The superstition of prayers

(Q) said:
Ok, so once you've convinced yourself that you can muster effort and are optimistic, is there any reason to pray beyond that?

Is there also any reason why you can't simply rationalize, within your own mind, that mustering effort requires no prayer, but instead the simple logic of having to deal with problems? And that further one can rationalize that being optimistic will only serve in helping one to solve those problems?
Click to expand...

Mustering effort requires no prayer, at one time it does.

What I can't clearly explained, this mustering process runs for long period of time, which intermittently, I am faced with a feeling of "hopeless" (or in other word, no rational solutions I have in hand at one specific time). Instead of stopping just like that, praying will 'direct' me to a choice, continue or not. Without any rational way of potential solution, when the praying 'answers' me with go, I will go for it. It is sometimes not rational, because no reason for continuing something that already hopeless.

The other reason to pray, is more irrational; I pray to be 'directed' that the efforts I am working in, is the good way, and I prayed to be avoided from taking 'wrong' way (sometimes in your work, you are hard tempted to get more benefit beyond your right, and very easy to execute without much risk by your own power and opportunities lie in front of your very eye). The more I pray, the harder the 'warning' bells me: Don't get benefit beyond your right!
 
LiveInFaith said:
Instead of stopping just like that, praying will 'direct' me to a choice, continue or not. Without any rational way of potential solution, when the praying 'answers' me with go, I will go for it. It is sometimes not rational, because no reason for continuing something that already hopeless.
Click to expand...

And, most likely it will have a variety of consequences, ones that may be correct while others are not.

I suppose that using rationale and reason would also provide a variety of consequences, but at least they'll more often favor the correct ones than that of prayer. Thus, by using prayer, the outcome will be strictly based on chance, which would mean that using prayer is as pointless as flipping a coin.

The other reason to pray, is more irrational; I pray to be 'directed' that the efforts I am working in, is the good way, and I prayed to be avoided from taking 'wrong' way (sometimes in your work, you are hard tempted to get more benefit beyond your right, and very easy to execute without much risk by your own power and opportunities lie in front of your very eye). The more I pray, the harder the 'warning' bells me: Don't get benefit beyond your right!
Click to expand...

If prayer and the flipping of a coin (or a dwarf) brings results entirely based on chance, then you aren't avoiding the 'wrong' way or the 'right' way, you're inviting both as equals, completely unaware.
 
LiveInFaith said:
Flipping coins doesn't do anything to my engagement to what I am working in. Praying does.
Click to expand...

So, one form of 'ritual' gives you "warm and fuzzies" over another, even when both offer exactly the same results?

If, some time ago, it was determined that the ritual of prayer was to stand on one leg with a bag over your head clucking like a chicken, would you do it?

Or, would you flip the coin (or the dwarf?)
 
(Q) said:
Complete nonsense. Theists already assume complete knowledge from their religions while those who use reason and rationale never assume such things.
Click to expand...

My experience has been otherwise. Atheists are wedded to their beliefs about theists, so much so that they refuse to consider any other influence besides theism, except perhaps following several "bonks on the head" with an expanded view of reality.;)
 
You don't know how I pray.
I did ritual as a routine, as written in scriptures. I pray in routine rituals.
I also pray in specific event (regarding facing problems) within and out of rituals.

Rituals has praying within, while praying doesn't always require rituals.
 
samcdkey said:
My experience has been otherwise. Atheists are wedded to their beliefs about theists, so much so that they refuse to consider any other influence besides theism, except perhaps following several "bonks on the head" with an expanded view of reality.;)
Click to expand...

Your 'experiences' are faith based and not based in reality. The rest of your post confirms it.
 
LiveInFaith said:
You don't know how I pray.
I did ritual as a routine, as written in scriptures. I pray in routine rituals.
I also pray in specific event (regarding facing problems) within and out of rituals.
Click to expand...

Are the results of your prayers any better than flipping coins (or dwarfs?)
 
Prayer is meditation.
God is not talking to you, but instead, you are helping yourself with your own problems as you reason them out in your head with a cool head, instead of a tensed one.
 
Ayodhya said:
Prayer is meditation.
God is not talking to you, but instead, you are helping yourself with your own problems as you reason them out in your head with a cool head, instead of a tensed one.
Click to expand...

