Jump to content

Beliefs, Religion and Faith.


Assume Nothing

Recommended Posts

What YOU believe to be the truth. A child should be freely exposed to all belief systems, all learning opportunities and then they will make up their mind through critical thinking. Religion as whole would completely evaporate if only a single generate skipped the indoctrination process, consider that for a moment.

 

Sorry to barge in on your argument, but who are you to tell anyone what to teach or not to teach their children? Sure, there are ways of over-doing it, but as long as the children get to choose not to believe in the religion they've been brought up with I don't see what's so bad about a religious upbringing.

 

Everyone in my family has been raised Catholic: that is to say, exposed to moral values and biblical stories, taught about the faith.. but we are by no means forced to assume it as truth - nor was it taught as such. As a child I was told these were stories with moral values within them, not something to mindlessly assume to be the truth. You just appear to be over-generalising things.

 

 

 

Oh, and also:

This is not speculation and I'm not here to spoon-feed you data. If you want proof, go search for it. You cannot ignore the historical correlations between violence and religion.

 

Then could you please explain to me why the religious community I was raised in always was against war? Religion doesn't equal war, but has been used as an excuse for war.

ms_julie.png

jafjepediasig.jpg

 

 

angel2w.gif Tip.It Website Crew Leader

[hide=Quotes]

I love it how Jafje comes outa nowhere and answers my questions

Hehe now we know what real life does...drugs, drugs, more drugs. Thank god we are addicted to something that won't kill us.

[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 411
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

What YOU believe to be the truth. A child should be freely exposed to all belief systems, all learning opportunities and then they will make up their mind through critical thinking. Religion as whole would completely evaporate if only a single generate skipped the indoctrination process, consider that for a moment.

 

Oh okay, so you'll be teaching your children the merits of organized religion then?

 

And no adults raised as atheists ever convert to organized religion, right?

 

This is not speculation and I'm not here to spoon-feed you data. If you want proof, go search for it. You cannot ignore the historical correlations between violence and religion.

 

It is speculation, and if you can't support your claims with factual evidence, don't make them. You also weren't talking about historical correlation between violence and religion, you were saying the only reason the US starts wars is because many of its citizens are religious.

polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What YOU believe to be the truth. A child should be freely exposed to all belief systems, all learning opportunities and then they will make up their mind through critical thinking. Religion as whole would completely evaporate if only a single generate skipped the indoctrination process, consider that for a moment.

 

Sorry to barge in on your argument, but who are you to tell anyone what to teach or not to teach their children? Sure, there are ways of over-doing it, but as long as the children get to choose not to believe in the religion they've been brought up with I don't see what's so bad about a religious upbringing.

 

[hide=response]Who am I? You do realise that how we collectively raise children affects all society. What's so bad about a religious upbringing? How about the surreptitiously dangerous mindset of paranoia and punishment regarding different ideologies? If you're going to teach a child one religion, teach them all religions, then teach them how morality can exist without the threat of damnation.[/hide]

 

Everyone in my family has been raised Catholic: that is to say, exposed to moral values and biblical stories, taught about the faith.. but we are by no means forced to assume it as truth - nor was it taught as such. As a child I was told these were stories with moral values within them, not something to mindlessly assume to be the truth. You just appear to be over-generalising things.

 

[hide=response]What's so difficult about teaching a child that violence is bad or that you shouldn't violate the property of others? Why traumatize children with the false idea of eternal damnation? Why is learning blind faith a good thing what it is a completely irrational concept? Correct me if I'm wrong, but they did force you through a baptism and holy communion, right? Anyway, you shouldn't try to use yourself and/or family when trying to prove a point because that represents an extremely limited sample space.[/hide]

 

 

Oh, and also:

This is not speculation and I'm not here to spoon-feed you data. If you want proof, go search for it. You cannot ignore the historical correlations between violence and religion.

 

Then could you please explain to me why the religious community I was raised in always was against war? Religion doesn't equal war, but has been used as an excuse for war.

