Clockwood said:
you seem to be suggesting that at some point our (humanities) knowledge was complete, and we have only lost this knowledge through passing it down poorly?
Minimum requirements of a religion.
- Thread starter Light Travelling
- Start date
you seem to be suggesting that at some point our (humanities) knowledge was complete, and we have only lost this knowledge through passing it down poorly?
spidergoat said:
Yes I think it broadly is, but I understand that Dharma encompasses much more than than we normally associate with religion. It is to do with the essential reality of everything. It is a much bigger concept than religion.
But that is maybe what religion should mean, but in the west we have lost that 'completeness'. ?
Water are you that densed?
Knowledge of ancient times comes from "experience". Simple observations get rationalized, without scientific knowledge, which is derived from experimentation, and mathematical calculations. The longer the human especies has existed the experience n observations have been expanded. Thus epitemology is a derivitive of observation, experience, and rationalizations, experimentation to assert that the rationalization is accurate.
And mysticism explain nothing Yorda. You are the biggest mystic in this freaking board, you live in fantacy and not reality.
The gullible accepts "rationalizations" of authorative religious figures, thus the flat earth, and the earth being the center of the universe, when true science tempted to show otherwise, the church criminalized those whom spoke truth, by scientific discovery.
Water my suggestion is get to know history and "FAILURES" of church doctrine dogmas.
Godless
All theology is the same Water.
People of whatever theology make rationalizations that can't be proven and they use "force & fear" to dupe the ingnorance of the others. When a party tries to contradict their assumptions they are made to be criminals.
When are you going to take your head out of your ass?
Godless
People of whatever theology make rationalizations that can't be proven and they use "force & fear" to dupe the ingnorance of the others. When a party tries to contradict their assumptions they are made to be criminals.
When are you going to take your head out of your ass?
Godless
Godless said:
yr so funny
But I think you're one of the biggest mystics on this board! And you're also pretty gullible. I'm not sure what the word means but it sounds like a fun thing to be. and you always live in fantasy, otherwise u wouldn't call me a mystic :bugeye:Godless said:
I didn't say anything mystic.
What if I am?
Seriously, is that the best you can do? When something gets beyond your understanding, you just say that the person is delusional.
What does it matter?
you live in fantacy and not reality.
Suffering comes with having a body, but often physical suffering is a solvable problem, where mental suffering caused by our desires are more difficult to overcome.
Umm... bullshit. A good atheist just want's you to recognize your position in the scheme of things and stay out of public life. Subjective fantasizing has no place in a complex and challenging modern world.
second that. separation of church and state kicks ass.
anyway, for the ground work of religion you need three things:
1. revelation
2. faith
3. MONEY
[SARCASM]you see, mere humans will never learn the truth of the universe with such insignificant pursuits as science, but my six-foot tall, three-eyed, golden armadillo knows. and He told me. and i'll tell you, if you send me money.[/SARCASM] thought that bit needed clearly displayed sarcasm tags, but the three "fundamentals" i still think are valid.
anyway, for the ground work of religion you need three things:
1. revelation
2. faith
3. MONEY
[SARCASM]you see, mere humans will never learn the truth of the universe with such insignificant pursuits as science, but my six-foot tall, three-eyed, golden armadillo knows. and He told me. and i'll tell you, if you send me money.[/SARCASM] thought that bit needed clearly displayed sarcasm tags, but the three "fundamentals" i still think are valid.
superluminal,
And you do that all based on completely arbitrary principles, assuming your own superiority.
I have asked a dozen times for a justification of scientific pursuits, for a non-circular and non-self-referential justification of what you are pursuing -- but you, nor any other atheist, has given me one.
They all avoid justification like the plague.
And you do that all based on completely arbitrary principles, assuming your own superiority.
I have asked a dozen times for a justification of scientific pursuits, for a non-circular and non-self-referential justification of what you are pursuing -- but you, nor any other atheist, has given me one.
They all avoid justification like the plague.
Water,
This makes no sense to me. The world is real. People are born, they live they prosper, they suffer, they die. The only thing that provides, and ever has provided, any improvement to the lot of people is science. It began with stone cutting tools for stripping meat off of bones. Then came spearpoints. Fire. Agriculture. Animal husbandry. Wheels. Indoor plumbing.
