Dear Believer, why do you believe what you believe? Why, given thousands of faith choices, did you almost certainly choose the dominant religion of your culture, or that of your parents? Do you realize that every member of every faith is just as devout, just as sincere, and their conviction every bit as sure as yours? They too read infallible holy texts, have air-tight apologetics, experience miracles, feel god's presence, obediently follow his perfect will, and can defend their belief with the same fervency as you. And yet, since every religion is mutually exclusive and contradicts the others in matters both large and small, they cannot all be right. The truth is, you already know what it's like to be an atheist in regard to every other faith but your own. Given this, is it so hard to see why some of us just take our atheism one god further?
Skeptics will and should recognize some of the arguments contained here within the texts and videos of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, John W. Loftus, and Carl Sagan.
.
this not about atheist/theist .. not at all
this about those idiots or those charlatans that make out of a spirituality a business or genocide
More and more I am taken by the beauty of wisdom that recognises every faith sees some manifestation of the divine. Mutually exclusive and contradictory? No problem. Precisely so, we can believe they point to a particle of the Truth. One universal claim to faith can be made, the Divine is fully revealed to no one. That said, we can believe some people see more and some people see less - and some faith systems stubbornly refuse to see what is in plain sight otherwise. Seeing no G_d is not worse than seeing an estranged or an incoherent one; and what faith can compare to when seeing no G_d, one acts as if there was one or that it would matter?........
More and more I am taken by the beauty of wisdom that recognises every faith sees some manifestation of the divine. Mutually exclusive and contradictory? No problem. Precisely so, we can believe they point to a particle of the Truth. One universal claim to faith can be made, the Divine is fully revealed to no one. That said, we can believe some people see more and some people see less - and some faith systems stubbornly refuse to see what is in plain sight otherwise. Seeing no G_d is not worse than seeing an estranged or an incoherent one; and what faith can compare to when seeing no G_d, one acts as if there was one or that it would matter?.......
Why is this in current events? This should be in Philosophy.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
“There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent? Take a look at what we’ve done, too.” - Donald J. Trump, President of the USA The Kushner sh*t is greasy - Stevie B.
Miss_Faucie_Fishtits wrote:More and more I am taken by the beauty of wisdom that recognises every faith sees some manifestation of the divine. Mutually exclusive and contradictory? No problem. Precisely so, we can believe they point to a particle of the Truth. One universal claim to faith can be made, the Divine is fully revealed to no one. That said, we can believe some people see more and some people see less - and some faith systems stubbornly refuse to see what is in plain sight otherwise. Seeing no G_d is not worse than seeing an estranged or an incoherent one; and what faith can compare to when seeing no G_d, one acts as if there was one or that it would matter?........
The blind men and the elephant? They were all wrong.
Dear Believer, why do you believe what you believe? Why, given thousands of faith choices, did you almost certainly choose the dominant religion of your culture, or that of your parents? Do you realize that every member of every faith is just as devout, just as sincere, and their conviction every bit as sure as yours? They too read infallible holy texts, have air-tight apologetics, experience miracles, feel god's presence, obediently follow his perfect will, and can defend their belief with the same fervency as you. And yet, since every religion is mutually exclusive and contradicts the others in matters both large and small, they cannot all be right. The truth is, you already know what it's like to be an atheist in regard to every other faith but your own. Given this, is it so hard to see why some of us just take our atheism one god further?
Skeptics will and should recognize some of the arguments contained here within the texts and videos of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, John W. Loftus, and Carl Sagan.
.
this not about atheist/theist .. not at all
this about those idiots or those charlatans that make out of a spirituality a business or genocide
.
1CLjYHqfilE
"We don't have to presuppose anything on insufficient evidence." -- Samuel
"We ought to stop honoring people for not thinking." -- Daniel
Farcus wrote:
The blind men and the elephant? They were all wrong.
They were all right, just not to the extent and relevance they so confidently assumed. A prime article of faith is that The Big Picture is not available to us in our present situation. Belief that the human mind can see Truth on the level of G_d is a reliable source of the really good Big Problems, not to mention the epic l0lz....'>.........
"And so these men of Hindustan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right
And all were in the wrong."
We can see the elephant so we have reason to be smug,
and to blame the blind for being blind is something sorta thug......
But if we were in the same carrack and the vision avast is murky,
to claim that none can have a valid opinion is rather jerky.....XDDDDD..........
Never seen a version where the blind men shared their evidence about why they think the elephant is what it is. Instead they just start asserting their different versions. Then they start fighting about it.
Good thing we've developed a way to avoid all that nonsense...
Dear Believer, why do you believe what you believe? . .
Of course everyone's a "believer" except the durian asking the question.
Does anyone take this sort of drivel seriously?
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
The universe is a grand information system. Consciousness is an intrinsic property of 'reality'.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
Enki wrote:The universe is a grand information system. Consciousness is an intrinsic property of 'reality'.
Yes, Tinker, and we're all "believers." Can't believe this crap is still being bantered about. Where it goes from here is predictable—
Downhill . . we'll get shitty, personal insults from the "spaghetti monster" crowd, some pompous obfuscations, and in the end, all will remain as is.
Till next time . .
Gotta go shovel snow . . .
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
Enki wrote:The universe is a grand information system. Consciousness is an emergent property of 'reality'.
Fixed it for you. Bingo!!
Reality is an emergent property of consciousness.
But this argument is one for people who actually believe in universal beginnings, which I do not. There was no beginning of the universe, and there will be no end. Consciounsness and Matter have ALWAYS existed.
Men often oppose a thing merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike.
-Alexander Hamilton
Enki wrote:The universe is a grand information system. Consciousness is an emergent property of 'reality'.
Fixed it for you. Bingo!!
Reality is an emergent property of consciousness.
True, but off the point in the twisted sense you use it. Which was not mine BTW.
But this argument is one for people who actually believe in universal beginnings, which I do not. There was no beginning of the universe, and there will be no end. Consciounsness and Matter have ALWAYS existed.
Existence preceeds essense. "Consciousness" is ill-defined. There is no real property "greenness" of a tree.
Belief is product of necessity, reliant upon it. Metaphors are nice, but they are not disembodied brains, merely figments of signification. Drugs alter consciousness. Consciousness alters drugs.
