@Baden Ain't nobody whining mister. I'm talking about your hypocrisy. It's you judging everybody by groups and color. So every white person has power,even the unemployed on the fringes of society?
And in black majority countries can powerless minority whites call black people pejorative?

@Baden Come on. So if a black person is racist I can use his color as a pejorative?

@Baden I think @T Clark is talking about the phrase "white jeezus-ism" that @180 Proof used. If this would have been any other other color used there would have been comeback. And I speak as a so called POC.

@Tom Storm Well the fundamentalists are overrepresented in the media,and general religion is a mixture of personal culture and bufoonish priests.
I have no fear of any theocracy being established in the Western world and even elsewhere its very very rare. Iran being the only real example.
Big government is the problem,not really religion. Most religious people I know just want to practice in private and live relatively normal lives. I feel the government, media and scientism is far more intrusive than religion. Maybe in the US people might feel differently.

Excellent and much much needed post Wayfarer!!
This is a major aspect of religion which atheists and even theists need to refer to and grapple with. Rather than taking the worst excesses of literalist fundamentalist religion,listen to the experiences and presentations of eloquent mystics,shamans and meditators.

@Banno Here's a fellow with zero scepticism of the motives of the corporate medical money making industry,or the motives of governments.
And no understanding of the lack of scientific research protocols that have gone into the current "vaccines".
A useful idiot and gatekeeper.
A true believer in the god of science.
Probably has no idea of the validity of covid tests or the numerous medical academics who disagree totally with lockdowns and the medical response.
To say nothing of the real reason for this pandemic.
Cherry picking just like the fundie Christians.
In praise of DNA!

Very interesting points made here!

Very underrated philosopher. And one extremely useful for those who pooh pooh existential personal religion and worship the intellect.
Its no surprise the materialists don't mention or engage with this guy.

@Fooloso4 Pedantry and apologetics.
No luck needed mate.
You prefer to live in a world of abstractions,obfuscations and maybes.
Maybe one day you will see how powerful human intuition can be. Until then,keep your thermometer handy old boy.

The use of the concept reincarnation is a poor word conjured up by priests as a control mechanism. Ditto rebirth.
Now,life after death is a totally different thing.
The Soul is your etheric body with all its memory,skills and growth detaching from the outer material body at death.
No need for this what reincarnates and such like.

@DingoJones It was never a discussion. Your attached to dialectics and science and cannot think of symbolism,metaphor and the primacy of Intuition.
Problem is that people so invested in their ideology cannot dicuss the actual meaning of religion and spirituality. I appreciate many religious folks are exactly the same. So your both on the same level of dogma.

@Fooloso4 Nope. Your wife is right,you are wrong,your thermometer is not the judge.
Your essay means Jack.. Your posts and assertions show you value dialectic over intuition.

@jorndoe Love is internal and external. The feeling and actions are the connection. Care to elaborate your behaviourism?

@DingoJones You know,its the height of irony that you come across as overemotional and defensive in your effusion and praise of logic. I'm a person who gets to the heart of the matter. I'm not gonna address every point you make when I feel.they are not valid. The salient pint is the scope of logic. You admit logic and emotion are not mutt exclusive. So at what point or what is irrational according to you? Do you think religious folk can't use logic?
And very importantly,why doesn't logic include "falling in love"? A sign that logic is not primary???

@jorndoe And why should anyone care about your "thoughts"?
As if science doesn't claim its "findings" are universal!
You guys have no sense of irony or self awareness.
Is the "introspection illusion" universal?

@DingoJones Have you ever questioned that your attachment to logic and science is emotional as well?

@DingoJones A series of defensive assertions.
The last point exposes your "rationality" . The most important thing that a human does is finding a partner and having a Family. And your claiming logic doesn't apply here. So when its something ultra important we turn to irrationality? Or is it that emotions are primary? Why abandon your number one tool,logic,when the going gets tough?

@Fooloso4 Let's just say you obviously don't regard feelings as primary. In fact your trying to find exceptions where feelings may be mistaken.
When your hot do you dispute that? Do you dispute your feelings of hunger. Do you dispute your feelings of existing?
I don't have to persuade you,why would I? Your obviously closed minded. A worshipper of dialectics.
And just because your to wishy washy to be intuitively certain doesn't mean I'm not.

