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.
And theism need not involve binding you to specific feelings and responses, either. It seems that because some theism tries to, you intend to doggedly insist that that is a characteristic of theism itself.
No, although I do assert that it is a very strong tendency and that theists who do NOT believe that it must constrain others in any way, shape or form are fairly rare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU
I'm saying that it inspired responses within me and my spouse: We own a certain locus of purview over truth, that which applies within our own bodies, within our own home, within our own family, and within our own worship. That's the nature of responsible, respectable religion.
Understood and agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU
You choose not to understand the word "faith" the way it generally applies outside reactionary religious perspectives. So it is pointless to try to help you understand how faith does apply to some of the things I mentioned.
Religious faith outside of reactionary religious perspectives becomes something other than what faith is within reactionary religious perspectives so here again we are using the same label for two very different things. My guess is what you choose to label your religious faith with is something more like an appreciation for the value of symbolism and ritual and subjective personal experience. But it will remain a guess so long as you won't deign to elucidate it. Which is your issue, not mine.
...nothing is being offered in the way of argument, evidence, data or reasoning ...does not change or rebut the point I have made in even the smallest way. ... asserting things, then running away when asked for the substance behind those assertions. ...you need to work on. You. Not us.
... as to what I will accept as a response. inability and unwillingess to engage on those topics ...you will not answer the question.
you are not substantiating your claims in ANY way at all. ... form and types of cop outs and dodges you are using, that suggest strongly to me you are simply making it all up, and you know it.
...as dishonest as it is useless.
...I remember with a wry smile a debate ...in the end he pinned Butt to the mat on it .
i am not interested in debating or arguing or fighting or proving anything to anyone. in my view those are not avenues of growth and increased understanding, but rather ego-based exercises in one-upmanship [=the technique or practice of gaining a feeling of superiority over another person] which by design inherently preclude increased understanding.
the tone and tenor of "discuss" (which i will do) is very different from "debate" or "argue" or "fight" (which i will not do). Discuss (in my view) fosters increased clarity and understanding and harmony, and is a win-win mindset. Debate (in my view) is based on and fosters hostility, contention, attack, and is a win-lose mindset.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 05-30-2016 at 11:51 AM..
..."soul" and "spirit" seem to be nothing more than placeholders for our ignorance. Our ignorance about the full working of human consciousness.
....You have not even DEFINED "soul" or "spirit" here...
i like the phrase you use "full working of human" because it speaks to wholeness, which is important. interesting that "ignorance" has "ignore" in it.
a person will never fully understand or experience what it is to be human, if they ignore the spirit/soul. We as humans have four parts, and if we ignore or deny or fail to understand and nourish any of these four aspects of ourselves, we are incomplete, we are not whole: physical, emotional, mental, spiritual; that is body, heart, mind, soul.
The soul or spirit inhabits the human body, entering it at birth and leaving it at death, like putting on a coat and taking it off. in the analogy, the coat is an inert physical object, it is you inside of the coat wearing it that gives it life and makes it move. the coat is a garment worn by you. when you take it off it is a discarded garment.
as a human, the body is an inert physical object, it is the soul inside of the body wearing it that gives it life and makes it move. the body is a garment worn by the soul. when the soul leaves the body (at death) the corpse is the discarded garment.
that is one example, one view, one map. other people can share with you additional views, illustrations, maps, and examples.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 05-30-2016 at 12:58 PM..
I don't even need to open that video. Your point is wrong in that it merely posits the old canard: "Science claims to know everything". It doesn't claim to but what it does claim to have verified is reliable and is remarkably consistently shown to be valid.
Neither I, nor Dr craig or anything in that video said "science claims to know everything." Science does not and cannot. However, there are some militant rationalists who seem to believe that is the case, like Dr. Peter Atkins. Science is humble...but those who turn it into a religion are anything but.
Quote:
Faith based speculation about the unknown, on the other hand, are without any validity at all.
So, whatever truisms that video was announcing, posting it did you no good at all.
Ahh...I am not basing my faith on speculation, but on belief. That is what faith is: belief. I believe because I chose to. End of the story
Precisely. My spouse and I went to the botanical garden last weekend, and after almost twenty five years of marriage it was declared the best date we ever had. Where is the science that proves that?
This morning I'm distracted and worried, even though my spouse and I are going on a waterfalls tour that could rival last weeks' trip to the botanical garden... because my good friend and sister-in-faith is recovering from major surgery. Where are the mathematical models for distraction and worry, which can accurately predict why the surgery of one person causes a certain effect and someone else's surgery causes a different effect?
Next week the chair of our worship team will suffer a loss, as her child and grandchildren move abroad. Prove, with science, that there is a loss. Doesn't science dictate laws of conservation that prove that there will be no loss?
There's a piece of porcelain in my china cabinet (which originally cost about $3). If there is a fire in the house, protocol is that my spouse grabs one cat, I grab the other, and then I grab that piece of porcelain. The rest can all burn to the ground. How does science prove the value of that piece of porcelain.
Science would try to fully explain such things with talk about stimuli and synapses firing, and that's all true, but it doesn't tell the whole store. Clearly science is irrelevant to explain certain things.
Excellent post!
We all are irrational and to be a human is to be a creature of faith, love, and dreams. An honest atheist would say "of course I don't base my life entirely on reason! I simply chose to put my faith in things besides religion" and that could be that. But so many say "I refuse to believe anything that is not proven by science!" I ask them why they love My Little Pony: Friendship is Magicâ„¢ so much and they go into the usual fedora clad tirade about the symbolism of the show, the animation etc.
