ideas about religion and authority

[Redux]

In a way we already attempt to balance with the environment, employing farming techniques that conserve soil, etc. But, getting the entire human population to create a complete balance would be nearly impossible, that would require a worldwide birth rate regulation, among other things.

Yes, education will help, but it's the technology that comes with it that will help more.

You forget the religion that sneaks in with science. The belief in technology. That it could cure all problems. It can't. If that is safeguarded against, then i think tech could be a possible solution of course. With some education too.

[Tea]

If we're gonna talk organised religion, I have one question.

Do want others to know the truth?

On the subject of belief in technology, I think the most dangerous is not the belief that it can cure all problems (maybe it can, probably not), but the belief that it can unrafel the complete truth.

[Redux]

I want to know the truth. I would sacrfice eternal life to see the universe as meant to be seen.

[Kaijyuu]

If we're gonna talk organised religion, I have one question.

Do want others to know the truth?

Certainly, it would be unreasonable to expect others to not to want to spread their "truth." I have no qualms with this. I do, though, when people expect others to accept their "truth," or worse, require.

On the subject of belief in technology, I think the most dangerous is not the belief that it can cure all problems (maybe it can, probably not), but the belief that it can unrafel the complete truth.

Interesting that you bring that up while we're discussing religion. Technology can reveal the complete "truth" only as far as we can perceive. Religion is about the supernatural.

Unlike many others, I do not thing that religion will ever "die out." It will continue simply because it's a question we will never be able to answer; no technology or logic will be able to "prove" anything supernatural's existence one way or the other. I don't think humanity will ever give up on a question it can't answer.


I'm probably going off topic though.

[Tea]

Just here to ask some questions.

Certainly, it would be unreasonable to expect others to not to want to spread their "truth." I have no qualms with this. I do, though, when people expect others to accept their "truth," or worse, require.

For some people, their religion is as true as mathematics. They know it's true, but they do not know nor understand everything. How can one righteous deny their spreading of the truth, other than proving the truth untrue?

Interesting that you bring that up while we're discussing religion. Technology can reveal the complete "truth" only as far as we can perceive. Religion is about the supernatural.

Religion is not only about the supernatural, since it clearly has many effects in the lives of many people. It has, however, unlike technology, to do with the supernatural as a fundament for everything. If not for your religion, a higher deity, what else can you use as a fundament for your morals and ideals? Your inner feelings? Pure logic? Both are easy to prove as a bad idea.

Unlike many others, I do not thing that religion will ever "die out." It will continue simply because it's a question we will never be able to answer; no technology or logic will be able to "prove" anything supernatural's existence one way or the other. I don't think humanity will ever give up on a question it can't answer.

However, people use technology as proof that there is no God, or no active one anyways. People use logic for it too. However, it is since long that people used logic to prove that God exists. Socrates did it, a lot of other philosophers have done it and for an example of a person who does it today, C.S. Lewis would be one. All of them considered the question of whether there is a god answered, other people just don't believe. Maybe it has do with trust. Since it is known that people rarely completely trust one another, not even a married man and wife. People need to see, to hear, to feel for their own, to learn something. A little kid proves this true, as he won't really learn the consequences of his actions untill he bears them. Imagine a hot oven and you know how the example goes.

[Kaijyuu]

For some people, their religion is as true as mathematics. They know it's true, but they do not know nor understand everything. How can one righteous deny their spreading of the truth, other than proving the truth untrue?

They can be wrong. At least from the "righteous" point of view. Another faith's "righteous" could consider them right. And then who's point of view do we trust?

Religion is not only about the supernatural, since it clearly has many effects in the lives of many people. It has, however, unlike technology, to do with the supernatural as a fundament for everything. If not for your religion, a higher deity, what else can you use as a fundament for your morals and ideals? Your inner feelings? Pure logic? Both are easy to prove as a bad idea.

"Good" and "bad" are relative to perspective. Whether you base your moral believes of feelings, logic, or faith, it is the same. Feelings can be deceiving, logic can be filled with holes, and faith can be lies from those wishing to manipulate. Also, feelings can lead you to the truth, logic can be sound, and faith could be true.

Ultimately, no matter what you use for a fundament for your morals and ideals, some will see it as right and some will see it as wrong. What you should use depends on who you're trying to impress. And if you're trying to impress yourself... only you can answer that question. Not me or anyone else.

However, people use technology as proof that there is no St. Ajora, or no active one anyways. People use logic for it too. However, it is since long that people used logic to prove that St. Ajora exists. Socrates did it, a lot of other philosophers have done it and for an example of a person who does it today, C.S. Lewis would be one. All of them considered the question of whether there is a St. Ajora answered, other people just don't believe. Maybe it has do with trust. Since it is known that people rarely completely trust one another, not even a married man and wife. People need to see, to hear, to feel for their own, to learn something. A little kid proves this true, as he won't really learn the consequences of his actions untill he bears them. Imagine a hot oven and you know how the example goes.

I would be interested in hearing the logic "proving" the existence of a deity or deities. I do not believe it can be, but honestly, that's only because I have been unable to myself.
I do not believe that technology can disprove it. The universe is just too ridiculously designed to discount the possibility. Could not the source of gravity, for example, be some deity's will?

The example of a hot oven is flawed. It assumes the oven can be touched at all, and that it is hot. Religion is an oven that cannot be touched, seen, or otherwise felt by normal means. Some claim that they have touched it... that they know it exists and what it is. Others claim that it doesn't exist at all, simply because they cannot see it.
Others still... like me... claim that either way, it is impossible to prove. And that to know... you have to reach out yourself. You probably won't touch anything and will still be left with an unanswered question.


I hope I answered all your questions and didn't misunderstand any. I guess it's just my perspective anyway...

