Religulous

[Kuya]

Religions do, quite often, assert that what they want to be true IS true, with no evidence to back it up. The rules by which I live my life force me to make a distinction between what I want to be true and what is reality. Religion doesn't have that rule, and allows people to cross that line. Is it healthy to allow society to be full of people with distorted views of reality, because it makes them feel good? We might as well let people use all the drugs they want.

And to respond to this with a little more focus; as i have said certain people, and sometimes the religions themselves assert that their dogma is true, and all others false, they are usually quite troublesome and they usually require that one fight against them, assuming they are actually endangering the state, or for whatever personal reason you have. Naturally, we're making generalizations again, not all religions assert absolute truth and that all other systems of belief are wrong, and it is faulty to extrapolate the failings and absurdities of certain religious dogma into all of them, and even the spiritual concepts like animism itself, which at times aren't even part of a system. And as for the last bit, i sort of commented on that in my other post, but yes, who decides what's healthy? Especially when what's healthy is usually whatever is conveniant to the state?

[Eratosthenes]

Healthy for whom? Certain religions often are social institutions structured to justify the status quo. I find it funny, because drugs are becoming our new "religions", they are being used to justify the status quo in the certain sense, and they also serve to quell mental unrest, though it doesn't always fix the problem.

Is it right for people who think they don't live in the real world to have influence, especially if they claim authority without being able to justify it? Nobody ever has the right to claim absolute authority, and bad things usually happen when someone does. So why should anyone listen when somebody says they have divine insight? I certainly don't want to follow anyone who prays for guidance, because it just means they're lost and won't admit it.

Reason is the best tool for determining what is likely to be true. Intuition, upon which religion and belief in the supernatural are based, is unreliable; it's likely to cause more problems than it solves.

[Neosutra]

Kuya: "BUT WHAT PROBLEMS DOES IT CAUSE!?"

Seriously, maybe I'm just tired today, but kuya your debating is seeming to be half hearted attemts to invoke responses rather than honest communication and/or reason.

[Eratosthenes]

To add to my previous post, the problems of blindly trusting intuition extend even beyond religion. There are people out there who believe vaccines cause autism, even though there is no evidence to suggest a connection. They push for vaccination laws, such as the ones requiring students of public schools to have up-to-date vaccinations, to be repealed. The harm in believing in this particular nonexistent cause/effect relationship is that not vaccinating puts EVERYONE at risk. Vaccines work best when everyone gets them, setting up a nearly impenetrable barrier to disease. Unprotected people are holes in that barrier.

[Demosthenes11]

All religion is bad. And the benifits from any spiritual/religious sets can be attained via non theistic methods and done so w/o the downsides of having to subscribe to false and ficticious perceptions of reality. This however is not a discussion about wether someone has the right to believe this fiction, as I believe they do.

I view religion as mental cancer, it's your right to do it, but that doesnt make it less retarded.

the fuck what. I think this comes down to a superiority complex. You think that if someone feels empowered without religion, they are better than those that feel empowered with religion.

I've never understood why you take issue with people, like myself, who are not really religious in the organized sense, yet believe in god. You even said all religion is bad. What is bad about thinking there is a point to it all? What is wrong with "seeing" god I look into the eyes of someone I love? Who does it hurt when I attribute good luck to god?
I'm not talking about groups of people, I'm talking about me. You said all religion is bad - you back it up.

[Kuya]

Is it right for people who think they don't live in the real world to have influence, especially if they claim authority without being able to justify it? Nobody ever has the right to claim absolute authority, and bad things usually happen when someone does. So why should anyone listen when somebody says they have divine insight? I certainly don't want to follow anyone who prays for guidance, because it just means they're lost and won't admit it.

The Protestants would agree with you; i hope you know what i mean with this.

Reason is the best tool for determining what is likely to be true. Intuition, upon which religion and belief in the supernatural are based, is unreliable; it's likely to cause more problems than it solves.

What do you call reason? Be careful you're not confusing reason and empiricism, and as for the intuition bit, i'm not sure what you mean with that either, care to define what intuition means to you?

Kuya: "BUT WHAT PROBLEMS DOES IT CAUSE!?"

Seriously, maybe I'm just tired today, but kuya your debating is seeming to be half hearted attemts to invoke responses rather than honest communication and/or reason.

