Religion: Why do you care?

[narcimund 0]

Quote

I can set my clock by the consistency of our solar system.

Gosh. Well that settles that. After all that fuss with quantum physics, Royd settles the matter for us.

Einstein will be very happy to hear this.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Royd 0]

Quote

ie; I choose to donate some time each month to charity. I do it for myself. I do it because it allows me to grow my sense of self-respect and it gives me silly tingles up my spine. It also happens to improve the lives of others. But make no mistake; I do it for myself.

So, if or when there is a day of judgement, you'll just be SOL when it comes to the reason that you gave to others.

[Royd 0]

Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I can set my clock by the consistency of our solar system.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote

Gosh. Well that settles that. After all that fuss with quantum physics, Royd settles the matter for us.

Einstein will be very happy to hear this.

Some things just aren't as complicated as some people would like to believe.

[champu 1]

Quote

Sanctioned does not equal required, so why would evidence of such laws be a necessary component of the discussion? For what it's worth, I'm unaware of any government facilities at which prayer is required.

Are there any states that still require oaths in the courtroom with a hand on the Bible? Or can you go with the whole, "under the pains and penalties of perjury" in place of "So help you God." just about everywhere these days?

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Sanctioned does not equal required, so why would evidence of such laws be a necessary component of the discussion? For what it's worth, I'm unaware of any government facilities at which prayer is required.

Are there any states that still require oaths in the courtroom with a hand on the Bible? Or can you go with the whole, "under the pains and penalties of perjury" in place of "So help you God." just about everywhere these days?

I think in Washington state, one is required to hold their hand up, palm forward, and "swear or affirm", with the option of saying or not saying "so help me God", but I'm not positive of that.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Quote

Gosh. Well that settles that. After all that fuss with quantum physics, Royd settles the matter for us.

Einstein will be very happy to hear this.

Some things just aren't as complicated as some people would like to believe.

And other things aren't as simple as some would like to believe.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[quade 4]

Quote

I can set my clock by the consistency of our solar system.

What ya gonna use; high noon? I suppose you could, but then it wouldn't be very accurate. You should Google, "equation of time".

The NIST periodically resets their clocks to match the rotation of the earth, but that doesn't mean that time is based on it.

There is NOTHING special about the earth.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[smiles 0]

Quote

I am always FASCINATED by the way any faith based discussion in SC always seems to end up:
Aetheists: You're all sheep if you believe in God with no proof.
Non-Aethesists: That's why it's called faith.

Why do I care what others believe?

I'm open to try and understand and take interest in what others believe, regardless of the faith- or my personal concept. Does that mean I care what others believe?
I am not fascinated by the way any faith based discussion in SC always seems to end up.

>What are the basics of sound logical discussion?

Some don't know how to construct one and they don't know how to avoid the most common errors in reasoning. Some don't even know what logical fallacies are, much less how to identify them.

The term 'critical thinking'..what does it mean?

Some may get the impression that it simply involves finding fault with others and others' ideas, but critical thinking involves developing some emotional and intellectual distance between yourself and your ideas - in order to better evaluate their truth, validity, and reasonableness.

Atheists and theists argue over the validity of religious experiences, for example, instead of discussing their different ways of forming beliefs and evaluating evidence.

These discussions may be more productive if people focus on these more fundamental matters first rather than last (or even not at all).

Is believing or not believing a choice which a person can make, rather than something determined by circumstances, evidence, reason, experience, etc?
Wagering requires the ability to choose through an act of will, is belief something that you can choose through an act of will?

Does an atheist choose atheism? — if one is incapable of believing a claim without good reason, and currently, lacks any good reasons to believe in the existence of any gods--is atheism chosen, or rather the automatic consequence of their circumstances as they understand them?

define spirituality?
-is it something that “develops in the person” or is it “found deep within oneself?”
-does it have more to do with emotional than intellectual reactions to events and experiences than a coherent set of beliefs and ideas?
-is spirituality a form of religion, but a private and personal form of religion?
-is there a valid distinction between spirituality and organized religion?

Is religion dependent upon a book of rules? Alcoholic’s Anonymous describes itself as spiritual rather than religious and has such a book. Is religion dependent upon a set of written revelations from God rather than a personal communication?

Religion is spiritual and spirituality is religious? One tends to be more personal and private while the other tends to incorporate public rituals and organized doctrines. The lines between one and the other are not clear and distinct.

For some spirituality involves a variety of very personal things like self-realization, philosophical searching, etc. For many others, it is something like a very deep and strong emotional reaction to "wonders" of life — for example, seeing a newborn child, etc.

Often it is used in conjunction with theism because people's spirituality is "God-centered." In such cases, is it unlikely that you could find an atheist who is "spiritual" because there is a real contradiction between living a "God-centered" life while not believing in the existence of any gods?

