Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Bulk Substrate, North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion.
    #14103096 -

Knowing that with religion spawned the anti-religious. From one idea to the next, where would we be without religion(in non-religious terms)Ideas mean everything to me.

Intelligentsia.


--------------------
Evolution of Time.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Droz]
    #14103219 -

Droz said:
Knowing that with religion spawned the anti-religious.

We know this?


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Droz]
    #14103240 -

Poid said:
Droz said:
Knowing that with religion spawned the anti-religious.

We know this?


Well we can say for something to be "anti" the thing it is against has to exist, right?

However this doesn't cover its non existence.

Example:

Person walking along with no concept of god, comes across god believer.

*God believer says: Hey you, you should believe in "God"
(This is the first time the person has heard of the concept)
Person: Um, no...actually, no. That is ridiculous.

Even though the first person was not in a state of actively denying God's existence, clearly there was no belief.

I am really not sure I am making sense at this point of insomnia.

***edit:

I just realised that you weren't addressing this at all, but the part of being able to know.

I still stand by my post though.


--------------------
:inlove3::inlove3:

Edited by Blondell_Letrange (03/11/11 12:22 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Blondell_Letrange]
    #14103291 -

Blondell_Letrange said:
Poid said:
Droz said:
Knowing that with religion spawned the anti-religious.

We know this?


Well we can say for something to be "anti" the thing it is against has to exist, right?

Why can't it just exist conceptually? For example, say I imagined a certain type of person, and I hated him/her, then some time later saw an actual person who was identical to the person I imagined.

Bitch, I was anti-you before we even met! :snub:


Blondell_Letrange said:
However this doesn't cover its non existence.

Example:

Person walking along with no concept of god, comes across god believer.

*God believer says: Hey you, you should believe in "God"
(This is the first time the person has heard of the concept)
Person: Um, no...actually, no. That is ridiculous.

Even though the first person was not in a state of actively denying God's existence, clearly there was no belief.

I am really not sure I am making sense at this point of insomnia.

I'm pretty sleep-deprived myself. Yesterday I drank a cup of coffee, then smoked a cigarette while being extremely sleep-deprived, because I didn't want to go to sleep and I was bored.

You should get some sleep, dreams kick ass. :cool2::cig:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Blondell_Letrange]
    #14103301 -

Blondell_Letrange said:
Poid said:
Droz said:
Knowing that with religion spawned the anti-religious.

We know this?


Well we can say for something to be "anti" the thing it is against has to exist, right?

Why can't it just exist conceptually? For example, say I imagined a certain type of person, and I hated him/her, then some time later saw an actual person who was identical to the person I imagined.

Bitch, I was anti-you before we even met! :snub:


Blondell_Letrange said:
However this doesn't cover its non existence.

Example:

Person walking along with no concept of god, comes across god believer.

*God believer says: Hey you, you should believe in "God"
(This is the first time the person has heard of the concept)
Person: Um, no...actually, no. That is ridiculous.

Even though the first person was not in a state of actively denying God's existence, clearly there was no belief.

I am really not sure I am making sense at this point of insomnia.

I'm pretty sleep-deprived myself. Yesterday I drank a cup of coffee, then smoked a cigarette while being extremely sleep-deprived; I didn't want to go to sleep and was kinda bored (i.e. out of weed:leaf:).

You should get some sleep, dreams kick ass. :cool2::cig:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Poid]
    #14103352 -

Quote:
Why can't it just exist conceptually? For example, say I imagined a certain type of person, and I hated him/her, then some time later saw an actual person who was identical to the person I imagined.


Well according to Blondell, Yes, God is currently existing on a conceptual level. :lol:

It seems like your scenario might go more like this:

Person 1: Hm, I wonder about some giant creator of life (whatever)...nah That doesn't seem likely.
Person 2: Hey you, have you heard about God? (explains God concept.)
Person 1: Well, I had actually wondered about something remarkably similar to that, but decided it was bollocks..."
Person 1: You fucking heathen.

Okay, aside from the poor imagination skills I put into that dialogue...

