Okay. So basically doubt is the beginning of all truth?

Religion for sure is complicated to talk about so just keep in mind that this is my opinion, so it can be wrong. — Yuuky002

Nice preface.

Religion today is really a big deal, not more that before in the medieval time, but i think that if you are a religious representative such as the Papa, you have more power than many countrys around.
Religion can be a way of uniting people all around the world for one only cause, that can variate, for a common god, for a life stile, but can also be for non acceptance, chaos and deaf.
I think that the pure concept of each religion is beautiful, no religion talks about deaf, no religion talks about non acceptance. The big problem is that no religion seems to follow there truth meaning and goal. when you go to the catholic church it fells more like a brainwash than anything else. — Yuuky002

Yeah, it sounds like people have more of a love/hate relationship with religion here. Can't say I blame them.

Regarding solipsism: do you know anyone who is? — Relativist

No, I just thought that it would be interesting to try and approach things from that viewpoint. I'm not a professional philosopher or anything.

We can be pretty damn sure, but we have to accept the fact that knowledge (in the strict sense) is impossible or at least rare, so we have to settle for justified beliefs. — Relativist

Ah, so there is no proof for spiritual things?

I would agree, I think that the closest thing we have as proof for the spiritual is each other.

What is the point of life?

Do we have any type of freedom as living things or is everything determined by nature?

Does romance have any good impact upon people?

What is the point of romance?

If a man admits he's weak does that make him weak?

Can everyone do magick or are some metaphysically retarded?

Are chaos and order supposed to be balanced or are we better off without one?

Is it wrong to be polyamorous?

Is man the king of nature?

What do women want from men romantically?

Does size determine a woman's faithfulness?

Is God "out there" or inside? Or both?

What is evil?

Why does evil win sometimes?

Is there such a thing as healing?

What is the relationship between a question and its answer? - That is: Where do we have to be so that the answer is seeable? — Perdidi Corpus

I believe I have reimagined your illustration.

Going back to your symbolism of the valleys and mountains, we begin as open minded as possible in the valley. Then we take the first step in research and building knowledge. As we ascend the mountain of truth we must overcome roadblocks and slips as we climb. We become more polemic about reality, learning about ourselves and the mountain on the way up. We learn from our mistakes, and we figure out from the rock formations of opposing ideas what is real. Until the day we reach the climax of the peak and see not only the answer to our question but the answers to life in general. It takes time I believe.

I don't think it's wrong to take ques from opposing ideas to your idea as long as you don't forget who you are. Sometimes opposites complement each other.

Therefore religion has no place in philosophy — Janus

I would agree. I wrote a paper in my intro to philosophy class about Thomas Aquinas being a theologian rather than a philosopher.

hence the function of religion to placate those who can't cope with the world as it is. — S

You know, I don't think that's all religion does. People are given ethical codes to live by through religion. And no, I'm not saying that people can't be moral without religion. Creating religions are fun too. Just to see what kind of stuff you can come up with.

It didn't go far enough, and it can't go far enough without ceasing to be Christianity. — S

Quite the LaVeyan statement. The reformers knew Christianity would have to change with time. Search semper reformanda in Google.

Religion is only good if a community finds it meaningful. — praxis

You might have just lead me to my next thread question. Thanks.

Do these non-religious "aspects" offer a unifying vision of life? — Janus

No, they just kind of make sense of some things like (possibly) suffering and why people abuse power.

This also raises the question of what counts as religious. — Janus

Religious positions attempt to explain the mysteries that science doesn't touch on. They are in essence pre-scientific answers that are easily reinterpreted by modern findings. To me, evolution doesn't cancel out divinity.

... I can't believe so many Christians believe that God created the world in 6 literal 24 hour periods. Have they ever taken biology?

I personally love the nu metal scene. My first classic metal album was ride the lightning. Do you consider AC/DC to be metal? Cause I know some would debate that.

1 John 4:8 says God is love. — Empedocles

1 John 4:9-10 says that the way God showed his love for us was by saving us from our sins by trusting in the sacrifice of Jesus. Why trust in Jesus if there is no punishment for sin? Maybe hell could be temporary for some people?

What if this was only applied on a personal basis? Maybe the person is not able to reproduce and they realize life is hard anyways but they still enjoy their own life. Is this the same as antinatalism?

Okay. :smile: That's cool too.

Have you ever encountered a Carl Jung book called Man and his Symbols? — Wayfarer

Never actually had the privilege of reading it myself.

They are symbolic expressions of all manner of existential and cultural meanings. — Wayfarer

So basically it is whatever it says to you?

