"Here, to her horror, she finds outsized and gruesome paintings of the punishments of hell. Demons and devils bounce about with great delight, finding all sorts of creative ways to torture their human subjects. As the student leaves the Louvre, the images of suffering haunt her. She wonders how a society could make punishment such a spectacle."
I mean, I'm not a history expert, but I'm pretty sure that medieval societies didn't just make a public spectacle out of violence/punishment by portraying hell in artworks; they also made a public spectacle out of violence/punishment by *violently punishing people publicly*. As far as I can tell, widespread belief in hell did not prevent this from occurring, and I'd have to imagine that some of these instances of medieval public punishment were a tad more extreme than your example of online commentators rhetorically "punishing" someone accused of sexual harassment at the very least.
For this point to be more convincing it would be worth providing some specific data showing that cruel and unusual punishment is less common across the board in societies with widespread belief in hell. The closest this article gets to that is pointing out the evils of communist countries and some theoretical examples of a theoretical girl watching videos of ICE agents and courtroom television shows. But that ain't enough. While this sort of contemporary spectacle may be fairly criticized, it is hardly unique to contemporary secular society; just look at the stocks, pillories, and torturous trials by ordeals the medievals used. Apparently, their belief in hell didn't stop it from occurring.
Some « unfalsifiable » propositions are so blatantly in contradiction with everything we know about the world that we can confidently say they’re false, and nothing else
If you're comparing any aspect of modern life to hell with a straight face (maybe there are a couple of exceptions, like the Holocaust, but social media is definitely not it) I don't think you actually believe in Hell in the way most Christian churches that believe in Hell mean it (I know less about Islam, sorry, and most people who believe in Hell in the US are Christian). Hell is supposed to be the most painful thing possible. It transcends any kind of pain or other negative experience we can feel on this Earth immeasurably. The religious analogue of the sorts of mild hurt we get from "the modern workplace" (actually, this seems like a benefit to me) would probably be Purgatory under a Christian worldview.
I personally do not believe in Hell and never have (I'm agnostic about the afterlife and universalist if there is one), and I'm also not particularly inclined to change my mind about it out of political expediency, but it still seems like if you're going to make an argument based on this it should at least be based on the conception of Hell most people actually have.
Is this serious or an April Fool’s joke in October ?
Why am I subscribed to such a silly channel ?
Any kind of afterlife, be it hell or heaven or whatever, is not only a neurological and biological impossibility, it’s physically impossible as it would violate the most basic laws of physics we all agree on. Get over it, get an education and start appreciating to live in reality, with all the mysteries, problems and marvels it brings. Theres no place in modern culture for the nonsense this article spews.
"Here, to her horror, she finds outsized and gruesome paintings of the punishments of hell. Demons and devils bounce about with great delight, finding all sorts of creative ways to torture their human subjects. As the student leaves the Louvre, the images of suffering haunt her. She wonders how a society could make punishment such a spectacle."
I mean, I'm not a history expert, but I'm pretty sure that medieval societies didn't just make a public spectacle out of violence/punishment by portraying hell in artworks; they also made a public spectacle out of violence/punishment by *violently punishing people publicly*. As far as I can tell, widespread belief in hell did not prevent this from occurring, and I'd have to imagine that some of these instances of medieval public punishment were a tad more extreme than your example of online commentators rhetorically "punishing" someone accused of sexual harassment at the very least.
For this point to be more convincing it would be worth providing some specific data showing that cruel and unusual punishment is less common across the board in societies with widespread belief in hell. The closest this article gets to that is pointing out the evils of communist countries and some theoretical examples of a theoretical girl watching videos of ICE agents and courtroom television shows. But that ain't enough. While this sort of contemporary spectacle may be fairly criticized, it is hardly unique to contemporary secular society; just look at the stocks, pillories, and torturous trials by ordeals the medievals used. Apparently, their belief in hell didn't stop it from occurring.
The proposition: Hell exists, does not have a truth-value and cannot be falsified. Unfalsifiable propositions should be kept out of politics.
Some « unfalsifiable » propositions are so blatantly in contradiction with everything we know about the world that we can confidently say they’re false, and nothing else
If you're comparing any aspect of modern life to hell with a straight face (maybe there are a couple of exceptions, like the Holocaust, but social media is definitely not it) I don't think you actually believe in Hell in the way most Christian churches that believe in Hell mean it (I know less about Islam, sorry, and most people who believe in Hell in the US are Christian). Hell is supposed to be the most painful thing possible. It transcends any kind of pain or other negative experience we can feel on this Earth immeasurably. The religious analogue of the sorts of mild hurt we get from "the modern workplace" (actually, this seems like a benefit to me) would probably be Purgatory under a Christian worldview.
I personally do not believe in Hell and never have (I'm agnostic about the afterlife and universalist if there is one), and I'm also not particularly inclined to change my mind about it out of political expediency, but it still seems like if you're going to make an argument based on this it should at least be based on the conception of Hell most people actually have.
The content of religion is a composite of language and sense perception and doesn’t refer to anything outside of intersubjective agreement.
I don’t even believe in the supernatural.
Hell has also inspired a lot of really cool music, which is surely a point in its favor!
lol true
Is this serious or an April Fool’s joke in October ?
Why am I subscribed to such a silly channel ?
Any kind of afterlife, be it hell or heaven or whatever, is not only a neurological and biological impossibility, it’s physically impossible as it would violate the most basic laws of physics we all agree on. Get over it, get an education and start appreciating to live in reality, with all the mysteries, problems and marvels it brings. Theres no place in modern culture for the nonsense this article spews.