Constructive use of the R/S Forum

[♥Mark]

...deep down I'm reluctant to decide that that large a chunk of humanity is susceptible to something as stupid as this seems. Yep. Young and naive. It's almost enviable, save for that it's inevitably followed by irreparably crushed spirits.

[NonDualistic]

Yep. Young and naive. It's almost enviable, save for that it's inevitably followed by irreparably crushed spirits. ... and at least Gnome well answered the question of this topic. You have been here twice and answered nothing as yet. So, what draws you into this forum? What do you yourself constructively gain from reading/participating here?

[Moonbeam]

People's minds are changed about religion when they learn about science; that's why there are a lot more atheists now than there ever have been, obviously. It's important because religion is a backwards and negative force on the human race. This is an exciting time for athesits, because finally there are some prominent, outspoken people being taken seriously and getting recognized. Of course there has always been the scientific and specificallly biologic atheistic viewpoint, but that meant Dawkins and Gould writing books for people who liked to read about evolution. Now there are many more, and not just biologists--specifically people like Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens who have really changed me from an atheist who didn't much care what sort of silly ideas other people had, to someone who realizes that education is the only thing that is going to save the human race from the oppression of the monotheistic (and some other) religions.

[blade5x]

People's minds are changed about religion when they learn about science; that's why there are a lot more atheists now than there ever have been, obviously. No... they're not. I've learned my general physics, astrophysics, and quantum physics. If anything... I now have MORE questions about "is there anything out there" than I've had before. Even in a few hundreds I believe there will still be the question - "how did we get here". We could discover parallel universes, create life, but that one question is THE question... that is probably never meant to be answered. The reason there are more atheists now is that it's because in our free American society religion really lacks a defining role, and lacks control these days. Science does help, but to say science=atheism is far fetched.

[Howie]

I do not talk with other people to make affirmations or confirm my beliefs - I speak with others to develop my beliefs because they are beliefs. I have taken a lot from these boards and learned from many people. Then for me to say otherwise would imply that you are not entitled to any belief. No... they're not. I've learned my general physics, astrophysics, and quantum physics. If anything... I now have MORE questions about "is there anything out there" than I've had before. Even in a few hundreds I believe there will still be the question - "how did we get here". We could discover parallel universes, create life, but that one question is THE question... that is probably never meant to be answered. The reason there are more atheists now is that it's because in our free American society religion really lacks a defining role, and lacks control these days. Science does help, but to say science=atheism is far fetched. I know what you are essentially saying Bladex. The more we learn in the fields of science, the more complied data though physics, astrophysics, quantum physics yada yada? Arises question upon question. Which in turn sparks our curiosity to ask -what is behind all this? I do believe that these fields do play a large role in creating an atheist's view. In part from what you say. Another, the effect of what the scientific community reveals to us. These facts are not at all in tune with the Bible. That is the fuel behind many of the atheist's reasoning. Facts discrediting fables. So this is why religion is lacking a defining role. People (with freedom) will role with what is defining and shaping their world, which today, is science. Without freedom we can see what else happens. So sometimes age does not have a bearing on a mindset. Many adults are sheltered under a purpose a religion or a belief to which they can be paralleled to a child's mindset.

[Carôusoul]

