Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Conspirologist

Theism and Atheism Vs Agnosticism

331 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Mr Walker
7 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hmm Walker, if this is your view now what happened to your god/alien/angel hybrid?

 

That is mighty generous of you :lol: see above statement.

 

How do you see this with respect to the vicious dog and snakes that your imagination created and was the reason for teaching yourself not to visualize.

jmccr8

The entity i know is a real physical advanced alien  being with advanced abilities and technologies  It evolved like us and is not omniscient or omnipotent but is powerful and wise.

I've NEVER  been a  creationist or simply believed in gods by faith. Nothing has changed. I  think posters just construct their own idea of what i am talking about based on common understandings of god.  eg if i live by a christian theology of behaviour they assume i believe in a christian god . Not really The biblical way of life is healthy life affirming and works in a modern western democracy so i can live by it. 

It is not generous  Belief is powerful, and as long as a belief is constructive and empowering, i think humans can productively hold any belief the y like. And of course i have no say over what peole believe, only over what the y do. 

I m not sure what you mean by your last question I simply decided that i would always be in control of both my conscious and subconscious minds Then basically by myself with many many hours of effort and training over 2 decades of time, I    took control of my mind and the bodily functions controlled by the mind.  In a way it was hard as  a kid because, while my parents gave me some good techniques, there were no books or experts on this  to get help from  

My parents were strong advocates of discipline allowing a person to control their behaviours;  and intelligence and logic allowing us to predict and extrapolate/evaluate consequences of behaviour From childhood we were held to high standards of behaviour and expected to act with self discipline (to compensate we had a lot of freedom allowed by being responsible and aware   (eg my parents were quite happy or me to make and use anything from longbows and cross bows to explosives)

On the other hand, i had lots of time ( no tv or electronic devices for the first 8 or so years of my life and the sort of dedication a kid can put into any endeavour.

 The human mind is extremely powerful. It shapes us and it shapes the world we live in. 

And so it is important for our self aware consciousness to always retain conscious control of our mind, and thus behaviours

  Later studies in psychology sociology cognitive  development and language  and even human history, all helped me.to complete this task by the time i was about 21 

Because humans are completely able to chose their behaviours, we are held accountable for those behaviours, by both  our conscience, and our legal system  

Free will, and the abilty to consciously chose our behaviours,  brings with it commensurate responsibility. Take away free will, and an understanding of cause and effect/consequence,  and we CANNOT be good or bad, because good and bad behaviours require knowing what  is good or bad (creative/destructive)  and freedom to chose them (hence animals other than humans have no evil or goodness in them and cant be said to rape or murder . 

This may not be the question you intended, but i have tried to answer what i THINK you were asking 

Basically a human can unlearn fear of anything, unlearn hate and anger and jealousy, and with will and discipline shape themselves into a person who is never angry never afraid never jealous  etc.  

This will not completely eliminate violence, for example but it will stop unreasoned or unreasoning violence  where a person's emotional lack of control allows them to commit acts of violence.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
4 hours ago, TruthSeeker_ said:

"Bright and luminous as you are, O Soul, by your own nature, you went to the world of darkness, and engaged in combat with it; and the world of darkness obscured your light, and encompassed you with darkness, and blinded you, and made you lose sight of all that you had seen, and forget all that you had known; and in the end, you were captured and held prisoner.”

- Hermes Trismegistus / The Hermetica

NUP  The light always wins out over the darkness as long as you keep the light burning. . In my life there simply is no room for any darkness, because every corner of it is filled with light  

I agree that the human spirit and soul is MEANT to be as represented in the first half of this verse, and that too often it is subsumed by darkness.  But this results from poor choices by the human beings involved, both in thought and in deed.

Darkness and light are products of our own mind, not good or evil external forces vying for our soul.  

  My soul is free (and thus the essential me is always free) .It cannot be confined by either material things like concrete cells or iron bars,  nor the prison of inflexible ideas.  

