Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not quite sure what the OP is really asking because there are so many variables here. "Would you choose religion over nonreligion"? First of all in which circumstances? What do you consider 'nonreligion'? Nonreligion does not mean atheism. The term nonreligious can mean several things such as a belief in god without adhering with any religion/s (such as myself), it can mean agnosticism (which is a varied term within itself), it could mean spiritual but not religious, it could also mean deism and so forth.
I guess I would choose 'nonreligion' over religion since that's my stance to begin with and my own personal philosophy. Depending upon the choices given to me I usually will either classify myself as 'spiritual but not religious', 'other' or 'nonreligious'.
Paradox73 raises a good point. What exactly are we talking about? Perhaps each of us should describe what we mean when we say "religion", and assume that each poster means the lack thereof when that same poster says "nonreligion".
To give my definition, I use 'religion' to mean 'a group-practice asserting a given set of philosophical stances oriented towards a method of living and attempting a reverential attitude towards the same'. It may help to illustrate the point to mention that if you remove the 'group-' part, I would consider that a definition of spirituality.
I advocate the use of that which adheres to the above definition when those same appear to be generally salubrious. By that reasoning, I support religion, but not all religion automatically, as not all religion fits that criteria.
MysticPhD> In reference to your comment "I do not waste time discussing with the close-minded unthinking fundies...". I can't agree with that approach. It takes patience, often a lot, and it takes a commitment to compassionate and sincere respect, and that takes familiarity, but it can always be done. With time, there is no way to fail but to stop trying.
To be fair though, a great deal of my adult education has been oriented towards learning how, so I'm certainly not saying it's easy.
MysticPhD> In reference to your comment "I do not waste time discussing with the close-minded unthinking fundies...". I can't agree with that approach. It takes patience, often a lot, and it takes a commitment to compassionate and sincere respect, and that takes familiarity, but it can always be done. With time, there is no way to fail but to stop trying.
To be fair though, a great deal of my adult education has been oriented towards learning how, so I'm certainly not saying it's easy.
The issue is more complex than that, Bunni . . . the lack of understanding of reality on the part of most atheist fundies presents an impenetrable barrier. They seem incapable of the level of abstract thought necessary to "know that they don't know" (Aristotle's "two-fold ignorance"). QED
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo
Yet the massive overlap can not fail to escape your notice unless you really try to ignore it... given that beliefs you have about god are contingent on the entity actually existing. If it does not exist then anything the religious claim about what it does / has done / thinks / believes / wants etc are clearly all bunk and made up too. That it exists IS one of the religious beliefs about it.
Beliefs about ANYTHING are not contingent upon anything . . . they are simply "beliefs about." But more relevant to your non-point . . . they certainly have no bearing whatsoever on the existence or non-existence of anything. So using them as arguments in the case for the existence of anything are pointless.
Quote:
You however seem keen to want everyone just to ACCEPT it exists as default... for no reason whatsoever... and then go on from there. This is not an assumption available to us to make though as there is no evidence, argument, data, or reasons forthcoming to lend any credence to the assumption.
The OP determined the focus of the discussion. When you are told to discuss from a given perspective . . . usually that is what is done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
I do not waste time discussing with the close-minded unthinking fundies for the same reason I am terminating any further attempts to penetrate the unthinking armor you are wearing. They do not read posts critically and think about their answers before spouting their rote dismissals . . . neither do you seem to. IF you ACCEPT that NATURE (universe, whatever) is the Source of everything that exists . . . you accept that God exists, period. Nature is an artificial distinction created by the religious persecution of science. What you believe about Nature's attributes, etc. are your "beliefs about" God. Have a nice day.
My point is perfectly valid. People believe things about a god such as what it wants or what it loves. They do this by assuming that the entity exists.
So there IS an over lap between religious beliefs and belief in god because the fact that this entity exists IS one of those beliefs and the rest of those beliefs are contingent upon it.
You clearly want to assume that god exists and go from there. This is not valid because you have nothing to lend any credence to the idea this entity does exist. The best you can do is play with english definitions and simply dilute the meaning of "god" so much that it means pretty much everything... and so it must exist.
Clearly however when people talk of "god" they are talking about an intelligent being, with Intent and a Will. There is however nothing forthcoming whenever I ask to suggest such an entity exists.
The people who say "god is love god exists" or "god is just nature so god exists" are essentially saying nothing... just playing with definitions to the point where their definition of god is so dilute that it exists by default.
This tirade is as vacuous as I said it was. You have no explanations for so much of what you call "laws" (physics,chemistry, biology) or "nature" and "natural;" have no basis for the existence of consciousness; have no basis for life itself; etc. . . . yet you presume to act as though we must just ACCEPT them by default as support for YOUR "non-God non-explanations" . . . and NOT as proof of the existence of God. ALL so you can claim there is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of God. No sale!
the lack of understanding of reality on the part of most atheist fundies presents an impenetrable barrier. They seem incapable of the level of abstract thought necessary to "know that they don't know"
That's just the problem; The assumption that there is an 'impenetrable barrier' or that they (no matter who 'they' are) are 'incapable', is a self-defeating attitude. Worse, if they detect that you consider them 'incapable' they will tend to wright-off your opinion.
Nozzferrahhtoo, maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but when you said, 'So there IS an over lap between religious beliefs and belief in god because the fact that this entity exists IS one of those beliefs and the rest of those beliefs are contingent upon it.' did you mean to be so general about it? There are plenty of religions which don't match your description. The clearest being religions which contain atheism amongst their beliefs.
Trying to get back to the central concept; What are other people's definitions of religious or non-religious? Do people agree with the one I gave?
Last edited by BunniRabbi; 02-15-2011 at 02:00 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
