0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
quote:The way i see it is because nothing can be proved either way then everyone should be allowed to believe whatever they like without argument or prejudice.
quote:Originally posted by ukmickyHi rosyCompare your perception of colour compared to a group of people who are colour blind,and without science prove to them they are the ones seeing things incorrectly, Now try to prove to somebody who's whole life has been dedicated to god that god doesnt exist without any proof that what your saying is true. To them your the one that persists in believing in something which is demonstrably untrue.Michael
quote:Sorry Michael, but it is quite possible to demonstrate to a colour blind person that “they are the ones seeing things incorrectly “.
quote:Originally posted by ukmickyNow go back a few hundred years to before Sir Thomas young and the modern theory of light so your in the same position as we are in now with trying to prove to a someone who passionately believes in god that god is fake with no science to back up our claims. Remember with no science to deal with colour you will have no idea how to create any tests to prove that a colourblind person is seeing things inaccurately, so how can you prove to him and expect him to accept your claims that his colour perception is not normal, as far as he is concerned your the one with screwed up vision and are mad because you you wont accept HIS colour perception as being normal.its the same situation with god we cant prove nothing in regards to our claims that there is no god so why should he a lifelong believer in god believe what we believe when we are in the same position as him and can't actually prove anything. at least he got faith , what have we gotMichael
quote:Originally posted by rosyI don't want to disprove God, I think he's an irrelevance. Either he's there and gave us this world to try to figure out, or he ain't and there's a world to figure out entirely by chance... it makes no difference to my life. I would quite like to discourage people from being unpleasant to each other on the grounds of who they are and who they go to bed with, and am consequently biased against organised religion as a whole, but that has nothing at all to do with the point I was trying to make above.
quote:The arguments against organised religion have more to do with organised humanity than with religion. Nationalism is no less dangerous that organised religion, and the vehement anti-religious perspective of mainstream communism is also no less dangerous. Religion is merely one of many ways in which you can segregate people into 'us' and 'them', and it is not the religion itself that is dangerous, but the segregation. Unfortunately, it is an innate part of human nature that we do like to feel we 'belong' to a group, which inherently requires that we distinguish between the group we belong to and those who are outside of that group.
quote:The bigger problem in terms of the philosophical discussion of God is the lack of adequately agreed frames of reference.
quote:The bigger problem in terms of the philosophical discussion of God is the lack of adequately agreed frames of reference
quote:Originally posted by rosyI'd suggest this is only partly true. I'll grant you the human tendancy to xenophobia, but would contend that where specific "outside" groups are designated, or perceived to be so, by a religion that it is more difficult to bring those people into the "inside" group if the communities are living side by side... bigotry is accompanied by a belief that it's righteous, rather than a set of unthinking assumptions which can (I would suggest) more readily be broken down in the face of real people who turn out to be much like the people on the "inside".
quote:I would ask whether what you are talking about is religion or God? There are religions that have no notion of God (Buddhism being one that comes to mind), and I would also suggest that communism itself has many of the properties of a religion, although they would be horrified to think of it so.
quote:Unless you accept the tenets of moral relativism, then it becomes inevitable that you have to fall back on some kind of notion of a righteousness that makes your notion of right superior to someone else's notion of right. Whether you attribute your notion of right as God given, or simply somehow 'self evident' or otherwise unarguable, by whatever mechanism, you have to either accept that there is no absolute right, or that a particular version of right that is superior is based on irrational bigotry.
quote:Once you accept that your version of right is the superior right, then it follows that anyone who believes a different version of right must be inferior to you.
quote:And i will not come to this conversation again because obviusly no one to date really knows the answer.
quote:Originally posted by tony6789And i will not come to this conversation again because obviusly no one to date really knows the answer.
quote:Originally posted by rosyReligion. I don't know much about Buddhism, but religions in general proscribe certain activities (and I'll go back to the sexual morality example because it's the one that comes to mind) simply because they're "wrong". I'd agree with you that communism (in some of its manifestations) has some aspects of a "religion" too... and it's those aspects, both of religion and of communism that I find objectionable. I'm not saying that I like anything else in particular just because I'm suspicious of religions.
quote:No. I disagree. If we accept that there is only one "truth" (whether or not any of the existing religions/non-religions have any kind of handle on what that is), then moralities based on writings purporting to be "divinely inspired" by the deity of a religion which doesn't correspond to that truth is of less value than one which is based on truth.Since we can't know who, if anyone, has the right idea then we have to reach a pragmatic balance where *provided no harm is done to other people*, we're all allowed to get on with what we believe is right. The effects of this are quite close to those you'd get by taking a relativist view *but* is philosophically very different.
quote:No. That is exactly my problem with the whole thing. Religion requires belief without rational backup. A rational view says "this appears to be best so we'll run with it until we find something better". Essentially it's a case of approaching right as you would science.
quote:Originally posted by daveshortsI think that there is a difference between irrational judgements that are a product of society and therefore alterable, and those that were divinely inspired 2000 years ago and therefore, the truth, the absolute truth and nothing but the truth, and therefore one is right in doing anything to promote these truths, and they can't be tempered with new information.
quote:Originally posted by daveshorts a supernatural bing
quote:Originally posted by BigBenGOD IS REAL IDIOTS!!!!!! i AM A VRY STRONG CHRISTIAN!!!!! BESIDES WHO MADE THE BIBLE IF HE DIDNT EXISIST