I reckon old hermes wrote this in his aged years, when he was accosted by the nature of old age, and approaching death. When the energies, optimism, hope,  and power of youth seems to lessen, and  darkness seems to be approaching 

serva fidem

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
2 hours ago, No Solid Ground said:

The concept of 'God' itself is human projection. 

Well, so are all concepts. eg dog.

 There are dogs,  and then there are human  concepts of dogs, projected on to the poor things. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits

Frank

One aspect of Christianity I haven't much thought about is what if there really was some "return in glory" in the style of Daniel? My first thought is to hear Christopher Hitchens in my mind's ear saying "So what?" That is, what would some flashy display like that have to do with the legitimacy of Christian claims? (Parallel to how does Jesus' mother never having had sex make him an expert on divorce?)

And as you say, there would be the further problem that miracles might all be faked anyway (a problem that ancient counterapologists raised, and never got much of an answer).


LG

Quote

I just am not sure why we don't do a comparison of the not-entirely-subjective content and thinking supporting our beliefs before classification.

I think people already have. Our (secondary) problem begins with the observed fact that different people have given different weights to the "pieces of the puzzle," and come up with different overall estimates for heaven and hallucination.

Quote

Does anything change if our original problem deals with 'reports' plural?  

Yes. In the actual discussion, "both sides" are aware that any specific report comes from a large body of many such reports. Unfortunately, for one side the volume, thematic similarity despite cultrual differences and the frequent inclusion of clinical data reinforce the veridical potential of the reports. For the other side, the same factors reinforce the similarity to dreams, hallucinations and so forth, and the obvious vulnerability of the CNS to malfunction. ("Clinically dead" = nothing is working correctly.)

Quote

Depending on what is meant by 'classify',

Attach one label to something, chosen from some set of possible labels. In this case, "happened" or "didn't happen," attached to claims like "I almost died and when I did, I saw..."

The parentheses were supposed to go around (Original) as opposed to the secondary problem. Evidence was supposed to shine forth.

Quote

"compare hypotheses against reality"

Unfortunately, the inability to do that directly is what makes the problem hard. There is no "envelope" to unseal, pull out the little card prepared by Price Waterhouse and read off the right answer. (And people sometimes manage to screw up even that).

Oh, just to be clear: once the focus shifted to the secondary problem, there really isn't any consensus about any "right way" to form prior opinions. In the orginal problem, I know what to do with the evidence because there's lots of consensus about that (even if it didn't help in this case). It is much easier to advise somebody how to change an opinion than to advise them how to form a good opinion in the first place. (And so, usually, the less evidence there is, and the less clear it is, the more diversity of opinion there is.)

Quote

Actually, do you think hallucinations are more likely explanations for NDEs compared to heaven trips?

Yes. These reports look just like especially vivid dream reports to me. What chiefly distinguishes them from sleep-dreams is the severe trauma aspect, and that seems to me to reduce their veridical potential rather than to increase it.

ETA: IRL, if I have a headache or a stuffy nose, I notice that my cognitive performance is impaired. Now, along comes somebody whose skull was cracked open or who hadn't breathed for ten minutes, and I'm supposed to think his cognitive performance has improved. Gimme a break.

 

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Davros of Skaro

Frank

First, I wish you were on more.

I did not know I was missed. 

I adopted a minimalist lifestyle. The energy I gather off-grid for my electronics is portioned. My pushback of bad ideas is divided up, and spread out which leads little time for idle chat, or even reading much here.

"I don't think my schizophrenic tendencies has anything to do with my situation in life.  It's incidental and I probably wouldn't have mentioned it except to maybe help counter some extravagant claims that were being made."

I missed the details. I can just imagine people trying to convince you it's more than it is.

There's an old woman down the road from me that screams at her neighbor's house in the middle night to turn down the Irish music. There's no music, and the house is several hundred yards away from her with woods between them.

"I am by local standards comfortable and wealthy.   The only problems with my health even have been pretty much cured.  Last time my doctor took a good listen he said he could hear no difference between my heart and one of someone much younger who had never had problems."

