Religion Is Logic

What a fucking pile of shit.

Religion is not logical, religion involves believing in something you have never seen and have no tangible evidence that it exists.
 
Norsefire,

Science and religion are on the same plain, both as accurate and as false as can be.
Click to expand...
Well no. Science and religion are exact opposites.

Religion asserts with certainty and then attempts to explain everything according to its assertion. I.e. Religion asserts with no doubt that IT KNOWS.

Science asserts nothing and looks to everything else with caution to see what can be discovered. I.e. Science is all about discovering what it DOESN’T KNOW.

religion relies on what you can see beyond, what you can determine, and what you are faithful in.
Click to expand...
That seems to be something of a confused perspective. Religion relies on what it claims is beyond but cannot demonstrate as true. Religion does not rely on what can be determined by any rational process, only on what can be imagined. And yes religion relies on faith, i.e. a conviction that something is true in the absence of any supporting evidence.

Neither, however, provide fact; although this sounds illogical, since Science does provide "facts", it nonetheless exists only if one is around to perceive it.
Click to expand...
That too seems very confused. Certainly religion provides no facts neither does it base any of its claims on facts or supporting evidence.

OTOH science is all about evidence and nothing but evidence. Even though science does not assert facts (i.e. proofs), it attempts to offer explanations only where evidence is available.

For all we know, there may be a God that created our universe with a set of laws, and therefore these laws govern our universe.
Click to expand...
Except there is no reason to assume anything such as that could or might be true or is even possible, so why propose it?
 
visceral_instinct said:
What a fucking pile of shit.

Religion is not logical, religion involves believing in something you have never seen and have no tangible evidence that it exists.
Click to expand...

I think what he's saying is the Religion was a primitive form of inquiry into the nature of life, an early hypothesis.
 
Norsefire,

Are you going to tell me that the scientific method is on par with beleif in Xenu?

While I agree that Xenu may exist, I'd say it's a far cry to suggest beleif in such a being is equivalent to the scientific method.

Science and religious belief are completely separate.

Science is a method of inquiry based on physical evidence.
Religion is a beleif based on feelings.

Not two side of the same coin - one is money in the bank and the other fairy floss.

Wouldn't you agree?
Michael
 
I am not saying they are the same, I am saying they are on the same plain; neither is fact.


Besides, from what perspective is "evidence" and "demonstration"? Science's "evidence" relies only on an individual's senses. Faith's "evidence" relies not on what we can experience physically, but rather what is higher and greater BASED ON what has been experienced.

Besides, what is the demonstration of "true"? Don't you understand? Both religion and science can make claim of the force of gravity

Science in that force
Religion in that that force is the product of the way God had set up the world

Who can prove they are right?

Religion always precedes science, because even IF you know how something operates, a religious person can say "because that is how God had intended it to do so"; however, this is still not fact, NOR IS SCIENCE!

Science is perspective, not fact. We can't say that it "attempts to explain the world by what can be determined true or experienced", because "true and experienced" refer to the individual


The way I see it, science is really dependent on the "here and now", really rock bottom, down-to-earth type of thing, whereas religion is also dependent on the "here and now" and the "past", but rather the setting is used to explain religious theory.
 
i.e, the same things that can be explained via science can be explained via religion and either both are correct or both are incorrect.

For instance, as with the reference to gravity, if one discovers the existence of bacteria, this only proves that bacteria exist and, further, that they have effect on organic material.

This does not, at all, contest religion, however, because they can exist mutually. There can be a scientific religious person.
 
Norsefire said:
i.e, the same things that can be explained via science can be explained via religion and either both are correct or both are incorrect.

For instance, as with the reference to gravity, if one discovers the existence of bacteria, this only proves that bacteria exist and, further, that they have effect on organic material.

This does not, at all, contest religion, however, because they can exist mutually. There can be a scientific religious person.
Click to expand...


Lol_Gifs_30.gif
Lol_Gifs_8.gif
 
Norsefire said:
i.e, the same things that can be explained via science can be explained via religion and either both are correct or both are incorrect.
Click to expand...
I agree but in as far as being predictable science overwhelmingly trumps religion. If we consider predictability a valuable asset in ascertaining what is true and not true (ie reality) then science does a much better job of describing reality than does beleif.

For example, I have very serious doubts on the "feeling" that humans arrived at our present state having anything at all to do with an overlord named Xenu flying around with A-bombs in space-capable DC-10 planes or that a magical garden was created whereby a God created a man named Adam blah blah blah...