 

[hide=response]Again, you can't use yourself as an example. I never said Religion equals war, but it definitely plays a major role in spurring conflict between sectors of society. Why? Simple. As soon as a society develops and accepts a collective ideology anyone who approaches with a different way of thinking instantly challenges what people believe to be true. People will begin to condemn foreign ways of thinking, even inflicting punishments in response as a desperate means of somehow validating their own beliefs. This can only escalate.[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bold black is easier to read than yellow or green. (suggestion)

 

I was just thinking the same thing :o Although it wasn't too bad since yellow nicely contrasts with dark blue and green isn't much of a strain anyway. Red would have been worse.

 

Sorry, my replies are a bit messy since I'm responding within quotes. I'll start separating them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Don't you dare corrupt your children's minds before they have the chance to rationalize what is being proposed to them. Children will believe anything they are told and it is truly monstrous for any institution to take advantage of this.

 

Sorry, are you trying to restrict my right to teach my children what I believe to be the truth?

 

I'm not going to stop you teaching your children whatever you like. However it is unfair to bring them up with such a one-sided view of the world and morality. You can be moral without being religious, and you can be immoral while being religious. Would you approve of me teaching my children the The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster? It's truly ridiculous, but hey, it's my belief, thus will be my children's. They will actually believe it because they are so young and naive that they don't know anything else other than it.

 

Oh, and also:

 

s it pure coincidence that the most religious western nation (the US) is also the most involved in foreign wars?

 

This is blatant speculation at best which doesn't even attempt to take into account any other (real) reasons why the US goes to war a lot. The US isn't even the most religious North American country.

 

 

edit: didn't mean to quote adrenal

RIP TET

 

original.png

 

"That which does not kill us makes us stronger." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[hide="Quotes]

What YOU believe to be the truth. A child should be freely exposed to all belief systems, all learning opportunities and then they will make up their mind through critical thinking. Religion as whole would completely evaporate if only a single generate skipped the indoctrination process, consider that for a moment.

 

Sorry to barge in on your argument, but who are you to tell anyone what to teach or not to teach their children? Sure, there are ways of over-doing it, but as long as the children get to choose not to believe in the religion they've been brought up with I don't see what's so bad about a religious upbringing.

 

[hide=response]Who am I? You do realise that how we collectively raise children affects all society. What's so bad about a religious upbringing? How about the surreptitiously dangerous mindset of paranoia and punishment regarding different ideologies? If you're going to teach a child one religion, teach them all religions, then teach them how morality can exist without the threat of damnation.[/hide]

 

Everyone in my family has been raised Catholic: that is to say, exposed to moral values and biblical stories, taught about the faith.. but we are by no means forced to assume it as truth - nor was it taught as such. As a child I was told these were stories with moral values within them, not something to mindlessly assume to be the truth. You just appear to be over-generalising things.

 

[hide=response]What's so difficult about teaching a child that violence is bad or that you shouldn't violate the property of others? Why traumatize children with the false idea of eternal damnation? Why is learning blind faith a good thing what it is a completely irrational concept? Correct me if I'm wrong, but they did force you through a baptism and holy communion, right? Anyway, you shouldn't try to use yourself and/or family when trying to prove a point because that represents an extremely limited sample space.[/hide]

 

 

Oh, and also:

This is not speculation and I'm not here to spoon-feed you data. If you want proof, go search for it. You cannot ignore the historical correlations between violence and religion.

 

Then could you please explain to me why the religious community I was raised in always was against war? Religion doesn't equal war, but has been used as an excuse for war.

