Silly Religion

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Is that the sacred Albaninan tomato ketchup festival?

[RCSaunders]

I have written about it many times.

1. DNA/RNA wise ALL humans has an inherent potential of an existential crisis which for the majority is exuded subliminally and manifested as various indirect negative psychological feelings and behaviors.

2. DNA/RNA wise, ALL humans are "programmed" to survive till the inevitable.

3. To ensure survival [2] all humans are "programmed" with a subliminal* terrible fears to avoid premature death. * note subliminal, not so much conscious fears.

4. DNA/RNA wise, ALL humans [not non-humans] are "programmed" to be self-conscious, self-aware and the likes.

5. Thus all 'normal' self-aware humans are aware of inevitable death which trigger the subconscious to activate 3 above, i.e. subliminal fears.

6. Therefore there is a contradiction between 2 [survive else fears] and 5 [naturally cannot survive ultimately]. This generate a cognitive dissonance, i.e. the inherent unavoidable existential crisis faced by all 'normal'* humans. * mental cases are the exception.

VA, I sincerely mean this kindly, but, if you really believe any of those things, you have a mental problem. There are no mysterious, "subliminal," or, "subconscious," influences except to those suffering from some form of schizophrenia, or extreme neurosis. If you really have these irrational fears of death, especially if you allow them to affect your thinking or behavior, you have a very serious problem. When you attribute these irrational fears and mysterious causes to, "all humans," you are projecting, attributing to others your own personal psychology. Perhaps you are hanging around with the wrong people. In my eighty years I have known thousands of people, the only ones who have the kinds of experiences you are describing (and they are very rare) are sick.

I do thank you for explaining. Just as I suspected, there is no, "existential crises," except, perhaps in your own life. The rest of us, fortunately, do not suffer any such thing. You do not need to either, but you'll have to get rid of the psycho-babble if you want to be rid of your problem.

[RCSaunders]

Is that the sacred Albaninan tomato ketchup festival?

Your esoteric knowledge and recondite understanding are amazaing. Few would have recognized that picture or understood its true significance.

[The Picture Is A Link]

[Lacewing]

It is like that intuitive feelings you get when you don't consciously know why, but there is some uneasy feelings that you felt when you are face to face with certain people.

Yes... I know intuitive receptors can be very informative -- and no, I have no existential crisis.

I am confident you will not be able to show my premises are false.

Well, they may be true to you. But they are not true to me, so that much is false. You cannot simply SAY they are true for everyone, using your own rationalization, and then claim that's your proof.

Thus my inference is based on justified premises, not made up ones.

According to who? How did your premises come to exist if not for you making them up?

Note the real evidence is >80% of humans are driven by the existential crisis into various theistic religions.
The central focus of all theistic religion is driven by the existential crisis, i.e. clinging onto to a God for salvation to eternal life and escape from eternal death and hellfire. Show me I am wrong on this?

I can see three examples right off that differ from your conclusion...

1) Adults may seek out religion for all kinds of reasons that have nothing to do with an existential crisis. Simply, they are going through a hard phase in their life, or they seek fellowship, or their friends/family urge them to join.

2) Children are indoctrinated into it before they can know any better or choose for themselves.

3) Religion actively seeks out people to join.

Then, the patterns and programming keep people involved in it, and they enjoy its benefits too.

These situations probably explain the majority of people in religion, and none of them are due to existential crisis.

As stated, all my premises are supported by justified premises.

As you see it. There are more ways to see it.

Yes, I have an ultimate cause of some sort, i.e. to rid the world of theistic religions some day in the future [not now nor present] so there will be no more theistic related evil acts inspired by a non-existent God.

I can appreciate that to some degree. Although, I don't want to tell other people what to believe, I just don't want them telling me what to believe. And, I don't want them praying to some imaginary god on the U.S. Senate floor or when taking a government office. To me, that seems absurd.

Yes, it seems that theistic-related evil is some of the worst. Ancient theists are the creators of Hell and Satan and Demons and eternal damnation... and many theists still preach about it and threaten people with it. Seems sick and foolish and primitive. Seems like such people could use some theism-detox. Maybe that's what you can focus on: a detox program, rather than coming up with a more clever belief to replace theism. People will just turn that into a religion, don't you know? Maybe that's what you actually want -- to be yet another religious founder who bases beliefs on his own personal/limited conclusions? Why are there so many people who fancy themselves and their thoughts this way?

I also agree with what RC said below:

When you attribute these irrational fears and mysterious causes to, "all humans," you are projecting, attributing to others your own personal psychology.

Perhaps it is a demonstration of your own (and others) existential crisis when they want to CREATE a new religion -- because to do so, would seemingly give them an important purpose/role in the grand scheme of things? Can it not be enough to love and enjoy this life experience, as witnessed and shared with others, and as part of a GREATER WHOLE that does not function by man's limited and distorted directions?

[RCSaunders]

Can it not be enough to love and enjoy this life experience, as witnessed and shared with others, and as part of a GREATER WHOLE that does not function by man's limited and distorted directions?

