Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit Socrates1's column >>

SOCRATES1

Articles Posted: 183  Links Seeded: 270
Member Since: 5/2008  Last Seen: 5/16/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Comparing The Least "White" Countries to The Most "White" Countries-Do We Need Whites to Thrive as a Society?

Fri Jan 20, 2012 10:47 PM EST
religion, quality, islam, freedom, christian, proof, statistics, independence, atheism, beliefs, grisham, scientific-method, fallacies
By Socrates1
Advertise | AdChoices

I'm writing this article in response to a recent article titled, Comparing Least Religious Countries With Most Religious - Do We Need Religion to Thrive as a Society?  The article purports to prove that the less religion, the "better" the country, as well as the more religion, the "worse" the country.  The author's conclusion is that a society does not need to be religious to be moral or to thrive.  I might mention here that the original argument was not that religion was required, but that religion was actually a hinderance, which I would suggest is a somewhat disingenuous juxtaposition in itself.  His statistics also, in my view, do not take a number of other factors into account, not the least of which is of which religion are we speaking, which shows a certain bias by suggesting that "all religions are alike".  It also does not take into account whether the particular society continues to coast on past religious instruction which, in effect, continues to provide the foundation for its system of morality.

In any event, and I ask that you read this entire article prior to coming to any conclusions regarding my intent in writing it, statistics were presented that the author claimed proved his case.  The question to be discussed here is NOT which claims are true, but whether the statistics provided in either article should be deemed conclusive proof for either assertion.

The assertion in this article, as reflected in the title, is that, on balance, "White" countries, by virtue of color alone, are better than less White countries.  Whether or not one wishes to argue that case is irrelevent in that, once again, that question is NOT the subject of this article.  I provide the link to the list which is rather interesting on its own, regardless of the purpose of this article.  http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/08/15/interactive-infographic-of-the-worlds-best-countries.html

The top 10 counties are all "White" countries with the exception of Japan.

None of the bottom 10 countries are primarily White, nor have they ever been.

Conclusion?  The color of one's skin is a key determinent in the quality of the country.

 

The point to this article?  Neither article has proved its thesis.

 

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Socrates1's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: Centervine, DA's ON Newsvine, EthicsVine, FOX NEWS, FoxNews, Free Thinkers, Invisible Viners, Libertarians, The Conservative Vine
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (21)
Socrates1

Read the article FIRST, prior to making any comments based solely on any assumptions you may be making based on the title alone.

  • 5 votes
Reply#1 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 10:49 PM EST
hard2port

Try not to burst a blood vessel blowing that rightwing-racist dogwhistle so hard. And the so called christians wonder about the pushback on their self-righteous rhetoric in America. Even Jesus thinks they're @!$%#s.

  • 8 votes
#1.1 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:39 PM EST
bluearcher

How could this article be more generalized?

Using categorization such as "white" society and equating skin color to success minimizes and ignores so many various aspects of culture, norms, morals, etc.

  • 5 votes
#1.2 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:28 AM EST
I'm Ringo

Just from reading the handful of comments already posted, it appears that not everyone read the article before posting

  • 5 votes
#1.3 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:51 AM EST
Socrates1

bluearcher....well, yes, that was my point. Did you read the entire article? Obviously hard2port did not.

I'm Ringo....I guess we were posting at the same time....agreed.

  • 2 votes
#1.4 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:52 AM EST
bluearcher

Did you read the entire article?

Yes, and it fails to prove your "thesis" in a way that the article on religion does not.

Using the generalization of race\skin color doesn't come comparatively close to the tenets\creeds\beliefs of archaic religions.

A skin color is not reflective of non beneficial human interaction in the way religious dogma and teachings of exclusivity. Sure racism exists but does not have a set ideology in print to claim divine providence.

Next you will be telling us that racism is a religion.

  • 5 votes
#1.5 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 5:10 AM EST
Socrates1

lol. I'm sorry you are unable to get past the references and understand that what you suggest is true in both instances. Really a bit ironic. The very same disconnect you see between my examples of race and religion emphasizes and makes my point.

    #1.6 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:45 PM EST
    Reply
    jrone

    Is Detroit considered a country now?

      Reply#2 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:51 AM EST
      Grisham

      Ha ha! Pretty funny, Soc. I wasn't aware that skin color had any impact on a societal level like religion. I guess you think skin color might effect the behavior of people. Pretty racist when you think about it like that actually.

      By the way, I didn't say religion was the sole cause of those things. I specifically said: 'By no means does this prove indefinitely that religion is the cause of these things, but I think it's rather curious how it played out.'

      I think maybe the article hit pretty close to the heart since you felt emotionally motivated enough to write up a horrible comparison article that tries to equate skin color with a societal/cultural thing like religion.

      • 5 votes
      Reply#3 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:55 AM EST
      Grisham

      btw: I think you missed the entire point of the article. The article was a response to an assertion made that without religion a society will fall apart. Nobody made the assertion that white people can't build a successful society so your entire premise is completely flawed. The original article wasn't meant to show that religious societies are worse than non-religious. It was meant to show that non-religious societies can be successful as well, thus debunking the assertion that religion is needed to have a successful society.

      • 6 votes
      #3.1 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 1:10 AM EST
      Socrates1

      Grisham...