Could be as you said.
Maybe the 'answer' is coming from within oneself.
The point is, it is coming when you pray.
 
LiveInFaith said:
I dont know. I never flipping coins.
My experiece, decisions taken based on 'answer' from praying doesn't do any harm.
Click to expand...

You don't know that. Decisions based on prayer have caused great harm throughout the ages.

Try flipping a coin each time you pray and test the results. If the answer to your prayer differs from the coin, and the coin is correct, while the prayer is not...

... well, you be the judge.
 
(Q) said:
ALL of your experiences are faith based, aren't you a Muslim?
Click to expand...

So being a Muslim automatically makes all my experiences faith based?

Hmm I just had a cup of coffee, it was slightly stronger than I wanted it to be, so it tasted bitter to me.

I saw a movie yesterday, it made me laugh. It was a satire on religion.

How is that experience relevant to my religion?

Interesting how, in the process of attempting to expose my bias, your "reason and rationality" are exposed.:rolleyes:

Ahem!!

Atheists are wedded to their beliefs about theists, so much so that they refuse to consider any other influence besides theism
Click to expand...
 
I'm sorry, would not flip coin to decide what I'm to do.
And praying is not just a matter of making decision. It's just one of it's purpose.
 
samcdkey said:
My experience has been otherwise. Atheists are wedded to their beliefs about theists, so much so that they refuse to consider any other influence besides theism, except perhaps following several "bonks on the head" with an expanded view of reality.;)
Click to expand...

Oh sam. You are so wrong. In your oh-so-appealing-and-unflappable way though.

Since ~95% of the population apparently believes in a god or higher power (making them theists of one sort or another), I think it's a safe assumption that the level of sophistication of the typical theist is that of the general population, i.e. not very high.

Atheists make up a much smaller and clearly more egalitarian segment of the population (*pats self on back*). Now, by comparing the typical theist to the typical atheist, you must take this into consideration.

We are all attached to our beliefs to some degree, but the typical atheist is a rationalist and therefore asking only for convincing objective evidence or proof of the claims of others. This apparently greatly disturbs theists.

Theists, you absolutely must admit, are not seeking to test their beliefs or use evidence to either support or discredit them. This is the very nature of 'faith'.

So, please try not to be disingenuous in your statements regarding atheists vs theists. Your experience of atheists is most likely the same as any theists experience of atheists. We ask for some objective reasons why a deity theory is better than a purely naturalistic theory, and you balk. You will, I guarantee, launch on a diatribe of obfuscation that descends into the deepest esoterica of philosophical meanderings.

The complexities are always introduced by theists. Atheists ask a simple question. Theists then proceed to fire-up the jackhammers of non-sequitur and 'faith based' logic(?). You are particularly accomplished at this, in your own way, as is LightGigantic in his. You two are quite sophisticated in this technique as compared to someone like IceAgeCivilizations who is more representative of the typical theistic population.

Please stop trying to spin the real nature of typical theists vs typical atheists. We all know the differences. Why not just admit and address the fact that no theist has any scientific results that support theism. It's really simple.

You can postulate that your god (who shall forever remain a mysterious and unfathomable 'entity' with no discernable attributes - as you've admitted) is somehow an active and ongoing agent in the universe. That's fine. The real cosmos however is a measurable, testable place. There has never been any indication that there is a realm "beyond" the natural other than the thoughts and writings of human beings.

I have a prediction for the type of response this will get. Bets anyone?
 
I look at the general population and see about 15% of the population as extreme fundamentalists and about 15% as atheists. The rest fall in between. This is what I call population distribution.

Nothing amazing or to be wondered at. In a mixed normal population I would be extremely surprised not to see any atheists. I would also not be surprised if an increase in atheism led to an increase in fundamentalism.

Atheists however like to believe they corner the market on reason and rationality.

This certainty also leads to rationalisation and they are able to rationalise their conclusions based on their viewpoints in the same way as fundamentalist theists.

Frankly, I see no difference between the two. Both represent extremities.

PS egalitarian means seeing all people as equal. When 15% of the population considers the rest as delusional and still considers itself as egalitarian, it gives pause to consider the definition of rationality.

Also an obsession with the concrete denies the human prepossession with the abstract; which in itself is strange since ultimately, all scientific knowledge rests on faith and is based on a consensus of agreement that evidence represents reality.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top