• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

religion

okay, so whats your stance on religion?, mines that following a religion is just silly, there is no god or any of that nonsense

i was raised as a catholic, and still have to go to church because if i dont my parents will kick me out
 
This made a lot of sense to me in another forum:

"I've always been convinced there are three types of people when it comes to religion/faith.

1. Those who were born into families of faith type "x" and they become more and more indoctrinated into it.

2. Those who make up their mind against or for a religion and turn everything th[ey] can into evidence regardless of context or other opinions.

3. Truth seekers."

I think you're #2 :P

*edit* though I hope you're #3
 
I was raised Catholic, went to a Catholic primary school, go to a Catholic high school, might have to go to a Catholic college(yes- they exist -.-).
I still have to go to Church 'cause the last time I told my Mum I didn't believe in God she went f*cking crazy. No joke. You should have been there. Argh.
I'm Atheist. I lack a belief in a deity due to the lack of empirical evidence. I don't deny the possibility of the existent of one, I just don't choose to believe in any of the current portrayals of one, and think the Biblical portrayal of a deity is just ridiculous, and if he did exist, I would do everything possible to get into hell just not to spend eternity with such a prick. The same for others.
I'm interested in Buddhism but I don't buy it. Royalty just don't leave lives like that.
I'm also a materialist because I find it easier to cope with life and death than dualism. When someone I knew very well died it was too hard to cope as a dualist so I started to read up on the metaphysical arguments for dualism, and the best was Rene Decartes', which, well, sucked, and the metaphysical arguments for materialism were more logical... They disproved the metaphysical arguments for dualism but not the concept(imo you can't metaphysically prove or disprove anything). So I'm a materialist now. It's easier to cope. It is a bit sad that all I think of when it comes to dead people in a rotting corpse, but I think I live life more productively as a materialist, thinking this is it, not just some test.
Stephen Fry agrees(he has an awesome accent, so yeah):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJOOx2o_PM0
EMZ=]
 
"you should have been there" ROFL

Sounds like your parents don't understand their own religion. I've always understood religion as something that can only be learned, not convinced. When I went to church, the last pastor I had made so much sense when she said that when children reach an age when they can determine what they want in a religious context, people shouldn't force their kids to attend just because they can.
 
My Mum _forced_ me to get confirmed.
That's how little she understands of the religion.
Srsly.
EMZ=/
 
The problem with 'empirical evidence' is that it can, actually, be interpreted several ways. What, then, do you mean by saying there isn't any for God? You probably mean you've not come across good enough presentations of the arguments!
 
This made a lot of sense to me in another forum:

"I've always been convinced there are three types of people when it comes to religion/faith.

1. Those who were born into families of faith type "x" and they become more and more indoctrinated into it.

2. Those who make up their mind against or for a religion and turn everything th[ey] can into evidence regardless of context or other opinions.

3. Truth seekers."

I think you're #2 :P

*edit* though I hope you're #3



gamers, i have decided to dislike the whole concept of religion as it is all based upon lies, lies which wars have been fought about and many people have died, religion set back technology hugely, it has done the world no good at all, it gives people who cant think for themselves something to follow
 
There's no evidence. There might be metaphysical arguments for the existent of a deity, but in the end of the day **** all can be proven metaphysically.
Secondary, 2000 years old sources are NOT by any means evidence. They're just claims.
"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."
- Bertrand Russell
Seriously. There's no evidence.
EMZ.
 
I guess it all depends on how you look at it. BUT, it's hard to say that religion in itself has set back technology. There is any of a million things that could have happened in between the crusades and the present day, and there has been all kinds of inventions even during times of war. It would have been just as likely to say that attacks on a civilization that advanced their technologies but not their defenses could have lost all of their written advancements due to fire and malevolence of literature and technology (which has happened before). I don't buy the lack of advancement thing at all, it would be foolish to say that any one thing could have happened barring all other possibilities. **** just doesn't roll like that, anyone that has attempted to do something intricate can tell you that.
Not to say that I agree with the Crusades, but man will do what comes in man's nature, it is ridiculous to assume otherwise.
 
The universe? You'd rather believe it spontaneously exploded out of nothing, for no reason & with no cause, that's fine. Or whatever metaphysical 'explanation' suits you. Same for chemicals spontaneously organising themselves & mysteriously becoming alive. Never mind that can't be called any sort of evolution & contradicts the 2nd law of thermodynamics!
 
