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.
Would it be fair to say (from an atheist perspective) that some religious people can be "realistic" about most things while being unrealistic about religion?
I'm not surprised. A muddied perspective can only get one so far, and reveal that everything in the world isn't just black and white. When you present a generalized arguments as you did, I would challenge ANY of your example of such realists you speak for.
I'm not surprised. A muddied perspective can only get one so far, and reveal that everything in the world isn't just black and white.
Oh, I know the world isn't just black and white. I'm pretty sure it isn't my inability to read, that is giving me trouble understanding what you said. Perhaps it's the way you presented it.
Quote:
When you present a generalized arguments as you did, I would challenge ANY of your example of such realists you speak for.
Well, you might be able to conclude from what I've said so far, that I don't feel the need to provide "examples". It's too much like proof or evidence. Which to me is icky, and yucky.
Oh, I know the world isn't just black and white. I'm pretty sure it isn't my inability to read, that is giving me trouble understanding what you said. Perhaps it's the way you presented it.
I don't doubt your ability to read, but to comprehend. Or, may be it is the way I presented it, starting with using Buddhism to make a point. After all, it deals more with realities than with superstitions. So, you could point at a realist who is religious and I can point at a religious who is utopian. The latter are pretty easy to spot BTW. Try it.
Quote:
Well, you might be able to conclude from what I've said so far, that I don't feel the need to provide "examples". It's too much like proof or evidence. Which to me is icky, and yucky.
Well, sticky matters are generally icky and yucky when they put you in a bind. You've learned from those facts.
I don't doubt your ability to read, but to comprehend. Or, may be it is the way I presented it, starting with using Buddhism to make a point. After all, it deals more with realities than with superstitions. So, you could point at a realist who is religious and I can point at a religious who is utopian. The latter are pretty easy to spot BTW. Try it.
Well, sticky matters are generally icky and yucky when they put you in a bind. You've learned from those facts.
You'd probably be suprised to know that I stumbled upon this forum while looking up stuff about Buddhism.
Despite your condescending tone, (my perception - I know) I will continue to read up on Buddism at some point. Maybe eventually I will be able to "comprehend" whatever it is you tried explain to me.
You'd probably be suprised to know that I stumbled upon this forum while looking up stuff about Buddhism.
Despite your condescending tone, (my perception - I know) I will continue to read up on Buddism at some point. Maybe eventually I will be able to "comprehend" whatever it is you tried explain to me.
Well, I'm sure your idea of a condescending tone isn't fact, evidence, proof based either.
But focusing back on the subject, I brought up Buddhism, not to discuss Buddhism but to present an example of a religious realist. People who generally adhere to Buddha's preachings seem to tread the line of being realists more than in other religions, IMO, based on facts and evidence, of course. So, you are unlikely to agree for that will be so icky.
Well, I'm sure your idea of a condescending tone isn't fact, evidence, proof based either.
But focusing back on the subject, I brought up Buddhism, not to discuss Buddhism but to present an example of a religious realist. People who generally adhere to Buddha's preachings seem to tread the line of being realists more than in other religions, IMO, based on facts and evidence, of course. So, you are unlikely to agree for that will be so icky.
lol
I don't object to all facts or evidence. I was just saying that I don't allow "lack of evidence" to stop me from believing.
You'd probably be suprised to know that I stumbled upon this forum while looking up stuff about Buddhism.
OK, here is what I know about Buddah:
He was a Hindu who lived about 525 BC. He could not find fulfillment in the Hindu faith, so he decided to sit under a tree and figure out the meaning and purpose of life. After about forty days, the answer came to him in a flash of enlightenment. He told others about his ideas and they were so impressed they began calling him Buddah, meaning 'the enlightened one'.
That is how I have lived my life. When I am puzzled about things, I think about them and the answer comes to me. Sometimes it takes years, but eventually I find my own answers.
Note that Buddah did not pray for guidance. He had enough confidence in his intellect to know the answers he sought would come to him. That is very different from religious people who seek answers from an outside source like a god.
What answers did Buddah find? I don't know and I don't care. I'm having too much fun trying to find my own answers. Even though I am an Atheist, I often say, "God didn't give us a brain so others could tell us what to think."
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.