I agree entirely with what Gnome said, and it applies to me, being his age also. However i poke more aggresively most of the time. Since I am still young, I still really don't understand how anyone could actually believe in a religion. Most of my efforts in these areas are aimed at trying to figure out how religious thinking works (if there is any, which I'm beginning to doubt - I see much more religious assuming going on). I'm basically poking at them and seeing how they respond in a rudimentary attempt at mental dissection. The end goal is that I will truly understand why and how people believe these things, and be able to tell why I don't, or if I should. Right now religions seem stupid to me, but deep down I'm reluctant to decide that that large a chunk of humanity is susceptible to something as stupid as this seems. I conclude that I'm still missing something, and poke some more. No... they're not. I've learned my general physics, astrophysics, and quantum physics. If anything... I now have MORE questions about "is there anything out there" than I've had before. Even in a few hundreds I believe there will still be the question - "how did we get here". We could discover parallel universes, create life, but that one question is THE question... that is probably never meant to be answered. I know what you are essentially saying Bladex. The more we learn in the fields of science, the more complied data though physics, astrophysics, quantum physics yada yada? Arises question upon question. Which in turn sparks our curiosity to ask -what is behind all this? I do believe that these fields do play a large role in creating an atheist's view. In part from what you say. Another, the effect of what the scientific community reveals to us. These facts are not at all in tune with the Bible. That is the fuel behind many of the atheist's reasoning. Facts discrediting fables. So this is why religion is lacking a defining role. People (with freedom) will role with what is defining and shaping their world, which today, is science. Without freedom we can see what else happens. So sometimes age does not have a bearing on a mindset. Many adults are sheltered under a purpose a religion or a belief to which they can be paralleled to a child's mindset. The following takes place between 7 and 8AM is based on something you posted in another thread also. Yeah, the problem with this is that you stick to 'God of the gaps'. Can't argue with that. Because we can never know everything about existence and I don't think we will. But to say that anything we don't know is God seems arrogant to me. When we didn't know how a river worked we created a river God, this is basically what you're doing on a grander scale.

[Howie]

It seems to always but heads. Science is trying to prove things via facts. What we have to understand is belief is something that isn't factual. Or it does not take facts. Either or can be strong in their own right. yada yada? Did I post that or is someone screwing with me? Fact or fiction Faith and fiction?

[Carôusoul]

I hope you aren't seriously saying you value belief over fact. Please. Tell me you were joking. ...please?

[O'nus]

Then for me to say otherwise would imply that you are not entitled to any belief. I really hope you see the problem with the subtext in what you have said here. "You have the right to have your own opinion/belief" "You are entitle to your own opinion/belief" Who is giving me this 'right/entitlement'? You? Is this just another way of saying that you completely disagree with me but will not debate it? What is wrong with saying, "Everyone has a unique set of views" rather than "Everyone is entitled to their own views"? I realize this may seem pedantic but the implications are severe. Furthermore, I suppose I do not truly understand what you mean by the statement? By that I mean its implications. It seems to always but heads. Science is trying to prove things via facts. What we have to understand is belief is something that isn't factual. Or it does not take facts. Either or can be strong in their own right. yada yada? Did I post that or is someone screwing with me? Fact or fiction Faith and fiction? The very first people to question religious beliefs and traditional doctrines are the ones that we typically treasure the most in many systems of thought. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle: Questioned all views Hippocrates, Galen, Vesalius, etc. Without science, we would surely still have a structure of thought to understand the world. However, it would be the God explanation for everything. What Plato would ask you is: Do you want to be the prisoner chained up, or set loose to see the sun? What the contemporary philosopher wants to ask you is: Do you want to remain in the matrix, even when you know the truth? But already we know the response most people will have; what is the truth? Is being in "the Matrix" religion or science? Well, you have to weight which is more importan: systematic observation, empirical data, (science) or an unfalsifiable answer to everything (religion). "In life you must choose whether to have faith in order to understand, or to understand in order to have faith." ~

[Howie]

I really hope you see the problem with the subtext in what you have said here. "You have the right to have your own opinion/belief" "You are entitle to your own opinion/belief" Who is giving me this 'right/entitlement'? You? Is this just another way of saying that you completely disagree with me but will not debate it? What is wrong with saying, "Everyone has a unique set of views" rather than "Everyone is entitled to their own views"? I realize this may seem pedantic but the implications are severe. Furthermore, I suppose I do not truly understand what you mean by the statement? By that I mean its implications. No, I guess I don't see the problem O'nus. What you have said is what you believe that you take out of this R/S Forum. Your Constructive use of the R/S Forum. I agree with you. Becasue it is your view, I did not feel that it was my place to say otherwise. That is what I meant. But I do not think your actions reflect the majority of the members of this Forum. And that is what was said, or meant in my first post. But I don't know if anything I say at this point, you would not jump on the defensive. Aside from your own approach, do you feel that the R/S Forum is used constructively? I hope you aren't seriously saying you value belief over fact. Please. Tell me you were joking. What I have posted is an attempt to see the premises for both sides of the argument. I'm not sure how you had taken that for a value of belief over fact. The point I was trying to make would be the main cause for the question of the thread. To try and understand another's view and maybe how they came to that view. You have to try understand the other side of the fence before you can see if it is greener. But it is statements like yours that lead to the argumentative nature on this Forum. It seems to always but heads. Science is trying to prove things via facts. What we have to understand is belief is something that isn't factual. Or it does not take facts. Either or can be strong in their own right. I know what you are essentially saying Bladex. The more we learn in the fields of science, the more complied data though physics, astrophysics, quantum physics yada yada? Arises question upon question. Which in turn sparks our curiosity to ask -what is behind all this? I do believe that these fields do play a large role in creating an atheist's view. In part from what you say. Another, the effect of what the scientific community reveals to us. These facts are not at all in tune with the Bible. That is the fuel behind many of the atheist's reasoning. Facts discrediting fables. So this is why religion is lacking a defining role. People (with freedom) will role with what is defining and shaping their world, which today, is science. Without freedom we can see what else happens. So sometimes age does not have a bearing on a mindset. Many adults are sheltered under a purpose a religion or a belief to which they can be paralleled to a child's mindset.