I wasn’t addressing what is “good” about religion, but it is good to consider the “other.” By “other” I mean everything that isn’t self: the external world, other people, etc. This is better than narcissism. Interactions with other people doesn’t have to be about common goals; I think we benefit (both individually and collectively) from positive socialization. So there’s a lot of good that can come out of religion. Some bad comes out as well (e.g. child molestation, organizing hate against gays, …) but on balance, I think there is more good than harm. — Relativist

You make the multi-faith movement sound really cool. :up:

There also is a chance that Jesus is actually the Son of God, and the purpose of His Church is our salvation. Just sayin. — Rank Amateur

Right, and I would agree. I think that mainline churches make a lot of sense in a post truth age.

Religion is to offer a unifying vision of human life. One interacts with a religion (and its adherents) if one finds its vision of human life inspiring, or even merely satisfying. — Janus

I even find that there are some aspects of non-religion that can be satisfying.

People insult me for believing in God and act like I'm a neanderthal.... — Ram

You're not, you're a highly developed neanderthal blessed by the God of creation with the ability to believe.

Sad. (I sound like Donald Trump) :lol: I wonder if it's just natural for religious leaders to abuse people or if it's a product of the modern church.

I'm against special treatment for religion. All religions, like all philosophies, have their pros and cons. — S

True, truth can be hard to take in. I know that's not what you mean but I just thought I'd just add to the argument.

Yet some religious folks would have you believe that their religion is the one true religion that everyone should follow, that's it's wrong to be critical of their religion, that their religion gets a special exemption, and should not be viewed in a similar vein to philosophies or even other religions. — S

This is why I believe Christianity went through a reformation.

Yeah it is. Why do you think otherwise? — S

You can't disprove the unobservable.

Leaps of faith aren't reasonable. — S

You think I just believe because? You don't even know me.

They are by nature in conflict with reason. — S

Define leap of faith.

Reason and faith are two categorically opposed ways of arriving at a belief — S

So you're saying you put your faith in reason?

you can't have your cake and eat it. — S

I do it all the time.

You either use your capacity to reason to reach a conclusion or you disregard reason and take a leap of faith. — S

That is, until someone gives you a reason to believe.

In the eyes of an intellectual with in interest in philosophy over religion, then faith should be viewed in a disparaging light. Faith is for the unthinking, for the uncritical, for those who do not care to examine, but want an easy answer to placate themselves. — S

1300 pages of well thought placating can be found in any good volume of systematic theology.

Socrates said that the unexamined life is not worth living. — S

And Nietzsche went crazy, I wonder why.

By the way, conforming to a prearranged list of topics and instructions from a WikiHow page is not very "metal." Most metalheads I know, including myself, would laugh at such a thing. — Thorongil

You know, in a way you're right. I'm not sure that metal focuses only on negative aspects of existence, true. I think that it's just to get the ball rolling as like a beginners guide. They do make the distinction between what society says about such and such a topic and what you believe. Call me a conformist, but I think if you take away the list of topics it does inspire you to think differently.

Ask not what is the purpose of religion, but what purpose each individual has in practising their religion. The answers will vary widely between individuals. — andrewk

Yes. That much I know. That's why I asked in such a way to get more individual responses.

Unfortunately, people motivated by the second set are often prevalent amongst those in power at the top echelons of organised religions. — andrewk

Quite a sad reality. We need more honest spiritual leaders.

Your question of interaction. I think it needs a little clarification. — Grey Vs Gray

Alright. What level of interaction or devotion do you (all) express in regard to spirituality?

Given the above, we necessarily interact with religion socially. Glue has no purpose without things to bind. — praxis

So religion is only good if it brings people toward a common goal?

The "purpose" of religion is to provide a context for consideration of the other, beyond the self, and an inter-subjective understanding of our place in the world. As such, it helps shape our interactions with other people. — Relativist

I admire existentialism because it has a mystical feeling along with a feeling of simplicity of mission in life. Love people.

'“Half the people in the world think that the metaphors of their religious traditions are facts. And the other half contends that they are not facts at all. As a result we have people who consider themselves 'believers' because they accept metaphors as facts, and others who classify themselves as 'atheists' because they think religious metaphors are lies.” ~ Joseph Campbell — Wayfarer

So how does one interpret their faith if meanings are hidden? What are the metaphors symbols of?

Religion is the appeal to the ineffable for answers to questions not otherwise answered. — tim wood

As you can probably tell from my other recent thread, I am a skeptical theist. Nice to know I'm not the only one who thinks along these lines.

Religion's purpose, as such, is to service humans. — VagabondSpectre

What I gather from your post here is that is society's or the majority of humanity's purpose for religion and you're dissatisfied with that. I commend you if this is the case. I notice the Ouroboros sign as your avatar. The question is, is religion about connecting to something bigger than yourself and finding answers there or is it all a sham?