Doctors tend to use the placebo effect on their patients. So believe it, and I always recommend walking, or any low impact exercise. 

Rub a Dub Stubz

As for your post accident memory loss. I wonder what percentage is the physical trauma to the mental trauma that's responsible? 

"I find this a bit, unsettling. When it comes to prosetylising, (which you probably already know is my pet peeve) I can understand wanting to put a stop to it. I'm not sure, if this is what you mean, though. :unsure: Now, if it's people simply living their lives believing something, but go on and just be people, I don't think there's harm in that. I wonder, if trying to stop people from believing what they feel strongly in believing is the thought here."

To me Mark came here to spread seeds. He's thinking some will fall to the choking weeds, parched rocky ground, and to the seed eating Birds. Some he believes will fall on fertile ground to sprout, and fruit.

I'm just showing he's casting Styrofoam Peanuts of illogical fallacies, and total ignorance of science. He can't see the seeds for what they are. But he can see the wind of cognitive dissonance blowing his seeds back in his face.

Now if someone went around knowingly spreading AIDS it would be a horror. But someone spreading a Socially Transmitted Disease is ok to some people. Not to me. 

People can believe what they want. But if they want to infect others with bad ideas? The Doctor is in to help the spread of contagion. ;)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
5 hours ago, davros of skaro said:

Frank

First, I wish you were on more.

I did not know I was missed. 

I adopted a minimalist lifestyle. The energy I gather off-grid for my electronics is portioned. My pushback of bad ideas is divided up, and spread out which leads little time for idle chat, or even reading much here.

"I don't think my schizophrenic tendencies has anything to do with my situation in life.  It's incidental and I probably wouldn't have mentioned it except to maybe help counter some extravagant claims that were being made."

I missed the details. I can just imagine people trying to convince you it's more than it is.

There's an old woman down the road from me that screams at her neighbor's house in the middle night to turn down the Irish music. There's no music, and the house is several hundred yards away from her with woods between them.

"I am by local standards comfortable and wealthy.   The only problems with my health even have been pretty much cured.  Last time my doctor took a good listen he said he could hear no difference between my heart and one of someone much younger who had never had problems."

Doctors tend to use the placebo effect on their patients. So believe it, and I always recommend walking, or any low impact exercise. 

Rub a Dub Stubz

As for your post accident memory loss. I wonder what percentage is the physical trauma to the mental trauma that's responsible? 

"I find this a bit, unsettling. When it comes to prosetylising, (which you probably already know is my pet peeve) I can understand wanting to put a stop to it. I'm not sure, if this is what you mean, though. :unsure: Now, if it's people simply living their lives believing something, but go on and just be people, I don't think there's harm in that. I wonder, if trying to stop people from believing what they feel strongly in believing is the thought here."

To me Mark came here to spread seeds. He's thinking some will fall to the choking weeds, parched rocky ground, and to the seed eating Birds. Some he believes will fall on fertile ground to sprout, and fruit.

I'm just showing he's casting Styrofoam Peanuts of illogical fallacies, and total ignorance of science. He can't see the seeds for what they are. But he can see the wind of cognitive dissonance blowing his seeds back in his face.

Now if someone went around knowingly spreading AIDS it would be a horror. But someone spreading a Socially Transmitted Disease is ok to some people. Not to me. 

People can believe what they want. But if they want to infect others with bad ideas? The Doctor is in to help the spread of contagion. ;)

Of course mark (and I)   might argue that the virus he is trying to spread is the antidote to a wider plague presently killing off humanity,  or at least the things which make us human.  In that sense, faith belief and spirituality are not the disease but the cure . SOmetimes it is even necessary to cure people who don't want to be cured. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xeno-Fish
7 hours ago, davros of skaro said:

