Philosophy Now Forum

sthitapragya wrote:

Walker wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:
Screw the french. Where is the emperically proven evidence?

Of what?

Just what the hell are you talking about?

I think you are pretty much like krishnamurthy. you seem to have suggested that you have empirically proven evidence of the existence of God. If that is not what you meant, then I must say, well played, because that is what I understood. You are really good at this. You just said empirically proven evidence and I jumped at the bait. Well done. You got me fair and square. Walker -1, Sthit - 0.

Let's go for a bonus two, to make three.

You must read carefully if your intent is to stay within the context of a discussion and not simply propagandize. Odds are good some folks reading this will attest to the comprehension enhancement possibilities of slow reading.

The topic from which which you spun off was about your need to have someone pay attention to what you were saying, and tinnitus sort of sounds like a bee with a bell but that doesn’t do it justice either. There are explanations for tinnitus that you would not believe because the truth is not a matter of belief. The truth is a matter of knowing, which does not require belief, or choice for that matter.

Walker wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:
Let's go for a bonus two, to make three.

You must read carefully if your intent is to stay within the context of a discussion and not simply propagandize. Odds are good some folks reading this will attest to the comprehension enhancement possibilities of slow reading.

The topic from which which you spun off was about your need to have someone pay attention to what you were saying, and tinnitus sort of sounds like a bee with a bell but that doesn’t do it justice either. There are explanations for tinnitus that you would not believe because the truth is not a matter of belief. The truth is a matter of knowing, which does not require belief, or choice for that matter.

Not really. I have accepted that I am a loser good for nothing who presents himself very well. I have almost no ego. But I really do believe from the bottom of my heart that religion is the single biggest threat to the human race. It divides, and makes us weak. If we let go of the belief in God, humans might have a chance to survive. When I see how religion affects clear thinking, like the rejection of evolution or the ban on cow slaughter in India because we believe cows are our mother, or isis or the guy who killed the supporters of abortion, or the numerous "moral" issues like abstinence, or worst of all, priests who sexually abuse children,I believe we are going back to the stone age.the belief in God seems to be a pollutant and contaminant arising from ignorance. There is more harm than good from believing in God. Thanks this what I see. I might be wrong, but belief today seems to be the single biggest threat to humanity. So even as a loser I try to do my best to change the mindset. If it works, fine. If it doesn't, too bad for humanity.

Oh, and sorry for making your quote mine. I am still getting used to this tablet.

Lacewing wrote:

Nick, aren't we all typically making things up in order to say that we "know" them? And then one person denies what another has made up -- how is that wrong or blind? People don't KNOW.

When you say "blind deniers", I think you are referring to people who reject the idea of a god without giving it consideration. Is this not what you mean?

People who reject the idea of a god are simply rejecting someone else's creation/fantasy. It does not mean that they are closed to the unknown truth -- they just haven't turned it into a story, nor defined it.

Have you read Plato’s cave analogy? It describes the effects of society on human being. Blind believers and blind deniers are simply those whose egos depend on the shadows on the wall. My concern is for those who no longer need to make things up but seek to verify through personal experience the truth of the situation. Empirical evidence isn’t the point; experience is. How is it done? Maybe it is better just to make things up?

“In the Church, considered as a social organism, the mysteries inevitably degenerate into beliefs.” - Simone Weil

Religions visible in society have all degenerated in this way. What of the minority who have the need for meaning? What should Simone Weil have done at 14? Should she just invested in a box of condoms and do the fashionable thing and deny her need for meaning or try something else? What should she have done? Who could have given her a sane acceptable answer?

From a personal letter to a close friend who wanted to know her better. I think he knew she had TB at the time.

At fourteen I fell into one of those fits of bottomless despair that come with adolescence, and I seriously thought of dying because of the mediocrity of my natural faculties. The exceptional gifts of my brother, who had a childhood and youth comparable to those of Pascal, brought my own inferiority home to me. I did not mind having no visible successes, but what did grieve me was the idea of being excluded from that transcendent kingdom to which only the truly great have access and wherein truth abides. I preferred to die rather than live without that truth……………………

sthitapragya wrote:

Walker wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:
Let's go for a bonus two, to make three.

You must read carefully if your intent is to stay within the context of a discussion and not simply propagandize. Odds are good some folks reading this will attest to the comprehension enhancement possibilities of slow reading.

The topic from which which you spun off was about your need to have someone pay attention to what you were saying, and tinnitus sort of sounds like a bee with a bell but that doesn’t do it justice either. There are explanations for tinnitus that you would not believe because the truth is not a matter of belief. The truth is a matter of knowing, which does not require belief, or choice for that matter.

Not really. I have accepted that I am a loser good for nothing who presents himself very well. I have almost no ego. But I really do believe from the bottom of my heart that religion is the single biggest threat to the human race. It divides, and makes us weak. If we let go of the belief in God, humans might have a chance to survive. When I see how religion affects clear thinking, like the rejection of evolution or the ban on cow slaughter in India because we believe cows are our mother, or isis or the guy who killed the supporters of abortion, or the numerous "moral" issues like abstinence, or worst of all, priests who sexually abuse children,I believe we are going back to the stone age.the belief in God seems to be a pollutant and contaminant arising from ignorance. There is more harm than good from believing in God. Thanks this what I see. I might be wrong, but belief today seems to be the single biggest threat to humanity. So even as a loser I try to do my best to change the mindset. If it works, fine. If it doesn't, too bad for humanity.

Oh, and sorry for making your quote mine. I am still getting used to this tablet.

Three is a bit much, as are all at times I suppose. Let’s go for the symmetry of 2.

