Religion. Discuss ( or should that be argue )

I'll have a go:

LFGSS debate makes me want to execute myself.

My God, this is boring. Why does it always have to go the same way?

IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THE FORUM CONSENSUS YOUR VIEWS WILL BE DISCREDITED.

It's a shame that those who don't wish to become embroiled in a long-winded, immovable and slightly aggressive argument are extinguished. I think Hugo7's first post (where he mentioned his grandfather) raised some decent points that ought not to be mocked.

Willy-waving/bum-sniffing party is that way >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A lot of what gets posted is written casually and as such is not intended to be infallible or even reasoned a lot of the time. Yet people insist on jumping down throats, analysing even last grammatical or semantic error and generally railroading the underlying sentiment. It's basically just quite rude and at odds with the progressive freedom of thought that is, I presume, generally thought of as desirable. It often appears less about a passionate view and more about cleverness of argument. I think some people ought to put their cocks away.

And I say this as an atheist and advocate of thoughtful debate. Please feel free to disagree.

I think he is saying he doesn't like the way debates on the forum are carried out/end up. This is because if you deviate from the common consensus you get gunned.

I guess the willy-waving, means people showing off and the bum-sniffing refers to people sucking up to each other.

Exactamundo on all counts.

No dancing then?

Balki, promise me one thing: never change.

I don't know or care what the forum consensus is.

On a technical point, I'm not getting involved in a debate, as I don't debate with theists. Religion's wrong and false and that's the end of it.

Excellent stuff here.

To pick up on Tynan bringing Mein Kampf into the discussion, I’d humbly say that it can teach lots of things, prominent amongst them being how not to write. Adolf could not write, bless him. The translator’s introduction to the volume of it that I have makes this clear several times before you get stuck into the book proper. Despite the effort of freely translating several hundred pages of humiliating wind, the translator seems not to have enjoyed the process one bit, and to begrudge the literary Hitler entirely. Hitler repeats himself page after page. Is he not another of the historical speed-freaks, the ones which Lou Reed claimed in the sleeve-notes to Metal Machine Music were responsible for all wars? Adolf sure wrote like one. I couldn’t even finish Mein Kampf. To write a pile of boring bilge which by rights should explain the beginnings of one of the most fascinating ‘events’ (if that’s the right word) in all of history is quite a feat.

There's religion and there's spirituality. You can be a total atheist but be very spiritual about the universe instead of some fairy tale that was invented thousands of years ago and is still causing people to kill each other.

The thing is though, if it wasn't religion being an excuse for small-mindedness and conflict, it would be something else. Humans are very good at finding reasons to hate other groups of humans; be it religion, race, political persuasion or what football team you support, there's always the "other".

Organised religion has a very clever design of being totally inward and closed, but under the disguise as the opposite. By its very nature, one can not argue, reason, question or attempt to prove otherwise its logic. It basically functions as the grey area where morality and idealism meets the 'outside' world - a kind of pseudo-logic that stands-in for an actual attempt at understanding the world.

Bit of a stream of consciousness there...

I've never understood what being a 'spiritual' person actually means.

It means you're a nut job.

I think being a spiritual person means you're a nut job.

My feeling is that spiritual = nut job

I think you can find spirituality in science... Not in a creepy "worship the numbers" way, just, you know, appreciate the awesomeness of the universe way.

I'm using the term extremely loosely here, mind.

House music is a spiritual thing. It's a body thing. It's a soul thing.

Excellent stuff here.

To pick up on Tynan bringing Mein Kampf into the discussion, I’d humbly say that it can teach lots of things, prominent amongst them being how not to write......

.... To write a pile of boring bilge which by rights should explain the beginnings of one of the most fascinating ‘events’ (if that’s the right word) in all of history is quite a feat.

+1

No wonder no one read it when it first came out. I've had the misfortune to have to read large chunks of it twice, albeit a while back.

Funnily enough tho (as we are discussing religion), he does mention the church in reference to propaganda - especially in terms of controlling our senses to make us more susceptible to propaganda.

House music is a spiritual thing. It's a body thing. It's a soul thing.

++

Well put. I think one can have a similar connection with the world around them in general. Not to sound like a total stoner, but I think an atheist can find some sort of spiritual connection with the interconnectedness of everything.

I think you can find spirituality in science... Not in a creepy "worship the numbers" way, just, you know, appreciate the awesomeness of the universe way.

I'm using "the term" extremely loosely here, mind.

Not trying to be picky, but by term do you mean spirituality or science? I think you mean spirituality, if so I think there is something to that.