 

[hide=response]Again, you can't use yourself as an example. I never said Religion equals war, but it definitely plays a major role in spurring conflict between sectors of society. Why? Simple. As soon as a society develops and accepts a collective ideology anyone who approaches with a different way of thinking instantly challenges what people believe to be true. People will begin to condemn foreign ways of thinking, even inflicting punishments in response as a desperate means of somehow validating their own beliefs. This can only escalate.[/hide]

[/hide]

 

Who am I? You do realise that how we collectively raise children affects all society. What's so bad about a religious upbringing? How about the surreptitiously dangerous mindset of paranoia and punishment regarding different ideologies? If you're going to teach a child one religion, teach them all religions, then teach them how morality can exist without the threat of damnation.

 

First off, you don't need to be so condescending. :mellow:

 

Anyway, since you didn't answer the question. Who do you think you are, telling others how to raise their children? What makes you so special that you know the best way, and what is that based on?

 

In addition to that, you claim I cannot use myself as an example, even though I am relevant to this discussion and am an example of how what you're claiming does not apply by default. Why is that?

 

Do you honestly believe I know nothing of other religions, and do you also think I am utterly incapable of seeing people who don't share the same religion as equals simply because I had a religious upbringing? Why?

 

As soon as a society develops and accepts a collective ideology anyone who approaches with a different way of thinking instantly challenges what people believe to be true. People will begin to condemn foreign ways of thinking, even inflicting punishments in response as a desperate means of somehow validating their own beliefs. This can only escalate.

 

Shall we get rid of democracy while we're at it too then? Oh wait, we should make thinking illegal. You imagine what might happen when people were to disagree.. it can only escalate! :rolleyes:

ms_julie.png

jafjepediasig.jpg

 

 

angel2w.gif Tip.It Website Crew Leader

[hide=Quotes]

I love it how Jafje comes outa nowhere and answers my questions

Hehe now we know what real life does...drugs, drugs, more drugs. Thank god we are addicted to something that won't kill us.

[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did answer the question, society is the upbringing of children. I am not stepping out of place when I insist children should be raised more rationally, cut the fat so to speak. People shouldn't be afraid to break tradition, tradition represents stale thinking.

 

When you use yourself as an example it doesn't matter if it seemingly disproves a statement, an exception on its own does not equal the rule. So until you show me how the rest of (global) religious society behaves similarly your points are a little invalid. However, I do acknowledge that a religious individual can still be a great person, although I would argue that it is not the religious aspect that causes people to become good.

 

Of course people are going to disagree - this is a constant. Just step back and look at the magnitude of religion, what do these ideas represent? (where you go when you die). I'm quite sure disagreements over religion hold a great deal more gravity in a person's mind than say.. 'who gets the last slice of pizza?'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did answer the question, society is the upbringing of children. I am not stepping out of place when I insist children should be raised more rationally, cut the fat so to speak. People shouldn't be afraid to break tradition, tradition represents stale thinking.

 

That implies religious beliefs equals people being incapable of rational thinking, or children with a religious upbringing aren't taught to think rationally, which is ridiculous.

I was raised to think rationally, and I'd like to think my parents succeeded in making me an honest and rational person, thank you very much.

 

Anyway, that still does not answer why you as an individual have authority enough to be allowed to say how people may or may not raise their children.

 

When you use yourself as an example it doesn't matter if it seemingly contradicts a statement, an exception on its own does not equal the rule. So until you show me how the rest of (global) religious society behaves similarly your points are a little invalid.

 

Please prove that the majority of religiously raised people are so much different. You're the one making the claim, you come up with valid proof, rather than claim I am wrong based on my experiences being raised the way I am. The fact that I speak from experience gives me authority on what I say, yet you apear to be basing your claims on prejudice and ignorance.

 

Of course people are going to disagree - this is a constant. Just step back and look at the magnitude of religion, what do those ideas represent?

The fact that many people are religious does not equal religion being the cause of that. Prove that it is.

ms_julie.png

jafjepediasig.jpg

 

 

angel2w.gif Tip.It Website Crew Leader

[hide=Quotes]

I love it how Jafje comes outa nowhere and answers my questions

Hehe now we know what real life does...drugs, drugs, more drugs. Thank god we are addicted to something that won't kill us.

