I would argue that these (birth and death - both one's self and that of others) are the high points of stress levels for practically anyone (regardless whether their outlook is strictly non-metaphysical or otherwise)
What do atheists think that "to know God" means?
- Thread starter wynn
- Start date
Let's see what the Buddhists have to offer on this (since they are the ones most occupied with issues of stress and suffering):
"The four noble truths are the most basic expression of the Buddha's teaching. As Ven. Sariputta once said, they encompass the entire teaching, just as the footprint of an elephant can encompass the footprints of all other footed beings on earth.
These four truths are best understood, not as beliefs, but as categories of experience. They offer an alternative to the ordinary way we categorize what we can know and describe, in terms of me/not me, and being/not being. These ordinary categories create trouble, for the attempt to maintain full being for one's sense of "me" is a stressful effort doomed to failure, in that all of the components of that "me" are inconstant, stressful, and thus not worthy of identifying as "me" or "mine."
To counter this problem, the four noble truths drop ideas of me/not me, and being/not being, and replace them with two sets of variables: cause and effect, skillful and unskillful.
In other words, there is the truth of stress and suffering (unskillful effect),
the truth of the origination of stress (unskillful cause),
the truth of the cessation of stress (skillful effect),
and the truth of the path to the cessation of stress (skillful cause).
Each of these truths entails a duty:
stress is to be comprehended,
the origination of stress abandoned,
the cessation of stress realized,
and the path to the cessation of stress developed.
When all of these duties have been fully performed, the mind gains total release."
Each of the noble truths comes with a duty. But as casual observation shows, it's not common for people to think of truths in relation to duties.
Which is how, dying and death, for example, are simply seen as mere facts about which there ultimately cannot be anything done, and that the most anyone can do about them is just to accept them.
Well, Scientology was, in a sense. Hubbard founded it knowing that he could get the sheep braying, so to speak.
But whether or not a religion was intended to be a mockery is irrelevant to the question.
And just as an aside, Scientology has something in common with Buddhism, which is that they both seek this perfect harmonious existence, free from stress and trouble. I don't know if Buddhism bleeds their followers for money like Scientology does, but whether its being sold or given away, at the end of the day it's still snake oil.
@LG --
Oh yes, it must suck having to admit that an atheist knows more about religion than you do.
Here's a bit about the beliefs of scientology that you may not know.
And interestingly enough, South Park was pretty much on the money, not even really a parody.
So how do scientology and christianity differ at the fundamentals?
@wynn --
Ignorance must be bliss.
Oh yes, it must suck having to admit that an atheist knows more about religion than you do.
Here's a bit about the beliefs of scientology that you may not know.
And interestingly enough, South Park was pretty much on the money, not even really a parody.
So how do scientology and christianity differ at the fundamentals?
@wynn --
Ignorance must be bliss.
Perhaps only if one doesn't have a computer, ... or a body, for that matter ...
Otherwise, ignorance tends to hurt, big time.
Yeah, and you have the enlightenment to prove it!
actually when I made that comment I was aware of all that stuff. I have even previously watched the full episode of south park you are referring to on at least two occassions.
If you look at the idea of perfection for a scientologist ....
Once an individual has reached Clear status, they claim to be more self-confident, happy and generally successful in their careers and interpersonal relationships. Beyond the state of Clear, Scientologists move through several auditing steps called Operating Thetan levels, the most sacred religious activity. An OT is a state of spiritual awareness in which an individual is able to control himself and his environment.[1]
...its generally about refining one's ability to control things in this world or to be more successful in careers and relationships. I think they also hold that this honing on being a success can be cultivated over many life times.
IOW it doesn't seek to address the desire of the living entity to lord it over others through the acquisition of name,fame,adoration, wealth, or some other transient aspect of material existence that will shortly cease to exist.
Probably part of the reason for this is that they don't have a very clear definition of god (as a creator of the universe) outside of being someone with special powers , so all their subsequent definitions of spiritual become similarly vague and any discussion of relationship etc seems to revolve around the acquisition of powers or polishing up the performance of the mind. Things aren't helped any since they have this cone of silence thing going for any public mention of xenu etc
That's why I said "It seems that scientology is mostly about psychic phenomena ... kind of like "how to win friends and influence people" mixed in with reincarnation."
And I also added that I am not very expert on it ( and, frankly, I don't think you are either) but I just said that from the onset it seems to diverge from standard religion since the discussion points of its ideal goal for practitioners is simply about playing around in the material sphere for having special powers (although admittedly, its also quite common for Christianity to be popularly dumbed down into a similarly feeble shadow of spirituality with ideas of being rich and so forth being the real goal of life ardently pursued in guise of platitudes of spirituality that render terms like "soul", "god" and "spiritual" practically meaningless).
So even though there might be statements like ..."Scientology describes itself as the study and handling of the spirit in relationship to itself, others, and all of life. One purpose of Scientology, as stated by the Church of Scientology, is to become certain of one's spiritual existence and one's relationship to God, or the "Supreme Being." ... there is no real substance to such claims since the key terms are vague or more accurately defined as a subset of the material world (a subset that conventional religion tends to brand as illusory or splaying the aptitude of the potential spiritual practitioner, etc)
I watched a documentary once and a former member said they made vows for the next thousand lifetimes (perhaps it was even a bigger number, but it was a considerable number); that some power they would have would be manifest only if for the next thousand lifetimes they would keep to the teachings of Scientology, and if they wouldn't, it would all come undone, retroactively somehow.