[Tea]

Religion is not only about the supernatural, since it clearly has many effects in the lives of many people. It has, however, unlike technology, to do with the supernatural as a fundament for everything. If not for your religion, a higher deity, what else can you use as a fundament for your morals and ideals? Your inner feelings? Pure logic? Both are easy to prove as a bad idea.

"Good" and "bad" are relative to perspective. Whether you base your moral believes of feelings, logic, or faith, it is the same. Feelings can be deceiving, logic can be filled with holes, and faith can be lies from those wishing to manipulate. Also, feelings can lead you to the truth, logic can be sound, and faith could be true.

Now, when that faith has morals that do not hurt someone in any way, but aspire to teach, to comfort and to care for others? Even if they were lies made to deceive, to manipulate, would that matter?

Ultimately, no matter what you use for a fundament for your morals and ideals, some will see it as right and some will see it as wrong. What you should use depends on who you're trying to impress. And if you're trying to impress yourself... only you can answer that question. Not me or anyone else.

I don't have morals to impress anyone. I have morals because I find they are right and just and thus are not a wrong way to live.

I would be interested in hearing the logic "proving" the existence of a deity or deities. I do not believe it can be, but honestly, that's only because I have been unable to myself.
I do not believe that technology can disprove it. The universe is just too ridiculously designed to discount the possibility. Could not the source of gravity, for example, be some deity's will?

For example, every person has a basic feeling of what is right and wrong. Of course, there are many more and are all intertwined as they are all important parts of the entire argument, and I nor know, nor can be bothered to write it all up here. If you really are interested in how people can come to the conclusion that there is a God, I still think C.S. Lewis has awesome books, even if christianity doesn't appeal to you at all. It didn't to him either, so it should be no problem.

The example of a hot oven is flawed. It assumes the oven can be touched at all, and that it is hot. Religion is an oven that cannot be touched, seen, or otherwise felt by normal means. Some claim that they have touched it... that they know it exists and what it is. Others claim that it doesn't exist at all, simply because they cannot see it.
Others still... like me... claim that either way, it is impossible to prove. And that to know... you have to reach out yourself. You probably won't touch anything and will still be left with an unanswered question.

This is true and totally not the point of the example of the hot oven, which was to illustrate the need to experience first hand before you learn and understand.  And people cleerly hear, see, or whatever their God by normal means, or at least they believe that they do. Science usually calls this randomness or something like that.
Also, most people who do believe, require no proof. They rather require trust, also called faith. That is something you can't "grab", it's a gift. You can decide to act as if you trust a person, you cannot decide to fully trust the person in any case. It is something that grows.

I hope I answered all your questions and didn't misunderstand any. I guess it's just my perspective anyway...

It certainly is your perspective, but I don't see how that is bad.

[red_bird]

authority is your opinion has dominion over other people's opinions.  it exists only because the people it rules over let it exist.  not that that's a bad thing, i'd rather have an intellgent guy i disagree with in public office than i moron i agree with.  anyways, the most effective way to oppose authority, in our day and age, is to call it out on the stupid things it does, like john stewart and stephen colbert do.  investigative journalism.  media.

a free and unafraid media is the only way to curb the excesses of power.  if china had a free and unafraid media, they wouldn't have the environmental problems they have, cause the media would bust the bureaucrats and politicians and manufactourers who profit from it.  [some areas of rural china no longer have bees.  they were all killed by excess pesticide spraying, so all polinization is done by hand]

i don't see the point in trying to rationalize religion.  religion is irrational.  i don't believe or disbelieve in any religion.  i've had two religious experiences in my life.  one, when i was kicked out of my parents house and i had nowhere to go, another when i was high on something in the military.

unrelated, but  i can't stop writing in the passive voice, and it's pissing me off!  has anyone taken any writing classes?

[Tea]

A free and unafraid mediais not the only way to curb the excesses of power, it is power. The media creates a lot of problems too.

Also, what do you mean with a passive voice?

[red_bird]

i have had problems with drinking  - passive
i am a drinker -not passive

i don't completely understand what the passive voice is, but i do see how it's bad.

and the problems of the media can be remedied by outsiders with inconvient points of view, like comedians.  

basically, everyone watches everyone else, and we all speak up when someone is being oppressed because it might be us next.

[CidIII]

Holy shit there is some many incorrect statements in this topic, I can't stand it.


The passive voice is not bad, it's just frowned upon if a person over uses it. It just basically using two verbs where one could fit.

[ouroborosp]

iri thinks that problems dont rest with priests and politicians, nor organizations in and of themselves. problems rest with fanaticism, and even an atheist can be a fanatic, for instance they could see need to rebel against and throw off the yoke of religion- maybe at any cost. problems arise when one is inclined to demonize and ostracize those who don't hold the same beliefs and with those who worry about their societies so much as to cave into its pressures.

iri thinks that fanatics can come in all colours and creeds, and that no one is safe from falling into fanaticism. because you're an atheist or a capitalist doesnt mean you're not in danger of being a zealot, they're not mutually exclusive. because you're a good person doesn't mean you're not at risk of wrongly accusing people based on the colour of their skin.

If you look for evils, you'll find them in abundance, youll always be able to say this is the reason why bad things happen, that is the reason why we cant have a nicer life.

iri thinks, because of this, that the pieces that are most often absent are careful self-examination and a compassionate embrace of others.


Edit: Sorry for the necro

[Archael]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXe ... annel_page (short)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxGMqKCc ... annel_page (long)

/thread

[Kaijyuu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg&feature=channel_page (short)

Everyone of every faith or non faith needs to comes to terms with that. Way too much bias in the world based on upbringing (or perhaps a better word, circumstance).