[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem here is that you're using yourself an example while I'm using the general state of the world as an example. (I did edit the middle paragraph of my previous post btw). I can't argue if you keep throwing exceptions at me, there's no point. I'm not the one who has to prove anything. We simply have to question the necessity of religion and then analyse the problems it may cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assure you the burden of proof lies on religion and always will, do not try to shift it onto me.

 

If you make a statement based on nothing but prejudice and ignorance you shouldn't be hypocritical enough to point and claim you're too good to support your claims. I have supported mine, so I suppose you just don't know what you're talking about?

 

In any case I think it is rational to conclude that you can neither support your claims, nor are objective in this matter. Meh, that's too bad.

ms_julie.png

jafjepediasig.jpg

 

 

angel2w.gif Tip.It Website Crew Leader

[hide=Quotes]

I love it how Jafje comes outa nowhere and answers my questions

Hehe now we know what real life does...drugs, drugs, more drugs. Thank god we are addicted to something that won't kill us.

[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be useful to lesson the amount of rhetoric and fallacies in your posts. Please, explain how is it prejudice and ignorance?

 

Please realise that anecdotal evidence is likely to be distorted or cherry-picked, and thus shouldn't be used for generalisations. I for one agree that the burden of proof will always remain on those who make these meta-physical claims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, I've already explained in detail why I have concluded the idea of god to be logically false, read my previous posts. I don't like repeating myself, but here it is again. You cannot solely support an argument with personal experience, it does not mean you're completely wrong, it just means you have a weak argument - a minority occurrence across a sample space of all religious people.

 

To be honest I'm not 100% sure what it is you're objecting to. That being religious is a bad thing? My argument concerns the necessity of religion because it can be a bad thing. I know you're able to acknowledge that. So you should first be trying to demonstrate why religion is necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please, explain how is it prejudice and ignorance?

That was an assumption on my part, looking at some of the statements made by said individual.

Though I see where you are coming from in the above post, I am neither claiming a god exists, nor claiming everyone should be raised religiously. I am simply stating that if someone makes a statement and expects to be considered an authority with his posts, the statements should be backed up with something other than "no u" replies to requests for the basis on which the claims were made. This goes for all sides.

 

Edit:

 

You cannot solely support an argument with personal experience, it does not mean you're completely wrong, it just means you have a weak argument - a minority occurrence across a sample space of all religious people.

 

Yet everyone should take you seriously without backing anything up?

Prove that it is a minority occurance, because out of the many religiously raised people I know, no-one thinks as you claim religiously raised people do.

 

Please also support your claims on raising children religiously. I understand you believe it is illogical to believe in a higher power, and I don't care to discuss that with you. What I am curious about is what kind of research you have done to justify your claim on religiously raising children. Again, what gives you the authority to tell others how to or how not to raise their children?

 

 

To be honest I'm not 100% sure what it is you're objecting to. That being religious is a bad thing?

I'm objecting to the fact that you (apparently?) think yourself too good to support your arguments while you arrogantly make generalisations on how people should or should not be raising children.

 

As for your claim about being religious being a bad thing: it may not be necessary for survival, but how is it bad?

ms_julie.png

jafjepediasig.jpg

 

 

angel2w.gif Tip.It Website Crew Leader

[hide=Quotes]

I love it how Jafje comes outa nowhere and answers my questions

Hehe now we know what real life does...drugs, drugs, more drugs. Thank god we are addicted to something that won't kill us.

[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Mankind is growing out of religion as out of its childhood clothes." - Schopenhauer

 

"Religion has run out of justifications." - Hitchens

 

---

 

"In your hands or the hands of any other person, so much power would no doubt be dangerous. I am the only man in the world whom it would be safe to trust with it. Remember, I am a prophet!" - Joseph Smith

 

"What is the damnation of hell? To go with that society who have not obeyed His [the Lord's] commands." - Smith again

 

---

 

These make for interesting comparisons.


