Too Taboo To Chew! (Religion) (Page 1 of 16)

Yeah. I've changed my life philosophy so many times I can't even remember. The most recent thing I've changed is losing my faith in objectivity when it comes to anything human. Like morality and value. So I dont believe in any objective meaning for human life or anything else, just subjective meaning. In the same vein, I used to care what other people believed and did, because I somehow thought that the world could be a better place if people were proven wrong and people listened to reason. But since I no longer care about the fate of humanity I don't care what people think or do. And I also realise that even if I could change the world it wouldn't matter, because we are all different. and what I would consider a better world, might not be everyone elses view of a better world. I didn't have to venture far to realise that most people don't have the same value system that I did. So I've basically stopped caring about anyone else, and pretty much only act out of self interest. Obviously that was what I did before as well, but I'm just self aware about only acting out of self interest now. It also helps that I don't have to consider morality when making decisions because I only need consider my own personal benefit. I also realise that this makes me what a lot of people would consider maybe a bad person among other things. And that's not really a problem, because I don't have a problem keeping up a fake front when dealing with most people. I also definately think that if the world where filled with only people like me that it would be worse off by most peoples standards (including mine) so im glad that people have belief in religion and things like that to make them feel good about doing society's good.

Regarding the origin of the universe It's probably not going to be explained anytime soon. But I obviously believe the big bang theory. (I think most people who think the world is alligned just too perfect for it to have happened by chance need to study astronomy a little better) And regarding what happened before that I am perfectly content with not having a clue, because there is no clear cut theory that the science community agrees on right now. But if you had to push me Id stick with Stephen Hawking's boiling bubble theory, but there are plenty of other fine theories as well. Pretty much after that the origin of life doesn't have an agreeable theory about it either, it seems like we might find an answer to this one day, but regardless I dont know, and im fine with that right now. After that however evolution explains pretty much anything and everything in my opinion. Religion, morality, society, psychology and everything else is pretty much explained by it. All things being equal evolution is definately the simplest explenation in my opinion.

I feel my post needs a third paragraph so Ill write some more. I definately think you've got some interesting ideas robcore. it certainly would be interesting to see what made to reach all these conclusions. My sister actually has a similar view on life that is much more organic and human-centric, that I interepret are a few of the things you believe. But I could be wrong. Anyways I think im done with this post.

No im not. Regarding agnosticism. Isn't that just the stance that we can never know or not know wether god is real? so you could be theist and still agnostic and atheist and agnostic. I just find it weird that people consider atheism, agnosticism and theism three exclusive viewpoints. Im not saying that you do. Its just a lot of people seem to look at it like that.

Also I guess if you wanted to put a label on my viewpoint I think nihilist comes the closest.

Ach, Jesus Christ, really?

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. 

But I'm with NaS on the viewpoint that you can be both agnostic and atheist at the same time - that was how I used to think of myself.  I didn't believe there was a god, but I didn't think it could be proved one way or the other.

These days if anyone asks I just say I'm an atheist.  Fuck proof! 

Aah, I hope i can stop myself before it gets too long

I've grown up in a relatively nonreligious country, my parents aren't religious (mother is agnostic, rest of the family is in my boat I think) so I was free to make up my own mind. We still get Christian benefits such as Christmas and stuff but I've never made a prayer or gone to church to be closer to God

Why? Because having faith in something you have no proof to is stupid. The chances of something backfiring that way are huge. I like to keep an open mind to things, not blindly thinking that something is true. That way I can actually learn something. One might argue from my posts in that origin of life thread that I believe in what I say. That is true, but if you gave me compelling evidence against it I would be converted in a jiffy. Same does not apply to faith, you cannot have science and God for they contradict on too many levels. I remember reading about a scientist called Kurt Wise who had been brought up religious and when he was already very educated, he compared the Bible and science and decided that he had to throw one out, he went for religion and world lost a brilliant mind.

So religion is useless on almost all levels. It gives some moral codes but I have them and I'm not religious, there is such a thing called empathy and reasoning from which I can operate. I think that man could be kind to another man far before religion came along. In the end all I can say is that religion is business and a serious one at that. No other business project has claimed so many lives, had so much influence or committed so many atrocities and been so beneficial at the same time.

z1rra I'm sure that wasn't there on the last post I did. IM REALLY PISSED AT HE MOMENT but what you said dude that's COOL.

I sleep through most or all of these

I see myself as agnostic

Agnosticism is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims — particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of deities, ghosts, or even ultimate reality — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently impossible to prove or disprove.