Personally I think a lot of the 'science' that is banned around at the moment, is very similar to religion. Climate Change / Environmentalism is, imo, one of the best eg.s

The very debate is polarised between believers and non-believers. While I aways thought that scientists didn't *believe *in anything.

By this I don't mean that CC is made up, just that it seems that for a huge number of people out there it fills a very similar role. Especially when it comes to traditional style good Vs. evil. Bicycles = morally good, 4x4's = morally bad.

Agreed.

I have views on CC, but they are essentially only founded on the media and Lovelock (that guy who put forward gaia theory). Therefore, they're probably no better than a belief and I fall into the same catorgory as the majority people out there.

Not trying to be picky, but by term do you mean spirituality or science? I think you mean spirituality, if so I think there is something to that.

Personally I think a lot of the 'science' that is banned around at the moment, is very similar to religion. Climate Change / Environmentalism is, imo, one of the best eg.s

The very debate is polarised between believers and non-believers. While I aways thought that scientists didn't believe in anything.

By this I don't mean that CC is made up, just that it seems that for a huge number of people out there it fills a very similar role. Especially when it comes to traditional style good Vs. evil. Bicycles = morally good, 4x4's = morally bad.

Yes, I was referring to the term "spirituality". As for science and climate change... thats a can of worms that deserves its own thread.

Regarding scientists not believing in anything... that's a tad strong. I think they believe in the pursuit of understanding, which is where I align my own 'beliefs'.

Sorry I was taking the piss a bit which is why I put it in italics. I meant that science is about evidence and truth, rather than "belief".

I am not saying in itself that the age of a belief makes it by default valid and applicable. However, it does make it worth looking at, think about movements like The Enlightenment. Dismissing old disciplines out of hand (which I think far too many people do), is not a wise choice.

I don't think anything has been dismissed out of hand, as you point out religion is our oldest science of the world and the reason we have largely jettisoned it's claims is that we have a better science of the world won over thousands of years.

Firstly, IMO human nature is human nature, people change very little.

I'd say we are profoundly different from our ancestors.

What is basic common sense now (through an inheritance of 150,000 years of accumulated knowledge) would have marked you out as a genius in 1800, a witch in 1500 and a god in 100BC.

A modern 12 year old girl (in another era) with even a passing interest in her school work could, with the germ theory of disease, quite literally save people's lives in their millions, demolish a thousand years of quackery and usher in an age of enlightenment in an afternoon.

part of the purpose of Ramadan is to spend time focusing on God and your family avoiding other distractions. So remove the God bit if you want and you have a good point. People will obviously counter this (as they do with xmas) by saying “oh but why do you need religion to tell you to do this, surely you can do this yourself…”

Yes of course you can. However, people usually don’t. People generally work best to routine. Having the routine of a set period of time when you do focus on loved ones.

You don't need religion to set a routine.

When you say without religion people won't form routines ("However, people usually don’t.") - I would say routine will happen with or without religion.

Well, to my knowledge most religions *start *with the premise of love.

I can't see that at all, religions start as an attempt to explain the world around us, it's science, religion is our first clumsy attempt at science, an attempt to remove some of the doubt and fear from the world.

It's a shame that those who don't wish to become embroiled in a long-winded, immovable and slightly aggressive argument are extinguished. I think Hugo7's first post (where he mentioned his grandfather) raised some decent points that ought not to be mocked.

I don't think anyone is mocking anyone else, are you simply saying that religious ideas should not be challenged ?

i believe that 'angels do god's work' and are among us..

Not trying to be picky, but by term do you mean spirituality or science? I think you mean spirituality, if so I think there is something to that.

Personally I think a lot of the 'science' that is banned around at the moment, is very similar to religion. Climate Change / Environmentalism is, imo, one of the best eg.s

The very debate is polarised between believers and non-believers. While I aways thought that scientists didn't *believe *in anything.

By this I don't mean that CC is made up, just that it seems that for a huge number of people out there it fills a very similar role. Especially when it comes to traditional style good Vs. evil. Bicycles = morally good, 4x4's = morally bad.

Agreed.

Making no comment on the issues themselves, the way people conduct themselves in support of their position is religious in nature.

This is true of many things people become passionate about, I am sure we all do it to some degree, intellectual honesty goes out the window and confirmation bias becomes the tool of choice.

It follows a modern anti-Semitic line that was born out of science, as opposed to traditional anti-Semitism that stems from religion.

I would LOVE to hear this scientific basis for hating the Jews. Off you go then.

I would LOVE to hear this scientific basis for hating the Jews. Off you go then.

The statement:

"It follows a modern anti-Semitic line that was born out of science"

Does not (necessarily) make the claim that anti-semitism was born out of science.