"Imagine yourself surrounded by the most horrible cripples and maniacs it is possible to conceive, and you may understand a little of my feelings with these grotesque caricatures of humanity about me."

- H.G. Wells, The Island of Doctor Moreau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concepts of religion has been a highly divisive factor among mankind - it has been a leading cause of death for thousands of years (although I acknowledge that it's not the beliefs themselves that kills, but rather, the multiple interpretations of the said beliefs which has resulted in conflict).

 

Considering that it contributes very little to society - it simply isn't worthwhile. Please bare in mind that it's not the religious doctrines itself that causes harm (for the most part), but rather, the people who hold said views.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concepts of religion has been a highly divisive factor among mankind - it has been a leading cause of death for thousands of years (although I acknowledge that it's not the beliefs themselves that kills, but rather, the multiple interpretations of the said beliefs which has resulted in conflict).

 

Considering that it contributes very little to society - it simply isn't worthwhile. Please bare in mind that it's not the religious doctrines itself that causes harm (for the most part), but rather, the people who hold said views.

 

I partially agree with this. There are aspects of certain religions and religious groups I abhor, however I don't think religion is the cause. Humanity is, and when religion isn't used as an excuse I'm sure humanity is resourceful enough to use something else for an excuse.

 

I suppose religion is what humanity makes it, and as such it can have both positive and negative influences. What I can say, however, is that the western society has largely been based upon interpretations of Christianity (according to my philosophy prof who studied religious philosophy and its impact on (primarily) European society). I would count that among the good influences, and wars used with religion as an excuse as one of the bad influences.

ms_julie.png

jafjepediasig.jpg

 

 

angel2w.gif Tip.It Website Crew Leader

[hide=Quotes]

I love it how Jafje comes outa nowhere and answers my questions

Hehe now we know what real life does...drugs, drugs, more drugs. Thank god we are addicted to something that won't kill us.

[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are still two primary areas which Religion dominates when it comes to social interaction, you can clearly see this in the mainstream media.

 

1. Marriage

2. Funerals

 

These are often considered to be the reasons some people are unwilling to let go of their faith, I'll explain why.

 

Religious marriage ceremonies serve to enforce conformity, especially within family groups. What happens when everyone in your family and all of your friends are organizing Religious marriage ceremonies then you decide that you don't want one? You're likely to become somewhat excluded because you're openly challenging their belief system. Children are also frequently exposed to these ceremonies and come to believe that they too should take part one day. There's the connotation that if two people are to live happily together they need to be married via the church, which isn't true at all. Marriage will not prevent separation in a relationship, and it is insecurity to think otherwise.

 

Next we have funerals. This is the more significant of the two because it occurs at times when people are most open to accepting false hope. That does not mean it is a rational thing to be carting around a lifeless body in a box all day then storing them either underground or in a mausoleum. This is something I don't understand about mainstream Religions - according to your beliefs the dead person has journeyed to the afterlife, yet you still treat the body as if it holds the essence of who the person used to be. So basically if someone was to deny religion and refuse to attend a religious funeral it is viewed as a major disrespect and/or they would lack the false hope to help them get through the likely depression. Note that you don't need false hope to break a depression. False hope digs a person deeper into denial and the deeper they go, the harder it is to break the cycle. Funerals do not have to be religious and mourning is 100% acceptable, but please recognize that you're not sad because someone else lost their life, your sad for your loss and being reminded of mortality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Religious marriage ceremonies serve to enforce conformity, especially within family groups. What happens when everyone in your family and all of your friends are organizing Religious marriage ceremonies then you decide that you don't want one? You're likely to become somewhat excluded because you're openly challenging their belief system. Children are also frequently exposed to these ceremonies and come to believe that they too should take part one day. There's the connotation that if two people are to live happily together they need to be married via the church, which isn't true at all. Marriage will not prevent separation in a relationship, and it is insecurity to think otherwise.