I'm sorry, Lacewing, it cannot be enough. I love people and thoroughly enjoy my intercourse with them, and no one loves and enjoys life more than I do, but I do not labor under the illusion that the majority of mankind are anything other than shallow and superstitious, wallowing in ignorance and squallor. That is the, "GREATER WHOLE," of which I wish to have not part and all your attempts to cover up their responsibility for their own wretched condition by obscuring the fact they have chosen it does not excuse or improve the odor of it.

Perhaps your life is guided by, "limited and distorted directions." If you believe so, it probably is. But I can assure you others are living by clear principles that are limitless and distortionless and are the only means to true success and happiness in this world.

[Lacewing]

I do not labor under the illusion that the majority of mankind are anything other than shallow and superstitious, wallowing in ignorance and squallor. That is the, "GREATER WHOLE," of which I wish to have not part and all your attempts to cover up their responsibility for their own wretched condition by obscuring the fact they have chosen it does not excuse or improve the odor of it.

When/where have I done that? My posts continually aim to hold people accountable for their crazy crap, and I fully agree that people are choosing what they see and think.

Perhaps your life is guided by, "limited and distorted directions." If you believe so, it probably is. But I can assure you others are living by clear principles that are limitless and distortionless and are the only means to true success and happiness in this world.

Wait a minute... you just said that the majority of mankind are "shallow and superstitious, wallowing in ignorance and squalor". How is that possible if their principles are limitless and distortionless? And no, I do not live guided by limited and distorted directions...at least not to any major degree. I am continually focused on the opposite.

[gaffo]

Some strains of Buddhism acknowledge no God or gods at all.

this is true, however this is why we have minds and words to define, a Buddist that is a Buddist and denies a belief in the Gods or a God - is a follower of a Philosophy and not a Religion.

That's a hard distinction to defend. It turns out that "religion" blends smoothly into "ideologies" on a grey scale, rather than the two being black-and-white. And that turns out to be true no matter what criterion one chooses, it seems.

I agree Sir, the world is Gray, as are the trillions of Religious dogmas WRT to their relation to the as many trillions of Philosphies. - living and dead - from both camps (hay, I'd give a belly laugh - being an Athiest - finding after my death, that Zeus was/is/ and formost be the only True God of Creation).

I posted something or other about Buddists not believing i God/s - i replied that some do.

that all.

not sure why are are replying to me on this point - esp since you not the Tibetan reference below!!!!!!!!!!!! (which means you have education/interest and knowledge that in that place was a Religion (now lost - maybe 1000 yrs ago?) - separate from Hinduism to the south, and Taoism to the Northeast.


and you are right Sir! Tibetan's form of Buddism has the remains of the now forgotten Religion.

- it form is shifted culturally toward that old and dead religion, just as the western forms of Buddism is shifted to the puffery and flacky "quick fix" mentality of the western consummerist modern world.

Knowing something of history, and knowing that Gautma(sp) - the founder of Buddism, was an Indian of formerly Hindu faith (whatever form Hinduism of 400 BC in his part of India was (which prob had little or nothing in common with the many forms of it today)) - Buddism in it original form probably (like early Christianity) shared a general view to that of Hinduism.

what was the view? - God i'd love to know, but can i?................if you know or can recommend a valid source for "Hinduism 2500 yrs ago" - give reference please.

unlike other Buddists that beleive in the Gods/God.

That's the point. Buddhism is a scale, ranging from the supernaturally motivated (like Tibetan Buddhism, for example) all the way to the sort of very secular, or even the "Beatles Buddhism" of the West in the '60s. It's not easy to pin down.

yep.


I've been here 2.5 yrs now - ok i admit i a dumbshit.

how to the quotes work????

lol

[Dubious]

They're all silly and the Jesus story most of all.

[gaffo]

but Judaism and Islam affirm my Reciprocity Rule and not the Golden Rule BTW.

There's a third version, which is not the Golden Rule, but sounds like it: "do not do to others what you would not want to be done to you."

The problem with this is that whereas the GR specifies that you have to be actively nice to people, this one does not. It just says, "Leave people alone," and if that's all you do, you've kept the rule. So people mistakenly think they're both the GR, but this one is not.

Oh, wow, you are right Sir!!!!!!!!!!!! - that concept never occured to me (I guess because i'm not that kind of person and never thought of it that way).

I stand corrected!

I thank you Sir (this forum is of value! - to me at least - every once in a while i learn to think better than before, Mr Kant, i thank you in expanding my Wisdom!

Truly Thank you Sir!

----------for anyone wandering by, read Emanual's post above WRT to his refute to my Reciprocity/Golden Rule post.

i knew i like you - wherever your reside in that secret bunker in that secret country (Canada).............i always liked you, just moreso now that you schooled me!

.

[gaffo]

I'm also not anti-religious. I have no interest in changing anyone else's beliefs (which would be impossible anyway) and I'm certainly not anyone's enemy.

my view too.

but still unclear when you say you are not a Atheist?

Religion is a very broad subject. In this article I was only addressing the silliness of it all. Here is another of my views on religion: "An Atheist's Defence of Christianity."