Socially Transmitted Disease

That would depending on the lethality of the memetic virus. Comparing Christian beliefs to Islamic beliefs, which do you think it the worse? Common cold vs Cancer. I think you know where I stand on this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf
7 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Of course mark (and I)   might argue that the virus he is trying to spread is the antidote to a wider plague presently killing off humanity,  or at least the things which make us human.  In that sense, faith belief and spirituality are not the disease but the cure . SOmetimes it is even necessary to cure people who don't want to be cured. :) 

419px-Cutting_the_Stone_(Bosch).jpg514qFL2mO4L._UX385_.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
4 minutes ago, Mystic Crusader said:

419px-Cutting_the_Stone_(Bosch).jpg514qFL2mO4L._UX385_.jpg

Wrong allegory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf
28 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Wrong allegory.

It isn't really, you can combine analogies and form a new analogy.

You need to work on your aphantasia.

Edited by Mystic Crusader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
35 minutes ago, Mystic Crusader said:

It isn't really, you can combine analogies and form a new analogy.

You need to work on your aphantasia.

Aphantasia has nothing to do with this. Bosch's artwork referenced a totally different allegory  Of the surgeon who was so ignorant he was more insane than the patient he was attempting to treat 

 

The prevailing theory that insanity was caused by evil demons made it necessary to treat, if not cure, the mentally ill. In the 15th, 16th, and as late as the 17th centuries, a group of charlatans came to the forefront to cure the diseases of the mind. These quacks were often men and women untrained in the medical sciences. Among them were astrologers, chemists, monks, nuns, alchemists, jugglers and street peddlers, all who claimed to have the cure for mental illness.

Mental illness, they said, was the result of a small stone inside the brain, and they could cure this disorder by trepanning the skull, and letting out the stone. It made sense, to a point, that an individual could produce mental results through physical intervention in the brain. Thus developed a mythical stone of madness, after removal of which, the insanity would be cured.

The great artist Hieronymus Bosch immortalized the scene of a physician trepanning the skull to remove stones in his painting The Cure of Folly, otherwise known as The Extraction of the Stone of Madness. This painting depicts the scene with a dry wit and sarcastic view of the removal of the stone of madness. The “doctor” in the scene is wearing a funnel hat, an early symbol of madness, indicating that he is also insane. He is trepanning the skull of a patient, in order to retrieve the stone from within the patient’s skull.

http://brainblogger.com/2011/05/27/extracting-the-stone-of-madness-the-search-for-the-cure-to-insanity/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf
8 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Aphantasia has nothing to do with this. Bosch's artwork referenced a totally different allegory  Of the surgeon who was so ignorant he was more insane than the patient he was attempting to treat 

 

The prevailing theory that insanity was caused by evil demons made it necessary to treat, if not cure, the mentally ill. In the 15th, 16th, and as late as the 17th centuries, a group of charlatans came to the forefront to cure the diseases of the mind. These quacks were often men and women untrained in the medical sciences. Among them were astrologers, chemists, monks, nuns, alchemists, jugglers and street peddlers, all who claimed to have the cure for mental illness.

Mental illness, they said, was the result of a small stone inside the brain, and they could cure this disorder by trepanning the skull, and letting out the stone. It made sense, to a point, that an individual could produce mental results through physical intervention in the brain. Thus developed a mythical stone of madness, after removal of which, the insanity would be cured.

The great artist Hieronymus Bosch immortalized the scene of a physician trepanning the skull to remove stones in his painting The Cure of Folly, otherwise known as The Extraction of the Stone of Madness. This painting depicts the scene with a dry wit and sarcastic view of the removal of the stone of madness. The “doctor” in the scene is wearing a funnel hat, an early symbol of madness, indicating that he is also insane. He is trepanning the skull of a patient, in order to retrieve the stone from within the patient’s skull.

http://brainblogger.com/2011/05/27/extracting-the-stone-of-madness-the-search-for-the-cure-to-insanity/

I am forming a new analogy through the use of two analogies, what didn't you understand.

B.T.W., he is taking the gold flower out of his mind and replacing it with the insanity of the book, which was already done on the woman (Nun).

