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 -
God Lover

Spiritual or science

643 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

eight bits
4 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

If you read the bolded bits, you could see within them the beginnings of explanation for causal effects and links, which 8 bits said did not exist in studies.  Without the surrounding text the y were not apparent or clear. 

As luck would have it, I read the bolded bits. The beginning of an explanation for causal effects and links is not a study showing that there is a cause-and-effect relationship to begin to explain.

Your claims involve causality in the sense of intervention, if a person makes some change in their life, then doing that will confer benefits upon the person. The change I specifically commented upon was a current unbeliever coming to religious belief. The problem there was that the change was impossible to manipulate experimentally, and so there are no studies showing what happens when the change is experimentally manipulated.

I imagine all this talk of correlation versus causation can quickly get boring for many readers. In this case, it may be life and death. Suppose it were the case that religious belief helps some people to maintain a healthy weight. Behold, the beginning of an explanation for causal effects. Religious belief will likely correlate with every good thing a healthy weight causes healthwise.

But suppose further somebody reasoned, "Hey, I have religious belief, so I don't have to worry about my weight. Studies show that people like me live long healthy lives."

You do see the danger in getting that wrong, right?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

Classic... 

Quote

 

[00.00:32]

~

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
7 hours ago, Habitat said:

Does not explain your pre-occupation with the subject. And it seems you are trying to deflect, Jodie-style, with feigned concern about my well being, anything but face up to your obsession with "woo", you'd rather imply I am somehow mentally unhinged. Your "concerns" are unfounded .

Talk about the kettle calling the pot black, I see a classic case of projection Waldo. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
3 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Talk about the kettle calling the pot black, I see a classic case of projection Waldo. 

Sorry, only calling it as I see it, and all in the service of the only thing worth knowing, the truth !

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
5 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

It does hold up scientifically and medically. You just cannot believe it 

My personal  experience is irrelevant  eg some non smokers contract lung cancer and die from it, but as I said you could also argue that, without god, I would be dead many decades ago  

Again yep all those things help

 BUT If i went to church it would help me live longer and if I had spiritual beliefs, that would also help.  That is the part you refuse to accept

Always ate "right" but maybe enjoyed good food too much 

Sure, you can argue anything and by golly you do, but what is supported with facts that is the important part, well not anything you are claiming.

Please reference 8ty’s posts explaining where you are confused. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Sherapy said:

You gotta lot of assumptions going there Die. 

If you were to set them to the side just for sheets and giggles what contributes to you being predisposed to believe in god and as you pointed out how do you know it is the god you believe in as opposed to RA, Thor, Shiva? Do you think this could be a habit at all?

I not seeking to change this, but get a better grasp of the believers mindset. 

Thanks for humoring me. 

Well that was some interesting pages...

Let's see... a lot of assumptions, because without them, there little point of discussing the particular point.

What makes me predisposed to belief in the Christian God? History... Friends... Positive Experiences... all which revolved around the Triune God. 

It's true, I'm assuming I know who I'm talking to, and listening for. Could be Aliens, or Professor X, for all I really know. But there's near on 2000 years of unbroken history. Which seems to me to be a deep source to draw on. 

I did know a Thor worshiper in college and he was an alright dude... 

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Sherapy said:

You are gonna think what you want. Knock yourself out Waldo.

Or get a spirit from the great morse code office in thr sky to do it :lol: :rofl:

Edited by psyche101
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright
14 hours ago, DieChecker said:
23 hours ago, Stubbly_Dooright said:

I’m curious as to why you believe that. Not putting it down, or even trying to get you to not believe it. (I respect it, it is what you instinctly believe in) .... (and it would be wrong to do that.) But, as to being told, I personally don’t think so. 

...

I consider scientific things as straight out objective situations. I consider the spiritual, religion, (despite the majority of people who practice it) as more of a subjective nature. Because, to each to honestly believe, it’s what is convincing them inside of themselves. 

....

