the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
I can honesty say, with confidence, that I have found zero evidences of the possible existence of myself. It appears that I exist, but if I claim that I know that I exist, that would be very arrogant of me, because so far, my so called "evidences" of my existence, are based on what I believe is true. If the truth is beyond what I believe, then I may have a problem, if I exist.
May the Tao be with you, always ;)
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
Is faith a virtue? Is atheism?
I think what a person does and how they treat others is what really matters. Especially when there's disagreement. How else do you measure tolerance, understanding and what may really be considered virtues?
i've always wondered that.
recently i asked that question on another thread and didn't really get ananswer.
cofty made an excellent point that we often hear what it isn't, but that really isn't useful.. so, what is it?
Safe to say then that spirit doesn't exist?
the classic debate between those who believe that consciousness is merely the result of the operation of the brain, and those who believe that it is apart from the brain, like the idea of a soul or the classic dualistic distinction between mind and body, is a well-known one.. however the thought has occurred that when people try to convince me that the soul cannot be real; soul in the sense of consciousness being a separate thing to the operation of the brain, then really the materialistic non spiritual view is in fact a rehash of animism, strange as that might sound.. animism is the idea that soul, spirit, consciousness, or whatever it might be called, exists in plants, animals, things, objects, places or basically in everything and anything in the material world.
the view of some is that very primitive cultures had this wide category of spiritual belief, which eventually evolved into the all the religions, faiths and spiritualties of today.
some of the faiths of modern times are not defined as animistic because these draw a distinction between soul and body or in modern parlance, consciousness and brain.. so in very ancient times, at the dawn of human spiritual belief, the sun, for example, rising and setting was seen not so much as being caused by the proverbial spaghetti monster but as being the proverbial spaghetti monster.
Well said, Snare
Some interesting thoughts and feelings displayed here on some of the pixels of this 1920x1080 resolution LCD monitor. The arrangement of ASCII characters is fascinating
the classic debate between those who believe that consciousness is merely the result of the operation of the brain, and those who believe that it is apart from the brain, like the idea of a soul or the classic dualistic distinction between mind and body, is a well-known one.. however the thought has occurred that when people try to convince me that the soul cannot be real; soul in the sense of consciousness being a separate thing to the operation of the brain, then really the materialistic non spiritual view is in fact a rehash of animism, strange as that might sound.. animism is the idea that soul, spirit, consciousness, or whatever it might be called, exists in plants, animals, things, objects, places or basically in everything and anything in the material world.
the view of some is that very primitive cultures had this wide category of spiritual belief, which eventually evolved into the all the religions, faiths and spiritualties of today.
some of the faiths of modern times are not defined as animistic because these draw a distinction between soul and body or in modern parlance, consciousness and brain.. so in very ancient times, at the dawn of human spiritual belief, the sun, for example, rising and setting was seen not so much as being caused by the proverbial spaghetti monster but as being the proverbial spaghetti monster.
Your points are as fallacious as the OP and title itself
if one rejects the idea of a soul, they are not an animist (who believes everything has a soul or is conscious).
one needs a brain to process stuff; one cannot experience things without. where does the experience lie if not within the brain?
the classic debate between those who believe that consciousness is merely the result of the operation of the brain, and those who believe that it is apart from the brain, like the idea of a soul or the classic dualistic distinction between mind and body, is a well-known one.. however the thought has occurred that when people try to convince me that the soul cannot be real; soul in the sense of consciousness being a separate thing to the operation of the brain, then really the materialistic non spiritual view is in fact a rehash of animism, strange as that might sound.. animism is the idea that soul, spirit, consciousness, or whatever it might be called, exists in plants, animals, things, objects, places or basically in everything and anything in the material world.
the view of some is that very primitive cultures had this wide category of spiritual belief, which eventually evolved into the all the religions, faiths and spiritualties of today.
some of the faiths of modern times are not defined as animistic because these draw a distinction between soul and body or in modern parlance, consciousness and brain.. so in very ancient times, at the dawn of human spiritual belief, the sun, for example, rising and setting was seen not so much as being caused by the proverbial spaghetti monster but as being the proverbial spaghetti monster.
I believe there is absolutely a state of consciousness. This state has not been fully studied.
Agreed.
That human consciousness is a result of brain activity is clearly apparent.
Exactly what it is and how it works is not understood and thus cannot be measured, yet it exists.
This doesn't mean a soul exists.
ot law required jews to take the lead in stoning a family member who became apostate.. the watchtower has lamented the fact that the law of the land now forbids them from doing so.. if the law permitted it, as it does in some musim countries, and if the watchtower required it, would your family obey?.
my parents are good people and i believe their love for me is genuine, but i think they would follow orders.. what about yours?.
I have no idea what other people would do in a hypothetical situation.
i've always wondered that.
recently i asked that question on another thread and didn't really get ananswer.
cofty made an excellent point that we often hear what it isn't, but that really isn't useful.. so, what is it?
You can prove scientifically that what you are is just merely atoms, molecules and cells.
Is this all you are?
How do you measure "you"?
i've always wondered that.
recently i asked that question on another thread and didn't really get ananswer.
cofty made an excellent point that we often hear what it isn't, but that really isn't useful.. so, what is it?
What definition of spirit are you referring to?
Again...
i've always wondered that.
recently i asked that question on another thread and didn't really get ananswer.
cofty made an excellent point that we often hear what it isn't, but that really isn't useful.. so, what is it?
Congratulations
You have a survey of a select group of opinions from a less than visible minority.
You win?
lmao
