Poll: Whats Your Religion?
- Thread starter Shock and Awe
- Start date
Recommended Videos
i choose not to believe as i personally have no need for it, im perfectly content knowing that when im gone i will be decomposed my thousands of bacteria. i realize its not a cheery thought but i can live wit it.
Atheist, but not in a militant way. I see benefits of Christianity the same as I see benefits in Atheism.
You stated morality will never be proven in a lab, which is correct. But that's not the only way for science and philosophy to overlap. scientific data is relevant in philosophical arguments.cuddly_tomato said:
also this:
Wouldn't it be nice to actually have some understanding about how the brain works while developing fancy theories about minds and souls?
What's useless about being able to relate human aesthetic perception to more basic pattern-matching that we gained as a result of natural selection?
Isn't tracing the history of an idea -- especially something taken for granted, like a custom, religious belief, or moral code -- vital to actually making sense of that idea?
Why shouldn't we use a machine to help us identify structural similarities between different languages or texts or musical works?
How is a philosopher who still thinks about the physical world in terms of Newtonian mechanics going to offer us much insight into that world?
Shouldn't ever priest writing about an infinite God develop at least some kind of understanding of mathematical infinities?
What kind of a moral system ignores human psychology and behavior?
There's no clean separation here. Philosophical and aesthetic concepts shape scientific exploration and scientific knowledge provides us with a wealth of information that can help us understand all sorts of different facets of human existence.
(Also, there's a lot more to scientific inquiry than taking a metaphorical microscope to stuff. I can't think of a single field of study that doesn't involve making big, holistic models as well as tiny measurements.)
What's useless about being able to relate human aesthetic perception to more basic pattern-matching that we gained as a result of natural selection?
Isn't tracing the history of an idea -- especially something taken for granted, like a custom, religious belief, or moral code -- vital to actually making sense of that idea?
Why shouldn't we use a machine to help us identify structural similarities between different languages or texts or musical works?
How is a philosopher who still thinks about the physical world in terms of Newtonian mechanics going to offer us much insight into that world?
Shouldn't ever priest writing about an infinite God develop at least some kind of understanding of mathematical infinities?
What kind of a moral system ignores human psychology and behavior?
There's no clean separation here. Philosophical and aesthetic concepts shape scientific exploration and scientific knowledge provides us with a wealth of information that can help us understand all sorts of different facets of human existence.
(Also, there's a lot more to scientific inquiry than taking a metaphorical microscope to stuff. I can't think of a single field of study that doesn't involve making big, holistic models as well as tiny measurements.)
I dont have a religion because I don't believe in any of the stuff they tell us..
Is it just me or has there been alot of religion themed topics this last couple days?
Is it just me or has there been alot of religion themed topics this last couple days?
Yah but at the same time all the theists around seem to act like douchebags. Actualy reason: People are just douchebags.Hunde Des Krieg said:
T'was this part:-Falconus said:
It hinted that I was asking him to prove there was a 'deeper meaning' in concepts of ethical and moral codes, and refute that they have a perfectly valid scientific explanation. A perfectly understandable assumption but not the correct one. I was actually focusing on reductionism, assuming from the start that they have a perfectly valid explanation and trying to take him to the logical conclusion of that - that morals and ethics don't exist.
As for my beliefs...
This I will say in the public forum:- I for one tend to think that if any higher power wanted us all to believe one thing, he would have made sure we all knew precisely what that was. Please, if any Christians come back at me with the Bible and I will send you to the hot place. It works for you, that is good. I am happy for you. But for me it is waaaaay to ambiguous. Since the distribution and variety of faiths running through humanity since the dawn of time isn't really consistent with the "one god fits all" policy, I suspect that diversity is favored by whatever driving forces are at hand (whether that be human creativity, an evolutionary advantage to religiousity, or a number of supernatural entities bombing around making our lives difficult).
Whatever the case may be I am happy with my own personal beliefs, which I fully accept might be the retarded brain murmurs of electrochemical reactions within my balding head. As for what they are, I will send a PM to anyone actually interested but I won't be giving a public sermon on The Way of The Tomato.
Neutral Good towards Chaotic.
Christian with a minor grudge against organized religion. Sometimes the dogma gets in the way of the grand purpose.
These threads should cease their occurance, and soon.
Christian with a minor grudge against organized religion. Sometimes the dogma gets in the way of the grand purpose.
These threads should cease their occurance, and soon.
I was raised a catholic but nowadays, like most Irish people, it merely defines wheither you support celtic or rangers.
When pushed, I will usually write "Jedi" as my religion....
When pushed, I will usually write "Jedi" as my religion....