That is why I can see how one can accept the other, but yet not necessarily the other way around. 

I'll try to explain again, why I think this way.

It is true scientific things are factual, and religious things are subjective. At least for the most part.

My point is religious people shouldnt dismiss science, and factual people shouldnt dismiss what is subjective. Since something is subjective, it usually cant be proven one way or the other. Trying to disprove the subjective using facts simply isnt going to prove anything. Thus, logically, the factual cant dismiss the subjective.

So rather then saying, "God is not real", a factual statement. It is more correct to say, "I dont believe in God". Which is subjective. 

There are definitely many who reject the subjective beliefs of religion, and many who reject scientific facts out of religious fervor. But, those are based on individual opinions and experiences.

Science and religion need not conflict with each other.

I see what you are saying. It’s going back to the ‘you can’t disprove it’ situation. As I have mentioned in a subsequent post to your subsequent post, I find it leaves a lot open for interpretation. 

I think, it’s an interesting answer you have there. I agree, you can’t disprove the subjective using facts. And, my reasoned opinion is that there is so much in the subjective outlook that could be an individual’s ‘proof’. Not necessarily these individual facts at the same time, and this is why I think it’s not ‘correct’ to assume one can use the subjective, or  the spiritual to be ‘necessary’ for the factual mindset. 

And, I think, that is why I consider it necessary (still binding this to my opinion) for the spiritual, the subjective, to consider the factual, because I consider the logical, the objective proof as to one thing, and one thing only. To me, I see it as proven to all, that it’s there. It just doesn’t vibe with equalizing it to fill in the blanks, and there you have it for the factual to insist upon themselves to consider the subjective, the spiritual. It’s not consistent. 

I think, for science to work, to see logic as it is, it’s has to be, (and is) consistent. 

I don’t see the subjective, spiritual, and other elements of this as consistent. That’s why I don’t see them as you do, as accepting each other. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, DieChecker said:
23 hours ago, Stubbly_Dooright said:

I did read the rest of the posts, following this one, to see if this was then pointed out to you in disagreement. I didn’t see any, (though, I did think the varying reply posts from some as just as logical.) I don’t think one can make that claim. Usually with claims, to be believed, one should point out how the claim is true. 

Frankly, I find it kind of condescending to assume that of anyone. How can you go about proving that people ‘simply aren’t listening’? Considering that God, (which I think you have pointed out) is not proven objectively, and is a subjective thing, how can you consider that to be readily proven to people to show they aren’t listening? How can you prove how people aren’t listening? Mostly so, when everyone is different in how they believe, and how they take in information. I think the Yanni/Laurel sound clip  is a good example on how people hear differently to something that is provable. Is the blame going on the Yanni people for not hearing Laurel, or vice versa? Now, consider something, like God, that is definitely not provable, and see ‘why’ people are not listening. To make a claim, the way I see it, I think you have to prove how is it, ‘they are not listening’. 

What would be your specifics in how people would listen in the first place? 

Kind of like, some years ago, there was a poster who claimed that those who don’t believe, that God spoke to them before, and I asked how. The point was that usually it’s with someone who grew up going to church or some religious place, as usually assumed in this country. But, considering this country has the right to go or not to go to religious meetings, the chance of one not going growing up is there. I pointed that out and asked how I would get that message. No answer. Yet, that poster was still around to reply to others. 

Is it going to be something like this, how someone is not listening? I go back to my thought on the yanni/laurel crowd. 

How can I say people aren't listening...

OK, so a few assumptions. Assuming God is real. Assuming God speaks to people.

Assuming those, then we have to ask, then has God never spoken to some people? To which I have to say I don't know. But, very likely. 

Assuming that then, has God spoken to many and they were not listening? Probably. Else we'd have a lot of converts going all the time. Heck, I often hear my wife, but dont process what she said. I'm busy with something else usually. Much the same with God. Even Jesus had to walk away time after time, to be alone and have quiet, to talk to the Father.