Quote

A nun is a member of a religious community of women, typically one living under vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience.

 

Edited by Mystic Crusader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
14 minutes ago, Mystic Crusader said:

I am forming a new analogy through the use of two analogies, what didn't you understand.

B.T.W., he is taking the gold flower out of his mind and replacing it with the insanity of the book, which was already done on the woman (Nun).

Mixing analogies might work in your mind But not for me. This has nothing to do with religion, either as a source of madness, or a s a cure for it, except in your mind. 

Actually Bosch  just replaced the classic stone of madness  with a bulb  in his painting  The woman is the fool, and is holding a book over her head, representing the amulets and charms (often made from books) used to ward off evil   While there IS another bulb on the table there is no indication it was removed from any of the characters in the painting 

So what about Bosch? His painting is much harder to reconcile with reality than the others. Not only is the scene staged most strangely (in the vacant countryside with weird props and household furniture), poor Lubbert has a blooming flower sprouting from his head! The flower, which is probably a tulip, may have its origin in a Dutch saying: according to James Harris (2004), “simpletons were referred to as tulip heads, and having a bulb in your head was synonymous with having a stone.” Colloquially the phrases might have been synonymous, but even the most skilled quack would have a hard time passing a tulip-extraction off as a legitimate cure. By making this visual pun, Bosch ensures that the scene is too incredible, too unlikely, to be mistaken for reality. Like many of Bosch’s works, it’s better read as a representation of human weakness.

http://scienceblogs.com/bioephemera/2008/08/25/the-stone-of-madness/

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf

henry-harris-quote-all-i-can-say-is-a-pi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
1 minute ago, Mystic Crusader said:

henry-harris-quote-all-i-can-say-is-a-pi

Only if the viewer has the same contextual understanding and knowledge as the painter or photographer, or the person trying to use the picture to communicate  

Bosch's painting clearly meant something totally different to you, than it does to me,  and i can still only guess what it does mean for you; which is not a very effective form of communication  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf
2 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Mixing analogies might work in your mind But not for me.

Aphantasia is the suggested name for a condition where one does not possess a functioning mind's eye and cannot visualize imagery.

confused.jpg

Quote

Actually Bosch  just replaced the classic stone of madness  with a bulb  in his painting  The woman is the fool, and is holding a book over her head, representing the amulets and charms (often made from books) used to ward off evil   While there IS another bulb on the table there is no indication it was removed from any of the characters in the painting 

It's a gold flower, not a bulb. It was extracted from the woman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
6 hours ago, Mystic Crusader said:

Aphantasia is the suggested name for a condition where one does not possess a functioning mind's eye and cannot visualize imagery.

confused.jpg

It's a gold flower, not a bulb. It was extracted from the woman.

lol yes i know. i've explained it a few times myself :) 

While it might restrict my ability to understand images, this is more a problem with a lack of common contextual understanding.

Fortunately i do not live in your mind and thus do not interpret images as you interpret them  I am also a bit of an old fashioned pedant when it comes to the use of metaphors, which only work where both people understand they are talking about the same two halves of the metaphor (or simile)  

Not sure where you got that interpretation of the painting from.  It doesn't appear in either the artistic OR the psychological interpretations of that painting, which I have read.

Are you sure its not just the theory of some like mystic? 

There is no evidence in the painting that the woman has had any operation on her brain/skull This was quite a serious operation (and often performed in real life) Often the quack or charlatan doctor produced a small stone to convince the onlookers of the success of his operation  BAsically it was trepanning,  and only in very special circumstances would it have helped a mental illness. 

