@180 ProofWow! One scientist! Talk about a cherry picker! Is this your famed rationality and dialectic at work?
So those scientists who are religious,they all live in the middle East?

@Jack Cummins Whose standard of rationality?

@Jack Cummins If you look at my thread I'm trying to ascertain what angle people are coming at,without the overheated debates. In other words it's giving people a chance to express their view clearly,not just as part of a dialectic of entrenched opinions.
Look as my thread as complimentary to yours.

@180 Proof LOL! Been nice if you had an original thought old man. Sense jealousy monsieur.
My stuff is original,yours rehashed mash ups of book learnt platitudes. Verbose blarney.

@Jack Cummins The problem is the word rationality is ambiguously used. I prefer the word common sense or "clear explanation."
Rationality has become a dogmatic dialectical tool,and a cover for sophistry.

It's a strike against traditional philosophy that it needed a proof for existence. As if that wasn't axiomatic and immediately obvious and clear.
Delusions are generally conceptual confusions or metaphors about experience.

@DingoJones I would say either according to their reasoning religion is rational. Or they feel science is not qualified to deal with the human experience and its aspirations.
Ultimately I think whether a person is religious or not or science based depends on emotional belief factors.
I think rationality in terms of cold logic is a myth.
But that's not to say emotional belief is irrational per se or untruthful. But it can be. There are true beliefs and false beliefs. Deciding which is which is again a personal emotional decision.

@DingoJones And what do you make of esteemed scientists who believe in religion? Have they become irrational according to you?

@Banno
Ah,another who can't tell the difference between technology and the theoretical ideology knows as science. Strawman thread.
Beavers have technology,but no textbooks on quarks.
Science in the main tries to claim its the only route to knowledge. I know that's not your/ wittys position,but nonetheless in practice you try to silence alternative thought. And your kneejerk fear of religion leads you Dawkins like ignorance of what religion is pointing to and
the actual original religious method. Which method is banno?

@180 Proof The irony of a guy who writes in a clichéd hackneyed jumble saying wtf!
Suppose you've never heard of Ludwig feurbach or siggy freud on the origin of religion?

@Fooloso4 Read my post. You can experience a feeling of eternity. Your post has nothing to do with what I wrote.
And I suppose you don't distinguish between felt time and clock time?

@god must be atheist Really,those are your responses?
You show your vitriol and lack of insight with every post. Argument my pompous anger and fear!

The reactions of some atheists to a discussion is a proof itself of fear.

@god must be atheist You think life is a dictionary definition?! You don't understand as your wedded to dogmatic conceptions.
Yes,I've experienced eternity,continously as well.
Since when was the truth a particular conception only?
Your defensiveness shows your fear and anxiety of eternity. Or for you,let's say life after death.

@god must be atheist Who said eternity doesn't involve time? It means continuous unending time.
And why can't that be experienced?

@Jack Cummins I think all 3 are in some ways oppositional as they are different methods of knowledge.
Dialectics. Reductionism. And real religion being intuitive,mystical and meditative.
Science and philosophy do not adequately use direct human experience and seem to be obsessed with the misuse of the intellect.
Personal or mystic religion uses almost entirely the intuitive powers,personal experience and meditation.
Primary truth is never second hand. So it has to be first hand,which rules out science and philosophy.

@Fooloso4 Ha ha! OK,I will be back!

@Jack Cummins Of course,one could say there is a three way opposition between philosophy,science and religion?!

@Fooloso4 Maybe I missed that part.
You suggest he experienced eternity or hunkered for it?

@Fooloso4 I followed that thread before i joined.
Plato does seem mighty keen on "proving" eternity?
What do you think the reason is for that?

@Fooloso4 There is still time!!!
Do you feel plato experienced this feeling. Or do you think he was striving for this through his dialectics?

@Jack Cummins Thank you for the welcome.
How about,can philosophy reveal eternal truths that science cannot? That seems to be the gist of your title?
I must say I feel meditation can reveal eternal truths.
Modern science and philosophy don't even believe in eternity!

@Fooloso4 What if eternity is a an intuition,a feeling,an experience?

@Jack Cummins I read a lot of your posts before joining. I would argue that the general method of mystics and philosophers is Meditation. And this method is the way to true knowledge and insight. This knowledge is eternal,but different mystics have had different motivations and aptitudes. For instance plato was about political control. Buddha was about the practical path to human happiness and flourishing. Both didn't have modern academia but expressed more real knowledge than the whole of mainstream science today.

People deny real conspiracies because of fear. Fear of confronting the status quote,and fear of hidden criminal machinations. Fear of the truth. Fear of ridicule from gatekeepers and the crowd. Fear of being very different.
Government itself is a conspiracy of elites working to consolidate power and wealth inequality at the expense of the populace. But most are to scared to even investigate this at all. Just look at the last year and a half and the behaviour of governments and media. The biggest clue in peooples lifetimes,yet they still believe in the government,the medical industry and academia!

I don't see science and technology as the same thing.
Technology has obvious benefits,but not all technology.
Weapons and excessive automation of services is not the best of inventions.
Science as an ideology is a dud. The amount of appeals to science these days is ludicrous. Science has become the new dictator,the new religion. Science has almost zero to say on the human condition and little to say on values and morality,except evolutionary psychology and social sciences,both of which are terrible.
Give me art,common sense and religion instead of dogmatic materialism.

@Fooloso4 that's all good.
But what is the reason you are unsure about eternity?

Many atheists are afraid of there being anything after death,like some judgement. Denial is a positive psychological force. Fear of the unknown makes many run to comforting ideologies. Of which materialism is one.

@Jack Cummins
I think certain principles are valid regardless of context.
For instance art,aesthetics and religion/spirituality are valued in any era. The human condition is the same regardless of science,engineering or the political landscape.

Philosophy is an expression of the human psyche.
Every philosophy is a projection of the authors desires and morality.
Some philosophies may even be a psychological stage of depression,anger,ennui,etc.
Many philosophies are an attempt to codify and control reality. Ergo,an ideology,and this ideology is many times political and represents an elite class and its values.
Very similiar to many religions,including the scientific/secular worldview.

I believe religion is an expression of human wants,values and desires. And this can be good or bad.
"God" is an expression of human immortality,justice and creativity,an expression of the human self.
God in short,is a humans practical awareness.