 

What is this based on? My mother is an athiest and my father is religious: they never had this problem. As a child I was at relatives' weddings, but though they may have been in churches and had a priest present, it was about them, not the faith. Your final statement seems like nonsense to me. Care to explain what it is based upon?

 

 

This is something I don't understand about mainstream Religions - according to your beliefs the dead person has journeyed to the afterlife, yet you still treat the body as if it holds the essence of who the person used to be. So basically if someone was to deny religion and refuse to attend a religious funeral it is viewed as a major disrespect and/or they would lack the false hope to help them get through the likely depression.

Define religious funeral.

What false hope?

What depression?

 

Funerals do not have to be religious and mourning is 100% acceptable, but please recognize that you're not sad because someone else lost their life, your sad for your loss and being reminded of mortality.

 

What is this based on? Lost plenty of family members over the years, and my own mortality would be the last thing on my mind. How could anyone be so selfish after losing a loved one?

 

Have you even experienced any of what you mention in the above post? I'm also still waiting on the answer as to what you believe gives you the right to be telling others how they should and should not raise their children.

ms_julie.png

jafjepediasig.jpg

 

 

angel2w.gif Tip.It Website Crew Leader

[hide=Quotes]

I love it how Jafje comes outa nowhere and answers my questions

Hehe now we know what real life does...drugs, drugs, more drugs. Thank god we are addicted to something that won't kill us.

[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is this based on? My mother is an athiest and my father is religious: they never had this problem. As a child I was at relatives' weddings, but though they may have been in churches and had a priest present, it was about them, not the faith. Your final statement seems like nonsense to me too. Care to explain what it is based upon?

 

Based on? I'm making generalized statements regarding the institution of marriage in religious circles. You're not arguing against my points by calling them nonsense without providing why, it only means that you don't like or understand my opinion. Please tell me why you think it's nonsense, an argument cannot be sustained without rebuttals.

 

Define religious funeral.

What false hope?

What depression?

 

What is there to define?

 

Religious funeral: A ceremony held to mourn a deceased individual or group, explicit usage of sermons and spiritual themes leading on to...

 

...False hope (in this context): Hope for the continuation of the subject's spirit and 'spirits' in general.

 

Depression (in this context): I'm not going to insult your intelligence defining what this is.

 

What is this based on? Lost plenty of family members over the years, and my own mortality would be the last thing on my mind. How could anyone be so selfish after losing a loved one?

 

Don't try to take a moral high-ground while attempting to diminish others for being 'selfish'. Funerals are about being sad for yourself and/or the people who've lost a loved one. You cannot rationally be sad for the deceased because they do not exist any more, there is no one to receive the projected sympathy, you might as well be crying over a coffin filled with cement for all the good it will do. Furthermore according to Religious beliefs, a funeral would logically be a time to celebrate an individuals ascension to 'a better place'. Funerals will always remind an individual of mortality just as marriage always reminds someone of love. I implore that you seriously question "my own mortality would be the last thing on my mind". Good on you if it was the case.

 

Have you even experienced any of what you mention in the above post? I'm also still waiting on the answer as to who you think you are telling others how they should and should not raise their children.

 

If I had never experienced at least a taste of what we're discussing it would be stupid of me to hold such strong opinions. On the flip side, you cannot let your opinions be dominated by personal experience (as I have already hinted at).

 

I don't want to dwell on the issue of raising children because that is more of a political discussion. To put it simply - there is an undeniable correlation between violence and bad parenting. Smarter parenting means a better future for everyone. There are many factors which play into this, not just religious indoctrination, although it is truly narrow minded to automatically assume it is OK to raise a child the same way you were raised just because you introspect during an idle moment and conclude that 'I turned out fine'. That is assuming the methods of one's own parents were completely flawless and therefore safe to replicate, seemingly without long-term implications. Unfortunately most experiences during childhood favour long-term implications. A bad move on the parent's part could inflict a permanent physical detriment on a child's brain because it is still developing.