Are similar senses of "spirituality" entirely compatible with atheism?

Is there anything about atheism that prevents a person from having such experiences? For many atheists their atheism is a direct result of such philosophical searching and religious questioning — thus, one might argue that their atheism is an integral component of their "spirituality" and their ongoing search for meaning in life.

Is an atheist who has spent a lot of time studying logic and philosophy more rational than a theist who has never gone beyond their Bible?

Most theists seem to be more accustomed to talking about their religion with other believers who share the same assumptions as they have. This means they aren't used to defining or explaining their key concepts, especially the nature of what their god is.

You can't have a meaningful and productive discussion if the two of you define key terms differently. You cannot evaluate their arguments and claims unless you know exactly what they mean by "god," so you have to start there.

Should theists who make claims of any sort be asked to support those claims and be prepared to support them? Should atheist who make claims of any sort be asked to support those claims and be prepared to support them?

Religious theists are frequently criticized for not adequately supporting many of their claims. Precisely because these criticisms are often justified, atheists who debate theists should make a point of not doing the same thing.

If you are going to make any specific claims, you should be prepared to back them up by whatever support is most appropriate. If you can't, then you shouldn't have made the claim in the first place; it would be best to admit that you can't support the claim, take a couple of steps back and start again from a stronger foundation.

There's a difference between a discussion and preaching. A discussion is a two-way street where both contribute and what each person says actually reflects something they have taken from what the other says.

In a discussion, you listen to what the other is saying and respond directly to it. When a person is preaching, they aren't really paying attention to what the other says. None of their statements reflect their having noticed or taken anything from others.

If you want to have a discussion with an atheist, great, but don't use the pretense of a discussion as a platform to practice preaching.

Preaching or proselytization is a one-way street where one person does all the talking but none of the listening and none of the learning.
SMiles

eustress. : a positive form of stress having a beneficial effect on health, motivation, performance, and emotional well-being.

[billvon 2,874]

> I can set my clock by the consistency of our solar system.

Then your clock is broken.

A year isn't a year; it's 365 days 6 hours 9 minutes 9 seconds between the same points in the earth's orbit. Which isn't the same as the time between equinoxes. That's 365 days 5 hours 48 minutes 45 seconds. And it's getting shorter as the moon slows the earth's rotation.

And a day isn't always a day. When the earth was first formed, the day was about 6 hours long. Now it's 24 hours by definition. But even that is changing; the earth is slowing its rotation, so the days are getting longer. So unless your clock is slowly winding down it's not going to match the solar system.

Besides which, what are you doing talking about solar systems and planets orbiting the sun? The church would have burned you at the stake if you'd been spouting that heresy a millenia ago!

[livendive 8]

Did you actually write all that? Specifically for this thread? Well done!

I think of faith in my own terms, as I suspect most people do. The word "know" is used very loosely by many.

I KNOW that I don't know whether there's a God, soul, or afterlife, and I BELIEVE that it is unknowable, at least by living humans. Those who insist there is no God are relying on almost as much faith as those who insist there is.
I SUSPECT there are greater beings than us, and that we are no more or less "special" than any other lifeform of which we are collectively aware.
I DOUBT that such beings care whether we worship them.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[mnealtx 0]

Well said, Dave.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DSE 5]

Quote

.
I SUSPECT there are greater beings than us, and that we are no more or less "special" than any other lifeform of which we are collectively aware.
I DOUBT that such beings care whether we worship them.

Blues,
Dave

*if* such beings exist, I'd believe that they *do* need us to worship them, just as parents, we hope our children "worship" us, or want to follow in our footsteps, hoping they'll perhaps do better than we did. Of course, then the whole argument regarding the "perfection of God" comes into play.
I for one, know God isn't perfect if there is a God. There is no valid point to mosquitos, therefore, that was a serious screwup.

[billvon 2,874]

>I for one, know God isn't perfect if there is a God. There is no valid
> point to mosquitos, therefore, that was a serious screwup.

Devil: When I have the map, I will be free, and the world will be different, because I will have understanding.

Minion: Understanding of what, master?

Devil: Digital watches. And soon I will have understanding of videocassette recorders and car telephones. And when I have understanding of them, I shall have understanding of computers. And when I have understanding of computers, I shall be the Supreme Being! God isn't interested in technology. He knows nothing of the potential of the microchip or the silicon revolution. Look how he spends his time: forty-three species of parrots! Nipples for men!

Minion: And slugs!

Devil: Slugs! He created slugs! They can't hear, they can't speak, they can't operate machinery. If I were creating the world, I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would've started with lasers, eight o'clock, day one!

[DSE 5]

I have the map! I have the map!And the day after tomorrow, the world!

nicely done.

[smiles 0]

Quote

Did you actually write all that? Specifically for this thread? Well done!