I think that far too many religious people fail to recognise where the real value in religion lies, and fail to treat it as it ought to be treated. It's real value is as a philosophy, and it ought to be treated as such, and compared to other philosophies as though on a level playing field, not mindlessly worshipped or placed on a pedestal, unless it has truly earned its place there, which is open to debate. — S

So you're not militantly against religion, you just respect all paths?

To address the illusion of division which is a fundamental reality of the human condition. — Jake

The eastern ways are as old time itself. Brahman is in all and is all to that way of thinking. Are you Hindu?

Well, we kind of do, don't we? We sleep, and some of use have other experiences of unconsciousness. — tim wood

Dreams? Those are experiences not of unconsciousness but of subconsciousness. I feel that we come from different philosophical planets. Who would you say influences you the most?

Ego dies. It's somewhat comforting to think that with ego goes all the thing that matter to ego. — tim wood

I agree. Death is a mysterious, dark, beautiful thing.

7 months later...

Thank you. Random was not the word I should have chosen there. I have actually read a very simple introduction to Philosophy book by Sharon Kaye. Ever heard of her?
Makes sense. I just hate having to reinvent the wheel.
I've got Stanford on my favorites list. Don't use them as nearly enough as I should.
Cool. Thanks.
Alright. Thanks.

Objection: Yes, the perfect natures exist, but some are man-made, as is the case for a hammer or a unicorn, thereby making these perfect natures to exist in the mind only. How do we know this is not the case for morality as well? — Samuel Lacrampe

My thought is that the morality of cultures is different from the morality of a divine, holy entity. The morality of cultures must be anthropologically discerned or observed through the people's actions. Divine morality is given through the being's words to a people/peoples to affect their actions. So yes, divine revelation has cultural effects. This is why people get the two moralities confused.

The way I see it is if life is inevitable so is death, and death is inevitable. The question you propose is much more interesting seeing as none of us know what it's like to be in a state of non-existence, we're here. I guess I always wonder why. If there is no good reason for why we're here then what keeps all of us from checking out? That's a head scratcher.

Sorry, I just thought that cells were on the atomic level and they reproduce, die, and regenerate all the time.

In essence the cell never dies out even though individual cells die.

the secret teaching of all ages — JohnHermes

By Manly P. Hall?

Do you have to be of above average intelligence to engage seriously with philosophy? — Andrew4Handel

I think all you need is a questioning spirit, a way to look into yourself, and honesty.

Should philosophy and philosophical debate be made more accessible (without diluting it)? — Andrew4Handel

I think everybody ought to have a right to learn to think for themselves.

Does philosophy improve based on the philosophers hypothetical IQ? — Andrew4Handel

Honestly, I know it pays to be able to write and speak clearly when philosophizing. I haven't always done this.

Or should it be a highly qualified domain? — Andrew4Handel

Professional philosophy yes, amateur philosophy no.

As an atheist, I care more about everything in existence than God. — S

I must ask, do you consider God to even be a possibility? If so, I would say that is the definition of faith. If not, how can you be so certain about something you cannot see? There are theories that modern governments spy on their citizens, do you believe or disbelieve that? Edward Snowden, just saying.

We can change the word from "God" to "Reality" and reap the same responsibility. — Lif3r

So God is everything in existence? I feel like you just answered your own question.

I think President Trump is alright. Nothing more, nothing less. When he says things like the Democrats exaggerated the death toll in Puerto Rico it makes me do a double take. That's just unlike any other president. And before you say that's the reason why we elected him let me say no, we did not elect him to criticize government agencies that provide statistics on dead people and then let him act like a victim because of that. I'm sorry, it just makes him look and sound weak. He let Putin off for hacking into our computers here in the United States, that's just inexcusable. If rogue hackers did it Putin would be putting them in prison, but you haven't heard anything about that have you?

I just can't get behind the guy 100%.

Outlines of Philosophy by Will Durant — Monitor

Is The Story of Philosophy the same book?

This is a shrine of deplorability. :lol:

The information gets transformed into work, and work is physical.

But they are being controlled by the laws of nature. — David Solman

So it is physically impossible to wear a coat in the summer?

These days we don't need to think about the best solution before we do it because the generation before us already solved the problem, the farmer knows the best way to grow his produce because he had been taught that way by someone who knew before him. Not because he just does it because he is responding to the laws of nature. Human knowledge is a process and the more we progress the more we'll know. One could argue that this nature but in regards to your discussion I do not believe that everything we do is just a response to the laws of nature rather than it's just our knowledge and responding to what we have learnt as an intelligent race. — David Solman

The farmer looks at his weather app or farmer's almanac and decides what to do based on his training (Yes, you are correct.) and his common sense. Training harnesses instinct, I guess.