@Fooloso4 You think just by repeating "you've lost track of your argument" that somehow you are correct!?
I examined my position further up. Go read and then come back. Hint,if I'm eternal,no death except for the outer body.

Life is not a platonic dialogue!

@Fooloso4 Nope,of course not. Come on,you can work that one out yourself. Read between my lines!

@Fooloso4 Well I'm not dealing in "ifs" here. I've already stated some can be mistaken,just as scientists and philosophers can be! And tbh,how often is it you've met people who felt they could literally fly?

The use of the phrase "made up" implies science isn't made up?? Really,I seem to recall several theories overturned or even considered ludicrous now. And what of string theory,cosmology,racial IQ,etc,etc?

@DingoJones There is no false equivalence. I said both sets of people ultimately determine this on their beliefs and emotions. Feelings if you will.
Everything you mentioned you do with feelings. You fix your car according to to the beliefs you have. Either do it yourself or if you don't feel able you ask a mechanic.
What you claim as logic is really memory of a task,plus some creative tinkering and pushed by your desire to fix your car.
Tell me,in meeting a partner do you get a tape measure and engage in dialectics and a DNA test to assess their suitability? In everyday life,very few use scientific logic or philosophy.

@Fooloso4 Meaningless. Because one you don't feel that yourself,so its disingenuous to tell me. Two,I can disagree with someone if I feel their feelings are mistaken. Some people claim they haven't felt love. Is that a proof it doesn't exist?

I agree we shouldn't give up our power to anyone or anything.
But personal religion is sometimes an expression or symbol of something powerful or just,something karmic. Like believing in the future positively. An expression of hope. Mystics go a step further and believe in a union with God or even becoming a God.

@Fooloso4 OK. Follow this closely, if you feel eternity then you feel you are forever. You feel you are not your material body. Thus death is not the materialist "nothingness".

Psychologism is the view that all true knowledge comes from feelings of certainty rather than "objective" truths independent of subjectivity. I see nothing of the scientism approach in this. In fact just an obvious fact.
Or maybe you had something else in mind?

@Cuthbert It seems some people are scared of psychologism,which Is really just the way the world is,as it demolishes platonism.

@dimosthenis9 I don't really worry about defining to closely. I prefer philosophers who talk about human behaviour rather than just metaphysical stuff.
What makes you see nietzsche is not a psychological philosopher,he seems thd prime literary example.

@dimosthenis9 Buddha by far the best. Protagoras,pantanjali. Nietzsche,dostoevsky and Feurbach. Freud is also exceptional on some points. But his oedeipus is way off.

I found buddhists in general to be just as dogmatic as any other group.

I think of all the religions/spiritualities I have studied Zen buddhism is the closest to a correct one. But I mean the Zen that emphasises meditation and everyday practice in everyday life. Basically an attitude of Focus brought to all our personal experiences. And a rejection of over intellectualisation. The mystical Zen.
The beliefs of Buddhism like anatta,rebirth,and the organised aspects are horrible just like many other forms of organised religion. I distance myself from buddhism,but the Buddha,mysticism and real Zen are tremendous!

Pros of science; can be a springboard for new ideas,theoretically encourages free thought. Can be empirical.

Cons; organised science is an elite activity dictated by money and ideology. Many sciences are just speculative theories. Science in the main asserts its the only valid path to knowledge.

Pros of religion; can take account of personal experience,human desires,aesthetics and psychology.
A positive worldview. Deals in certainty.

Cons; Organised religion is about dogmatic control and money. Texts at variance with human experience and ambiguous. Asserts it has a monopoly on truth.

There's more. But just a taster!

@180 Proof Another book cliche from Shakespeare!
Have an original thought chap!

@180 Proof Yawn!

@Jack Cummins But who decides what is sound logic or apparent facts?
And clear explanations trump cold abstract dialectics and unnecessary reductionism. I mean philosophers don't even agree amongst themselves. So what has this sound logic achieved philosophically or practically?

@180 Proof Nothing to refute. I don't play your dialectic game,sophist.

@180 Proof The overemotional bookworm strikes again!

@Jack Cummins But it is important to know what people really mean when saying rationality.
Out threads are complimentary,don't worry.