Bosch is seen as a social critic, and this is perhaps most straightforwardly on display in The Extraction of the Stone of Madness, also known as The Cure of Folly. This early painting depicts the extraction of a “stone” from the patient’s head – a common operation that was said to alleviate the sufferer from madness. Of course, such an operation aided little, and Bosch apparently critiqued the practice. First, he has exchanged the traditional stone with the bulb of a flower. A “tulip head” was a Dutch expression for a madman. Second, the inscription reads, “Meester snyt die Keye ras - myne name is lubbert das” (Master, cut away the stone – my name is Lubbert Das). Lubbert Das was a comical character in Dutch literature, underlining Bosch’s intention that he was critiquing the “fool” who thought he would be cured from madness in this way. Third, the doctor’s funnel hat is Bosch saying the fool in this painting is not only the patient, but also the doctor, as he is obviously mad – a fool – to assume that any of the no doubt dozens if not hundred of operations he had performed, would relieve anyone’s suffering. But he also depicts a monk encouraging the guileless victim and a nun who watches with bland unconcern. The role of the church is portrayed as that of a non-agent, and Bosch does not seem happy with their let-it-be attitude. 

http://philipcoppens.com/bosch.html

 

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Davros of Skaro
17 hours ago, XenoFish said:

That would depending on the lethality of the memetic virus. Comparing Christian beliefs to Islamic beliefs, which do you think it the worse? Common cold vs Cancer. I think you know where I stand on this.

I view them the same.

Bad ideas feed off each other. 

Example; "Our bad idea is the correct way to the bad idea. Those others have the wrong bad idea, and is not the path to the true bad idea."

Both sides of the bad idea say this about each other, and it feeds both bad ideas. Just because one bad idea trimmed up a bit over the other, it still legitimizes both holders of bad ideas.

Also consider President Putin. He's a pimp mac daddy worth billions, has much blood on his hands, and rocks the dead guy on a stick.

If you want to hold the Brain virus metaphor? Think of the potential for mutation from benevolence to malevolence. 

I know I'm the odd one out, but to me I hold both as the same bad idea that hold each other up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
3 hours ago, davros of skaro said:

I view them the same.

Bad ideas feed off each other. 

Example; "Our bad idea is the correct way to the bad idea. Those others have the wrong bad idea, and is not the path to the true bad idea."

Both sides of the bad idea say this about each other, and it feeds both bad ideas. Just because one bad idea trimmed up a bit over the other, it still legitimizes both holders of bad ideas.

Also consider President Putin. He's a pimp mac daddy worth billions, has much blood on his hands, and rocks the dead guy on a stick.

If you want to hold the Brain virus metaphor? Think of the potential for mutation from benevolence to malevolence. 

I know I'm the odd one out, but to me I hold both as the same bad idea that hold each other up.

Actually both religions are useful and constructive WHEN they are applied usefully and constructively. As in all things human it is human free will and abilty to do both harm and good which CAN mess up the outcomes.

 I could live strictly  by any of the books such as the koran torah or  bible very peacefully, constructively, and productively; in harmony with other humans and the environment  and be better off than a person with NO faith or belief. However if i was otherwise inclined i could generate great destruction and  evil from any of the books

Knowledge and   power works both ways, equally, for good and evil  and is a two edged sword.  Yet knowledge and power is essential and without the sword you can neither hurt, nor defend, yourself. Thus  it is better to have the sword than not to have it .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xeno-Fish
5 hours ago, davros of skaro said:

I view them the same.

Bad ideas feed off each other. 

I can agree on this. I do not like the guilt shaming that hooks you into Christianity as equally as I dislike the barbarianism of Islam. I see religion as a spectrum, from 1 to 10 and 10 being the worst. I don't hear much about how a Christian drove a truck into a crowd to kill non-believers, or killed someone over a picture of Jesus, nor have I see where they come into a country and turn it into a **** hole. I can tolerate Christianity because it's not a threat to me. Plus it's not an extreme form of OCD where you have to pray 5 times a day and for everything, where every thought you have isn't controlled by your belief. Islam is the most dangerous memetic virus to date. It's a religion of conquest not peace.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BarnCat68
On ‎5‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 8:28 PM, Sherapy said:

I am an agnostic, to me it is the equivalence of saying I don't know one way or the other, but. I am open to all takes on the subject, but I am still not going to be able to say I know anything. There isn't an answer to the god question at this point and I am okay with it. 

