verb]]al inflection. Like nouns, [[adjective]]s also decline and must agree with the nouns they modify in terms of gender, number and case. In addition, Latin also has the full range of other parts of speech, including [[adverb]]s and [[pronoun]]s.

=== Nouns ===

Noun cases are used to indicate the grammatical function of the noun within the sentence. By contrast, English and most other modern Romance languages mostly use the noun's position within the sentence to denote its grammatical function.

Nouns all have grammatical [[grammar|gender]] (either masculine, feminine or neuter). While nouns the correspond to people will generally match the logical gender (for example, ''puella'', meaning "girl" is feminine, while ''puer'', meaning "boy" is masculine), other nouns which do not have a natural gender will still have a grammatical gender (for example, ''arbor'', meaning "tree" is feminine, ''portus'', "harbor" is masculine, and ''bellum'', "war" is neuter).

Each Latin noun falls into one of five declensions, which will determine the endings used to indicate case. Latin has six major grammatical cases as indicated below:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Case
! Grammatical Function
! Example Paradigm (1st Declension Singular)
|-
| '''Nominative'''
| Subject
| Puella
|-
| '''Vocative'''
| Object of Direct Address
| Puellam
|-

| '''Accusative'''
| Direct Object; also used with certain prepositions, mostly concerning motion
| Puellam
|-
| '''Genitive'''
| Possessive; also used with certain prepositions; translated 'of the ...'
| Puellae
|-
| '''Dative'''
| Indirect Object; also used with certain prepositions; translated 'to/for the...'
| Puellae
|-
| '''Ablative'''
| Used with certain prepositions, mostly concerning location; also indicates agency in passive constructions; translated 'by/with/from the...'
| Puellā
|-
| '''Vocative'''
| Used when directly addressing a person or thing
| Puella
|}

Note that certain cases are identical to others (they may vary in other declensions); in situations where there is more than one possible case for a particular noun, the case must be determined from the context of the sentence. In Latin dictionaries, nouns listed will indicate the nominative and the genitive singular forms of the noun; this enables an experienced reader to determine the rest of that noun's declension, even if he or she has not encountered it before. Thus the verb in the example above would be listed ''puella, -ae'' in a Latin dictionary.

=== Verbs ===

Verbal morphology distinguishes [[voice]] (active and passive), time (past, present, future), [[mood (grammar)|mood]] (indicative, imperative, subjunctive, infinitive), [[aspect (grammar)|aspect]] (simple, perfective, imperfective), and person (first, second, and third person in singular and plural numbers). Time and aspect are normally combined into the verb's tense. Unlike English, which uses auxiliary verbs to create a wide variety of tenses, Latin just has six (four in the subjunctive mood).

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Tense
! Time
! Aspect
! Grammatical Function
! Example Paradigm (3rd Conjugation, first person singular active indicative)
|-
| Present
| Present
| Simple or Imperfective
| Used to indicate both the present simple and present progressive.
| dico
|-
| Imperfect
| Past
| Imperfective
| Used to indicate ongoing actions in the past (which may or may not continue to the present).
| dicebam
|-
| Perfect
| Past
| Simple or Perfective
| Used to indicate both the past simple and specifically completed actions in the past.
| dixi
|-
| Pluperfect
| Past
| Perfective
| Used to indicate actions completed prior to other actions in the past.
| dixeram
|-
| Future
| Future
| Simple
| Used to indicate actions that will occur in the future.
| dicam
|-
| Future Perfect
| Future
| Perfective
| Used to indicate actions that are not complete now, but will be in the future. Usually this means actions that occur after the present but prior to other actions in the future tense.
| dixero
|}

Like nouns, the morphology of verbs in Latin is mostly indicated by regular changes in how the verb is formed, rather than through the use of auxiliary verbs, as is common in English. Most verbs fall into one of four conjugations which determine the form and the endings used to indicate the various aspects of morphology. Unlike nouns however, there are a number of irregular verbs that do not fall into any conjugation.

Latin verbs in the dictionary customarily show their four principal parts, the first person singular present active, the infinitive, the first person singular perfect active, and the supine (a form of verbal noun). Thus, the verb meaning "to say" would be listed in the dictionary as ''dico, dicere, dixi, dictum''. Using this information, an experienced Latinist can derive all of the other forms of the verb.

