Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
User Journal

insanecarbonbasedlif's Journal: [Religion] What to believe? 12

Journal by insanecarbonbasedlif
So, I'm aware that I'm offending people with some of my posts, but I really need some sort of forum to post this stuff and talk about it. Despite treading on other people's faith, I really don't mean to offend... I just really want to work this all out, and check my blindspots.

Anyhow, on to this journal's real topic; What to believe?
Essentially, since faith is necessary if I am to adhere to a religion, there remains one question to ask:
How should I determine what, amongst all the possibilities, to have faith in?

I know intuition has been raised by a number of commentators as the path - I still think that the number of directions taken by people who use intuition as their spiritual guide to be in line with the null hypothesis, that is, that there is no absolute truth outside of reality that can be found via intuition. To be honest, I'm not convinced that intuition is in any way different than the conscious problem solving or creativity that people exhibit, except that it happens below the "awareness of thought processing" radar. If I had seen intuition solve problems that were unsolvable via normal thought, then I would be convinced. The fact that intuition leads to as many bad decisions as it does to good decisions leaves me uncompelled.

Is intuition the only other possibility aside from rationality, or is (are?) there some other way(s) to find something beyond this reality?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

[Religion] What to believe?

Comments Filter:
  • Or at least the worst consequences for non-believers. At least then you're covered from the worst outcome, right? :-)

  • I don't believe. I came to the conclusion that I don't need it: it is completely irrelevant and can be downright harmful [whatstheharm.net]. (I know that moderate theists will say that it's just fringe nutcases, but look what happens in the Islamic world [dailymail.co.uk]. That's mainstream Islam.... Don't dare to say that Christians wouldn't ever do anything that cruel. Don't worry, they do worse [independent.co.uk].... Yes, yes, I know, extreme nutcases.)

    Incidentally, I just finished The Handmaid's Tale [wikipedia.org].... That's what religion does in the long run....

    • And we all know that atheists are always cuddly teddy bears exempt from such behavior [wikipedia.org].

      Troll is as troll does.

      Cheers,

      Ethelred

      • Troll? No absolutely not.

        You see, for atrocities to happen you need an ideology to fall back on. That Mao (or Stalin for the matter) fell back on a non-religious ideology is not important. Fact is, religion is a prime candidate to be used as an ideology to do harm.

        I don't mind people believing insane things, I just mind it when they harm other people. It happens way too often in the name of religion.

        Besides, he asked me (us) what my "beliefs" are, so I replied.

        In a modern scientific and rational world,

        • *shrug* Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin et. al. all claimed to be acting in the name of rationality, modernity and science. You can protest all you like that they weren't really doing so. But I can do just the same -- and with just as much justification -- for those who commit atrocities in the name of God. You can't have it both ways.

          You could instead just blame human nature. Instead, you find a favorite old saw.

          The conversation is over at this point.

          No need to go off in a sulk, Jorg. *shrug*

          Cheers,

          Ethelr

          • But I can do just the same -- and with just as much justification -- for those who commit atrocities in the name of God.

            So both used excuses to commit atrocities. Okay, fair enough. Still doesn't make God real, especially not a God that allows it (religiously motivated or not)

            No need to go off in a sulk, Jorg. *shrug*

            Can't help it, I've grown a severe antipathy against you by now.

            • Still doesn't make God real, especially not a God that allows it (religiously motivated or not)

              I didn't say that it does. I merely discount the idea that religion causes people to do bad things, which is what you claimed.

              Can't help it, I've grown a severe antipathy against you by now.

              Um, OK.

              Cheers,

              Ethelred

              • Just in case you wondered: he asked about my(our) beliefs and you found it appropriate to attack me and call me a troll. If I said all theists should be lined against the wall and shot, I'd be a troll. I'm not, I stated my opinion as in the question and you found it appropriate to attack me.

                I just sick 'n tired of you condescending attitude... You love to ridicule people and think you're better than them because you're a believer. Screw that John!

                • Just in case you wondered: he asked about my(our) beliefs and you found it appropriate to attack me and call me a troll.

                  You didn't state a belief: You made a specific claim, which I strongly disagreed with, and said why. Since the "religion is the root of all wars" canard is a typical troll, and since you've been known to openly troll for fun (including setting up accounts for the purpose), I called you out on it.

                  Meanwhile, as a matter of fact I don't think I'm 'better' because I believe in God. I've

  • Why is it that you insist on making it an either-or thing?

    If I had seen intuition solve problems that were unsolvable via normal thought, then I would be convinced. The fact that intuition leads to as many bad decisions as it does to good decisions leaves me uncompelled.

    Time and again you've attempted to define reality as "that which can be proven". That is utter nonsense and a very stunted way of looking at things.

    As a very simple example, any human being sometimes makes decisions based on things li

    • Why is it that you insist on making it an either-or thing?

      I'm not even sure what thing you're referring to with this, so I'll abstain from comment, and just ask for clarification.

      Time and again you've attempted to define reality as "that which can be proven". That is utter nonsense and a very stunted way of looking at things.

      Please provide your working definition of reality, and we'll see if I can be reformed from my nonsensical view.

      As a very simple example, any human being sometimes makes decisions based

Small is beautiful.

Working...