There seems to be a lot of assuming in your reply here. I want to repost the sentence of your’s again. 

Quote

God speaks to everyone, many simply aren't listening.

This seems to be a statement to me. To me, a statement is said, based that there is proof, a source, facts, to allow someone to make a statement. I cannot see how assumptions can be proof to assume one can make the statement, ie: the statement that many simply aren’t listening. 

Using assumptions of situations, and assumptions that the situations could exist, is not proof. Maybe, if you think many are simply not listening, your explanation might make me understand why you yourself, consider this. I still wouldn’t see it as true. Even looking to what you just said: 

Quote

Assuming that then, has God spoken to many and they were not listening? Probably. Else we'd have a lot of converts going all the time.

That’s just it, I think we would have a lot of converts, because a lot of people are probably are listening. If something is true, then a majority of those would be acknowledge it. Frankly, I have come to understand the majority of the religious in this country were more likely from religious families and raised that way. The one’s who weren’t and have become orthodox religious, I have come to understand are very few. I’m spiritual, who knows maybe religious, but not orthodox. Am I or was I listening? Who knows, as well. I think, looking back on it, there are too many elements to show how I became spiritual. I could have come from a song or a news bit, but I think, there’s too much to factor in, that it might have been something within me and not spiritual, to see it as spiritual or probably familiar. There is nothing exact to show it’s something that some can say was God, or what ever I believe in. I am ready to acknowledge that it’s could be a need to be it too. 

The examples of not listening to your wife, and not listening to God or Jesus, I see being a big difference. You can still prove your wife. In the end, she can come back to you and yell, “Why aren’t you listening to me?!?” 

What are the chances, that a factual God or provable Jesus will do that? 

14 hours ago, DieChecker said:

n the context of speaking to Xeno though, I knew he has "listened", and has "heard". At least heard something, even if he thinks it was imagination currently. I've spoken to him often enough to know he has such experience. So he didnt contradict the statement. IMHO.

Well, this part leaves out something that makes me wonder on how. How did you know? What proof shows you know? 

14 hours ago, DieChecker said:
Quote

Here’s the thing, with that type of thinking or assumption. I don’t take the ‘you can’t disprove God, so you should at least then believe in God’ as something to accept. Because, if one is to consider not able to disprove God, than you’re not able to disprove all of the gods/goddesses/myths, and so forth. So, you cannot disprove my belief, so than are you going to accept (at least) my belief? 

That line of thinking leaves so much open to interpret for other things, that I think it actually backfires. 

I dont believe logic can be used to create belief. Logic can be used to demand tolerance though. Belief and Faith must come from the desire of relationship with God. 

I am trying to understand how is it Belief and Faith must come from the ‘desire of relationship with God’. I have belief and I have Faith, but it doesn’t come from a desire of relationship with God. In fact, I grew up not being told, not seeing evidence, or assuming the reality of God. My point is, is God the sole factor for there to be Faith and Belief? 

Quote

I'm sorry if that is how I came across... that logic should force belief.

I don’t see how logic should force belief. Logic would force .......... logic. Right? I think, other elements would then lead to possible belief, but beliefs are not objective and thus, not logical. 

Quote

Belief is reinforced by Faith, which cant be earned, only accepted. Belief comes from experiences, and relationship... and sometimes by hope, or love.

That I agree with 100% :yes:  

Quote

I admit, that my belief is based on my experiences. If I was to pray to Thor, or Ra, or Shiva, and I got reinforcing things happening, I'd be predisposed to considering them  to be real also. 

Which is the example I’m using. Anything can fill in the blank. And your use of being predisposed to considering them, I find that interesting in you using that. Are you using that to say how people should listen, or why they aren’t listening? And that is something, I also like point out, that one is supposedly is listening, if they are already in the mindset for it. 

So, are you saying everyone must be in the predisposition to be listening to God or Jesus? What keeping you from agreeing with someone who tells you to be predisposed to listening to Thor, or Ra, Shiva, or my higher power? This is opening it up to an unlimited situation for everyone, to be open to so much. That can get a bit overwhelming, don’t you think? 