For many people, theistically and atheistically inclined, spirituality is essentially about how to better cope with the problems of material life, how to be a functional person. For those people, spirituality is a tool for material purposes.
Can you give me examples of such massive/radical differences? IMO, what makes them effective is that they are pretty similiar to actual religions, yet ridiculous.
wynn
LG has been shown to be full of it. The parody is more effective because it is so similar to what the religions actually claim, just the names have been changed to show the irrationality. LGs desperate attempt to conflate racism's and atheism's tactics failed miserably. Parodies such as FSM are so effective BECAUSE they are virtually identical to religious claims, as any parody is(IE the better the parody conforms to the thing being ridiculed, the greater it's effectiveness as a parody).
Grumpy
LG has been shown to be full of it. The parody is more effective because it is so similar to what the religions actually claim, just the names have been changed to show the irrationality. LGs desperate attempt to conflate racism's and atheism's tactics failed miserably. Parodies such as FSM are so effective BECAUSE they are virtually identical to religious claims, as any parody is(IE the better the parody conforms to the thing being ridiculed, the greater it's effectiveness as a parody).
Grumpy
wynn
LG has been shown to be full of it. The parody is more effective because it is so similar to what the religions actually claim, just the names have been changed to show the irrationality. LGs desperate attempt to conflate racism's and atheism's tactics failed miserably. Parodies such as FSM are so effective BECAUSE they are virtually identical to religious claims, as any parody is(IE the better the parody conforms to the thing being ridiculed, the greater it's effectiveness as a parody).
Grumpy
Aww, you're so sweet!
Aww, you're so sweet!
In the Twitterverse, the kids would respond to that post with something like #trolltactics
I am not talking about whether the parody is effective or not.wynn
LG has been shown to be full of it. The parody is more effective because it is so similar to what the religions actually claim, just the names have been changed to show the irrationality. LGs desperate attempt to conflate racism's and atheism's tactics failed miserably. Parodies such as FSM are so effective BECAUSE they are virtually identical to religious claims, as any parody is(IE the better the parody conforms to the thing being ridiculed, the greater it's effectiveness as a parody).
Grumpy
I am talking about the absolute necessity of a parody (regardless of what it is the subject being parodied or the manner in which one does it) to askew key aspects in order to be termed "parody".
If it was otherwise, one wouldn't term it a "parody"
IOW your claim is just as absurd to suggest that racist ideas of africans made in the form of parodying evolution are virtually identical
:shrug:
I am simply pointing out that stress is the sign of experiencing problems ... and trying to say that death and birth are not a problem on account of the inevitability of them (or inherent nature of the material world) in no way alleviates the stress (or problem-like nature) of them or that there are a range of medications, financial insurance plans, counselling groups and therapies persons avail them of in an attempt to deal with such problemslightgigantic
Are you laboring under the delusion that stress is not a part of living? And any paradigm that promises to give you a stress free life is a false one.
Grumpy
lightgigantic
Stress is a sign you are still alive. And belief in something doesn't change the fact that such problems are inherent in being alive, nor do I see it making it easier to deal with the problems of living. When my father died of Alheimer's it came as a relief for everyone, same when my wife died of cancer. I guess when you get older death loses it's dread and becomes more the cessation of toil, pain and being a burden to others. When life becomes not worth living, I too will look forward to the end of that suffering. I'm dealing with ill health and death is not a problem to me, but it's not as if you have any alternative. At least any rational ones.
Grumpy
Stress is a sign you are still alive. And belief in something doesn't change the fact that such problems are inherent in being alive, nor do I see it making it easier to deal with the problems of living. When my father died of Alheimer's it came as a relief for everyone, same when my wife died of cancer. I guess when you get older death loses it's dread and becomes more the cessation of toil, pain and being a burden to others. When life becomes not worth living, I too will look forward to the end of that suffering. I'm dealing with ill health and death is not a problem to me, but it's not as if you have any alternative. At least any rational ones.
Grumpy
hence euthanasia also comes under the umbrella of ways of managing the inherent (and largely insurmountable) problems of material existencelightgigantic
Stress is a sign you are still alive. And belief in something doesn't change the fact that such problems are inherent in being alive, nor do I see it making it easier to deal with the problems of living. When my father died of Alheimer's it came as a relief for everyone, same when my wife died of cancer. I guess when you get older death loses it's dread and becomes more the cessation of toil, pain and being a burden to others. When life becomes not worth living, I too will look forward to the end of that suffering. I'm dealing with ill health and death is not a problem to me, but it's not as if you have any alternative. At least any rational ones.
Grumpy
:shrug:
Last edited:
lightgigantic
My point, exactly. The problems you see are problems of living that are just things you have to deal with to continue living. And there is nothing you can do about it, so you deal. And there is no evidence that religious people deal any better than the non-religious or get exempted from any of it.
Grumpy
My point, exactly. The problems you see are problems of living that are just things you have to deal with to continue living. And there is nothing you can do about it, so you deal. And there is no evidence that religious people deal any better than the non-religious or get exempted from any of it.
Grumpy