Then based solely on the phrasing of that clear statement your waters part to say get to the bottom of the Red Sea … errr … go to the bottom of belief since you are the “I” you identify as a believer. The world is in you and independent of belief though belief does exist as ignorance to obscure the world within you, as creation.

Come on now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bQnxlHZsjY

Walker wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:
Just read what you have written. My lack of belief in your belief is a derivative of your belief.therefore my lack of belief is not reality.

Tell your friends that you came up with that and then just observe how they look at you.

Do you realize a child could use the same argument against you for your lack of belief in Santa?

Funny what folks hear.

You’re big on belief and projection.

Lay a little Jiddu on you.

“Belief is a denial of truth, belief hinders truth; to believe in God is not to find God. Neither the believer nor the non-believer will find God; because reality is the unknown, and your belief or non-belief in the unknown is merely a self-projection and therefore not real.”
- J. Krishnamurti

This summarizes Nick's point about blind deniers and blind believers.

DUH, oh so very DUH.
You've missed the point entirely.
JK is drawing attention to the idiocy of belief in general. And other atheist, like JK, are way ahead of you. Atheism is about NOT accepting belief as adequate.
Read it again, and try to see the stupidity of what you are trying to say. Try real hard!!!!

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
DUH, oh so very DUH.
You've missed the point entirely.
JK is drawing attention to the idiocy of belief in general. And other atheist, like JK, are way ahead of you. Atheism is about NOT accepting belief as adequate.
Read it again, and try to see the stupidity of what you are trying to say. Try real hard!!!!

Oh my. I'm still laughing, which may cause a double post. Let's see here ...

Walker wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
DUH, oh so very DUH.
You've missed the point entirely.
JK is drawing attention to the idiocy of belief in general. And other atheist, like JK, are way ahead of you. Atheism is about NOT accepting belief as adequate.
Read it again, and try to see the stupidity of what you are trying to say. Try real hard!!!!

Oh my. I'm still laughing, which may cause a double post. Let's see here ...

What do you not understand about "Belief is a denial of truth, belief hinders truth; to believe in God is not to find God." You are laughing at yourself.

You've already declared yourself a believer.

Atheists do not believe.

sthitapragya wrote:Krishnamuthi was literally obliquely trying to say that God exists while maintaining that reality is unknown.

I thought he was smarter than that.

sthitapragya wrote:That is how these Godmen work. make grandiose statements that no one understands and get the public to give you money.

I guess I just translate it into something that has value. Maybe that comes from being bombarded with so much of it, while not prescribing to it. I still seek clarity and truth beyond man's convoluted self-indulgent fabrications.

sthitapragya wrote:just carefully read what Walker put up

Please, anything but that.

Lacewing wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:Krishnamuthi was literally obliquely trying to say that God exists while maintaining that reality is unknown.

I thought he was smarter than that.

He was smarter than that. he rejected all believe. He did not believe in God

sthitapragya wrote:That is how these Godmen work. make grandiose statements that no one understands and get the public to give you money.

I guess I just translate it into something that has value. Maybe that comes from being bombarded with so much of it, while not prescribing to it. I still seek clarity and truth beyond man's convoluted self-indulgent fabrications.

sthitapragya wrote:just carefully read what Walker put up

Please, anything but that.

Walker did not understand what he put up

In fact the quote is so good, I think I'll use it.

“Belief is a denial of truth, belief hinders truth; to believe in God is not to find God. Neither the believer nor the non-believer will find God; because reality is the unknown, and your belief or non-belief in the unknown is merely a self-projection and therefore not real.”
- J. Krishnamurti

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Walker did not understand what he put up

I didn't think so either.

The problem for Walker is that he also understands the concept of neti neti. So he knows that whatever concept of God he might conjure up, that is not God. He obviously has an opinion or concept of God in his mind, but he knows that that is not God because neti neti. Hehehe he. It is hilarious in a way, because his God is not God and will never be God. Ever. Ever. Ever. Because neti neti.

sthitapragya wrote:The problem for Walker is that he also understands the concept of neti neti. So he knows that whatever concept of God he might conjure up, that is not God. He obviously has an opinion or concept of God in his mind, but he knows that that is not God because neti neti. Hehehe he. It is hilarious in a way, because his God is not God and will never be God. Ever. Ever. Ever. Because neti neti.

It ought to be a burden carrying around all that neti neti, but I also suppose you have to recognise the burden. But as god is not what he thinks it is, then the concept of god must be very light, and only covers his eyes like a cloud.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:The problem for Walker is that he also understands the concept of neti neti. So he knows that whatever concept of God he might conjure up, that is not God. He obviously has an opinion or concept of God in his mind, but he knows that that is not God because neti neti. Hehehe he. It is hilarious in a way, because his God is not God and will never be God. Ever. Ever. Ever. Because neti neti.

It ought to be a burden carrying around all that neti neti, but I also suppose you have to recognise the burden. But as god is not what he thinks it is, then the concept of god must be very light, and only covers his eyes like a cloud.

Sometimes I think of publishing a book called "religion for dummies". A 5000 page book with a very elaborate cover but complete blank inside. Not a single word on any page. I think that would be a perfect book.

sthit wrote:

Not really. I have accepted that I am a loser good for nothing who presents himself very well. I have almost no ego. But I really do believe from the bottom of my heart that religion is the single biggest threat to the human race. It divides, and makes us weak.

This is where you make your biggest mistake. Blind belief isn't the cause of division and weakness, it is a symptom of what we ARE. Your problem is that you want to fight a symptom while ignoring the cause of why humanity as a whole so easily descends into blind belief vs blind denial. It is the biggest threat to the human race. What we ARE is a study in itself which apparently only a few free of an allegiance to blind belief and blind denial are capable of. Obviously it couldn't be done here where blind denial is dominant.