I wish I could write!

I have so many questions, some I google- and read different concepts, copy & paste stuff I'm interested in. If the info I find for answers sounds reasonable to me, (I think I follow my instincts) I save it and then ponder...(the stuff between > &
When I read your well written post I admire how you can express your feelings without question and with ease and confidence.....I think, I suspect, I know that I don't know, I believe, I suspect. I doubt....sounds so classic human!



SMiles

Quote

I choose rather admit that I know what little I know, and confess that I do not know that which I do not know, for that is the beginning of knowledge.

[br0k3n 0]

Blind belief in any holy book, is the same as rejecting reason. You do not become holy and wise – faith makes you ignorant and dangerous.

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[JackC 0]

Quote

Those who insist there is no God are relying on almost as much faith as those who insist there is.

Not necessarly. Square circles cannot exist by definition. Married bachelors cannot exist by definition. Onimax entities are similarly illogical.

[JackC 0]

Quote

>a-the world came together in a big bang that began all life, and evolution has brought us here.
>b-A deity built the earth in 6 days complete with all life forms.

>Somewhere in the middle lies the truth, IMO.

One is a religious belief, the other is a n (incorrect) description of a scientific approach to things. There is no "middle" - they are different areas of study. It's like saying:

a - Joe is a carbon based organism whose phenotype is based on expression of the DNA he inherited from his parents, and modified by the environment he was raised in.

b - Joe is a devout catholic.

Is the 'truth' between those two extremes, such that neither one is 100% true?

Again with this non-overlapping magisteria rubbish.

You seem to think that it is possible to be both a creationist and a big bang cosmologist because they are different areas of study. That's utter rubbish. Both are theories on the origin of the universe and therefore they must overlap. One cannot simultaneously hold the view that the universe was created "as is" in six days and it also developed over billions of years following the big bang.

In your example, Joe's Catholicism is a direct result of his social environment. The two are most definately related and any study of the effects of social enviroment on human developement must take that into account.

Non-overlapping magisteria is a flawed concept.

[JackC 0]

Quote

why do YOU care what others believe?

I try not to but it's a compulsive reaction to bullshit. It's a waste of time though. Facts are irrelevant and logic doesn't apply in matters of faith.

[philh 0]

I care what others believe, because pervasive beliefs have effects on society. If everyone believes the bets way to deal with an infectious disease is to gather together in a church and pray then its more likely thhat disease will spread. the attacks of 9/11 didnt come out of a vaccumm, they came from a belief that Islam is the one true faith and that its worth killing others to spread it. Its not just Islamisst that have shared this view. Thats why I care.

[Royd 0]

I can set my clock by the consistency of our solar system.

Quote

Then your clock is broken.

It may as well be. I seldom consult it for my daily schedule.

Quote

A year isn't a year; it's 365 days 6 hours 9 minutes 9 seconds between the same points in the earth's orbit. Which isn't the same as the time between equinoxes. That's 365 days 5 hours 48 minutes 45 seconds.

Next year it's not going to be 365 days, 4hr. and 3 sec. is it?

Quote

And it's getting shorter as the moon slows the earth's rotation.

That would make it longer, wouldn't it? Logic would say that is wrong. Who's the boss in this relationship? The Earth or the Moon?

Quote

And a day isn't always a day. When the earth was first formed, the day was about 6 hours long.

And you know this how?

Quote

Now it's 24 hours by definition. But even that is changing; the earth is slowing its rotation, so the days are getting longer. So unless your clock is slowly winding down it's not going to match the solar system.

Has all of this been factored into the global warming equation? Slower earth=less wind=higher temps.

Besides which, what are you doing talking about solar systems and planets orbiting the sun? The church would have burned you at the stake if you'd been spouting that heresy a millenia ago!

[Royd 0]

Quote

Blind belief in any holy book, is the same as rejecting reason. You do not become holy and wise – faith makes you ignorant and dangerous.

Al Gore said it , I believe, that settles it.

Talk about buying into a concept. We now have first graders spouting this crap by rote. No thought involved. Sounds like a religion to me. Al Gore have mercy on the heretics.

[philh 0]

"Al Gore said it , I believe, that settles it. "

Easy to crticise a percieved superstition when its not your own, right ?

However Al Gore sometimes provdies evidence for his case, bible bashers dont.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Those who insist there is no God are relying on almost as much faith as those who insist there is.

Not necessarly. Square circles cannot exist by definition. Married bachelors cannot exist by definition. Onimax entities are similarly illogical.

You'll have to flesh that out a bit if you want it reasonably discussed.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[beowulf 1]

The problem with religion is that they are sadly lacking in critical thinking skills. Their reasoning is flawed and they are unable see it or just don't want to. That has led to many atrocities in the name of which ever god they happen to worship.