I'll check the link out - i guess i have too............ugh (some sort of mumbo jumbo about not being a Thiest nor Athiest at the same time?) - let the 6 beers metabolize from my liver first.

or maybe you can just tell me how you are not an Atheist, while not also a Theist, to save me the future bother to check your link tomorrow (next week) - lol.

[Immanuel Can]

i knew i like you - wherever your reside in that secret bunker in that secret country (Canada).............i always liked you, just moreso now that you schooled me!

.

Well, that's fine...I'm not trying to "school" anybody here...I've just thought carefully about this particular issue, and done quite a bit of research on it, so I feel certain of my grounds for saying what I say. On something else, you'll "school" me, eventually. And that's fine, too. As you say, the point here is to figure things out, right?

[Eodnhoj7]

You think the "coals" are literal?

No, they are metaphorical and represent shame. A person does harm to another and does harm to himself. One receives what they project. This is a loop.

A "loop"? That' seems a singularly inapt description of a situation so one-sided. The victim has a duty to "love...and do good to...and pray for" the enemy, and the enemy has no duties specified by the GR. That doesn't look like a "loop." Maybe a ➔, but there's no feedback cycle to create the loop.

The enemy assumes what the "victim" projects and responds, positively or negatively, accordingly. The response is in accords to the action, thus a loop does occur.

[RCSaunders]

I do not labor under the illusion that the majority of mankind are anything other than shallow and superstitious, wallowing in ignorance and squallor. That is the, "GREATER WHOLE," of which I wish to have not part and all your attempts to cover up their responsibility for their own wretched condition by obscuring the fact they have chosen it does not excuse or improve the odor of it.

When/where have I done that? My posts continually aim to hold people accountable for their crazy crap, and I fully agree that people are choosing what they see and think.

You haven't. I am not accusing you of that and I'm sorry I put it that way. But there is a contradiction between holding people accountable and also asserting determination. One cannot be accountable for choices and actions about which they are not free to choose. If that's not what you mean by determination, I apologize again, but then I have no idea what you mean by determination.

Perhaps your life is guided by, "limited and distorted directions." If you believe so, it probably is. But I can assure you others are living by clear principles that are limitless and distortionless and are the only means to true success and happiness in this world.

Wait a minute... you just said that the majority of mankind are "shallow and superstitious, wallowing in ignorance and squalor". How is that possible if their principles are limitless and distortionless? And no, I do not live guided by limited and distorted directions...at least not to any major degree. I am continually focused on the opposite.

The vast majority of mankind is "shallow and superstitious, wallowing in ignorance and squalor," but there is, and always has been throughout history, a small minority of individuals who live according to "principles that are limitless and distortionless," who choose to learn all they can, refusing to believe or go along with anything because it is what they were taught or is what everyone else does and believes or because some, "authority," says so, and, rejecting all shortcuts to success, they labor to achieve and be all the can be no matter the cost, guiding their lives by the principles of objective truth and reason, because it is the only life that is worth living.

But I might have been mistaken about what you meant.

I was referring to your description of the, "a GREATER WHOLE that does not function by man's limited and distorted directions," which I may also have misinterpreted. I thought you were saying the, "greater whole," does not function by man's limited and distorted direction and I may have made the wrong connection. When you wrote, "man's," I thought you are referring to mankind generally and therefore were attributing, "limited and distorted direction," to mankind in general, and when you wrote, "GREATER WHOLE," I thought that also refered to the, "whole," or, "most of," mankind as well.

Thanks for pointing out where I was mistaken, and where I wasn't, I hope my explanation helps.

[Immanuel Can]

The enemy assumes what the "victim" projects and responds, positively or negatively, accordingly. The response is in accords to the action, thus a loop does occur.

Nothing in the GR instructs the enemy as to what he is to do. There is no reciprocation, no bottom-side of the cycle, if you will, in the GR. So no "loop." And the actions of the victim are not made in any way contingent on what the perp does or does not do.

[gaffo]

i knew i like you - wherever your reside in that secret bunker in that secret country (Canada).............i always liked you, just moreso now that you schooled me!

.

Well, that's fine...

i think its Great!!!!!!!! - i love being schooled!

seriously, i just use my "horse sense" and leave my "fragile ego" out of it.

you posted wisdom, per a mentality i never thought of, and using my reason saw that you have more truth and wisdom than i did!

thanks to you i also now have your wisdom per this particular!

and i thank you Sir!

I'm not trying to "school" anybody here...I've just thought carefully about this particular issue, and done quite a bit of research on it, so I feel certain of my grounds for saying what I say.

I understand, and know you a gentleman and not an Egoist (your posts here show your character as not an egiost - though biased per Christain thinking (biased per morality is christian - instead of morality is human) - if i may say so), but i still thank you for schooling me!!!!!!!!!

lol .

On something else, you'll "school" me, eventually.

maybe, or not. you seem wise from the posts i read from you - and we hit loggerheads on the morality of all men (me) - and only christianity offers the true morality for men (you) - and it seem to me we have agreed to dissagree on this issue.

we both value wisdom, and so we are both on the same side, my we help each other in that endever (I lifetime struggle).

with no end "full 100-percent wise", just a road - with some backsliding, sadly.

And that's fine, too. As you say, the point here is to figure things out, right?

Right!