Latin verbs also have specialized forms including [[gerund]]s (verbal nouns mostly found only in earlier Latin), gerundives (verbal adjectives used to express necessity or obligation), [[participle]]s, and others.

== Syntax ==

Because Latin is so highly inflected, in simple sentences, word order is irrelevant. Thus ''Canis puerum mordet'' (The dog bites the boy) has exactly the same meaning as ''Mordet canis puerum'' or ''Puerum mordet canis''. Nevertheless, Latin did have the tendency to settle into customary word orders, generally with the verb at the end of the sentence. It was this tendency that led to the change from an inflected language to a more analytic one in the case of the Romance languages.

When translating, it is always important to pay close attention to the words at the beginning and end of a sentence. This position connotes the importance of the word to the writer's thought, if not the actual meaning as in English.

Latin poetry, in particular, takes advantage of the flexibility of the word position in order to create pleasing minglings of grammatically unrelated words as word play or to provide secondary meanings. The flexibility of the word position also made it easier for Latin poets to conform to a particular metre.

== Linguistic Descendants ==

The modern Romance languages are descended from Vulgar Latin, which is Latin that was spoken by the common people in the later centuries of the Roman Empire. Changes from Classical to Vulgar Latin included the merger of long /e:/ and /o:/ with short /i/ and /u/, respectively, the loss of /h/ and the accusative nasalisation, and the replacement of cases, tenses, and voices with periphrastic constructions (this change occurred across western Europe). Latin has also given us the alphabet used to write most Western European languages, including English.

Direct modern descendants of Latin include French, Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Romanian, Italian and a variety of less well known languages. Collectively, these are known as Romance languages. In addition, many other languages, such as English and German, have large numbers of Latin loanwords that have been absorbed into the language.

Latin was also the language used by educated elites throughout the [[Middle Ages]] and [[the Renaissance]] in Western Europe. Thus a wide variety of medieval literature, ranging from theological works to histories to scientific works to legal records to literature were all written in Latin, not the author's mother tongue. This had the advantage of facilitating communication between educated people throughout Europe.

Until 1962, Latin was the language in which all Roman [[Catholic]] masses were conducted. A number of Roman Catholics still conduct masses in Latin, and Latin is still the official language of the Roman Catholic Church. Phonologically, Latin is generally similar to other western languages of the Indo-European family.

== Contemporary Latin Use ==

Much of the Latin read nowadays is [[literature]] written during the latter days of the [[Roman Republic]] and during the [[Roman Empire]]. In particular, the first century BC is considered a golden age of Latin literature, with such notable poets as [[Catullus]], [[Horace]] and [[Virgil]], historians such as [[Livy]] and other writers such as [[Cicero]]. Many other Roman writers outside of the first century BC, such as [[Plautus]], [[Seneca]], [[Juvenal]] and [[Tacitus]], are important authors whose works continue to be influential in modern culture and literature. In addition to being enjoyed in their own right, they are also important for the study of Roman history and culture.

In addition, many of the Fathers of the Church, such as [[Augustine]] and [[Gregory the Great]], wrote in Latin. One of the most important translations of the Bible was the Latin [[Vulgate]] by [[Jerome]], which was completed in the fourth century AD and allowed the common people (Lat. ''vulgus'') to understand the Bible in their native language instead of Hebrew or Greek.

Today, Latin remains the official language of the Catholic church although the Vatican II council removed the requirement for services to be conducted in Latin. Ecclesiastical latin, as it is known, is pronounced similar to modern Italian as opposed to classic Roman pronunciation. In the main, however, Latin is not spoken anymore; and as such oral Latin is not taught in most schools; the emphasis is on translation.

Latin was also highly important in the development of law, both because of the highly influential [[Justinian Code|Civil Code of Justinian]] and because of the use of Latin in the composition of the writs used in English [[Common Law]]. The persistence of Latin may be seen in legal terms such as "[[certiorari|writ of certiorari]]" or "[[Adjournment Sine Die|adjournment sine die]]".

Latin (along with Greek) is also used by scientists of all kinds, from biologists to chemists. Latin is particularly used when naming things such as biological species or chemical elements. Latin terms are also used extensively in medicine, recognizing the significance of medieval medical schools.

For many, however, the attractiveness of learning Latin comes from the fact that it shows intellectual ability; many of those who study the language will not enter a field directly related to it.

