Raptors Forum | Toronto Raptors Forums & Message Boards - View Single Post - another discussion about religion
View Single Post
Old 12-21-2010, 11:37 AM   #155 (permalink)
brainfarting keyboard eater

Dwane Casey kicks ass!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,254

Originally Posted by Ligeia View Post
I will leave with a brief critique of the most galling points in elT's response (some of which was ok, some of which wasn't):

Which is absolutely laughable. Tell me: what are the contents of the concept called "atheism"? Atheism is a commentary on only one question (does god exist or not). Have you ever heard the phrase "Atheism is a religion like non-stamp-collecting is a hobby"?
And inherently all other questions coming from the main question. It is why these discussions always get out of hand. Perhaps it's insulting or uncomfortable for atheists to be called members of yet another religion but the behavior and the value system is there and it simply is what it is. And, atheists simply believe there is no God. To them there's a bunch of proof that it's so. To me there is a bunch of proof that God does exist. But, it's matter of faith in the end. Or lack there of. Depends on the side.

Originally Posted by Ligeia View Post
Most of your argument is actually against naturalism, which is quite distinct from atheism (though many atheists are also naturalists).
My argument is against excluding anything out of our lives, especially preemptively, as it directly makes us poorer in every single way, making our experience dramatically worse then what it could be. And yes that includes both doubt and faith, science and religion etc.. etc.. I'm both attacking and embracing everyone.

Originally Posted by Ligeia View Post
Absolute garbage. For you to say that nothing of signifance or substance has happened in science of late only demonstrates how fundamentally ignorant of science you are. To take but one absolutely monumental discovery of the last couple decades: you don't think sequencing the human genome was of the utmost importance? I'd also wonder how closely you read any scientific papers (do you get your science from the media or the scientific journals?) because scientific papers are chock full of caution; very rarely do they make any claims about how revolutionary their research is. If you want to blame scientists for the work of science journalists in the popular media, I suppose that's your choice.
I think sequencing the human genome is an excellent progress. It's simply amazing.

I wanted to make a point about sciences effect on our daily life. My intention was not to diminish everything scientists are doing but it seems I have done that in my previous post and I apologize for that, it just didn't come out right.

I'd say mostly from around web and yes that in fact means the media.

Originally Posted by Ligeia View Post
I don't see how you can call that the same behaviour. Would you say that someone passionate about bettering the world is exhibiting the same behaviour as someone passionate about destroying the world, just because they're both passionate?

Scientists are generally focused on what is empirically verifiable. Religion is the antithesis of empirically verifiable. Stop falsely equivocating the two so that you can produce your desired conclusion.
I believe you haven't quite understood what I'm saying, hence the stupid loaded question and comment.

Originally Posted by Ligeia View Post
Could you maybe do us both a favour and tell me what religion is, and how you determined that to be the case? I think you're ignoring all the etymology and sociological data that contradicts your view.
From the start I'm saying there are as many religions as there are individuals in the world, meaning that once you strip away institution and the representatives, what's left is the religion. And that's how it should be.

When I look at a Canadian, I don't look at him/his trough his/her government or the actions of his/her government. That's the institution part of his/her citizenship. I'm more interested in the human, the individual. At that point, I forget I'm looking at a Canadian, just another human.

When I look at scientist, I'm not looking at his diploma or awards but again, the individual. etc.. etc..


So, one I look at a Catholic Christian, I'm not looking at him trough the Pope, the Inquisition or whatever the Pope said last Sunday or any of that. I'm looking at the individual, ESPECIALLY when we are talking about religion.

So, just like with anything it comes down to that, the individual. That's why it is an individual matter IMO. The institutions are just parasites on a beautiful organism. I'd like them out of the picture.

Latin: religionem (nom. religio)
"Respect for what is sacred, reverence for God"
"Obligation, the bond between man and God"

Well, the etymology kind of supports what I'm saying. We don't need the institutions.
elT is offline   Boss Key Wife Key