With regard to Christianity, I was raised Catholic...but in a home where we weren't forced to be Catholic...
So, my church attendance was on and off throughout my whole life growing up. Currently I'm a regular attendee of United Church services...mostly because my girlfriend is the Sunday School teacher there, lol (I prefer Catholic services).
In any case, I definitely agree with those who think that there's a lot of bogus stuff in the Bible. I wouldn't call it all fairytales...more just subjective interpretation by people without the faculties to understand what they were interpreting. For example, the Book of Revelation (written by a different John than the John who wrote the Gospel of John)...it's more of an astral vision than a celestial one...not reflective of the God of whom Jesus spoke...
Basically, I'd toss out all of the Old Testament, except Genesis, Psalms, and Proverbs, as well as the Book of Revelation from the New Testament...then you'd have a good Bible with only a minimum of flaws (There are redeemable passages in some of the books that I'd exclude...but too few to warrant picking them all apart).

With regard to evolution...to me, evolution and creation are one and the same. I suppose that this view is best comprehended from a Deist sort of perspective, although it can be much deeper than that as well. It just seems obvious that they're the same thing to me.

With regards to a complete religion...I think there are so many parallels that to dismiss one religion in favour of another is to dismiss a favourable context within which one can understand things in greater depth. Also, with most religions, the founders all taught their followers to devotedly serve and worship God - NOT to devotedly serve and worship religions. Christ, Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, etc. all taught that people should be passionate for God/Truth(Which they don't really differentiate), not for belief systems....that Ignorance is the only real sin.

This reminds me of Mytzlptlk's House reference...since House is always interested in the Truth and not in belief systems. He's more enlightened than the writers will ever let on, lol.

-Rob

You cannot look at evolution from deist point. Evolution completely excludes any involvement from a higher power. Creationist view on the other hand tells that everything sort of popped into existence.

No no no...The start is entirely different. The creationist clearly states that the beginning was made by god. Why make imperfect start? Creationist is often equaled with intelligent design. None of the early organism designs were successful or intelligent compared to today's organisms.

If that were true there would be no conflict between creationists and evolutionists since evolutionists have no idea where things came from originally, only how they have transformed since they first appeared. Creationism merely recognizes God(whatever that may be) as the origin of existence. Evolution is the expression of that existence. There is no conflict.
I'm not talking about 'Creationism' though. I'm talking about Creation.

Creation is to get something from nothing (making something into something else is just transformation).
Evolution is also getting something from nothing.
For example, you can have a hundred generations of white pheasants, and suddenly there will appear a generation of brown pheasants. The evolution of the pheasant is creation...something (brown-ness) coming from no-thing (the absence of brown-ness). Creation and evolution are one and the same.

As for intelligent design...paranoid atheists have equated it with creationism. Intelligent Design does not propose that there is or is not a designer, only that the design of existence is intelligent (Protoplasm reacts positively to positive stimuli and negatively to negative stimuli, suggesting that it is designed according to a higher principle than 'randomness' since randomness would have the protoplasm react positively in negative conditions, and negatively in positive conditions, at least on occasion).
Creationism recognizes the divine essence of nature.
Evolutionism recognizes nature at the exclusion of any inference of essence.
Intelligent Design recognizes that nature has an essence that is intelligent.

Thus, intelligent design rests somewhere between Creationism and Evolutionism.

Nevertheless, Creation and evolution are one and the same.

-Rob

Intelligent design does not require a designer.
If you saw a rube goldberg-esque contraption that resulted from a tornado blowing through a junk-yard, you would not have to infer that the tornado designed the contraption intentionally in order to consider the design of the contraption to be of an intelligent essence.

And fyi Dawkins' work is ripe with philosophical error. Most of his arguments against God simply attempt to undermine sociological and anthropological conditions which would have falsely inflated the significance of beliefs. So what?
Freud figured that the God that people believed in was simply a projection of an angry unconscious mind. Carl Jung agreed with Freud that most people believed in a God that was merely a projection of their unconscious minds, though Jung was more advanced philosophically and he recognized that just because people have delusions of God doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.
It's like inferring that water doesn't exist since everyone experiences the illusion of mirages.

Also, Dawkins' view of God is extremely juvenile and limited to the pop-culturized judeo-christian interpretation of God. He is completely ignorant to authoritative views on the divine such as Christ or Krishna or any of the famed mystics throughout history.
I reccommend watching Rupert Sheldrake's presentation with Googletalks for some real insight into the nature of reality and into the integrity of such persons as Dawkins.

http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=JnA8GUtXpXY

-Rob

Just a thought:
If we could just make up an answer to something we do not know, we would all be all knowing. Thus, either there's no god, or every person with imagination is god.

yeah. definately a big difference in what people believe to make sense of the world. I think the biggest problem when discussing something like religion is the lack of understanding of different subjective viewpoints on the same matter. people draw completly different conclusions when met with the same information. and all this is just based on who they are. your opinion on nihilism and atheism is really easy to see is colored with your own pre conditioned biases. much like my opinions on nihilism and atheism are colored with my biases.