      I wasn't aware that skin color had any impact on a societal level like religion.

      According to my stats it does....See the problem?

      Also..you original premise when quite a bit further than that, as I mention above.

      Thanks for commenting....:)

      • 2 votes
      #3.2 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:55 AM EST
      Grisham

      Also..you original premise when quite a bit further than that, as I mention above.

      Then your reading and comprehension skills are even worse than I thought. I wrote the article. I should know what it was about.

      According to my stats it does....See the problem?

      I see the problem. You have a flawed premise and are misrepresenting what I said and making an ignorant attempt to link skin color with debunking an assertion that religion (which again is a cultural thing not a racial one) is needed to have a successful society.

      How you don't see that is beyond me.

      • 4 votes
      #3.3 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:02 AM EST
      Socrates1

      Sorry, Grisham. The problem is that the very same thing is true in both articles, without digging a bit deeper, neither one can be claimed as true.

      As to skin color vs religion...doesn't matter....as you suggest, the variable has to have relevance, not just be present...or absent.

      as an aside....are you now claiming that you do not see religion as a negative component of society?

      • 2 votes
      #3.4 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:08 AM EST
      Grisham

      You know what, I used to enjoy the conversations we had but I don't appreciate being directly misrepresented. I also think it's cowardly act of you to not make this bogus point in the original article. I've pointed out to you how it's a misrepresentation and why it is. Disagreeing with me is one thing, but misrepresenting me and what I actually said is a completely different issue.

      I'm done talking with you on NV. If you make a comment I will ignore it from now on and allow others to engage you in debate.

      • 6 votes
      #3.5 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:22 AM EST
      Socrates1

      Hmm. I'm sorry too. I just could no longer ignore examples such as this where the irrelevant statistics are presented as somehow proving a particular premise.

      As to this being a cowardly act? I don't see it that way. First, I linked to your article. Second, I did nothing behind your back. Third, it was in reference to an article that you yourself admit was a result of my thoughts, and thus I could say your article was a reaction to me and should have been a comment on the thread rather than an article. All that being said, some are better at throwing punches than receiving them and this article was not meant to be taken personally, but rather to point out the fallacious nature of many of the arguments I see here on Newsvine. It's a question of logic, or lack thereof, which goes to the heart of the question of who really applies it.

      As to debate? I was under the impression that debate virtually required the presentation of two different views.

      • 1 vote
      #3.6 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:54 PM EST
      Reply
      lifeisgood43

      Wow and a WTF too. So white people religions are better than everyone else. Is that what you are saying.

      • 1 vote
      Reply#4 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:36 AM EST
      TVOR-1229297

      Actually, he was making the point that Grisham's premise about religion and successful countries was as false as comparing whiteness and national success.

      • 3 votes
      #4.1 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:23 AM EST
      Reply
      Marshall James

      I see the point you were trying to get across, find it correct.

      the problem with the world is that we try to separate people into groups....we need to look at people as individuals.

      then there wouldnt be all this bickering.

      • 2 votes
      Reply#5 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 10:11 AM EST
      teufelhund

      Soc,

      Another article you write in which many people seem unable to get beyond the title. It most likely wasn't your intent to amuse anyone, but I think it's fuk'n hilarious.

      The question to be discussed here is NOT which claims are true, but whether the statistics provided in either article should be deemed conclusive proof for either assertion.

      I want to address this in terms of the other article, which I read as well. The otherr article provides a gallup poll for as the foundation of the article. I went to the gallup site and read the how the poll was conducted. The poll claims to compare religious with non religious with the determining factor on what qualified as religious or not religious was wheter the poll respondants claimed that religion played a part in their daily lives.

      You make the point in your article about which religion is eing refererred to as well as the "all religions are the same" bit. I'm in agreement. It's key to making the point of the article. Additionally, what constitutes "a part of daily life"?

      Is a christian from the southern states of the U.S. who gives a shoutout to jc over their daily meals religiously comparable to someone from the middle east who prays 5 times a day and wipes his ass with rocks IAW the sunnah of the profit?

      I think this is the starting point of errors in the poll and using it to support the article makes no sense.

      • 2 votes
      Reply#6 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:47 AM EST
      Socrates1

      Thanks..(really to all of you). I'm afraid I might have made my point too well, but than the original Socrates was not the most well-liked person of his time for doing the very same thing.

        #6.1 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 2:57 PM EST
        Reply
        sambonner

        Socrates, you don't understand - the arguments that atheists and 'progressives' make are inherently more valuable and more correct purely on the basis of their nobility. Since your intentions are not noble, your conclusions are inaccurate.

        • 3 votes
        Reply#7 - Sat Jan 21, 2012 5:01 PM EST
        Leave a Comment:
        You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
        You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
        (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
        Newsvine Privacy Statement
        As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
        FUN STUFF:
        • Leaderboard |
        • E-Mail Alerts |
        • Top of the Vine |
        • Newsvine Live |
        • Newsvine Archives |
        • The Greenhouse |
        COMPANY STUFF:
        • Code of Honor |
        • Company Info |
        • Contact Us |
        • Jobs |
        • User Agreement |
        • Privacy Policy |
        • About our ads
        LEGAL STUFF:
        • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
        • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
        • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com