Pat Condell: "God or Nothing"

by leavingwt 40 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  bohm

  BTS: I agree with this statement:

  Human beings are religious animals. It is psychologically very hard to go through life without the justification, and the hope, provided by religion

  But i think that it is possible to create a society that condition people to be more irrational, and a society that condition people to be less. For example, a place like taliban dominated afghanistan, or a large isolated family in some cult, is (i would claim) less conditioned for rational thought, and more conditioned to irrational ideas than eg. the average american city.

  So yah, it is a game of whack-a-mole, but the more you whack them, the less annoying they become. besides, its fun :-).
• 

  VoidEater

  BTS: Really? I thought that was what religion was supposed to be about. My own faith has been extremely helpful in that regard.

  I find "religion" to be politics.

  EDIT for your EDIT: We've been "getting on" with these problems ever since we became human.

  Religion these days is more about avoiding issues than addressing them.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Religion these days is more about avoiding issues than addressing them.

  I really do not agree with this generalization. In the case of a superficial fundamentalism, I do.

  There is too much deep, introspective, religious thought to post here. But its totality tends to disprove your blanket statement, rather than validate it.

  BTS
• 

  sabastious

  That was awesome.

  -Sab
• 

  sabastious

  I really do not agree with this generalization. In the case of a superficial fundamentalism, I do.

  "Explaining away the issues" would constitute avoiding in my book.

  -Sab
• 

  sabastious

  Unless of course, your argument follows the laws of logic and reason and hold water.

  -Sab
• 

  designs

  God, as most religions define this term use anthropomorphisims- what could be more limiting. Some like Buddha tried to conceive of something beyond the concepts of his time.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  God, as most religions define this term use anthropomorphisims- what could be more limiting. Some like Buddha tried to conceive of something beyond the concepts of his time.

  Anthropomorphisms are a "handle" to more easily conceptualize what, in its sum, is beyond human conception.

  If you take the anthropomorphisms as literal and only limit yourself to them, then of course, you are limiting yourself. I do not.

  Google "via negativa."

  BTS

  PS Here:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophatic_theology

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophatic_theology#In_the_Christian_tradition
• 

  leavingwt

  BTS:

  Below the Spectator article you posted, was the comment below. What do you think of it?

  We have a capitalist democracy which necessarily means that peoples time and money goes where it is most rewarded. Christianity and other religions promise a lot but deliver little, secularist materialism promises nothing and delivers health, wealth, and power. It is therefore predictable that cultures walk away from such superstitions.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  False dichotomy. "Man does not live from bread alone."

  A number of comments respond to the one you pulled out.

  BTS