[O'nus]

No, I guess I don't see the problem O'nus. What you have said is what you believe that you take out of this R/S Forum. Your Constructive use of the R/S Forum. I agree with you. Becasue it is your view, I did not feel that it was my place to say otherwise. That is what I meant. But I do not think your actions reflect the majority of the members of this Forum. And that is what was said, or meant in my first post. But I don't know if anything I say at this point, you would not jump on the defensive. Aside from your own approach, do you feel that the R/S Forum is used constructively? Hey come on, I would hope that by now you know I am not like that, just as I think the same of you. I was more or less curious to clarify what you meant; text is a little vague sometimes you know. I have seen many discussions going about, whether they are constructive or not is really up to the people involved. Either way, I know that I have learned a lot, so I think it is constructive. I can only hope others feel the same. Anything else you have said, I fundamentally agree with. ~

[♥Mark]

So, what draws you into this forum? What do you yourself constructively gain from reading/participating here? I just like to make snide comments. Isn't that obvious? The reason I haven't answered the topic is because I haven't read most of it.

[Mes Tarrant]

Even in a few hundreds I believe there will still be the question - "how did we get here". We could discover parallel universes, create life, but that one question is THE question... that is probably never meant to be answered. But to say that anything we don't know is God seems arrogant to me. When we didn't know how a river worked we created a river God, this is basically what you're doing on a grander scale. Carou said exactly what I first thought when I read Blade's post. In addition, I feel like because of the advances of science, god (if he exists) has been pushed further and further back from our lives. First he was everywhere, he controlled the rivers and the thunder, then he moved back further with control of the sun or the stars.. and how finally he's moved so far back from us that the only thing that could possibly have been left to his control is "the beginning of time," simply because we don't know for sure how things started. I ask, how do people assume that this god who possibly created the universe all that time ago is the same god who supposedly answers prayers and looks out for a select few, etc? How is this the same god who sent his son to earth? If he created that enormous thing we call the universe, why would he pay sooooo much attention to our minuscule little planet?

[NonDualistic]

I just like to make snide comments. Isn't that obvious? . Fair enough As to being obvious, my question is geared to the individuals own self described perspective. I would much rather hear from the individual themselves as to what they are doing and as to why they do it, rather than make my own potentially erroneous assessment based on mere appearances.

[blade5x]

Not the beginning of time really... but existence in general. Some people find existence to be miraculous. Others view the design of this existence as being too perfect - like as if I higher intelligence had to be present because no way all of this was built up from fluke after fluke after fluke. There's different many reasons for people's beliefs in God(s), not just to explain the unknown. As far your "Christian" like question about the son, etc - that's off limits for me. I don't exactly part-take in any organized religion (which I think is stupid for various reasons).