The justification for everything we do is completely self-referential. What makes you think it is not? And what's the problem with that? To survive, evolution has, in stages, equipped us with curiosity, fear, love, hate, deceit, altruism, intelligence, and every other human trait in just the right balance. So when I exercise my natural curiosity by doing engineering or science, what justification do I need? What is circular about that? When I worry about my children do I need justification?
What we are pursuing is really nothing more than an itch that we need to scratch. What the hell is that colored band in the sky? Just how does it get there? The bible says it's a reminder not to destroy the earth anynmore with water or something, right? Does the bible delve into Rayleigh scattering? Refractive indices? Quantum ElectroDynamics? No? Well, I guess science has its place then. And some side effects of science are:
- Modern medicine
- Average life spans in the 70's to 80's instead of 30's
- Electric power
- Clean drinking water
- Every item in your household (it's all been engineered)
- The ability to feed billions (the church still says go forth and multiply, right? Someones got to feed 'em all. Science to your rescue once again.)
- The internet
- Space stations
- Indoor plumbing
(I'm sure I'll get a corresponding list of all the horrid things science has done now. Spare me.)
So, we're self referential since that's all we have and there's nothing wrong with that. We're not circular unless we want to build a round pool. Any other questions about why we do what we do?
BTW water, I've explained this to you before. Problems with memory? Modern medicine has drugs that can help...
This makes no sense to me. The world is real. People are born, they live they prosper, they suffer, they die. The only thing that provides, and ever has provided, any improvement to the lot of people is science. It began with stone cutting tools for stripping meat off of bones. Then came spearpoints. Fire. Agriculture. Animal husbandry. Wheels. Indoor plumbing.
The justification for everything we do is completely self-referential. What makes you think it is not? And what's the problem with that? To survive, evolution has, in stages, equipped us with curiosity, fear, love, hate, deceit, altruism, intelligence, and every other human trait in just the right balance. So when I exercise my natural curiosity by doing engineering or science, what justification do I need? What is circular about that? When I worry about my children do I need justification?
What we are pursuing is really nothing more than an itch that we need to scratch. What the hell is that colored band in the sky? Just how does it get there? The bible says it's a reminder not to destroy the earth anynmore with water or something, right? Does the bible delve into Rayleigh scattering? Refractive indices? Quantum ElectroDynamics? No? Well, I guess science has its place then. And some side effects of science are:
- Modern medicine
- Average life spans in the 70's to 80's instead of 30's
- Electric power
- Clean drinking water
- Every item in your household (it's all been engineered)
- The ability to feed billions (the church still says go forth and multiply, right? Someones got to feed 'em all. Science to your rescue once again.)
- The internet
- Space stations
- Indoor plumbing
(I'm sure I'll get a corresponding list of all the horrid things science has done now. Spare me.)
So, we're self referential since that's all we have and there's nothing wrong with that. We're not circular unless we want to build a round pool. Any other questions about why we do what we do?
BTW water, I've explained this to you before. Problems with memory? Modern medicine has drugs that can help...
water said:
When an asteroid will be on course to crush the earth, the scientists will hardly try to avoid this by the means of pure science and technology. On the other hand, the believers will accept this destiny that could be seeing as the God will, or the re-re-predicted end of the world.
Water,
There is no higher motivating purpose in the universe. We are the genes' way of making more genes. I answered your question forthrightly and without hesitation. Didn't you like my answer? Tough shit. All you do is whine. And your post content is devoid of much else.
So, I've said nothing? Why don't you rewrite it to suit you like a good little theist. Wrap yourself in your fantasy. Nobody cares.
There is no higher motivating purpose in the universe. We are the genes' way of making more genes. I answered your question forthrightly and without hesitation. Didn't you like my answer? Tough shit. All you do is whine. And your post content is devoid of much else.
So, I've said nothing? Why don't you rewrite it to suit you like a good little theist. Wrap yourself in your fantasy. Nobody cares.
Because I don't have the grace of god within me. I am an amoral atheist who just wants to do what I want with no accountability to a higher authority. Like a sky daddy.
"I answered your question forthrightly and without hesitation. Didn't you like my answer?"
So why didn't you respond to this part of mt post?
"I answered your question forthrightly and without hesitation. Didn't you like my answer?"
So why didn't you respond to this part of mt post?