The Religion word
- This topic has 527 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
As usual LBird, accusations without proof, but then your type of science doesn't require proof! Its all relative.
LBird wrote:They always try to reject criticism of their god (Materialism).Well if you reject materialism or physicalism what's your take on it? Dualism, idealism some kind of pluralism or do you think the issue is metaphysical and therefore an none issue?
LBird wrote:They always try to reject criticism of their god (Materialism).And are you talking about materialism in the ontological or the epistemic sense?
http://www.alternet.org/belief/why-you-cant-reconcile-god-and-evolution?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmarkWorth a read to fill your atheistic armoury
Some good stuff there.At one point Christina makes the point that evolution has led to human brains that are capable of amazement, and are inclined to be amazed at the complexity of life. Or as Dawkins put it, we look at the world through purpose-coloured spectacles.Playing devil's advocate though, a believer in God might say that the human brain is not developed enough to appreciate God's role in the whole affair (a variation on the theme 'God moves in mysterious ways').I also think that arguments pointing to the lack of evidence of a god are beside the point – believers don't need evidence, they have their belief.
Hi rodshawSwitching that back around you could then say if the human brain is not developed enough to appreciate God's role then who's fault is that?I like the God moves in mysterious ways theme as it suggests that us non beleivers are in effect, Doubters by Design.
rodshaw wrote:Playing devil's advocate though, a believer in God might say that the human brain is not developed enough to appreciate God's role in the whole affair (a variation on the theme 'God moves in mysterious ways').But then whose fault would that be? God the omnipotent surely would have ensured that the human brain was developed sufficently in order that we could appreciate his 'great works'.
Quote:I also think that arguments pointing to the lack of evidence of a god are beside the point – believers don't need evidence, they have their belief.I don't think it's quite that simple. Believers do utilise evidence-based thinking for many everyday things. I'm currently engaged in an ongoing exchange with a Catholic who is also a socialist. That person has been compelled to examine previously unchallenged beliefs after I pointed out some of the many contradictions and absurdities contained with The Bible, for example. Religious people do, from time to time, jettison their beliefs. I know; I was one of them.
Religious people have their own set of thoughts. The faith oriented people will never accept other religious people even if you allow them in the party. Once they grow in number and strength, they will have their own rules against other religions and those who are not religious. Let the socialist be few in number, but what to do with senseless and stubborn fellows. Faith will soon be eliminated from the world, as we see how it has diminished. Have patience, If we could not see socialism, our children and their childrens will see.
We are hopefull, we are not guilty, we are against the cut-throat competition… Soon, the sun will rise, darkness will be the will fate of oppressers.
I think that the party has accepted as members peoples with religious view, and later on, they have left the party, because they were not able to reconcile their view with the materialist approach of socialism
I think this is a reference to our companion party in the US which at one point tried to draw a distinction between "spiritual" and "religious" which may have let in one or two people we over here who we would have rejected as religious.
In regards to religious beliefs..the irrationalist versus the materialist, i found myself realising my own weaknesses.I have this idea that there is good and bad luck…i know…there is no such thing , events and opportunities have causes and have some logical reason for happeneing but i still keep returning to it. "Just my damn bad luck"…or .."he or she is a lucky bastard"…A world of "if only…"I also have this …dare i say it..ethical position …that what goes around comes around…that people get their just desserts…Again, a lot of really nasty people never face retribution and get away with their evil acts (ooops another loaded term)…but for some inner reason, i feel the requirement to think they will suffer some punishment in the future …and i have a great delight of shadenfreude when it does occur…..I know…non-Marxist ideas…superstitions or perhaps a vague personal acceptance/interpretation of the Karmic principle of life but so deeply ingrained that i carry them around. Am i religious?..Should i resign for not being a materialist….? Does what i believe individually actually have any importance regards the bigger issues we face collectively.
Your 'karmic beliefs', for want of a better phrase, will be proved right or wrong as time goes by because they are rooted in real life. You're not hoping (presumably) that people will get their just desserts in heaven or hell when they die, but at some future point in the physical world. Your beliefs may or may not prove to be correct. There will no doubt be a statistical model for this kind of thing.It's a bit like football managers saying that luck balances out over a season. They may or may not be proved correct when the season is over (and no doubt, the ones who feel they've had more than their share of bad luck will find all sorts of scapegoats – referees, the fixture list, etc.)Of course, that begs the question whether the statistics involved are just a way of formalising the underlying karma…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.