[Carôusoul]

Not the beginning of time really... but existence in general. Some people find existence to be miraculous. Others view the design of this existence as being too perfect - like as if I higher intelligence had to be present because no way all of this was built up from fluke after fluke after fluke. There's different many reasons for people's beliefs in God(s), not just to explain the unknown. As far your "Christian" like question about the son, etc - that's off limits for me. I don't exactly part-take in any organized religion (which I think is stupid for various reasons). I feel like a challenge. List for me the basic arguments for the existence of God and I will plow through and analyise each fairly to try and see where it fails, and if it works. If you don't want to, ok. But I feel in my Religious Studies class I have pretty much covered every serious argument for God's existence and have a rebuttal which is firm and unarguable for each one. So... yeah. That's an open challenge really.

[Moonbeam]

No... they're not. Yes, there are; this is a well-known fact that is easily looked up; I suggest you do so if you don't believe me. In addition, the younger a person is the more likely they are to be an atheist, so this percentage will continue to grow. 2007, Pew Research Values Study: Percentage of people identifying themselves as atheist, agnostic or "no religion" by year of birth: Date of birth <1946 : 5% 1946-1964: 11% 1965-1976: 14% 1977+: 19% Another interesting statistic: 1997, Federal Bureau of Prisons, 0.21% of inmates were atheist. Wow, atheists hardly ever go to prison. I now have MORE questions about "is there anything out there" than I've had before. Then you are in the minority; the more educated a person is, the more likely they are to be an atheist. It correlates with scientific education to an even greater extent.

[Howie]

Hey come on, I would hope that by now you know I am not like that, just as I think the same of you. I was more or less curious to clarify what you meant; text is a little vague sometimes you know. I have seen many discussions going about, whether they are constructive or not is really up to the people involved. Either way, I know that I have learned a lot, so I think it is constructive. I can only hope others feel the same. Anything else you have said, I fundamentally agree with. Yes O'nus, I do know you better than that. My apologies. I too try to learn from the many different belief systems and rationalize each, analyze, compare, ponder etc. To not find myself on the defensive, what I really need to do is disregard the Mark75ish mentality of the Forums and concentrate on posts that have some thought behind them. Onward James!!!!

[Taosaur]

the younger a person is the more likely they are to be an atheist, so this percentage will continue to grow. Hehe, the latter does not necessarily follow from the former.

[Moonbeam]

Hehe, the latter does not necessarily follow from the former. Optimistically assuming the trend continues. I guess I shouldn't be optimistic with the state of the world as it is.

[♥Mark]

what I really need to do is disregard the Mark75ish mentality of the Forums and concentrate on posts that have some thought behind them. Usage of this phrase pleases me.

[Universal Mind]

Date of birth <1946 : 5% 1946-1964: 11% 1965-1976: 14% 1977+: 19% People are gradually catching on to the hoax, just like people slowly started to understand that professional wrestling is fake. The more science explains the origins of the universe and humanity, the less people can be fooled about invisible dictators. It is going to be a much better world when religion stops being such a powerful institution of oppression. It looks like we are on our way there. 1997, Federal Bureau of Prisons, 0.21% of inmates were atheist. Wow, atheists hardly ever go to prison. They do menacing things like smoke salvia divinorum on their couches and not move for ten minutes. At least Howie thinks locking up people like that adds to the positivity in the world.

[Howie]

They do menacing things like smoke salvia divinorum on their couches and not move for ten minutes. At least Howie thinks locking up people like that adds to the positivity in the world. Yaaa > Universal mindless. That makes it all that much more clear how much you really try to understand another's point. I never once discussed my views towards what the judicial branches role of an offender should be. Becasue you were too obtusely obsessed with the game of golf.

[Universal Mind]

Yaaa > Universal mindless. That makes it all that much more clear how much you really try to understand another's point. I never once discussed my views towards what the judicial branches role of an offender should be. Becasue you were too obtusely obsessed with the game of golf. Howiedoyoubesodumb, you expressed support for the making of salvia possession a FELONY in several states. That was the subject of my thread, right? Do you know what "felony" means? It basically means "prison time". I also asked you several times what you think the punishment for salvia possession should be, and you kept dodging it just like you kept dodging other questions. So let's try it again here. What kind of nightmare infliction on the lives of salvia possessors would make sense to you? What should the punishment be?

[shark!]

I'd rather have my own beliefs than be right, if it was possible I'd say r/s should be about stamping out something bad. But its not, cause this is the internet, so who cares?