 

You don't try to design a house without any knowledge of architecture and mathematics, it doesn't matter whether you have a pretty good idea of what a house looks like, these things must be taught. Likewise, You don't dive into parenting without a proper education regarding the subject.

 

So are we to treat parenting as an issue of private concern? Is it still a private issue when a poorly raised child ends up violating someone else's property? No. I am not stepping out of line when I encourage intelligent parenting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on? I'm making generalized statements regarding the institution of marriage in religious circles.

Which apparently you based on no research or fact whatsoever, and therefore aren't valid by definition.

 

You're not arguing against my points by calling them nonsense without providing why, it only means that you don't like or understand my opinion. Please tell me why you think it's nonsense, an argument cannot be sustained without rebuttals.

 

If you make a statement, and I ask you to support it, why don't you just do that? It's not the first time I am asking you what you are basing your generalisations on.

 

Religious funeral: A ceremony held to mourn a deceased individual or group, explicit usage of sermons and spiritual themes leading on to...

So you're referring to funerals that generally assume the soul is immortal? You don't have to be religious to believe that, nor does that make a funeral specifically religious.

 

...False hope (in this context): Hope for the continuation of the subject's spirit and 'spirits' in general.

You believe that a soul dies when a person dies. That does not mean you are right, and thereby the hope, as you call it, is not by definition false.

 

 

Depression (in this context): I'm not going to insult your intelligence defining what this is.

You appeared to be referring to depression caused by the realisation of one's mortality after a loved one died, which makes no sense provided the person in question believes in an afterlife.

 

 

Don't try to take a moral high-ground while attempting to diminish others for being 'selfish'.

Wat. O,o

...moving on

 

You cannot rationally be sad for the deceased because they do not exist any more

Please refer to the topic title and get back to me on that one.

 

Furthermore according to Religious beliefs, a funeral would logically be a time to celebrate an individuals ascension to 'a better place'.

In some religions, death is celebrated. In others it isn't. On one hand you are claiming someone no longer exists and therefore it is impossible to be sad that they are gone (why is that?) and on the other you are claiming that it is logical to celebrate an individual’s ascension to what may or may not be described as heaven? Although that may be a consolation, that does not take away the hurt of missing someone, mourning someone, or feeling sad that they may have had a short or harsh life. Had you ever attended a funeral led by a priest, you would know what you are saying can come across as rather one-sided and shallow.

 

 

Funerals will always remind an individual of mortality just as marriage always reminds someone of love. I implore that you seriously question "my own mortality would be the last thing on my mind". Good on you if it was the case.

It was. Funerals are about the deceased, not about contemplating one's own inevitable demise.

 

 

If I had never experienced at least a taste of what we're discussing it would be stupid of me to hold such strong opinions. On the flip side, you cannot let your opinions be dominated by personal experience (as I have already hinted at).

 

So what are you basing your opinions on? Any research done, or just blind babbling? As far as opinions go, I am fairly neutral. I am capable of looking at aspects of religion objectively. Why aren't you?

 

I don't want to dwell on the issue of raising children because that is more of a political discussion. To put it simply - there is an undeniable correlation between violence and bad parenting. Smarter parenting means a better future for everyone. There are many factors which play into this, not just religious indoctrination, although it is truly narrow minded to automatically assume it is OK to raise a child the same way you were raised just because you introspect during an idle moment and conclude that 'I turned out fine'. That is assuming the methods of one's own parents were completely flawless and therefore safe to replicate, seemingly without long-term implications. Unfortunately most experiences during childhood favour long-term implications. A bad move on the parent's part could inflict a permanent physical detriment on a child's brain because it is still developing.

 

^In other words: "I have no intention of explaining my reasoning or the basis of my claims"

 

You don't know the first thing about how I was raised, only that I was exposed to religious ideology. Claiming it is narrowminded for me to believe the way I was raised is good without knowing how I was raised or how many siblings were raised the same way is just ridiculous.

