Rationality versus religion
- Thread starter Skeptical
- Start date
LOL He has had a Measurable impact on me. And many, many others. Our unbreakable faith is testimony to that real impact.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
lol...
no. i've never been diagnosed for good reason.
kenny just begged for, demanded evidence, i gave him some, and he ignored it. so who's insane?
who are you speaking for? christians or people of all faiths?
and atheists don't try to break anyone's faith. atheists argue over poor and illogical thinking in relation to it. there is nothing to break if one believes. it's a choice. atheists don't go to christian forums to try and persuade them otherwise or at least most don't, just like they don't go to church to try and persuade either. people have freedom of religion but that doesn't mean religionists have some right to demand it's a fact. even your post is hinting that it is. why theists constantly want to butt it up against atheists seems to betray how strong your beliefs really are as well as their beliefs are intolerant since you have freedom of religion and your organizations.
it's christians who have a problem with atheists not believing or confirming that it's a truth instead of a personal belief.
Last edited:
been here long?
it is why that doesn't happen, that is the reason i am here and not there..IE they proofread posts before allowing them to be posted..i do not believe in that..
there are some users here that i can see them going to church to do just that..they are very rude about others beliefs..
um..yes they do.IE. i have a right to believe what i believe, i have a right to believe in god as fact..i have a right to expect others to RESPECT that i believe and not call me delusional just cause i believe..(there can be other reasons to call me delusional, but not 'only' on whether i believe)
but if you were to phrase it as 'they don't have the right to force their beliefs on others', i would agree..
are you saying that the only reason a christian recruits others to their beliefs is to justify those beliefs?
the same can be said for any organization whether christian or not..
a bunch of semantics because one religion will consider the other one delusional.
no, people do have a right to consider your beliefs as delusional! they don't have a right to stop you from getting together with others who agree with you or practice your religion on your own time and have your organizations!
just as people have a right to think and state the belief in aliens or ghosts as delusional! or people think the color orange is gross! or they don't like peppermint ice cream!
if you don't like people to state your beliefs are delusional, then don't keep sharing them with people that don't share the same beliefs!
otherwise, the constant narcissisim and intolerance of religionists will be called out as they think eachothers religions are wrong or delusional just as they think atheists are delusional!
it's all very simple and clear!
this is getting into the differances between the religion and the individual..IE don't judge the individual for what you believe the religion is..
so you have a right to call me delusional but i do not have the right to defend what i believe?
applies to both sides of the argument..
so ppl who think the color orange is gross, are delusional?
in real life i have never met anyone who called me delusional because of my beliefs..most of the christians that i have met (when i didn't believe so much..) always asked me if i wanted to know about jesus or god..if i said no, that was the end of it..
most of the times in this forum the formula tends to be;
athiest finds theist..
atheist questions theist..
theist provides an answer
atheist proceeds to invalidate answer..
theist tries to clarify answer
atheist doesn't understand, starts to berate individual attempting to communicate such..
theist gives up..
atheist continue to berate all believers..
in the forums here i see more atheist trying to show us christians the error of our ways, than i do christians trying to convert all you pagan atheists..
who is showing disrespect?
i have a right to share what i know to be true..
just as you do..
you have the right to either believe what i say or not..
just like i do, with you..
you don't have the right to demean me just cause you don't believe(or have a different opinion)..
i see more atheist doing that here than i do theists..
projecting..
This discussion of 'rights' is a bit misleading. 'Rights' are special privileges given to people by the government or by the group will of society as a whole. A 'right' is not necessarily right. Once, the right to burn witches was considered reasonable. At the time I suspect that if a person declared himself/herself to be atheist, that person would also be burned. I suspect many religicos today would like to restore that custom! I have no doubt that things we call 'rights' today will be considered barbaric and unreasonable in the future.
Thus, to say we have a 'right' to do this or that, is not a scientific approach to this kind of debate. More accurate to say the current customs permit certain behaviours. There is nothing morally or ethically correct or incorrect, except what people decide, usually in a subjective and emotional way, is proper.
However, this is a science forum, and I am more interested in the scientific way of looking at things. In relation to rational thinking and credible evidence, where does religion fit in?