And when I ask them if they have any scientific evidence for how great My Little Pony: Friendship is Magicâ„¢ is?...they tip their fedora and walkaway, mumbling something about Carl Sagan under their breath.
Indeed science does not explain or even engage with all aspects of existence. It is the wrong tool for the job if you want some objective validation that your visit to the gardens was the best ever. But you don't need any validation, evidence, substantiation or logical argument for that because it is strictly an agreement between you and your spouse that's not binding on me, me and my spouse, or anyone else.
So in other words, in a secular state that does not endorse or condemn religion in which separation of church and state are respected, science would not need to confirm any believe in the supernatural? After all, if it is okay to believe something not backed up by any science as long as it is between two people, what is wrong with believing in something not backed up by science as long as it is between only two billion people?
Which is the point I am making: you will NEVER convince the majority of humans to turn away from religion and faith. It is simply a part of what we are. But you can win an argument in favor of secular government.
Neither I, nor Dr craig or anything in that video said "science claims to know everything." Science does not and cannot. However, there are some militant rationalists who seem to believe that is the case, like Dr. Peter Atkins. Science is humble...but those who turn it into a religion are anything but.
Hmm. I must say I haven't heard that one recently, so you may be right. So agreed that science doesn't claim to know it all, what it does posit as reliable, can be taken as pretty reliable.
Quote:
Ahh...I am not basing my faith on speculation, but on belief. That is what faith is: belief. I believe because I chose to. End of the story
I know that faith if belief. What makes for speculation is where there is no scientifically validated evidence to support that belief. I tend to use the word 'Faith' for that as it is a term much used in religion with that meaning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorianpunk
Excellent post!
We all are irrational and to be a human is to be a creature of faith, love, and dreams. An honest atheist would say "of course I don't base my life entirely on reason! I simply chose to put my faith in things besides religion" and that could be that. But so many say "I refuse to believe anything that is not proven by science!" I ask them why they love My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic™ so much and they go into the usual fedora clad tirade about the symbolism of the show, the animation etc.
And when I ask them if they have any scientific evidence for how great My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic™ is?...they tip their fedora and walkaway, mumbling something about Carl Sagan under their breath.
Long ago in my UFo days, I learned that it is dangerous to cut your mind free of the validated basics and let it go floating. This is often thought of as freeing the mind of restrictions, but it was much more like losing any kind of reality check.
And what, pray tell, IS reality? Thousands of years later, and we will are not sure. For all you know, I could be an artificial intelligence program typing this response. Or, you may have gotten into a car accident you don't remember at the end of your "UFO days" and are now in a coma and you have dreamed the last few years.
All reality is is a bunch of neurons going off on a lump of flesh located in your skull being interpreted by a a bunch of cells. Our brains create reality anyway...at least those of us with faith admit as much.
And if it makes you happy, who cares what "reality" says? That's kind of like a young teenager who doesn't listen to the classical music he loves because his peers mock him for it. Who cares what they say or think? It is the individuals life, and that individual should be as authentic to themselves as possible so long as it does not impede anyone else's ability to be authentic, i,e, by harming them.
Haters are gonna hate. And reason is more often than not nothing more than another hater.
So in other words, in a secular state that does not endorse or condemn religion in which separation of church and state are respected, science would not need to confirm any believe in the supernatural? After all, if it is okay to believe something not backed up by any science as long as it is between two people, what is wrong with believing in something not backed up by science as long as it is between only two billion people?
Which is the point I am making: you will NEVER convince the majority of humans to turn away from religion and faith. It is simply a part of what we are. But you can win an argument in favor of secular government.
It isn't an issue of how many people believe, but how many of them attempt to impose their beliefs outside their valid scope, which is in between their own ears.
I don't expect to convince hardly anyone to turn away from religious faith, much less the majority. I expect that sea change will have to be gradual and take place over many generations, probably many centuries, with many setbacks. For now I simply have legitimate boundaries in discussions and human interactions and I promote a secular society with tolerance for all ... including unbelievers.
The only validated answers I am getting are about how people imagine things and find patterns where there aren't any. That doesn't have to be the actual explanation, so we make tests on one hand and ask for some decent evidence from those having the experiences.
it's not about what anyone else experiences, all that matters to you is your own experience.
it's noticing and gathering data--not analyzing it, not imposing meaning on it, no imposing pattern on it; just collecting it.
"i just noticed that...interesting" "i just saw that....hmmmmm" "this thought just popped into my head...interesting" or even "bizarre...i would never have come up with that on my own" pay attention to that which is at the periphery of your awareness. and notice that which just flashes quickly through. it will feel like your own thoughts. it will feel like your own feelings. if it feels like you just imagined it or made it up, it does not matter. it is just data that you are noticing and collecting and putting on a shelf. pay attention to the thoughts you have just as you are waking up. totally disregard all night time dreams, not a useful source. this is entirely while you are fully conscious and aware.
you may also notice other inner responses that are critical and dismissive, such as "you're making it up" "this is stupid" "you imagined it"
just ignore those comments, they are simply data you are noticing also
it helps to be curious and watchful. it is not forced. it is just you going about your daily life noticing things. however it helps to have specific questions or demands that you keep repeating and asking for help, clarity, insight, guidance. the more strongly you feel about the issue, the better, such as problem at work; health concern; family dispute; trying to understand something you're studying. have it be something real-life so that you can actually gauge the responses you are getting.
this is an interaction, with you as participant. it's not "how does it work" or "what good is this" or "there is not point in this." It is "let's give it a try and see what happens."
or not. however if you want substantiation, then this is the part where it happens.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 05-30-2016 at 07:07 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.
You have remarkable powers of imagination.