Person one has already conceived of God on a conceptual level, and by speaking with person two they have at very least partially agreed on the specifics of the concept.

So isn't person one is still actively denying this concept, rather than simply lacking the belief?


--------------------
:inlove3::inlove3:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Blondell_Letrange]
    #14108326 -

"God" is an abstract concept that has no physical manifestation in our realm of existence. The existence of God can't be proved or disproved so it is fruitless to argue God's existence. If He doesn't exist, then it is impossible to prove that He exists. However, if He does exist, then in theory, it would be unnecessary, even illogical, to prove his existence because you are not supposed to question God's existence. An Atheist will believe that God doesn't exist on the basis that His existence can't be proved and a religious person will believe that God does exist on the basis that their pastor has told them so and they will be damned to hell if they question. Who is right? It's impossible to know, but the two opposites will never come to a conclusion.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: AUX]
    #14108602 -

I don't think this thread even touches on the existence of God, but IMO you are correct it is a fruitless argument, and I am very much over discussing it.

It is more about the existence of belief, which undoubtedly DOES exist, and how that is the catalyst to ANTI-belief, but IMO NOT non-belief...Because you don't need to be aware of a concept to not believe it, but you do need to, to be "anti."

:sip:


--------------------
:inlove3::inlove3:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Blondell_Letrange]
    #14108708 -

Without the belief first existing, you can't be against the belief. What you are saying is that when a believer tries to share his beliefs with a non-believer, the non-believer becomes an anti-believer because he is aware of the beliefs of the other but does not agree with them, assuming that he isn't converted to belief by the believer? If this is true, then by simply hearing about somebody's beliefs and not agreeing with them, a non-believer becomes an anti-believer. What if the non-believer expresses no disagreement and chooses to ignore the believer? The non-believer still has knowledge of the believer's beliefs and chooses not to agree with them, but does not openly disagree with them, therefor he is not against that belief, only apathetic to it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: AUX]
    #14108782 -

whoa nelly...

There are mulitudes of possibilities of belief.

My statement is that to be ANTI something (in this example the person is already opposed, there is no what if...It is a premise of my argument) it has to necessarily exist conceptually (you have to be aware of it) otherwise it would merely be an absence of belief.


The horse goes before the cart.

Hm...I feel mysteriously anti, not sure what I am against though. :imslow:


--------------------
:inlove3::inlove3:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Blondell_Letrange]
    #14109806 -

I wasn't disagreeing with you, I was trying to make sense of what you were saying. Where do you go from absent of belief to against a belief? What does a concept need to exist? If I do not believe in something because I do not know about it, the concept still exists but I would be absent of belief. How can I be against a concept if I do not know it exists?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: AUX]
    #14109820 -

Quote:
How can I be against a concept if I do not know it exists?


:rofl:

I just realised you are totally fucking with me.


--------------------
:inlove3::inlove3:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Blondell_Letrange]
    #14109863 -

Blondell_Letrange said:
Quote:
Why can't it just exist conceptually? For example, say I imagined a certain type of person, and I hated him/her, then some time later saw an actual person who was identical to the person I imagined.


Well according to Blondell, Yes, God is currently existing on a conceptual level. :lol:

It seems like your scenario might go more like this:

Person 1: Hm, I wonder about some giant creator of life (whatever)...nah That doesn't seem likely.
Person 2: Hey you, have you heard about God? (explains God concept.)
Person 1: Well, I had actually wondered about something remarkably similar to that, but decided it was bollocks..."
Person 1: You fucking heathen.

Okay, aside from the poor imagination skills I put into that dialogue...

Person one has already conceived of God on a conceptual level, and by speaking with person two they have at very least partially agreed on the specifics of the concept.

So isn't person one is still actively denying this concept, rather than simply lacking the belief?

Why would one who is anti-something need to lack the belief in that something? You said "Well we can say for something to be "anti" the thing it is against has to exist, right?", I'm just saying that one can be anti-something that exists conceptually (that something doesn't have to exist "IRL"), and that this means that religion didn't necessarily spawn the anti-religious (which is what Droz claimed in the OP); it could be that some people were anti-religious before they were ever exposed to a religious person.