My own conclusions are that there is no rational logic, or credible, scientifically acceptable, evidence to warrant a belief in any deity. That quality that people call 'faith' seems to me to be just a form of gullibility - a willingness to believe what you are told without evidence.
Thus, to say we have a 'right' to do this or that, is not a scientific approach to this kind of debate. More accurate to say the current customs permit certain behaviours. There is nothing morally or ethically correct or incorrect, except what people decide, usually in a subjective and emotional way, is proper.
However, this is a science forum, and I am more interested in the scientific way of looking at things. In relation to rational thinking and credible evidence, where does religion fit in?
My own conclusions are that there is no rational logic, or credible, scientifically acceptable, evidence to warrant a belief in any deity. That quality that people call 'faith' seems to me to be just a form of gullibility - a willingness to believe what you are told without evidence.
just more bs. if you have a problem with disagreement or that your "beliefs" are considered delusional, then don't share them. end of story.
that's how it works for any subject.
by the way, the problem is 'beliefs' are not the same as truths. when you are trying to take a subjective belief and trying to get others to validate it or respect them as objective truths, that is insane.
of course they are going to berate them because they keep insisting that it's a truth when it's a faith.
is the belief in an thousand legged, pink alien delusional? prove that it doesn't exist in this universe or outside of it?
this is the constant argument that is used. this forum is a scientific one, and the religion section is used to debate it scientifically or rationally. this forum doesn't exist as a haven for religious ideas as most theists here seem to think. there are other forums for that.
it can be discussed as a belief and that there is no evidence but the constant and recurring arguments are about stressing that there is proof. it is better to just present it as what one thinks it all means and leave it at that. why would anyone have a problem with that?
it's like if i said that i think a certain color is nice, then so be it. that is not what theists come here to do, they come here to purposely argue with atheists that their beliefs deserve more credence than a faith.
you are getting what you ask for.
Last edited:
true one should specify how they are using the word, helps for context..
you basically just said there is no absolute truth..in science the search is for absolute truth..but even there, there is such a thing as no absolute truth..
do as your told? or think for yourself?
its hard to compare religion to anything other than itself..religion creates the terms for its description, one must learn how religion uses those terms before one can increase understanding.IOW evidence is there to be had if one only values them as such..
this is a scientific forum. also, that is repeated yet no one is listing what those evidences are. it's left nebulous and vague because there is none.
also, science is dealing with what can be known, not what is possible. even they have conjectures but it's understood as that.
The problem with the evidences offered by people such as NMSquirrel and Lori, is that such evidences are utterly subjective, internal, and personal.
Let me quote from the item below.
http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.c...LEID_CHAR=5A344217-237D-9F22-E8B2F7A727F4242A
"The capsules contained a high dose of psilocybin, the principal constituent of “magic” mushrooms, which, like LSD and mescaline, produces changes in mood and perception yet only very rarely actual hallucinations. At the end of the session, when the psilocybin effects had dissipated, Lundahl, who had never before taken a hallucinogen, completed more questionnaires. Her responses indicated that during the time spent in the session room she had gone through a profound mystical-like experience similar to those reported by spiritual seekers in many cultures and across the ages—one characterized by a sense of interconnectedness with all people and things, accompanied by the feeling of transcending time and space, and of sacredness and joy."
A woman swallows the drug psilocybin, and has a deeply religious experience. This is the 'evidence' offered by Lori and squirrel. I do not know what induced their equivalent experiences, and I am not suggesting they took drugs. After all, many factors that interfere with brain function can induce the same kind of experience.
But, really guys, we cannot accept something so extraordinarily suspect as evidence.
Let me quote from the item below.
http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.c...LEID_CHAR=5A344217-237D-9F22-E8B2F7A727F4242A
"The capsules contained a high dose of psilocybin, the principal constituent of “magic” mushrooms, which, like LSD and mescaline, produces changes in mood and perception yet only very rarely actual hallucinations. At the end of the session, when the psilocybin effects had dissipated, Lundahl, who had never before taken a hallucinogen, completed more questionnaires. Her responses indicated that during the time spent in the session room she had gone through a profound mystical-like experience similar to those reported by spiritual seekers in many cultures and across the ages—one characterized by a sense of interconnectedness with all people and things, accompanied by the feeling of transcending time and space, and of sacredness and joy."
