|
The Belief Spectrum (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
that's strange, because i experience the divine most often by servicing myself! :tongue2 |
:stongue:
Well played. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
I think the point he's trying to make is that truth does exist, we just haven't found it. I get the impression that Nefardec's view on the nature of god is more akin to the Hindu concept of Brahman then it is to any of the other great religions.... Brahman being the "ultimate reality" of which everything is part. |
To put it in spiritual terms perhaps, but it also sounds a great deal like Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, where 'God' is simply virtue, and man becomes closer to 'God' by striving to be more virtuous. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by elFreak
Everyone needs something to believe in, and this line of thought does not only apply to religion. Let people that are happy be happy imo. |
"What should I have to give thee! Let me rather hurry hence lest I take aught away from thee!"
--Nietzsche (Thus Spoke Zarathustra) |
|
|
| elFreak |
"burn baby burn, disco inferno!"
-adolf hitler. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by elFreak
When i was younger and more "controversial" (see: immature), i would make it a point to go out of my way to try and debunk anyone's personal beliefs, simply because I thought that needing absolute proof to be able to believe in something was essential. The older I get, the more i have seemed to move away from this. I am not a pious man by any means, but the bottom line to me is that i see how religion makes some people happy, therefore it can not be that bad. Everyone needs something to believe in, and this line of thought does not only apply to religion. Let people that are happy be happy imo. |
Live and let live is all well and good, but we do not live in a world that facilitates the respect and fairness that such a saying implies.
Personal beliefs are one thing, but there are oodles of people who fervently believe in a vengeful and omnipotent God, and think that just because their beliefs cover both a broad range of political spectrums and are empowered by the right of social occupancy, everyone should live like they do; because really - who are all these heathens to question the sovereignty of whichever one and true God has been farted into existence for the time being?
I would be more than happy to let these people be, if only their votes were not just as valuable as mine. |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by elFreak
When i was younger and more "controversial" (see: immature), i would make it a point to go out of my way to try and debunk anyone's personal beliefs, simply because I thought that needing absolute proof to be able to believe in something was essential. The older I get, the more i have seemed to move away from this. I am not a pious man by any means, but the bottom line to me is that i see how religion makes some people happy, therefore it can not be that bad. Everyone needs something to believe in, and this line of thought does not only apply to religion. Let people that are happy be happy imo. |
While I generally follow this thought, people should also be able to defend what they believe. If you can't, then why do you believe? To each their own on being religious or not, but if you can't defend what you believe, whether you have all the answers or not, is just ridiculous. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| Defense of one's beliefs is sort of dicey though - I mean, does it seem fair to expect people to defend something like religion when the most standard of argumentative terms require either a logical or scientific explanation? That's like trying to write a sentence entirely in numbers, rather than letters; there is something entirely lost in translation or otherwise left out, as they are two different systems for expression. |
|
|
| elFreak |
| quote: | Originally posted by gehzumteufel
While I generally follow this thought, people should also be able to defend what they believe. If you can't, then why do you believe? To each their own on being religious or not, but if you can't defend what you believe, whether you have all the answers or not, is just ridiculous. |
why do people need to defend their beliefs unless they are utterly insecure and feel that their way is the only possible way?
the way you phrased that is pretty silly considering that your grandparents had gold stars put on them for similar reasons. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| Well Nazi Germany was an excellent case of what happens when you let a religious doctrine control your state utterly. True, it began as a political party, but the inner circle undoubtedly had a religious agenda. |
|
|
| elFreak |
| german neo paganism. |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by elFreak
why do people need to defend their beliefs unless they are utterly insecure and feel that their way is the only possible way?
the way you phrased that is pretty silly considering that your grandparents had gold stars put on them for similar reasons. |
In a general sense they don't need to defend them, but if they are to get into more intellectual conversations on those subjects, and they are attempting to have any input on the subject, they need to be able to defend what they believe.
And no, they didn't, that I am aware of. Maybe some relatives that I don't know I have, but at this point, I am unaware of any. They fled Tsarist Russia. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| If I were a rich ma-an, a yubba dubba bububdjbaks lwef kljasfsdfusdjf,l l l;sdkfj yebba-deeba-dayyy |
|
|
|
|