== Further reading ==

* John F. Collins, ''A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin'', Catholic University of America Press (1985), ISBN 0-8132-0667-7 An introductory Latin text based mainly on medieval ecclesiastical sources.
* Nicholas Ostler, '' Ad Infinitum: a Biography of Latin'', Walker and Company, New York (2007) ISBN 0-8027-1515-X A history of the Latin language.
* Bob Moore and Maxine Moore, '' Dictionary of Latin and Greek Origins: a Comprehensive Guide to the Classical Origins of English Words'', Barnes and Noble, Inc, New York (2000) ISBN 0-7607-2082-7

[[Category:Latin| ]]
[[Category:Romance languages]]
[[Category:Latin Terms/Phrases]]

Latin

2009-02-25T13:17:00Z

LewisNewburn: Improved grammar

'''Latin''' is an [[Indo-European language]] of the [[Italic language]] family. Its closest relative was [[Umbric]], which is now extinct. Latin was the most widely spoken language in the [[Roman Empire]], and is the language from which all the [[Romance languages]] are derived. These languages include [[Spanish]], [[Romanian]], [[Portuguese]], [[Italian]], [[French]] and [[Catalan]], among others. '''Latin''' may also refer to people who speak Romance languages, particularly those in the Caribbean, Central and South America who speak either Spanish or Portuguese.

== Latin Grammar ==

Latin [[grammar]] is marked by an extensive system of [[noun]] [[Grammatical case|cases]] and [[verb]]al inflection. Like nouns, [[adjective]]s also decline and must agree with the nouns they modify in terms of gender, number and case. In addition, Latin also has the full range of other parts of speech, including [[adverb]]s and [[pronoun]]s.

=== Nouns ===

Noun cases are used to indicate the grammatical function of the noun within the sentence. By contrast, English and most other modern Romance languages mostly use the noun's position within the sentence to denote its grammatical function.

Nouns all have grammatical [[grammar|gender]] (either masculine, feminine or neuter). While nouns the correspond to people will generally match the logical gender (for example, ''puella'', meaning "girl" is feminine, while ''puer'', meaning "boy" is masculine), other nouns which do not have a natural gender will still have a grammatical gender (for example, ''arbor'', meaning "tree" is feminine, ''portus'', "harbor" is masculine, and ''bellum'', "war" is neuter).

Each Latin noun falls into one of five declensions, which will determine the endings used to indicate case. Latin has six major grammatical cases as indicated below:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Case
! Grammatical Function
! Example Paradigm (1st Declension Singular)
|-
| '''Nominative'''
| Subject
| Puella
|-
| '''Genitive'''
| Possessive; also used with certain prepositions; translated 'of the ...'
| Puellae
|-
| '''Dative'''
| Indirect Object; also used with certain prepositions; translated 'to/for the...'
| Puellae
|-
| '''Accusative'''
| Direct Object; also used with certain prepositions, mostly concerning motion
| Puellam
|-
| '''Ablative'''
| Used with certain prepositions, mostly concerning location; also indicates agency in passive constructions; translated 'by/with/from the...'
| Puellā
|-
| '''Vocative'''
| Used when directly addressing a person or thing
| Puella
|}

Note that certain cases are identical to others (they may vary in other declensions); in situations where there is more than one possible case for a particular noun, the case must be determined from the context of the sentence. In Latin dictionaries, nouns listed will indicate the nominative and the genitive singular forms of the noun; this enables an experienced reader to determine the rest of that noun's declension, even if he or she has not encountered it before. Thus the verb in the example above would be listed ''puella, -ae'' in a Latin dictionary.

=== Verbs ===

Verbal morphology distinguishes [[voice]] (active and passive), time (past, present, future), [[mood (grammar)|mood]] (indicative, imperative, subjunctive, infinitive), [[aspect (grammar)|aspect]] (simple, perfective, imperfective), and person (first, second, and third person in singular and plural numbers). Time and aspect are normally combined into the verb's tense. Unlike English, which uses auxiliary verbs to create a wide variety of tenses, Latin just has six (four in the subjunctive mood).