You're extrapolating the problems of a specific religion unto all of them, and seemingly, unto every single spiritual belief as well. You don't specify which religion, and what concept is causing problems, and you've certainly never detailed anything to replace whatever it is you want to change, but once again, you've not specified the problem. You're making two different arguments and you've been trying to merge them; you're making functionalist arguments that religion is inadequate, but not outlining what is needed to replace it, and you're making essentialist arguments that because they aren't empirical, then they are false, which many would argue is plain disingenuous.

[Eratosthenes]

I don't see how one could trust reason without empiricism. Comparing ideas with observable facts for consistency has definitely proved its reliability, especially in comparison to intuition, which is interpreting perceptions and drawing conclusions based simply on what feels right.

[Neosutra]

the fuck what. I think this comes down to a superiority complex. You think that if someone feels empowered without religion, they are better than those that feel empowered with religion.

I've never understood why you take issue with people, like myself, who are not really religious in the organized sense, yet believe in god. You even said all religion is bad. What is bad about thinking there is a point to it all? What is wrong with "seeing" god I look into the eyes of someone I love? Who does it hurt when I attribute good luck to god?
I'm not talking about groups of people, I'm talking about me. You said all religion is bad - you back it up.

You really want to repeat the argument of the effects of delusional states versus real physical stimuli? Thinking there is a big brother in the sky that makes you feel special doesnt "directly" hurt anyone, however the ramifications of having an entire society of people that are easy dubbed into believing mythos and superstition does nothing for the progression of our species.

And it isnt elitest to say it is better to be empowered through non theist methods than theist. Is it elitest to say it is better to be happy via friends/family instead of cocain? Cocain makes people happy. God makes people feel a little less insignificant, at the cost of a constant state of delusion for a species that has the intellectual ability to grow past such childish games, but refuses to let them go.

[Kaylia]

I didnt post the definition of atheist/agnostic in previous posts because 8 other posts before mine did it just fine.

Then it will be easy to post agnosticism definition, just need to copy paste it.

Disproving the reasoning for any given diety is sufficient to disproving the diety itself, as we transition back into the argument of any given premis having to have -some- evidence to be held as a valid hypothesis. If you state that Zeus exists because there is lightning, and then later on determine lightning is actually from a charge differential in an excited athmosphere, then the Zeus as you defined it is false. You are then arguing that Zeus can still exist, as disproof of the theology behind the legend isnt sufficient. "Anything is possible" is the stance you are taking, without requiring any evidence for ANY theory.

Exactly, and that's why most religions define God as the "causeless cause", or other various concept that revolve around infinity and similar thing

Zeus who lives on the the Olympia can't exist, he would break thermodynamics laws by shitting thunder. The god who live outside time and space can't be disproven, because he can't break physics.

And I already said people aren't trying to explain physics phenomenon with "god", they are trying to explain their own existence. Can you do this with science? Will you ever be able to do it?

God is the weakest answer for why everything exists, because of all the theories (expansionism, big bang cosmology, string theory, point theory), god actually has NO evidence/mathematical premises to back it up other than attatchments to old dogma and superstition.

Everyone know the real answer to this is 42.

String theory explain itself, big bang cosmology explain itself? They explain a lot of stuff within our universe, but they don't explain the universe itself. Your position is just as good as someone who pretend Newton's physics was absolute.

God is defined as everything you currently dont know about the universe. It permeates everything that you find mysterious. I say "you" currently dont know, because the concept of god changes from person to person. To one person god may be the reason it rains, to another it may be the reason for the baryon dissapearance. You worship the unknown, and give it form in a vain attempt to convince yourself you arent so insignificant.

If the universe is infinite, try finding a cause to this infinity. I've no problem with people who call it God.

[Neosutra]

You're saying existence isnt a physical phenomina?

Really?

Also, the universe contains a finite amount of matter.. probably.

[Blarg]

Zeus who lives on the the Olympia can't exist, he would break thermodynamics laws by shitting thunder.

Can't he just exist outside of thermodynamics laws? Can't he just actually be the one throwing lightning and thunder and then he covers it up really well and tricks us all which shouldn't be too hard for him to do.

[Kaylia]

You're saying existence isnt a physical phenomina?

Also, the universe contains a finite amount of matter.. probably.

I was talking about the broad meaning, which include its cause and everything.