All the evidence suggests we evolved from a common ancestor. All the evidence gathered last year supports this. And by all the evidence I mean paleontological, archaeological, biological, genetic, chemical, everything is in agreement that we evolved from a common ancestor.

So, in this sense, that of predictability describing reality, science is far superior to religion.


Of course religion can have value. I think religous people do a great service at funerals and weddings.
 
Last edited:
<Cris>

That is their perception but that doesn’t mean that what they believe is actually logical. Seen from their limitet logic, it is logical

Logic is a disciplined method for the determination of what is true/false valid/invalid.

Only if what you are told can be verified using logical reasoning.

Not necessarily. If I am told that if I pray outdoors and a bird poops on me that that is a sign from God, and I actually experience that then is what I have been told true or not? the question is not if it is true or not, the question is if it is logical to you.... so if you have been told that if a bird poops on you and you experince it.... then it would be logical to you that it was a sign from god.

That an imaginative explanation for something appears plausible it is no guarantee that it is true or not in the absence of facts. we are talking about logic..... not truth

Agreed, but that process does not follow any disciplined method for determining whether the holy man’s statements are true/false or valid/invalid. And as such their assertions and consequent beliefs by the masses are not logical. As with any religion.

So sorry, but since no religious claim has any factual basis and hence does not provide any means to determine whether true/false, then religious beliefs are necessarily and essentially illogical to those whos logic goes beyond religious beliefs, but it is still logical to those with religious beliefs
 
Carcano said:
Meditation is an absence of 'doing'.

The body is still...the mind is silent.
Click to expand...

No.
Meditation is focusing on the RIGHT NOW, The present.
This is hard to do if you do not train it.
People/humans have allways had something to massure times pasing ex. the sun and moon.
Therefor we precive time backwards.
To meditate is to precive RIGHT NOW.
There is an absent of time.
Still your subconsiencs track time, but it uses the heart as a massurement.
The body slows down, it is not still.
The mind becomes free of time while meditating.

This is much like dreaming.
When you dream/sleep your sense of time is distorted.
Your mind is meditating.
Dreams are what is happning i you brain at that moment, you are preciving what have happend and what have not happend yet, or what will never happen at all.
Ex. We have all had a dream that seemed to last hours, but whan we wake up it has only lasted 30 min.
What we dream are the potencal.
When one meditates, one focuses on the state of mind one is in when you sleep and dream.
Everyone can learn to meditate and if you becomes good enough at it you will be able to enter that state of mind at anytime.
You can use this focus to reach potencal.

So meditating is not just still body...still mind
 
When i said humans aren't logical, i mean they aren't when they consider religion. On the whole, we can be very logical beings, but we soon give that up in religious wars and sects... so where does science and religion meet? It's harder for the scientist to accept religion, but even harder for the religious to accept the science.
 
spidergoat said:
Then it's a big leap for religions to be saying anything about how God wants you to live.
Click to expand...

Yep it is..... and that is because false logic, outdated logic.

The human race have evolved from apes, apes have evolved from something near-ape(almost ape) sounds like a syntesic flavor)
At somepoint in this development that wich came to be our present race, we started to develop logic.
At first it was a VERY basic form for logic
ex. Shelter = Safe from predators.
As this became a good way for the race to survive, it became naturel for them to seek shelter over time.
Using its limited imagination and use of logic this race became logic thinking beings.

As our present race have the same way of surviving by usine our imagniation and our logic.

Through out our race and for a long time in history we can see what happens when we replace our imagination and logic with religion.
Eventhough it was logical in the past that the earth was flat, we discovered that it was not so.
we choose to belive that the earth was round.
alot of us have seen it in tv, books, pictures....... the world can be explaint by a new belief called sciencs.
It gives you a better understandning of what happens in the presens, where as religion only focus on the how it has been before.

Let us start a new time calender.
Why keep counting from when "jesus" was born?
Why not start counting from the birth of the first ateist?
 
Religion is science

Science comes closer and closer to the truth all the time. It is constantly evolving and expanding. Religion is the opposite: it never changes because it has already become the truth.

(parts of) religion is actually an ancient science that developed so far that it became truth. In those days science was a little different because people were different. They could see spirits and they didn't need much technical things.

One day our modern science has come so far that it has found the truth about everything again... and then something will happen that people will forget this science, and it becomes distorted, like religions today. People will no longer understand the science... but many will just believe it with faith.
 
Last edited:
If examined in a scientific way, the study of religious claims could be science. Mostly, I think religion is an extension of primate social hierarchy and politics. In large ape communities, there is always an alpha male. This is so instinctive that it seemed natural to use a similar scenerio to explain our existence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top