Wow.  I wish I could say that *I* am ok with the deity question... My upbringing was protestant Xian, and now I identify as somewhere  between agnostic and atheist.  Endlessly fascinating as I find religious/theological debates and conversation, I never feel satisfied by anyone's answers.  I feel haunted by this god that may or may not exist.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BarnCat68
On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 7:42 PM, Mr Walker said:

And yet, as self aware human beings, this is the natural, and inevitable, state of things. We cannot live like non aware entities.

For a human being, the nature of the natural world around them, is irrevocably shaped and determined, in their mind, via cognitive process.

Belief merely aids in the formation of understanding and processing the world around us , and provides a centre and a clarity for that understanding; acting like a lens through which we perceive our environment.

Belief in god is not culturally conditioned, although culture shapes the NATURE of the gods believed in.

Belief in gods is an inevitable cognitive step, as the human mind seeks to make sense of its world from infancy.  Without belief in magical agents, a young child's mind simply cannot make any sense of what is happening around it.

Once it establishes that certain real agents of change exist, such as humans,  it tends to attribute ALL changes to active and intelligent agents  While not thought  of as gods by the infant, this concept evolves into the belief in spirits, or gods,  or angels, or some  culturally approved equivalent.

Much later, as a growing child is taught the physical facts and realities of the world, it may grow out of magical thinking (or have a specific religious belief conditioned into it by surrounding culture)  but that  first cognitive process will always remain close below the surface of the mind, ready to surface again . 

I don't know about this... from what I remember of childhood, I would never have believed in Santa Claus, for example, if my parents hadn't told me about the myth...even so, I doubted what they told me about a fat man in a red suit driving a reindeer-powered flying sleigh. Our house didn't have a chimney, for one thing.  I had seen chimneys at other people's houses, and even at the age of 3, I knew that an overweight elderly gentleman couldn't possibly cram himself and a bag full of toys into that narrow aperture while trying to maintain his footing on a very slippery rooftop.  Observation taught me that my parents and other relatives were the bringers of gifts at Christmastime.  Observation also taught me that children are taught myths in order to divert them from noticing an inconvenient reality.

I was born a doubting Thomas.  These days, I am concerned that I am growing into magical thinking.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BarnCat68
On ‎5‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 4:04 AM, Mr Walker said:

Think of the whole movie industry which would be destroyed if humans rooted out their desire/ need/ capacity, for belief  If no one was scared by the IDEA of ghosts, zombies, evil leprechauns, living dolls, were wolves etc , then  storytellers and movie makers would be out of a job. :)

Entire groups of  world views and belief systems, like that of indigenous Australians  (And buddhism)  would be gone for ever.  And so, then, would be the lifestyles based upon the values and beliefs of people who held to those beliefs. . 

That's strange.  The day I become afraid of zombies and ghosts is the day I stop watching horror films.  I have loved those movies all my life, because they are comfortingly unreal.  I could meet a serial killer while out for a walk on a full moon night, but not a werewolf.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BarnCat68
On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 7:08 PM, markdohle said:

To live for the seeking of truth.  To live just for enjoyment I believe leads to a deep inner emptiness. 

Peace
Mark

I like that answer.  I once asked my dad his opinion about the 'meaning of life', and his reply was 'the meaning of life is simply to enjoy life'.  To which I said (silently of course) 'stuff and nonsense'.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Essan
On 15/05/2017 at 10:46 AM, XenoFish said:

That would depending on the lethality of the memetic virus. Comparing Christian beliefs to Islamic beliefs, which do you think it the worse? Common cold vs Cancer. I think you know where I stand on this.

I would say they are both almost identical - although the former has now almost run it's course (after causing the deaths of many millions) with signs of recovery on the way, whilst the later is only now entering it's most virulent stage.

Fortunately, having lived through Christanity, we may have a better chance of immunity from, and even curing, Islam.

To extend the metaphor.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.