Yes, id be quite fascinated to see this proof too...
It is a dangerous meme contrary to the survival of the human race.Alright. And why do you want the demise of religion?
Cottontop3000 said:/
What? Are you trying to imply there aren't any?
Cris said:Water,
It is a dangerous meme contrary to the survival of the human race.
What sort of God you seek the proof of?
If you don't have a scant idea about the sort of God, you will end up in searching for ever.
I convinced myself that i exist in God hence no proof is required for me. Strange?! every one has his/her own way.
Alright. And why do you want the demise of religion?
It is a dangerous meme contrary to the survival of the human race.
Well, depending on the noetic theory a person adheres to. (Most people don't know which noetic theory they adhere to; they don't consciously hold a theory on how they process reality.)
Mostly because God is easiest to blame.
Yes.religion is a danger to the human race?
OK.humans are a danger to themselves.
In the case of religion - not quite. It is a more a matter of conditioning.it is not the object that is dangerous but how the subject uses the object.
But all major religions encourage irrational beliefs contrary to optimal long-term survival.not all religions are used as a vehicle for manipulation.
My issue isn’t with peace and harmony, it is with survival, and religions are out of sync with that objective, whether they are benign, placid, or peaceful, or not.there are may ideals which threaten what little freedom and peace humanity has left.
Fine, but that isn’t my position.religion is sucha vehicle for the pursuit of an ideal where it unifies people and brings peace and harmony it will flourish where it segregates people and brings fear and hatred it will be killed by its own wrath. it is not good to condemn all religions because of a particular path that particular cults have trampled.
See my response to Ellion.How can you prove that?
It may be a dangerous meme contrary to the survival of a certain part of the human race, who hold a particular outlook and lead a certain lifestyle.
But I don't see how you can prove that it is dangerous to the survival of all.
Cris said:Fine, but that isn’t my position.
Two thirds of the world population hold religious beliefs. These beliefs encourage complacency towards death and that “there is probably something beyond death” type perspective. Involuntary death has at the present time a 100% track record of killing humans. With such a massive number of people following the defeatist path that we can’t solve this then the result is that we are not focusing on solving this very real overwhelming plague of humanity – involuntary death.
Of the 6 billion people on the planet only a few thousand are actively working at the leading edge of solving issues of killer diseases like cancer and aging. This is a disproportional absurd ratio which I am quite sure would have been quite different if the irrational ideas sponsored by religion did not have such a strangle hold on the population of the world.
Get rid of religion and bring people to the realization that they are really going to die and permanently cease to exist and that there is no fantasy eternal paradise when they die – then they will give some serious thought to solving the real problems we face. Peach and harmony are nice for a while but who cares if after a few years you won’t be around to appreciate them.
Why is that relevant? Why conclude I fear death?the short response is; why do you fear death?
Cris said:Ellion,
Why is that relevant? Why conclude I fear death?
It is simply that I do not find death an acceptable alternative to being alive.
Two thirds of the world population hold religious beliefs. These beliefs encourage complacency towards death and that “there is probably something beyond death” type perspective. Involuntary death has at the present time a 100% track record of killing humans. With such a massive number of people following the defeatist path that we can’t solve this then the result is that we are not focusing on solving this very real overwhelming plague of humanity – involuntary death.
Of the 6 billion people on the planet only a few thousand are actively working at the leading edge of solving issues of killer diseases like cancer and aging. This is a disproportional absurd ratio which I am quite sure would have been quite different if the irrational ideas sponsored by religion did not have such a strangle hold on the population of the world.
Get rid of religion and bring people to the realization that they are really going to die and permanently cease to exist and that there is no fantasy eternal paradise when they die – then they will give some serious thought to solving the real problems we face. Peach and harmony are nice for a while but who cares if after a few years you won’t be around to appreciate them.
Maybe that's because you need free will in order to have a say in how 'you' process reality?
Mostly because God is easiest to blame.
With great power comes great responsibility.
Of death yes, but not fear.it is relevant because you made such an issue of death in this post:
Well no and that is a non sequitur.the conclusion that you fear death comes from idea you convey of the importance to conquer death.
Or it could come from a desire to stay alive; fear is not a necessary factor. You also imply there is something good about natural processes and that we must accept them. I don’t agree. Nature is something imposed on us that we do not have to accept willingly.to overcome the natural processes of life aging and dying comes from a fear of embracing them.
Sorry but no, you are not even in the right ballpark.however subtle or distorted that need is, it is a fear based need.
Again you imply that natural is good and we must take a defeatist attitude. You are displaying the very apathy that comes from religious conditioning. Aging is a disease like any other and we should address it as such with appropriate disdain. And nature is a largely random and uncontrolled process that we should learn to control and manipulate for our own benefit.embracing all of life including death and old age is a freeing of your self from those needs to conrol your natural process.
I can’t see that the terms “fear” or “love” in this context are applicable to me. Life is preferable to death, so why would one ever willingly accept the least preferable option? This is simply a matter of logic.this fear itself is a natural process that is born of a love for your life holding life precious and the need to protect it is a response of a healthy being,
Sentence didn’t makes sense – sounds like meaningless psycho-babble – sorry but I don’t buy your defeatist conditioning, and rationalizing death as something acceptable is the result of such conditioning, which unfortunately leads so many to the irrationality of religion as a solution.but the need to protect life from its own nature is a fear of losing it.
you made such an issue of death that i thought it relevant to enquire about your fears.cris said:Of death yes, but not fear.
how is that a nonsequitur? you convey a sense of death (and not just death) being something you must fight off.cris said:Well no and that is a non sequitur.ellion said:the conclusion that you fear death comes from idea you convey of the importance to conquer death.
are you afraid to loose your life or the life of anyone close to you?Or it could come from a desire to stay alive; fear is not a necessary factor.
then what ball park are you in and i'll come join you for a game? why do you need to conquer death (we'll do nature later if you like)?Sorry but no, you are not even in the right ballpark.
i didnt mean to imply that but the implication is probably there because i do think natural processes are good, all of them (well, cant think of any right now that i cant somehow see having a purpose)You also imply there is something good about natural processes and that we must accept them. I don’t agree. Nature is something imposed on us that we do not have to accept willingly.
again the implication was not meant but it is present in my nature. your opinion is that embracing death is a defeatist attitude, this is a matter of opinion. my opinion is that you have the deafeatist attitude in your belief that death is a finality containing no potential for spiritual growth.Again you imply that natural is good and we must take a defeatist attitude. You are displaying the very apathy that comes from religious conditioning.
why is life preferable to death? do you love life then? do you fear losing it?I can’t see that the terms “fear” or “love” in this context are applicable to me. Life is preferable to death,
i dont know cris, Why would one?so why would one ever willingly accept the least preferable option?
the sentence does make sense. i have no idea what it sounds like or means to you nor do i care, lots of your comments sound like paranoid materialistic conditioning to me, but i dont mind i can accomadate your irrational short sightedness and i can comfortably accept your criticisms. i wasnt selling any deafeatist conditioning, i dont need to your conditioning is self defeating.Sentence didn’t makes sense – sounds like meaningless psycho-babble – sorry but I don’t buy your defeatist conditioning, and rationalizing death as something acceptable is the result of such conditioning, which unfortunately leads so many to the irrationality of religion as a solution.