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Tense
! Time
! Aspect
! Grammatical Function
! Example Paradigm (3rd Conjugation, first person singular active indicative)
|-
| Present
| Present
| Simple or Imperfective
| Used to indicate both the present simple and present progressive.
| dico
|-
| Imperfect
| Past
| Imperfective
| Used to indicate ongoing actions in the past (which may or may not continue to the present).
| dicebam
|-
| Perfect
| Past
| Simple or Perfective
| Used to indicate both the past simple and specifically completed actions in the past.
| dixi
|-
| Pluperfect
| Past
| Perfective
| Used to indicate actions completed prior to other actions in the past.
| dixeram
|-
| Future
| Future
| Simple
| Used to indicate actions that will occur in the future.
| dicam
|-
| Future Perfect
| Future
| Perfective
| Used to indicate actions that are not complete now, but will be in the future. Usually this means actions that occur after the present but prior to other actions in the future tense.
| dixero
|}

Like nouns, the morphology of verbs in Latin is mostly indicated by regular changes in how the verb is formed, rather than through the use of auxiliary verbs, as is common in English. Most verbs fall into one of four conjugations which determine the form and the endings used to indicate the various aspects of morphology. Unlike nouns however, there are a number of irregular verbs that do not fall into any conjugation.

Latin verbs in the dictionary customarily show their four principal parts, the first person singular present active, the infinitive, the first person singular perfect active, and the supine (a form of verbal noun). Thus, the verb meaning "to say" would be listed in the dictionary as ''dico, dicere, dixi, dictum''. Using this information, an experienced Latinist can derive all of the other forms of the verb.

Latin verbs also have specialized forms including [[gerund]]s (verbal nouns mostly found only in earlier Latin), gerundives (verbal adjectives used to express necessity or obligation), [[participle]]s, and others.

== Syntax ==

Because Latin is so highly inflected, in simple sentences, word order is irrelevant. Thus ''Canis puerum mordet'' (The dog bites the boy) has exactly the same meaning as ''Mordet canis puerum'' or ''Puerum mordet canis''. Nevertheless, Latin did have the tendency to settle into customary word orders, generally with the verb at the end of the sentence. It was this tendency that led to the change from an inflected language to a more analytic one in the case of the Romance languages.

When translating, it is always important to pay close attention to the words at the beginning and end of a sentence. This position connotes the importance of the word to the writer's thought, if not the actual meaning as in English.

Latin poetry, in particular, takes advantage of the flexibility of the word position in order to create pleasing minglings of grammatically unrelated words as word play or to provide secondary meanings. The flexibility of the word position also made it easier for Latin poets to conform to a particular metre.

== Linguistic Descendants ==

The modern Romance languages are descended from Vulgar Latin, which is Latin that was spoken by the common people in the later centuries of the Roman Empire. Changes from Classical to Vulgar Latin included the merger of long /e:/ and /o:/ with short /i/ and /u/, respectively, the loss of /h/ and the accusative nasalisation, and the replacement of cases, tenses, and voices with periphrastic constructions (this change occurred across western Europe). Latin has also given us the alphabet used to write most Western European languages, including English.

Direct modern descendants of Latin include French, Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Romanian, Italian and a variety of less well known languages. Collectively, these are known as Romance languages. In addition, many other languages, such as English and German, have large numbers of Latin loanwords that have been absorbed into the language.

Latin was also the language used by educated elites throughout the [[Middle Ages]] and [[the Renaissance]] in Western Europe. Thus a wide variety of medieval literature, ranging from theological works to histories to scientific works to legal records to literature were all written in Latin, not the author's mother tongue. This had the advantage of facilitating communication between educated people throughout Europe.

Until 1962, Latin was the language in which all Roman [[Catholic]] masses were conducted. A number of Roman Catholics still conduct masses in Latin, and Latin is still the official language of the Roman Catholic Church. Phonologically, Latin is generally similar to other western languages of the Indo-European family.

== Contemporary Latin Use ==

Much of the Latin read nowadays is [[literature]] written during the latter days of the [[Roman Republic]] and during the [[Roman Empire]]. In particular, the first century BC is considered a golden age of Latin literature, with such notable poets as [[Catullus]], [[Horace]] and [[Virgil]], historians such as [[Livy]] and other writers such as [[Cicero]]. Many other Roman writers outside of the first century BC, such as [[Plautus]], [[Seneca]], [[Juvenal]] and [[Tacitus]], are important authors whose works continue to be influential in modern culture and literature. In addition to being enjoyed in their own right, they are also important for the study of Roman history and culture.