 

For the record: I wasn’t indoctrinated, and it is both shallow and ignorant of you to assume I was. I never even said I was religious now – all I noted is that I had been raised religiously. Who even says I believe in the figure of God? The fact that you would even imply all of that makes it seem to me that you speak out of prejudice towards religious people and how they may wish to teach their offspring.

 

So are we to treat parenting as an issue of private concern? Is it still a private issue when a poorly raised child ends up violating someone else's property? No. I am not stepping out of line when I encourage intelligent parenting.

Okay, I'll bite.. What is intelligent parenting? How is exposing a child to religion not part of intelligent parenting? And again, what qualifies you to make that decision? What is your train of thought there, and what research have you done to claim what is intelligent parenting?

ms_julie.png

jafjepediasig.jpg

 

 

angel2w.gif Tip.It Website Crew Leader

[hide=Quotes]

I love it how Jafje comes outa nowhere and answers my questions

Hehe now we know what real life does...drugs, drugs, more drugs. Thank god we are addicted to something that won't kill us.

[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You believe that a soul dies when a person dies. That does not mean you are right, and thereby the hope, as you call it, is not by definition false.

 

There's only one absolute truth. The truth cannot be bent by mere faith. Besides, if the only thing backing up hope is faith then it is automatically false because you cannot truly hold a belief without observable evidence.

 

You appeared to be referring to depression caused by the realisation of one's mortality after a loved one died, which makes no sense provided the person in question believes in an afterlife.

 

Depression after someone's death is influenced by multiple factors. Exactly, depression at a funeral makes no sense if you're directly sad for a person's death, especially if you believe in an afterlife. People become sad for the same reasons when a loved one has to leave on a voyage from which they will never return (but, eliminate communication channels). It's a personal sadness.

 

==================================================

 

At no point was I attacking you personally, you're simply interpreting my posts incorrectly. I never claimed to be an expert on anything, philosophical discussions do not require a mastery of every single subject matter, in fact I'm giving you room to prove my perspective wrong, asserting that I'm wrong is not a solid counter-argument, it's your job to find evidence outside of personal experience that contradicts what I'm saying, it should be easy if I'm truly incorrect. Think things through instead of demanding that I explain what should be obvious. Sorry, I refuse to continue having a serious discussion when all you can do is insult my point of view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depression after someone's death is influenced by multiple factors. Exactly, depression at a funeral makes no sense if you're directly sad for a person's death, especially if you believe in an afterlife. People become sad for the same reasons when a loved one has to leave on a voyage from which they will never return (but, eliminate communication channels). It's a personal sadness.

I fail to see the relevance.

 

 

I'm giving you room to prove my perspective wrong, asserting that I'm wrong is not a solid counter-argument, it's your job to find evidence outside of personal experience that contradicts what I'm saying, it should be easy if I'm truly incorrect.

 

This is what can be defined as hypocrisy. You wish for me to support my claims, yet you refuse to support yours, and then claim it is my job to prove you wrong. That is like me claiming it is your job to prove there is no such thing as a god.

 

I am neither insulting your point of view, nor claiming you are downright wrong. All I am saying is that you should base claims on something other than nothing. I am not even asking for evidence, simply reasoning behind an argument would do. If asking for the basis of an argument isn't acceptable to you that's fine, but in that case I see no further need to consider any of your statements.

ms_julie.png

jafjepediasig.jpg

 

 

angel2w.gif Tip.It Website Crew Leader

[hide=Quotes]

I love it how Jafje comes outa nowhere and answers my questions

Hehe now we know what real life does...drugs, drugs, more drugs. Thank god we are addicted to something that won't kill us.

[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing anyone has proven in these last few pages is the problem of the dialectic.

 

And no, I'm not going to spend an hour compiling evidence to back up that statement.


"Imagine yourself surrounded by the most horrible cripples and maniacs it is possible to conceive, and you may understand a little of my feelings with these grotesque caricatures of humanity about me."

- H.G. Wells, The Island of Doctor Moreau

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.