Skip to content
December 22, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Why atheism is self-contradictory and not rational as a worldview

So thats at least 7 different reasons that atheism is self-contradictory under a rationalist framework. Atheism, materialism, and naturalism undermine rationality, not add to it. I would think those would be seven red flags—which would cause me to question the underlying foundation of materialism and naturalism, which is the basis of most forms of modern atheism.

Finally, here are some questions that might help you “Know thyself” with respect to the ideology of naturalism, materialism, and atheism:

Nathan Ketsdever’s answer to What critical thinking, skeptical, or self-reflective questions should atheists ask about atheism?

August 27, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Christianity and Emotionally Intelligent Leaders

1) Virtue/Wisdom/Leadership (culture & team)
2) Goal Setting
3) Time Management and Productivity
4) Conflict Resolution
5) Attitude & Mindset & Fear
6) Developing Quality Relationships
7) Developing Community
8) Persuasion/Communication (key, along with some critical thinking)
9) Ethical/Virtuous communication
10) Servant Leadership (service experience & consciousness awareness)
11) Self-reflection (self-coaching)
12) Passion/motivation (including quotes)
13) Innovation & Creativity
14) Problem Solving
15) Decision-making & Critical thinking

August 26, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Emotional Intelligence Leadership Bibliography and Resources

Articles on Emotional Intelligence:

Emotional Intelligence: What it is and why it matters (link)

Compassion at Work (link)

Books on Emotional Intelligence:

Emotionally Intelligent Workplace (link)

How to Be Happy at Work (link)

Other Emotional Intelligence Resources:

Article Reprints (link)

Reports (link)

More than Sound (link)

Emotional Intelligence Store (link)

Emotionally Intelligent Consortrium (link)

James Bailey

Arnauldo Comuffo

Jane Dutton

Olga Epitropaki

Cary Cherniss

Dennis Encarnation

Lynda Gratton

Margaret Hopkins

John Kotter

Kathy Kram

Peter Kuriloff

Babis Mainemelis

Tom Malnight

Janet Patti

Ken Rhee

Greg Shea

Kenwyn Smith

Robert Stern

Scott Taylor

Susan Wheelan

Jane Wheeler



August 19, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

A great tip on using identity categories that increases truth and decreases stereotypes.

I apologize. I don’t know the speaker in this case. Humans use identity categories. Ideally, we use them humbly and continently. Perhaps in the orginal post Dev could have added something that noted the specific contingency of the identity category he was using, but the alternative is zero talking about people as more than individuals and that ultimately neglects community and speaking to larger trends. That kind of nuance can add to our discussions and even our logical appeals. My debate background draws me to the notion of the use of qualifiers, that point to the limits of our arguments and assumptions, to make the argument stronger. For instance, clearly the argument “all X are Y” has the potential to have lots of counter arguments. You make it a stronger argument by narrowing the focus and/or providing qualifiers. So, nuance, qualifiers, and humility are all a way forward.

August 7, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Famous Quotes on Courage, Creativity, and Leadership

“If you hear the dogs, keep going. If you see the torches in the woods, keep going. If there’s shouting after you, keep going. Don’t ever stop. Keep going. If you want a taste of freedom, keep going.”

Harriet Tubman

For it’s not light that is needed, but fire; it’s not the gentle shower, but thunder. We need the storm, the whirlwind and the earthquake in our hearts.

Frederick Douglas

“Perhaps it is better to wake up after all, even to suffer, rather than to remain a dupe to illusions all one’s life.”

Kate Chopin

“If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!”

Soren Kierkegaard

“There is a sacredness in tears. They are not the mark of weakness, but of power. They speak more eloquently than ten thousand tongues. They are the messengers of overwhelming grief, of deep contrition, and of unspeakable love.”

Washington Irving

“Life always bursts the boundaries of formulas. Defeat may prove to have been the only path to resurrection, despite its ugliness. I take it for granted that to create a tree I condemn a seed to rot. If the first act of resistance comes too late it is doomed to defeat. But it is, nevertheless, the awakening of resistance. Life may grow from it as from a seed.”

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

“Everything that’s lovely is
But a brief, dreamy kind of delight.”

Y.B. Yeats

July 26, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Is truth relative?

The Practical Implications:

Truth is the basis of justice. Truth is also the basis of survival. If there is no such thing as truth libraries, books, the internet, reference texts, and school and the university are a waste of time.

Math is also pretty objective: 2 + 2 = 4. I don’t think that ever changes. Thats pretty objective. Are you saying math isn’t true? Is 2 + 2 equal to something else today or right now?

Lets look at the issue contextually and more concretely:

A good example might be apple pie. People make apple pie differently. People have different conceptions about what an apple pie is, but we still have shared agreement. In fact this applies to cooking almost across the board: steaks, hamburgers, pizza, chicken tenders, chicken pot pie, etc.. (almost ad infinitum).

Every dictionary definitions is an area where there is some disagreement, but also some pretty amazing clarity, because they are printed and no one launches critiques about the latest version of Webster’s beyond a word or two—certainly not all say 10 million words. No, that would be absurd, but thats the kind of absurdity that a relativist proposes.

Its worth noting that there is a difference between the ideal and the real, but you don’t give up on the real or the ideal just because the real is always going to be partially imperfect.

The map never fits the territory exactly, but we don’t stop using maps, because they help us move forward. Maps are imperfect, but useful in reaching the truth.

The assumption behind the relativist’s argument is that if we can’t perceive objective truth it doesn’t exist or it doesn’t matter. Those are both false assumptions and false dilemmas.

The above proves there is not really such a thing as a relativist, because everyone lives as if there is some notion of the truth and that other beings on this planet should in some sense agree with your definition—that is they have notions of expectations about other individuals.

In fact, in a world of subjectivity, where humans don’t agree, we need that Objective truth that only a God can provide. That is you need someone higher to appeal to when there are differences of perspective or opinion.

A World without Ethics:

Truth relativists ultimately have to be moral relativists and thats a dead end, because it undermines our ability to have rights, justice, or a US Constitution. It undermines the ability to have duties, responsibilities, and ultimately civilization. Ethical objectivity (or something very akin to it) is the glue of relationship and civilization. We need shared understandings to have common ground and enough commonality and tranquility to have a peaceful community.

And if we look at the cultures which lack an understanding of respect for life or rights or human dignity—its precisely those societies that are falling apart. So the evening news is a rather large manifesto to not only the value of truth, but also the value of ethical virtue, ethical objectivity, and ultimately fairness and justice. When we sacrifice objectivity—the bottom falls out of the overall security of the people and rule of law—and with it goes pretty much everything we hold dear as a people.

July 25, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

12 Logical Reasons to Reject Naturalism, Materialism, and Scientism

Active denying.  Active denying that:
1) yields irrational and contradictory premises and principles
2) destroys all purpose and meaning
3) destroys all thought, ideas, decision-making and discovery
4) destroys ethics
5) destroys free will
6) destroys truth
7) destroys identity
8) greater majority of no one lives like this (profoundly anti-human and anti-progress and anti-reality)
9) self-fulfilling process
10) what it ignores
11) expertism and scientism
12) Naturalism and scientism and materialism/physicalism