In addition, many of the Fathers of the Church, such as [[Augustine]] and [[Gregory the Great]], wrote in Latin. One of the most important translations of the Bible was the Latin [[Vulgate]] by [[Jerome]], which was completed in the fourth century AD and allowed the common people (Lat. ''vulgus'') to understand the Bible in their native language instead of Hebrew or Greek.

Today, Latin remains the official language of the Catholic church although the Vatican II council removed the requirement for services to be conducted in Latin. Ecclesiastical latin, as it is known, is pronounced similar to modern Italian as opposed to classic Roman pronunciation. In the main, however, Latin is not spoken anymore; and as such oral Latin is not taught in most schools; the emphasis is on translation.

Latin was also highly important in the development of law, both because of the highly influential [[Justinian Code|Civil Code of Justinian]] and because of the use of Latin in the composition of the writs used in English [[Common Law]]. The persistence of Latin may be seen in legal terms such as "[[certiorari|writ of certiorari]]" or "[[Adjournment Sine Die|adjournment sine die]]".

Latin (along with Greek) is also used by scientists of all kinds, from biologists to chemists. Latin is particularly used when naming things such as biological species or chemical elements. Latin terms are also used extensively in medicine, recognizing the significance of medieval medical schools.

For many, however, the attractiveness of learning Latin comes from the fact that it shows intellectual ability; many of those who study the language will not enter a field directly related to it.

== Further reading ==

* John F. Collins, ''A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin'', Catholic University of America Press (1985), ISBN 0-8132-0667-7 An introductory Latin text based mainly on medieval ecclesiastical sources.
* Nicholas Ostler, '' Ad Infinitum: a Biography of Latin'', Walker and Company, New York (2007) ISBN 0-8027-1515-X A history of the Latin language.
* Bob Moore and Maxine Moore, '' Dictionary of Latin and Greek Origins: a Comprehensive Guide to the Classical Origins of English Words'', Barnes and Noble, Inc, New York (2000) ISBN 0-7607-2082-7

[[Category:Latin| ]]
[[Category:Romance languages]]
[[Category:Latin Terms/Phrases]]

Muhammad

2009-02-24T15:58:39Z

LewisNewburn:

'''Muhammad''' (or '''Mohammed''' or (archaic) '''Mahomet'''), A.D. 570-632) was the founder of [[Islam]], one of the world's major religions.

Regarded by devout [[Muslim]]s as [[Allah]]'s final and greatest [[prophet]], Muhammad claimed Allah's [[revelation]]s, via the angel [[Gabriel]], that [[Judaism]] and [[Christianity]] had grown corrupt, and that Muhammad was to restore the religion God intended.

In accordance with the Islamic [[hadith]], it is considered proper to add an honorary phrase of "sallalahu aleyhi wasallam (or SAW)," meaning "Peace Be Upon Him (or PBUH)," after speaking Muhammad's name.

== Life of Muhammad==
He began life as a wealthy tradesman, one of the elite of his home city of [[Mecca]].

When he was about 40 years old, Muhammad's early revelations spoke of a need to return to the [[monotheism]] of [[Abraham]]; in this way, at an early age, Muhammad saw himself as reviving an ancient faith, a perceived correction to [[Christianity]] and [[Judaism]], and restoring his people to what he saw as their rightful position as the true founders and heirs of monotheism. In these revelations, submission to the will of God - [[Allah]] - was critical. Muhammad's fledgling religion continued to develop throughout his life, through periodic revelations often relating directly to events currently facing his new faith.

The faith caught on slowly, winning only a few converts in Mecca (the first being his wife, Khadija). In 622 A.D, under increased pressure and ostracism from elders in Mecca, Muhammad began the [[hijra]], an organized exodus of his followers from Mecca to the city of [[Medina]]. [[Muslims]] date the formation of their religion to the ''hijra'' itself, even beginning their dating system at this point.