Quote

To my knowledge I've never "heard" from another "god", though it may be I'm simply not listening for them.

But, can you understand and agree if someone else tells you you have to listen for them? Are you prepared to be told to listen for all of them? What about the one’s that we are not aware of? Are you prepared to listen for them too. You see what I’m saying, this is bringing too much assumption on everyone. 

Quote

I've heard from plenty of the agents of the Enemy though. I try to ignore them though. They only want destructive things.

Do you have objective evidence for how you year from them. (What ever your version of the agents of the Enemy is....... could be a video game, I don’t know) 

Anyways, what you think you are hearing and ignoring, I probably don’t. Goes back to the same thing. 

 

Edited to add: I do see your post as very thought provoking, and I do admire it. 

Edited by Stubbly_Dooright
To add my admiration
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
10 hours ago, Habitat said:

You might actually be surprised by how many people make life decisions based on star signs and what not. It might well be, that you have been affected by it ! 

I wouldn't be surprised and this of course doesn't address anything I just said to you.  I don't know how things are where you are in Trollsville, Australia, but here in the states I very rarely have ever not been within a few miles of a place of worship, because they are almost everywhere.  Not so with astrology.

10 hours ago, Habitat said:

But don't complain to me about people trying to convert you by fear etc, I have never tried to convert you, so take your complaint elsewhere.

I wasn't referring to you specifically, just your terrible analogy.

11 hours ago, Habitat said:

The fact remains, you are troubled by doubts "it" might exist, but are too benighted to see where your motives lie.

That's not a fact, that's just yet another story you like to tell yourself because you don't know how to argue and can just name-call.  Because you have issues of your own.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

I hate to bring this up but maybe it may be of some assistance... 

Quote

Screenshot_2019_0815_215148.thumb.png.9b41ceb5ac8dd047437c8137931a685c.png

~

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
10 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Actually statistically (and thus, in the real world)  they are not.

Just as smokers die younger than non smokers,  nonbelievers and non church attendees ( within an otherwise identical cohort)  live shorter lives, and are less healthy than believers/church attendees. 

No guarantees.

Stopping smoking wont always mean you  don't get cancer, and it wont stop you getting run over by a bus, but across a population for individuals, the benefits in not smoking ,and in attending any sort of church (or being spiritual ) are enormous. 

Where are your data?  You are making that up!  My experience is hard core believers are less healthy and have harder times getting along with others because any little thing they don't understand they judge to be wrong or against their beliefs, instead of asking for clarification.  That puts them in mental distress, which causes health issues.  And a lot who try to get along with others and can't reconcile the cognitive dissonance caused by their religion versus their experience have the same problem, lots of health issues due to mental distress. 

You can justify your bad behviour all you want using your religion but you can't make up statistics and claim they are real.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
7 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Where are your data?  You are making that up!  My experience is hard core believers are less healthy and have harder times getting along with others because any little thing they don't understand they judge to be wrong or against their beliefs, instead of asking for clarification.  That puts them in mental distress, which causes health issues.  And a lot who try to get along with others and can't reconcile the cognitive dissonance caused by their religion versus their experience have the same problem, lots of health issues due to mental distress. 

You can justify your bad behviour all you want using your religion but you can't make up statistics and claim they are real.

This includes him too, he has had major health issues. 

Before he had his heart surgery he was on here all the time bragging about his great heath and how his faith was the sole reason, dragging out all kinds of articles to validate himself, he constantly preached to us, he would say if only we were like him did as him we would all be charmed and enjoy great health like he did.  

I simply don’t believe him. 

With, Walls this to shall pass, he has about 5 sermons he rotates, we are back on how believers are superior in all ways cuz god favors them more, next up is the pillar of light who is his bestie. 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
28 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

This includes him too, he has had major health issues. 

