TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- God
Pages (25): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 »

Re: Re: God

quote:

Originally posted by chlola His memorial is this Saturday. A year from his death... I still don't get it.

IF you put the fork down, maybe you will understand.

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard Learn when to give up, big shooter. You already lost.

So you had no argument. Unfortunately I can't say i'm surprised.

But alright, we can say I've lost

or something

quote:

Originally posted by FuzzQi or something

If you believe in God answer me:

What is the essence of life: the soul?

If it is the soul, every living has a soul?

If every living has a soul, you agree that a tree, a plant, a roach and even a protozoan has a soul. So tell me, what happens to the souls of these lovely livings after death?

I'm a curious guy

Maybe those are our souls!

Maybe the "soul" is the biochemical energy that all living things possess, which is then recycled into more living things after they die and decompose?

I'd say that's extremely possible, but highly unlikely. The 33.3% chance of its occurrence isn't anything to committ belief toward.

I don't get why people can't just live their lives however they want to while they can and not worry about what happens when you die

Be patient, you'll find out.

It's not exactly a leap to say that most religion is largely fixated on death.

And each of us tends to be here for a really long time - fucking 70 years! Maybe more, maybe less - it's not so much boredom as it is a preoccupation with devoting one's time to what are easily natural inclinations in the fantastic; Whether you think these complete fiction, or you realize that the spiritual experience and fabriction are essentially inseparable elements that compose the human experience, you're still a participant in man's elevation.

Loss is behind every great piece of art, every song, every prayer - our ability to grasp that we feel one way for others, that will some day go away, is the persisting element behind most every devotion, even if the loss is of ourselves. Perhaps especially so.

I don't believe the mere curiosity to see what's next is truly what's most important at the heart of it all.

I feel like such a preoccupation with worrying about losing things tends to detract from what I believe to be the true nature of life, which is just to live and experience everything that you can while you still can.

You will lose everything in your life at some point, that's just part of life. Our natural inclination towards this might be fear, but I don't think one can truly enjoy life until they've accepted the undeniable fact that nothing is permanent.

People seeking some sort of divine entity is essentially them clinging to the idea that there is something that can save us from our impending doom. God, for me, is just man kind's avoidance of accepting the possibility that this is all there is. You're in it, right now, and this is your only time to experience it.

It's not necessary for people to use god to extract some kind of meaning out of life. We can create our own meaning through simply living. Our insignificance in the grand scheme of the universe may be our greatest asset.

I've always liked this quote a lot, even though it was from a shit movie:

"The Gods envy us. They envy us because we're mortal, because any moment may be our last. Everything is more beautiful because we're doomed. You will never be more lovely than you are now. We will never be here again."

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 I don't get why people can't just live their lives however they want to while they can and not worry about what happens when you die Be patient, you'll find out.

I'm not worried, just want to know if you a have a reasonable answer.

Reason has never been what it used to be.

quote:

Originally posted by rdevito I'm not worried, just want to know if you a have a reasonable answer.

Okay, a reasonable answer. The soul is not the essence of life, and probably isn't even a real thing, so use that to answer all of your other questions.

Just because we have the capacity for thought, and are the only species that are aware of our own mortality doesn't really make us "special." The idea that we have these special souls just because we have the ability to think that we do is kind of circular.

All we have is energy. Since energy can't be created out of nothing (or at least to our current extent of knowledge it can't), our "soul" (energy) probably just gets recycled back into the vast pool of energy when we die, like I said before. So "you" cease to be "you" as you would identify yourself now, when you die. You're broken down into the basic building blocks of life, and it starts all over again.

quote:

Originally posted by rdevito If you believe in God answer me: What is the essence of life: the soul? If it is the soul, every living has a soul? If every living has a soul, you agree that a tree, a plant, a roach and even a protozoan has a soul. So tell me, what happens to the souls of these lovely livings after death? I'm a curious guy

EDIT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSeS7vTEkHE

So much love in the world

quote:

Originally posted by Moongoose So much love in the world

If you take it at face value and only interrogate the intent meant to be measured by the public, at the imam's arguments, then it does reflect poorly on religion. If you look at it for what it really is, however, and see that it is nothing but a positioning statement leveled by a pathological narcissist, much like Trump did with his birther campaign, no such argument against religion stands.

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker If you take it at face value and only interrogate the intent meant to be measured by the public, at the imam's arguments, then it does reflect poorly on religion. If you look at it for what it really is, however, and see that it is nothing but a positioning statement leveled by a pathological narcissist, much like Trump did with his birther campaign, no such argument against religion stands.

So you dont think the world would be better of without religion?



With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil � that takes religion.

Steven Weinberg

quote:

Originally posted by mr.bison So you dont think the world would be better of without religion?

No. I don't. I also don't think it's a better place because of religion.

quote:

Originally posted by mr.bison With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil � that takes religion. Steven Weinberg

Stanley Milgram says otherwise.