Sure, information has potential to be physical as I said.

Alright, thanks.

That's my homepage. :)

Well, I'm no IBM engineer either. But, I will say this. I think information has the potential to become physical through acting upon it. That doesn't mean it happens all the time, a counselor counseling a client doesn't physically have the answer when they speak, they have it mentally or from within. However, when the head of a construction company decides to build a building that information is physical. It's not so black and white.

Your scenario sounds rather nightmarish. — Thorongil

Sorry to hear. I guess one man's nightmare is another man's paradise. *shrugs* What is ideal to you? Like, if you had to redo the whole planet, what would you do?

Esperanto is a constructed language, constructed for the purpose of making an international auxiliary language. Esperanto is incomparably easier than English, or any natural language. Esperanto is logical, minimal, regular and consistent, and easy, in comparison to English and other natural languages. — Michael Ossipoff

Quite interesting. I learned something today from you. Thanks

Your ‘ideal world’ would inevitably be a totalitarian autocracy. Why? Because it’s based on one person’s ideal, and assumes that all would agree; there’s no mechanism for meaningful dissent, which is exactly what democratic systems, despite their many and obvious faults, are intended to allow. — Wayfarer

Well I'm not saying that the world must be this way, there's undoubtedly a better ideal somewhere out there in another person's mind. This is a model of what I would do if I was... well... God.:D It's obviously not reality, I'm just getting my philosophical wheels turning.

Vote NO on MoutainDwarf Utopia.

You have all these grand ideas, but when it gets down to details, you're going to set the minimum wage at $12/hr??? Why not $9/hr? Or $99/hr? Or do away with wages altogether?

Is the world really broken? Actually the world is working the way it is supposed to work--which doesn't mean that everything is just peachy keen, of course. The world can be quite unpleasant, but its unpleasantness is quite explainable, and given the assholes that are running things, its really amazing that things aren't much worse. Give it time... — Bitter Crank

Alright, I basically just threw this one together because I thought I had thought it through. I didn't write it at all to be political or to try and force it upon anyone, I just wrote it cause I thought it would be a nice place to live.

I'm sorry if I have crossed the line in any way, I kind of thought that was what Philosophy was about.

Jesus Christ was a political figure with a radical message. Over the past two millennia, however, these teachings have been diluted to maintain systems of oppression. — Zoneofnonbeing

It is true that some can twist the message of the Gospel to their own devices. All oppression comes from a demonic source.

Jesus Christ was radicalized by the mass exodus from Egypt. For hundreds of years, the Hebrews suffered political and economic oppression. So instead of identifying with Pharaoh, Christ identified with Moses and the poor. Remember that Jesus fed 5,000 people (Matthew 14:13-21), and aligned Himself with the naked, homeless, and imprisoned (Matthew 25:40-45). In Luke 6:24, Jesus says “woe to you who are rich.” True believers in Christ must reject capitalism and stand in solidarity with the impoverished masses. — Zoneofnonbeing

No one should love the world, meaning that it should not be the main goal in life to gain as many material things as one can. My only problem is that socialism can do this just as much as capitalism.

Jesus Christ was not a conservative. He was anti-establishment. His homeland was occupied and dominated by the Roman Empire – and His teachings were a condemnation of the status quo. For this reason, He was convicted of sedition: the crime of inciting people to rebel against authority. Jesus was killed by the ancient equivalent of the police. Christ’s message was never meant to preserve the norm; it was designed to challenge and dismantle injustice in the spirit of love. — Zoneofnonbeing

The status quo in Jesus' mind was people living in rebellion against God. Yes, Jesus did challenge the status quo in all areas of life. It begins with the spiritual and works itself out into other areas.

“Religious suffering is at the same time an expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of men, is a demand for their real happiness. The call to abandon their illusions about their condition is a call to abandon a position which requires illusions.” — Zoneofnonbeing

To me this quote is almost talking more about religion than systemic oppression. Maybe that's just my reading of it.

To the extent that we believe in Christ, His message must be used in the spirit of freedom – or we are siding with the modern-day Pharaoh. — Zoneofnonbeing

Yes, I agree.

Why do you assume that I have one? I'm not a theist at present, but I don't have to be to identify bad arguments against God's existence. — Thorongil

How is what I said a non-sequitur? I had just started an argument.

A non-sequitur. God being invisible or immaterial doesn't entail that he cannot be proven to exist. — Thorongil

Well then, if it is obvious, tell me what proof you have.