Before he had his heart surgery he was on here all the time bragging about his great heath and how his faith was the sole reason, dragging out all kinds of articles to validate himself, he constantly preached to us, he would say if only we were like him did as him we would all be charmed and enjoy great health like he did.  

I simply don’t believe him. 

With, Walls this to shall pass, he has about 5 sermons he rotates, we are back on how believers are superior in all ways cuz god favors them more, next up is the pillar of light who is his bestie. 

 

Isn't he the one who claimed he is always happy as well?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Where are your data?  You are making that up!  My experience is hard core believers are less healthy and have harder times getting along with others because any little thing they don't understand they judge to be wrong or against their beliefs, instead of asking for clarification.  That puts them in mental distress, which causes health issues.  And a lot who try to get along with others and can't reconcile the cognitive dissonance caused by their religion versus their experience have the same problem, lots of health issues due to mental distress. 

You can justify your bad behviour all you want using your religion but you can't make up statistics and claim they are real.

But what is percentage of the population that are hard-core believer's and what's the percentage of the population that are religious or spiritual?

Then you must define 'hard-core', religious and/or spiritual.

Then if I take America for example, around 22-25% of the population claim to be Atheist, Agnostic or whatever. So they have a smaller sample size. So the results are just indication of something not an actual figure. 

But study has shown the Religious/Spiritual people tend to have slightly better health......but I reckon if you carried out the same survey with the people who attent sports events like NFL, Premier League, Rugby, Cricket, AFL or whatever, every week the results may be very similar.

 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
3 minutes ago, danydandan said:

But what is percentage of the population that are hard-core believer's and what's the percentage of the population that are religious or spiritual?

Then you must define 'hard-core', religious and/or spiritual.

Then if I take America for example, around 22-25% of the population claim to be Atheist, Agnostic or whatever. So they have a smaller sample size. So the results are just indication of something not an actual figure. 

But study has shown the Religious/Spiritual people tend to have slightly better health......but I reckon if you carried out the same survey with the people who attent sports events like NFL, Premier League, Rugby, Cricket, AFL or whatever, every week the results may be very similar.

 

I think you are on to something.  Perhaps the questions could be changed to "Do you have a group you interact with on a regular basis?"  etc.  Take out the religion and spirtual aspect and actually survey who has daily and weekly interactions with others face to face and who doesn't.  That is probably the actual statistics, not "religious/spiritual" or "active sportsfan/non active sportsfan-non-sportsfan".  I could see that as a valid factor. (with the exception of those who just intract with  others enough to get their drink at a bar)

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lightly
On August 13, 2019 at 9:02 PM, XenoFish said:

I don't believe in happiness. If anything it's a temporary rush of feel good chemicals that rapidly vanishes. Then you're right back where you started. The pursuit of happiness is a fools errand. 

On a completely personal note....I've had some unhappiness in my life,   but in between I've never had to pursue happiness....I just was.   It came from within.

i guess I just had a good childhood...and was born with happy genes .    Happiness has become a bit more elusive ...but I am still grateful for my basically happy heart.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
1 minute ago, lightly said:

On a completely personal note....I've had some unhappiness in my life,   but in between I've never had to pursue happiness....I just was.   It came from within.

i guess I just had a good childhood...and was born with happy genes .    Happiness has become a bit more elusive ...but I am still grateful for my basically happy heart.

My childhood wasn't great but it has nothing to do with whether I am happy or content or not.  I have always tended to find a way to be ok or happy, depending on the circumstances.  If that is genetic then I am what would be called a "sport" because it is not typical in my family.  It is just the way I cope, remember the good stuff and when I catch myself in those self destructive thought loops, jump off by changing what I am thinking about.  I call it my Jedi Mind trick.  I read about a person who was rescued from Auschwitz who said "they could take my possessions, my family, my friends but they could never take my mind."  It is something we all need to accept as our responsibility, how we think and what we think.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I think you are on to something.  Perhaps the questions could be changed to "Do you have a group you interact with on a regular basis?"  etc.  Take out the religion and spirtual aspect and actually survey who has daily and weekly interactions with others face to face and who doesn't.  That is probably the actual statistics, not "religious/spiritual" or "active sportsfan/non active sportsfan-non-sportsfan".  I could see that as a valid factor. (with the exception of those who just intract with  others enough to get their drink at a bar)

Exactly. 