At Medina, the new Muslims immediately adopted an aggressive stance, seeking to coexist with the [[Jews]] living in Medina on ''his'' terms. The encounter ended badly, though, with Muhammad dividing and conquering the Jewish groups in Medina, ordering the massacre of the [[Qurayza]] [[Jewish]] tribe, as they refused changing their [[religion]] to his submission, after (possibly) fabricating a cause to break what is called by modern historians the [[Compact of Medina]].<ref>Berkey, ''The Formation of Islam''</ref> It is important to note however that Muhammad offered mercy to the tribe many times, but they fought on to the end. <ref>Karen Armstrong, ''A short history of Islam''</ref>

A controversial point of Muhammad's life was his marriage to [[Aisha bint Abi Bakr|Aisha]], daughter of [[Abu Bakr]], who was six years old at the time of marriage.<ref>''Sahih Bukhari'' 5:58:234</ref><ref>Sahih Muslim 8:3311</ref> The marriage was consumated when Aisha was nine.<ref> D. A. Spellberg, Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: the Legacy of A'isha bint Abi Bakr, Columbia University Press, 1994, p. 40</ref> The narratives describing her age at marriage as six are narrated by Aisha herself. Though Aisha was known to use numerical substitution in other hadith, such as in the hadith of Laylat Al-Qadr where she substituted 1 for 21 and 3 for 23, which is a common way of referencing numbers in Arabic when the base number is established. Some scholars argue that she could have been speaking in such numerical substitution when narrating the Hadith regarding her age at marriage, thus rendering 16 as 6 and 19 as 9.<ref>Hakim Niaz Ahmad, '' تحقیق عمرعا،شہ صدیقہ (Research on the age of Ayesha)'', Mashkoor Academy, [[Karachi]].</ref> There is additional disagreement over her age at marriage, and a number of Islamic scholars believe that Aisha was older at the time of marriage. However, it is worth noting that at the time, and for thousands of years before and hundreds of years after, early marriage of a girl to a powerful man was very common. Aisha reached puberty at the age of nine, which is when the marriage was consummated.<ref>Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi, ''[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Age_of_Aisha Age of Aisha]'', Al-Rahman Publishing Trust, [[Karachi]]</ref><ref>Maulana Muhammad Ali, ''The Living Thoughts of the Prophet Muhammad'', p. 30, 1992, Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat, ISBN 0-913321-19-2</ref>

== After Muhammad's Death ==

Muhammad's death at an early age caused the splintering of his religion into new sects, over the question of succession. The groups called themselves the [[Sunnis]] and the [[Shiite|Shi'as]]. Many attribute this split to the high degree to which authority was centered in the powerful character of Muhammad himself: without his powerful personality, the movement could not survive intact.<ref>[[Bernard Lewis]], ''What Went Wrong''</ref>

The failure or splintering of movements built around a charismatic leader is a recurring sociological problem, often studied by psychologists, and referred to as the problem of the [[routinization of charisma]]. [[Christianity]] faced the same problem, and many attribute the conquest of this problem to the leadership of the apostle [[Paul]].<ref>Maximillian Weber, ''Theory of Social and Economic Organization,'' in the chapter "The Nature of Charismatic Authority and its Routinization," see also Len Oakes, "Prophetic Charisma: The Psychology of Revolutionary Religious Personalities"</ref>.

==See Also==
*[[Islam]]
*[[Muhammad cartoons controversy]]

== References ==

<references/>

== Notes ==

HIR | Muhammad's massacre of the Jewish tribe Banu Qurayzah [http://www.hirhome.com/islam/art.htm]

[[Category:Islam]]
[[Category:Religious People]]
[[Category:Muslims]]

And Did those Feet

2009-02-24T15:56:23Z

LewisNewburn:

'''And did those feet in ancient time''' is an English patriotic poem written by William Blake in the 19th Century. It tells of the legend that the Lord Jesus traveled to England, then under heathen Roman rule. 'Jerusalem' is used as a metaphor for the kingdom of heaven, and the poem exhorts the audience to fight for a reassertion of God's rule on earth. The poem can also be seen as a lament for a time in which decency, tolerance and respect for fellow man were present among all.

The Hymn Jerusalem, based upon the poem, is often sung at the annual conferences of the [[Conservative Party]].

==Text==

The text is as follows:
:And did those feet in ancient time
::walk upon England’s mountains green?
:And was the holy Lamb of God
::on England’s pleasant pastures seen?
:And did the [[countenance divine]]
::shine forth upon our clouded hills?
:And was Jerusalem builded here
::among these dark Satanic Mills?
 