:sisterwendy:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Poid]
    #14109905 -

Poid said:
Blondell_Letrange said:
Quote:
Why can't it just exist conceptually? For example, say I imagined a certain type of person, and I hated him/her, then some time later saw an actual person who was identical to the person I imagined.


Well according to Blondell, Yes, God is currently existing on a conceptual level. :lol:

It seems like your scenario might go more like this:

Person 1: Hm, I wonder about some giant creator of life (whatever)...nah That doesn't seem likely.
Person 2: Hey you, have you heard about God? (explains God concept.)
Person 1: Well, I had actually wondered about something remarkably similar to that, but decided it was bollocks..."
Person 1: You fucking heathen.

Okay, aside from the poor imagination skills I put into that dialogue...

Person one has already conceived of God on a conceptual level, and by speaking with person two they have at very least partially agreed on the specifics of the concept.

So isn't person one is still actively denying this concept, rather than simply lacking the belief?

Why would one who is anti-something need to lack the belief in that something? You said "Well we can say for something to be "anti" the thing it is against has to exist, right?", I'm just saying that one can be anti-something that exists conceptually (that something doesn't have to exist "IRL"), and that this means that religion didn't necessarily spawn the anti-religious; it could be that some people were anti-religious before they were ever exposed to a religious person.

:sisterwendy:


I am so confused by your response. :confused:

I never said that someone had to have a lack belief to be anti something. Lacking belief was the option, if there was a concept you were unaware of, because I can not see how you can be anti something you have no idea about.

If these people were anti-religious before being exposed to the concept of it, please tell me exactly what they were anti against?

In what way were they anti?


--------------------
:inlove3::inlove3:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Blondell_Letrange]
    #14110059 -

Blondell_Letrange said:
Poid said:
Blondell_Letrange said:
Quote:
Why can't it just exist conceptually? For example, say I imagined a certain type of person, and I hated him/her, then some time later saw an actual person who was identical to the person I imagined.


Well according to Blondell, Yes, God is currently existing on a conceptual level. :lol:

It seems like your scenario might go more like this:

Person 1: Hm, I wonder about some giant creator of life (whatever)...nah That doesn't seem likely.
Person 2: Hey you, have you heard about God? (explains God concept.)
Person 1: Well, I had actually wondered about something remarkably similar to that, but decided it was bollocks..."
Person 1: You fucking heathen.

Okay, aside from the poor imagination skills I put into that dialogue...

Person one has already conceived of God on a conceptual level, and by speaking with person two they have at very least partially agreed on the specifics of the concept.

So isn't person one is still actively denying this concept, rather than simply lacking the belief?

Why would one who is anti-something need to lack the belief in that something? You said "Well we can say for something to be "anti" the thing it is against has to exist, right?", I'm just saying that one can be anti-something that exists conceptually (that something doesn't have to exist "IRL"), and that this means that religion didn't necessarily spawn the anti-religious; it could be that some people were anti-religious before they were ever exposed to a religious person.

:sisterwendy:


I am so confused by your response. :confused:

I never said that someone had to have a lack belief to be anti something.

I was confused about why you mentioned "simply lacking a belief".


Blondell_Letrange said:
Lacking belief was the option, if there was a concept you were unaware of, because I can not see how you can be anti something you have no idea about.

I didn't say this, I was saying that you can be anti the concept of religious people (and thereby be anti-religious) before you ever meet a real-life religious person, or even if you never meet one at all; this means that religion didn't necessarily spawn every single anti-religious person (Droz implied that religion necessarily spawned every single anti-religious person by saying "religion spawned the anti-religious").


Blondell_Letrange said:
If these people were anti-religious before being exposed to the concept of it...

I didn't say this, I said they can be anti the concept of religious people before they are exposed to one IRL, meaning that they weren't spawned by religion.