Can't he just exist outside of thermodynamics laws? Can't he just actually be the one throwing lightning and thunder and then he covers it up really well and tricks us all which shouldn't be too hard for him to do.

If you want to define it outside time and space (which goes against the common definition), then no, I can't disprove him. I won't give him any importance either, because lightning don't interest me beyond what sciences know.

Could you point me to the thread then? I don't know where to start looking, and i presume you care enough to argue, unless you just like to make statements without opposition.

You're lucky enough to even get a statement from him, all I see is his confusion between science and personal beliefs.

Just because something feel logical in your head doesn't mean it's logical from a mathematical point of view. Your brain job is to make thing look true using fuzzy logic and neural algorithm...

[Blarg]

If you want to define it outside time and space (which goes against the common definition), then no, I can't disprove him. I won't give him any importance either, because lightning don't interest me beyond what sciences know.

Zeus doesn't have to exist outside of space and time. Can't he just be tricking everyone into thinking he doesn't exist? Can you really disprove it.

[Kaylia]

Zeus doesn't have to exist outside of space and time. Can't he just be tricking everyone into thinking he doesn't exist? Can you really disprove it.

That's exactly what it means to be outside time and space.

[Neosutra]

So...

You dont think the physical cause for our universe can be explained physically... and instead magic is the most probable answer.

And zeus existing outside of time/space doesnt interest you because you dont place everything you dont understand in Zeus's control.

Why dont you just admit that god is just a simple way for you to conceptualize everything you dont understand or cant fathom?

[Blarg]

That's exactly what it means to be outside time and space.

I'm not sure what you mean. Let's say right now Zeus is sitting right beside you, he is physically there, but he is using his god powers to not have light reflect off him so you can't see him. How does that put himself out of time and space.

[Kaylia]

You dont think the physical cause for our universe can be explained physically... and instead magic is the most probable answer.

I don't think the initial cause can be explained with sciences, because it would require you to define an infinity.

Why dont you just admit that god is just a simple way for you to conceptualize everything you dont understand or cant fathom?

Ooooh, there is something unknown..scary! Fast, I need god or my brain will breakdown!

I'm not proposing the concept of God to explain everything we don't know, I'm proposing it to explain the only thing I know we will never be able to know.


Beside, I already told you in the last thread that I don't -believe- in God. I don't consider myself as a strong atheism either, because the only stance I can justify is agnosticism.

Belief: strong atheism
Stance: agnosticism
Wish: that god exists

I'm not sure what you mean. Let's say right now Zeus is sitting right beside you, he is physically there, but he is using his god powers to not have light reflect off him so you can't see him. How does that put himself out of time and space.

If he isn't made of matter, he is beyond time and space. If he is made of matter, then he isn't invisible.

[Blarg]

If he isn't made of matter, he is beyond time and space. If he is made of matter, then he isn't invisible.

I think you are underestimating what a god (zeus) made of matter could do to trick you into not seeing or detecting him. So you think if a god was made of matter it would be impossible for it to trick people into thinking he isn't there?

[Kaylia]

I think you are underestimating what a god (zeus) made of matter could do to trick you into not seeing or detecting him. So you think if a god was made of matter it would be impossible for it to trick people into thinking he isn't there?

Define time, space, matter and Zeus if you really want to have this discussion. Pretty sure there will be a contradiction somewhere in your definition, unless you define Zeus outside the physical realm, which is exactly what I was saying earlier.

[Blarg]

Define time, space, matter and Zeus if you really want to have this discussion. Pretty sure there will be a contradiction somewhere in your definition, unless you define Zeus outside the physical world, which is exactly what I was saying earlier.

I basically have a problem when speaking in absolutes (which can be seen by my saying nothing is 100%) so when you said you can prove Zeus doesn't exist, ie there being 0% chance, I don't feel that is correct.

Me defining those terms won't do any good because I probably can't define space time and matter perfectly anyways.

Besides, I could just say that Zeus exists in the real world and everything you think is real is actually a dream (your physics only works in the dream world) so you can't disprove zeus using math or ideas on matter and space which are all grounded in the dream world.

Perhaps the dream thing means Zeus is outside the physical world as you say, but I'm sure I could think of another ridiculous however still possible way that doesn't involve dreams. For instance you living in a Truman Show type world where everything you were taught isn't how things actually work and you are mistaken about Zeus's existence outside of the Truman Show.