I think the world would absolutely be a better place because of religion. Look at some of the major wars over the course of history. A lot of them had a large portion to do with religion. Religion also breeds contempt towards other religions, intolerance towards races that typically practice those religions, etc. I think if people were just people, and not identified as Catholics, or Jews, or Muslims, or whatever, then people could identify better with one another, and there would be much less violence in the world.

Also little boys would feel safer at Sunday school.

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker No. I don't. I also don't think it's a better place because of religion.

Then why do different religions have different behavioral outcomes? Why do people practicing one kind of religion tend to be more dangerous/violent then people practicing another kind of religion. Jainism for example?

Do you seriously think that no religious teaching is capable of convincing a good moral person to do horrific things?



I think Sam Harris makes a good point in this video. A point i have never seen refuted. What are your thoughts of the point he is trying to make?




The Problem with Islamic Fundamentalism are the Fundamentals of Islam

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker Stanley Milgram says otherwise.

Just watched his Obedience to Authority Experiment. Really interesting.

If you're interested in psychological experiments gone wild, you should also check out the Stanford Prison Experiments.

quote:

Originally posted by mr.bison Then why do different religions have different behavioral outcomes? Why do people practicing one kind of religion tend to be more dangerous/violent then people practicing another kind of religion. Jainism for example? Do you seriously think that no religious teaching is capable of convincing a good moral person to do horrific things? I think Sam Harris makes a good point in this video. A point i have never seen refuted. What are your thoughts of the point he is trying to make?

You've been posting in nothing but syllogism, false choice, and straw-man fallacy to get to this point, which is some money shot featuring Islam as your target. The most valid question pertains to why differing regions have different outcomes which is easily understood because nearly everyone in those regions either is or has recently been subject to the rule of an authoritarian regime that made use of hard-line Islamic clerics in order to focus the anger of their populace onto something other than the regimes they operated under. That's not to say that all people who've suffered under authoritarian regimes are prone to being terrorists. In fact it's an astonishingly small fraction of that population accounting for terrorism, in general.

Saddam Hussein said, "Where there is a person, there is a problem. Where there is no person, there is no problem." The essential annihilation of self and subsequent loss of power is given redress in the narcissistic solution on offer from extremists. A meaningless, banal existence of servitude is granted a means of escape in the noble sacrifice, on the order of (even orders of magnitude greater than) winning the lottery in its reward. A source, for all the World's evil, is fictitiously characterized and targeted for divine retribution and to the young idiot, bedeviled by poverty, he is given the means to become a hero.

From where I sit, violent extremist fall into three sub-types: The born extremist has been sent to Madrassas, from an early age, and taught an extremist ideology. These morons are owed the credit of the nightclub bombing in Bali and the The 2008 attacks in Mumbai. The home-sick extremists, most of whom are credited with attacks in England and attempted attacks within the Continental United States, are made up of highly educated yet misplaced souls who are unable to find personal fulfillment in other activities, have found themselves isolated and therefor susceptible to radical cells operating within the periphery of local Mosques or on the internet. While more educated, this subtype more closely resembles Timothy McVeigh, who returning home, found himself isolated and gravitating towards interests he felt would allow him to serve a "higher" purpose. The third type is the disgruntled Muslim, who, were it not for the fact that they were Muslim, would not be so closely associated with having committed an act of terror and would be more known for having committed a spree killing. Resembling many mass-murderers, Nidal Malik Hasan was just as well known for his professional incompetence, among his peers, as he was for being a Muslim.

Klebold, Harris, Cho, and other non-Muslim (and presumably non-religious) shooters collectively outnumber my disgruntled Muslim, partly dismissing the association you're trying to make. The non-religious shooters are more closely related to the final two subtypes to a degree that religion being a factor, can nearly be ruled out. The Muslim perpetrators of violence, while doing so in the name of their religion, had made that vain association out of a need to rationalize their decisions opposing having it be as much of a motivator. Timothy McVeigh displayed traits of Paranoid Personality Disorder which roughly approximates the surrogate belief system inculcated in terrorist recruitment.

So, short answer: No. It could just as well be Christianity. In fact, it has been. Jim Jones and the People's Temple speaks eloquently to that. The Branch Davidians in Waco also illustrate that violence is non-denominational. Don't forget about Heaven's Gate, which had nearly nothing to do with religion, at all.

It's natural and can be expected that religion for the majority of the world will naturally become a minority view. As education about the world increases, the belief in unexplainable deities will drop off.
How many gods did we believe in thousands of years ago? Many more than now, but they dwindled down and they will continue to dwindle down. Until eventually all people have faith in is the possibility of a higher being but nothing even remotely linked to any of our current deities.

Then again we'll probably all die out within 200 years anyway due to other causes.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.