It isn't about your belief, it's more to do with interactions and activities carried out as a result of that belief. In my humble opinion.

Edited by danydandan
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
23 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I think you are on to something.  Perhaps the questions could be changed to "Do you have a group you interact with on a regular basis?"  etc.  Take out the religion and spirtual aspect and actually survey who has daily and weekly interactions with others face to face and who doesn't.  That is probably the actual statistics, not "religious/spiritual" or "active sportsfan/non active sportsfan-non-sportsfan".  I could see that as a valid factor. (with the exception of those who just intract with  others enough to get their drink at a bar)

I think that's pretty much it in a nutshell. No religion required. 

cormac

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
5 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Isn't he the one who claimed he is always happy as well?

Yes, that is him. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
4 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Yes, that is him. 

 

I question his veracity, then.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
2 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I question his veracity, then.

I do all the time too, 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, danydandan said:

But what is percentage of the population that are hard-core believer's and what's the percentage of the population that are religious or spiritual?

Then you must define 'hard-core', religious and/or spiritual.

Then if I take America for example, around 22-25% of the population claim to be Atheist, Agnostic or whatever. So they have a smaller sample size. So the results are just indication of something not an actual figure. 

But study has shown the Religious/Spiritual people tend to have slightly better health......but I reckon if you carried out the same survey with the people who attent sports events like NFL, Premier League, Rugby, Cricket, AFL or whatever, every week the results may be very similar.

 

What does it even mean to be religious or not religious, basically saying you do or do not believe in god, I personally wouldn’t find a survey compelling data, especially the claims began made that a person just by way of belief in god is accruing a longer life. 

Walls actually posted it improves your immune system, how in the hell would one test this. 

How does one distinguish between the natural healing capacity of a given human verses god did it. 

 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
16 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

Where are your data?  You are making that up!  My experience is hard core believers are less healthy and have harder times getting along with others because any little thing they don't understand they judge to be wrong or against their beliefs, instead of asking for clarification.  That puts them in mental distress, which causes health issues.  And a lot who try to get along with others and can't reconcile the cognitive dissonance caused by their religion versus their experience have the same problem, lots of health issues due to mental distress. 

You can justify your bad behviour all you want using your religion but you can't make up statistics and claim they are real.

Sorry but  i included data and sources.

 All you have to do is your own google search and you will find all the statistical data. There are tens of thousands of studies; and meta studies checking many thousands of those studies, and about 85% show the same results. About 5% show some negative effects and 10% are inconclusive  

I agree one can't make stuff up, but i don't have to I just quote overwhelming scientific and medial data  

Your  experience is anecdotal, and may even be true within your circle of acquaintances However its NOT  evidence based.

Maybe the y are in the 5% (if a belief is strongly negative then it can have negative effects but most humans choose or adopt religions/spiritual beliefs  which support and suit therm.  why woulpd a paeronhave cognitive dissonance unless they had been forced into a belief . Given we can pick and choose, adopt and reject, beliefs as adults, this dissonance  is quite rare Maybe your group of associates is entering adulthood and still struggling to find their own beliefs and spirituality.

  Some kids do find them selves growing out of their parents beliefs as the y become adults  Some become atheists others swap to other belief systems.  In part it is a natural part of growing up and establisjng Independence. 

Ps what bad behaviours? I am one of the best behaved human beings you will ever encounter :)  I was raised with strict, ethics moralities and value lines, but also an abilty to understand and analyse why human s need and hold values and ethics, and how these are all situational, and vary from person to person, culture to culture, and across time ,  by atheist, secular- humanist parents.  

  • Confused 1

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.