A woman swallows the drug psilocybin, and has a deeply religious experience. This is the 'evidence' offered by Lori and squirrel. I do not know what induced their equivalent experiences, and I am not suggesting they took drugs. After all, many factors that interfere with brain function can induce the same kind of experience.
But, really guys, we cannot accept something so extraordinarily suspect as evidence.
what doesn't make sense is why they need atheists to believe them (and their intent is their specific religion). what is the point?
why would i need to ask someone who likes hockey why they don't like tennis? otherwise, they should expect the same question.
it's like friendship, you have things in common as well as see the world the same way. you don't go up to just anyone and ask them why they are not your friend and see the world exactly like you?
it would make some sense if their wasn't freedom of religion but they are free to believe and cohort.
would they like it if a buddhist or universalist or scientologist was insistent that their beliefs are wrong about xyz?
why would i need to ask someone who likes hockey why they don't like tennis? otherwise, they should expect the same question.
it's like friendship, you have things in common as well as see the world the same way. you don't go up to just anyone and ask them why they are not your friend and see the world exactly like you?
it would make some sense if their wasn't freedom of religion but they are free to believe and cohort.
would they like it if a buddhist or universalist or scientologist was insistent that their beliefs are wrong about xyz?
i agree, with the exception of the word 'evidence' which you are using as an objective term,and many Christians testimony's are highly subjective.
i will focus on the word similar..does not mean equal..
i have heard lori offer this..but not me..i have never shared ANY spiritual experiences with this forum.i have only shared what i believe to be true.
again a case of stereotyping, you are comparing your preconceived notions as to what religion is to the individuals..bad form..
it is the atheist who is screaming evidence..whats the matter..don't want to take responsibility? IE you want it spelled out, so you do not have to be wrong about god..IOW you want to believe in the 'do as your told' cause it takes the responsibility away from you.
i don't need you to believe me(your loss)..i want you to respect me.
why would you ask someone who knows hockey why things are like that in hockey if your just gonna go off saying you don't believe that,and discredit the person you asked just cause you do not believe.IOW if you don't have any intention of seeking understanding.. STFU..
im not understanding what you are asking here..
Your unbreakable faith is testimony to your mode of thinking and the way you were raised, it can arise just as easily in a universe without a god as it could in a universe that included one. So, by your definition, divinity is still not measurable or testable.
typical.
lol
CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS ARE THE BIGGEST RELIGIOUS HYPOCRITES. since when do christians or muslims seek or even care to understand or be open to any religion or philosophy but their own???
NEVER! they only care that others respect and understand theirs!!!
on the same token, why is it incumbent on atheists to entertain or respect christians or christian beliefs so much??
wtf is ya'll's problemo?
Last edited:
when they are more interested in understanding than dogma.
because atheist are the ones doing all the bad mouthing..
they are the ones who need to learn respect.
keep in mind i have never said you have to agree..respect has nothing to do with whether you agree or believe the same as i do..you are the one trashing any christian who does not believe the way you do.
please, that's outright laughable. it's just simply not true and if it is, it's very, very rare. christians believe christian doctrines. that is why they are christian and not another faith. as a matter of fact, they would not be arguing for their religion on this forum. they would be more respectful or they would frequent their own forums.
and here you are making excuses for them. as if we are supposed to be waiting for one to do that and until then, it should never be pointed out that they are just as hypocritical or bigoted while christians play the victim card because atheists don't respect their beliefs.
pot/kettle. also, again, you ignore that it's christians always trying to get others to respect their beliefs (which is akin to agreeing with them) as if they are on some high horse.
if you look at the wording over and over, it's clear. i don't see that with other philosophies and that's why they don't get the negative response like christians do.
please, that's laughable. it's christians who need to learn respect. they are long and way overdue.
Last edited:
why would you post this if i've never had a "religious" experience while eating mushrooms? there was no indication, no cause, and absolutely no evidence that anything abnormal was going on with my brain when i've had this experience, or ever. would it help you to know that i had an mri of my brain conducted during the height of the experience in 2005? results: normal. so since there's absolutely no evidence to support your idea, here's mine...being the person who actually experienced it, i think mine is more credible, and makes more sense...
spirits cause spiritual experiences.
how do you think you know so much about christians if you're not one yourself?