This is kind of how like I can be anti-people who eat their own shit, even if I've never been exposed to someone who does that. If there happens to be a religion of shit-eaters, and I am exposed to some of its members, that doesn't mean that their religion spawned my hatred for them. :glittershitz:

Hope that made sense. :lol:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Edited by Poid (03/12/11 08:05 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Poid] * 1
    #14110228 -

:lol: Yep, fair enough. I think I understand where you are coming from now. :thumbup:

I have been a little distracted from my serious Shroomery debating today, by this abstract I was writing for Uni...*ahem* "College."

:rofl:

Edit*** Note to self, read own signature more often. :facepalm3:


--------------------
:inlove3::inlove3:

Edited by Blondell_Letrange (03/12/11 07:47 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: Blondell_Letrange]
    #14110306 -

Blondell_Letrange said:
Edit*** Note to self, read own signature more often. :facepalm3:

:lol:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: I'm pretty sure what we speak about has an opposite side to Religion. [Re: AUX]
    #14111490 -

AUX said:
"God" is an abstract concept that has no physical manifestation in our realm of existence. The existence of God can't be proved or disproved so it is fruitless to argue God's existence. If He doesn't exist, then it is impossible to prove that He exists. However, if He does exist, then in theory, it would be unnecessary, even illogical, to prove his existence because you are not supposed to question God's existence. An Atheist will believe that God doesn't exist on the basis that His existence can't be proved and a religious person will believe that God does exist on the basis that their pastor has told them so and they will be damned to hell if they question. Who is right? It's impossible to know, but the two opposites will never come to a conclusion.


The very first part of your post...speaks the truth.

There are so many definitions and ideas applied to what "God" is, that the arguing for or against the existence of one is almost completely pointless, because any one idea of God would be met with fervent opposition from people who believe God is something else, or anyone who has no belief in "God".

I'm using quotes because no one knows what it means. It's such a word beyond any single person's comprehension that it either exists in some way or another, or doesn't exist at all, and no one can prove or disprove the idea or concept.

George Carlin explained it best IMO: "I think we're part of a greater wisdom that we will ever understand. A higher order. Call it what you want. You know what I call it? The big electron. The big electron....Woaaahhhh....wooaaahhhhhh....wooooaaahhhhhhhhhh. It doesn't punish, it doesn't reward, it doesn't judge at all. It just is."

Funny shit. Especially the woah part and gesturing with his hands. You can find it in his HBO "Jammin' in New York"

And I think I get what Carlin was trying to explain, but I don't want to put words into his mouth! He was a great thinker of our time...basically...like those little chinese nesting dolls...there's one that encompasses the smaller ones, and that keeps going for infinity. Personally, and I am *NOT* trying to indoctrinate any of you or tell you what to believe, but I apply a fractal idea to the way our universe is. Personally, and again, this is just my own opinion, you are free to form your own, I think our universe lies along a giant fractal pattern of constant space and energy that continuously circulates, which consists of millions of other universes...an infinite number of them. And this energy just keeps getting recycled and goes between universes.

I'm not sure if what I just typed is worded into a tangible idea. Probably not, since I'm just another human, haha. 

Edited by tyler_0_durden (03/12/11 11:32 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Bulk Substrate, North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* some thought on religion 2Experimental 541 2 06/26/03 03:46 AM
by chunder
* Murder, killing, death penalty, religion, ect. Vulture 1,453 10 06/04/03 03:22 AM
by thestringphish
* philosiphy of religion
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 aluminum_can 10,626 77 08/10/01 05:58 AM
by Zen Peddler
* Concept of soul mates
( 1 2 all )		 cleaner 3,793 28 09/02/03 08:33 AM
by TrippeeChik
* There is no purpose of life without religion(READ)
( 1 2 all )		 tekramrepus 3,067 28 09/03/02 03:13 PM
by jayson
* Eastern Religions IV: Vedism Kremlin 726 1 11/05/03 07:15 AM
by Spokesman
* Eastern Religions VII: Warring State thinkers: Confucius Kremlin 923 7 11/06/03 08:33 PM
by Shroomism
* Eastern Religions VIII: Warring State Thinkers: Mozi Kremlin 959 1 11/07/03 04:26 PM
by Sclorch

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
772 topic views. 1 members, 13 guests and 23 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.039 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 16 queries.