Naked Science Forum
General Discussion & Feedback => Just Chat! => Topic started by: Pseudoscience-is-malarkey on 23/03/2019 19:51:58
-
People should be able to practice superstitions in a free society, but how can we allow breatharianism to be practiced? There are genuinely convinced followers that keep going to their grave practicing it.
-
Teach them the physical signs of dehydration and starvation. If they still keep with the breatharian thing despite seeing those signs, I'd almost be willing to call that suicide. If people want to starve themselves to death, that's ultimately their business. If they try to teach their children to be breatharians, then that's where I would draw the line.
-
It should be illegal to "preach" it.
-
I would be prepared to licence breatharian instructors. The approved training base will be a Stylite camp, say 100 ft off the ground in a sunny place, and the course lasts 3 years, with instant failure if you eat or drink anything in that time. Since the potential income for a professional breatharian instructor is enormous, I feel justified in basing the course and exam fee on those applicable to, say, a master mariner or commercial pilot - say £100,000 cash in advance, with no refunds.
-
People should be able to practice superstitions in a free society, but how can we allow breatharianism to be practiced? There are genuinely convinced followers that keep going to their grave practicing it.
Suicide is now legal in India, where this is practised. Up until last year suicide was punishable by imprisonment. https://www.thebetterindia.com/127121/decriminalisation-suicide-attempts-first-step-mental-health-revolution/
One would think this practise would die out from natural causes, unless someone is cheating and snacking when no one is looking.
Perhaps advertising when a belief system fails, people might get the hint that the belief in question is wrong. Failing that natural selection of the species should deal with it eventually.
To ban one belief system as opposed to another would be religious discrimination would it not, and likely cause a war. Who is to say which religion is better than another ??? Many people go to war and are prepared to die for their religious belief, what is the big difference here, except these people are not going to war, and are deliberately starving themselves to death. If their religion is banned, would they go to war and kill people who attempt to suppress the belief. Hindus are generally a gentle bunch but others might get caught up in a war, not of their making and may starve to death as a result.
With all the religious freedom and nutters in the world, if they are only harming them selves and not mentally ill, let them get on with it. They might live to learn from their mistakes ;) or not as the case me be :o
Alan Calverd has perhaps the best approach :) Those that teach breatherism perhaps should be licenced, and maybe go on training courses to demonstrate they can survive for six months without food, or even water. If they cant do it, they should not be given a license to teach it. :)
-
If I was convinced that this was a genuine religion rather than a a (total) scam I'd have more sympathy.
-
If I was convinced that this was a genuine religion rather than a a (total) scam I'd have more sympathy.
How would you define a genuine religion?
Someone worshipping the sun or an unseen god perhaps, or maybe someone who practises meditation with no belief in gods or an afterlife?
Are those that practise meditation religious, Zen Buddism (no afterlife or gods) for instance. Like wise there is Theravada Buddism which believes in reincarnation etc. Buddhism I understand has its routes in India and maybe shares some beliefs with Hinduism which is a few years older than Buddhism cerca 500BC ish