Religion

[Roses]

I certainly did not mean to suggest that war was acceptable, let alone genocide.

What people see as acceptable is directed by population and resource issues though. Hence the "othering" prior to war, genocide and acts of terrorism.

'Othering', what  do you mean by that?

[Nearly Sane]

'Othering', what  do you mean by that?

https://www.wordnik.com/words/othering

[ippy]

Hi everyone,

Most of the people here seem to think of religion as just a meaningless faith in a God up there somewhere. Also, the word 'religion' immediately seems to conjure up images of killings, terrorism, crusades, witches burnt at the sake...and so on. This is wrong.

Religions need not necessarily be about a God up there. Maybe the Abrahamic religions do emphasize this image but even they do talk of a God within. Indian religions emphasize bringing out the God within. For this, many paths are prescribed one of which is praying to external images of deities, temple rituals etc.

Secondly, all religions do not go to war all the time or keep fighting among themselves or other religions. Islam admittedly has a bad track record, but even there most Muslims are peace loving, pious people.

It is surprising that many people, especially those trained in science, have a blind spot when it comes to religion.  They just cannot or don't want to see the positives. The discipline, the self control, the compassion, the altruism, family values, humility, brotherhood and other positive features that religions have not only taught but have also enforced among the people for centuries.

This kind of an extreme and knee jerk reaction towards religions has to go!

It is a faith in God and in after-life that keeps the Ego in check. Once the Ego is controlled, wisdom and self control automatically arise. That is the point of faith.

Cheers.

Sriram

Sriram you say: Most of the people here seem to think of religion as just a meaningless faith in a God up there somewhere.

I just think of individuals that have religious beliefs as poor victims that have been indoctrinated to think they've got an invisible friend; to me this is rather sad and a total waste of time.

I manage to live a reasonably moral and ethical life as so many of us do without spending time thinking of some sort of spy in the sky scanning my most intimate thoughts and recording my daily deeds, nobody needs this god thing of yours you refer to, to enhance their lives.

Try forgetting all about these godly thoughts of yours, say for a couple of week I'll take a bet it'll not make the slightest difference to your experience of your daily life and then gradually increase the time span and before you know it you'll be able enjoy your life even more than you did in the past and you'll put it behind you, for good if you're lucky.

Regards ippy.

[Sriram]

Hi ippy,

Spirituality  is not so much about 'someone up there' as 'something within us'.  It is really about understanding our own unconscious mind. When I say 'understanding' I mean it in a subjective and personal manner rather than in an objective, third person manner.

And that is not as simple as you might think.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20160315-the-enormous-power-of-the-unconscious-brain

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2019/01/13/the-unconscious-mind/

Cheers.

Sriram

[ippy]

Hi ippy,

Spirituality  is not so much about 'someone up there' as 'something within us'.  It is really about understanding our own unconscious mind. When I say 'understanding' I mean it in a subjective and personal manner rather than in an objective, third person manner.

And that is not as simple as you might think.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20160315-the-enormous-power-of-the-unconscious-brain

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2019/01/13/the-unconscious-mind/

Cheers.

Sriram

Nor as complicated as you seem to think, or woo factorish.

Cheers, ippy

[Sriram]

I expected that!       Every discussion is either a vicious argument or a dead end. No wonder there is no activity on this board! 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

I expected that!       Every discussion is either a vicious argument or a dead end. No wonder there is no activity on this board!

That's not fair. Your posts often contain mistakes in reasoning, others point them out in the hope of a conversation about ideas and you run away. Why not instead own the things you say by dealing with the comments they elicit?   

[Walter]

I expected that!       Every discussion is either a vicious argument or a dead end. No wonder there is no activity on this board!

I'm sure you are a nice chap and all that but all you do is assert stuff and unless you get agreement you become petulant and defensive . Plus you keep repeating stuff even though it has been demonstrated to be wrong or miss informed or wooly thinking .

[jeremyp]

I expected that!       Every discussion is either a vicious argument or a dead end. No wonder there is no activity on this board!

There's plenty of activity on this board. How much do you need?

[Enki]

Perhaps he means activity from anyone who is inclined towards his point of view! Just a thought!!

[Sriram]

Nor as complicated as you seem to think, or woo factorish.

Cheers, ippy

The unconscious mind is not 'woo'.

[Walter]

The unconscious mind is not 'woo'.

i agree

the 'woo' is your interpretation and understanding of it though

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

The unconscious mind is not 'woo'.

No-one says it is. The woo is the content-less vagaries you assert about it. 

[Sriram]

Why?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Why?

Why are your content-less vagaries woo? It's because they're undefined, unsubstantiated and non-investigable. They're just white noise and so fail at the first hurdles as philosophy, as science or as anything else.   

[Sriram]

You find what Eagleman says in the BBC article also the same?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

You find what Eagleman says in the BBC article also the same?

What article?

The David Eagleman I have read isn't the same as your efforts at all though - he uses the findings of science and reason to make his points; you just assert platitudes and expect people to take your unfathomable statements seriously.   

[Sriram]

Oh...forget it!  Thanks! 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Oh...forget it!  Thanks!

And off you run again. Why not for once be honest with yourself and instead say something like, "OK, let's take one of the ideas I've asserted to be true and we'll examine it together to see whether it withstands scrutiny"?

What are you so frightened of?

[ippy]

Oh...forget it!  Thanks!

You're not going to get away with your assertive pronouncements, I'm going to keep on at you Sriram with my unconscious mind 24/7, so there!!

Cheers ippy

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

A quote from Richard Feynman that would he helpful to you if only you'd allow it to be:

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."

[Walter]

Oh...forget it!  Thanks!

Sriram ,
as blue says, please don't run off . I too would like to understand  you and why you think as you do but be prepared for serious investigation . I for one will not simply accept assertions , maybe where you come from millions of people do without question . and you are not used to that .
I don't know but lets find out eh .

[Sriram]

No...guys!  There is nothing to discuss.  It is about attitude and perception, not about information.   If you keep looking at the stars through a microscope...what can I do?! You see what you see! No discussion can change that.

Thanks anyway!   

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

No...guy!  There is nothing to discuss.  It is about attitude and perception, not about information.

No it isn't. Your various assertions are claims of information, only when you're asked why you believe them to be true you typically try some logically false arguments and then run away. Are your ideas really so fragile that you cannot risk their examination?   

If you keep looking at the stars through a microscope...what can I do?! You see what you see! No discussion can change that.

No-one does that. Your problem though is that your "stars" are just assertions, and the only telescope we can bring to examine them is reason. If you think them to be true despite collapsing when reason is brought to bear, propose a different tool instead.     

Thanks anyway!   

You won't understand this, but the thanks are deserved - it's just a pity you won't allow yourself to see why.   

[Sriram]

I have pointed out many times about the stubborn blind man and his argument about Light. It is the same here.

Sorry....but nothing can be done. Faculties and the mind don't open up due to arguments.   

Try reading the thread on Panpsychism again....!