:Bring me my bow of burning gold!
::Bring me my arrows of desire!
:Bring me my spear! O clouds, unfold!
::Bring me my chariot of fire!
:I will not cease from mental fight,
::nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
:till we have built Jerusalem
::In England’s green and pleasant Land.
[[Category:Patriotic songs]]

Talk:And Did those Feet

2009-02-24T15:55:37Z

LewisNewburn:

This is one of my favourite poems, especially when set to the music of Parry and Elgar [[User:DidThoseFeet|DidThoseFeet]] 11:20, 9 February 2008 (EST)

:It's actually called ''"Jerusalem"''! Only those ignorant of the title would call it otherwise. Blake's poem is part of a longer work about Milton...but it appears in anthologies as ''"Jerusalem"'' and as such in CDs, sheet music and Parry work lists etc., Can this be changed please?
::(And Elgar had nothing to do with it.) [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 16:02, 21 October 2008 (EDT)

Can someone authorise the removal of the anti-Islamic rhetoric from this article? Neutrality, anyone?

And Did those Feet

2009-02-24T15:52:35Z

LewisNewburn:

'''And did those feet in ancient time''' is an English patriotic poem written by William Blake in the 19th Century. It tells of the legend that the Lord Jesus traveled to England, then under heathen Roman rule. 'Jerusalem' is used as a metaphor for the kingdom of heaven, and the poem exhorts the audience to fight for a reassertion of God's rule on earth. Despite a clear decline in honest Christian values in England, this poem is still remarkably popular. Unfortunately, few people take the sentiments to heart, and England is undergoing a desperate moral decline. It is to be hoped that people will take inspiration from this poem, and its martial tone, and fight for a reestablishment of Christianity at the centre of both England, and the rest of the world, driving out the Islamics that infect the heart of our society. The poem can also be seen as a lament for a time in which decency, tolerance and respect for fellow man were present among all.

The Hymn Jerusalem, based upon the poem, is often sung at the annual conferences of the [[Conservative Party]].

==Text==

The text is as follows:
:And did those feet in ancient time
::walk upon England’s mountains green?
:And was the holy Lamb of God
::on England’s pleasant pastures seen?
:And did the [[countenance divine]]
::shine forth upon our clouded hills?
:And was Jerusalem builded here
::among these dark Satanic Mills?
 
:Bring me my bow of burning gold!
::Bring me my arrows of desire!
:Bring me my spear! O clouds, unfold!
::Bring me my chariot of fire!
:I will not cease from mental fight,
::nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
:till we have built Jerusalem
::In England’s green and pleasant Land.
[[Category:Patriotic songs]]

Virgil

2009-02-11T15:37:13Z

LewisNewburn:

[[Image:Gjcjyf68.jpg|right|thumb|A bust of Virgil, from the entrance to his tomb in Naples, Italy.]]
'''Virgil''' (Publius Vergilius Maro), who was born at Mantua in [[Italy]] on October 15th, 70 BCE and died on September 21st, 19 BCE, was a well known [[Roman]] [[poet]] & [[philosopher]]. He studied at the rhetorical schools of Cremona, Milan, and finally [[Rome]]. Maecenas, the Augustan socialite and (in)famous homosexual, was his patron and he was friends with [[Octavian]], the future first emperor of Rome.

Three of Virgil's works are known to have been of note:

* ''Eclogues'' are pastoral poems about his own day
* ''Georgics'' is a didactic poem on farming, using the world of the farmer as a model for the world at large.
* ''[[Aeneid]]'' was the work he spent the last decade of his life on. It was an epic [[poem]], the about the wanderings of [[Aeneas]] after the [[Trojan War]] and his travels to found the city Rome, which would one day become the Roman Empire. It is this work for which he is most known in history.

In [[Dante]]'s classic [[The Divine Comedy]], it is Virgil who as the noble [[pagan]] and symbol of wisdom who is the man to lead him through the lower levels of his journey, showing the respect that he still had in European culture over 1000 years after his death.

==Sources==

The New American Desk Encyclopedia, Penguin Group, 1989

[[Category:Ancient Rome]]
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:philosophers]]
[[Category:Poets]]

User:LewisNewburn

2009-02-11T15:29:20Z

LewisNewburn:

Hey, hey. I am a student living in London, England. I am currently in my last year of secondary school and have an offer to read Classics at St Hugh's College, Oxford, for which (inshallah) I shall get the required grades.

User:LewisNewburn

2009-02-11T15:28:53Z

LewisNewburn: New page: Hey, hey. I am a student living in London, England. I am currently in my last year of secondary school and have an offer to read Classics at St Hugh's College, Oxford, for which (inshallah...