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 are right there. when somebody doesn't see how they are the same and how they are different we can't really make any head way. As seen on this site.
But you see how avoidance can save a less valid point of view. A world view based on a less valid claim can't really look at the discussion from all sides can it?
what i am saying is that if someone really truly can not recognize and articulate and discuss and distinguish how humans are different than machines
then there can't be much of a conversation about religion and spirituality
I think that's very limited view on it.
I am more than happy to compare the claims side by side and the reasons for those claims.
"spirituality addresses what it is that differentiates humans from machines"
or
"spiritually is a discussion on the emotional and physical connections with the system around us and our place within it."
so in the first quote above, you have removed "religion" from the phrase.
so you are in your parlance avoiding the discussion of religion, and seeking to limit the discussion by removing it from the conversation.
and in the second quote above you equate "spirituality" with"emotional and physical connections." you are removing spirit from spirituality by limiting it to the emotional and physical. that shows you are avoiding discussion of spirit.
this is the religion and spirituality forum.
spirit is not equal to or the equivalent of or the sum of "physical and emotional" it is more than that.
again a conversation about religion and spirituality includes "religion" and it includes "spirit"
I am still trying to understand some of what you are saying. I figure the more I read what you write, sooner or later the more I'll understand I always leaned towards art not science so its taking me a while to get it.
Like when you say "align the traits of a god thing to the traits of the system we are in," I don't quite get what you are saying.
About "fundy" theist saying don't use science to change religion. That from what I know is part of their beliefs. What God said goes and it is final. You don't change it. I won't argue points like that with them.
err, let me think.
How do we really define objects? The basic description is we base our definitions of objects on how they interact with the system around them and the processes that work inside of them.
Like chair. Or a car, or a zebra, or a rock. We look at them and base our statements about them on how they are interacting with the things around them. They are the traits of the system and themselves that define them for us to make sense of.
Last edited by Arach Angle; 12-15-2019 at 10:31 AM..
what i am saying is that if someone really truly can not recognize and articulate and discuss and distinguish how humans are different than machines
then there can't be much of a conversation about religion and spirituality
Again, I agree. people that can't distinguish the differences and similarities have trouble with talking about our role and place on earth.
so in the first quote above, you have removed "religion" from the phrase.
so you are in your parlance avoiding the discussion of religion, and seeking to limit the discussion by removing it from the conversation.
and in the second quote above you equate "spirituality" with"emotional and physical connections." you are removing spirit from spirituality by limiting it to the emotional and physical. that shows you are avoiding discussion of spirit.
this is the religion and spirituality forum.
spirit is not equal to or the equivalent of or the sum of "physical and emotional" it is more than that.
again a conversation about religion and spirituality includes "religion" and it includes "spirit"
religion is kind of different to me. Religion is like the term country to me. Maybe I am wrong. for me, we can have different religions and be talking about the exact same "spirit" to me.
Religion is like a car, a train, or a plane, to get one where we think we need to be. When we get there and just "be", the mode of transportation becomes less important.
How do we really define objects? The basic description is we base our definitions of objects on how they interact with the system around them and the processes that work inside of them.
Like chair. Or a car, or a zebra, or a rock. We look at them and base our statements about them on how they are interacting with the things around them. They are the traits of the system and themselves that define them for us to make sense of.
I'll take the first one .. the chair. My statement about a chair isn't relative to its environment (least don't think so). I sit on this chair in my livingroom and it holds my weight. If I put the chair on a mountaintop or in a desert (different environment) it can still hold my weight. It by itself doesn't interact with anything. I interact with it.
I'll take the first one .. the chair. My statement about a chair isn't relative to its environment (least don't think so). I sit on this chair in my livingroom and it holds my weight. If I put the chair on a mountaintop or in a desert (different environment) it can still hold my weight. It by itself doesn't interact with anything. I interact with it.
So I'm lost.
yes, you sit on the chair. You are part of its environment. And yes, one of the things that determines the validity of the claim is how many different conditions the claim holds true for. The chair is a chair no matter where you bring it. The term is uniformitarianism. Its a geology term but it fits.
from my perspective how you interact with that chair makes it a chair and not a zebra. How do I know? I list the observations around the chair and the zerba and I compare them.
If I didn't know what a zebra was, its meaningless description. Unless someone tells me a zerba is like a horse. Then I can relate.
what i am saying is that if someone really truly can not recognize and articulate and discuss and distinguish how humans are different than machines
then there can't be much of a conversation about religion and spirituality
Some of our posters seem to forget that the discussion on this part of the forum is supposed to be about religion and spirituality. They have been asked repeatedly by moderators to keep within that scope, but they don't.
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.
I always leaned towards art not science so its taking me a while to get it.