I don't claim to know anything about physics, but I'd rather think that the Universe was just a spontaneous event, rather than some complete sadistic bastard created a world like this and laughs while seeing us kill each other and ****. If someone created us they created some really ****ed up thing tbh. I mean, seriously, we are _so_ flawed.
This video explains my views on the subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFQwsP0xdz8
That's just ****ed up.
And if you're a deist then I don't see what you gain? You might as well be an Atheist. It's way less depressing. Deism sucks in arguments too. There's no arguments for Deism too.
I used to be a Deist after being Agnostic and the conversion from the to Atheism... I was just happier. I was actually a bit crazy when I was a Deist.
EMZ=/
 
I guess it all depends on how you look at it. BUT, it's hard to say that religion in itself has set back technology. There is any of a million things that could have happened in between the crusades and the present day, and there has been all kinds of inventions even during times of war. It would have been just as likely to say that attacks on a civilization that advanced their technologies but not their defenses could have lost all of their written advancements due to fire and malevolence of literature and technology (which has happened before). I don't buy the lack of advancement thing at all, it would be foolish to say that any one thing could have happened barring all other possibilities. **** just doesn't roll like that, anyone that has attempted to do something intricate can tell you that.
Not to say that I agree with the Crusades, but man will do what comes in man's nature, it is ridiculous to assume otherwise.


the human race only advances technology when we are trying to kill each other
 
The universe? You'd rather believe it spontaneously exploded out of nothing, for no reason & with no cause, that's fine. Or whatever metaphysical 'explanation' suits you. Same for chemicals spontaneously organising themselves & mysteriously becoming alive. Never mind that can't be called any sort of evolution & contradicts the 2nd law of thermodynamics!


nothing happened spontaneously, it has taken millions of years of evolution to get where we are today
 
Mike, you may have just contradicted yourself. lol

How was humanity set back if the crusades were all about converting people?
 
Converting people to a different religion?
Which is debatably a flawed concept...(but if there was objective standards defining what was flawed and wasn't flawed religion would so be in the flawed part).
EMZ=]
 
Concept may be flawed based on what you believe in, but I see no reason for other things to be set back on based on belief.

Btw I'm trying my best to remain neutral in this discussion. I'm just trying to be logical.
 
Mike, you may have just contradicted yourself. lol

How was humanity set back if the crusades were all about converting people?


the crusades weren't about converting people they were about killing people, taking their land and claiming one religion was superior, hmm, somehow thinking about the crusades makes me think of what the nazis did
 
I think religion is bad, not so much because of its foundations(okay, a lot the foundations are terrible, but the New Testament isn't _so_ bad), but the people who represent it.
People claim certain beliefs have anything to do with the religion. Jesus said nothing about abortion, racism, sexism, homosexuality, witchcraft, contraceptives, pre-martial sex etc.
In a century or two the Church will stop being homophobic, like most Churches aren't racist anymore.
It's the amount of authority religion provides. It's wrong. It's ****ed up. You get people to adopt these crazy, irrational and inhumane(but not so inhumane) philosophies out of fear... It's disgusting.
I actually agree with parts of The New Testament. But you're crazy if you think Christianity is some sort of reflection of the views and philosophies Jesus was portrayed as being an advocate of in The New Testament. Christianity is one of the most ****ed up interpretations of the Bible yet.
And don't get me wrong, I'm a strong believer and advocate of moral subjectivity, but you're just messed up in the head if you think The Old Testament is in anyway ethical or some sort of reliable source.
I mean, again, don't get me wrong, there are _some_ parts I agree with, but you don't need to make out like it's some major deal and something people should use as some sort of moral guidance throughout their lives... 'cause the truth is, any idiot could have come up with the stuff I agree with in The Old Testament, not this supreme being.
If you want moral guidance and the feeling of inclusion a religion provides go with Buddhism, imo.
Christianity's just a reflection of the publics views, but perpetually a century behind. As society becomes more and more liberal Christianity will eventually become nothing. Which is a very, very good thing.
EMZ=]
EDIT: @Bruce: I said I don't know much about physics. But some magic guy who lives in the sky shouting 'let there be light!', 'let there be life!' etc. just doesn't cut it. I mean, if you're _so_ scared of death you'd actually buy THAT explanation... well... I just feel sorry for you. Any explanation physicists can provide is superior to that.
And the truth is, why do we need to know that anyway? Will we live life any better knowing that we do have meaning? Will we hell. And what exactly is meaning anyway? Being a part of some superior being's project? I mean. It's all relative. If there is a superior being, we're still nothing compared to him.
Us being a spontaneous occurrence, upon further observation, is far less depressing than there being a deistic deity.
 
I know that I do live better for believing in God than I did while an atheist. That don't prove anything, of course. The Bible do say don't murder, so anybody doing that isn't doing what it say. Then, for abortion, where the mother's life not in danger, it's murder of the baby! It's all in how it's phrased. I wasn't afraid of death, thanks. The idea of my life just ending isn't scary, to me. There are arguments for why God, as an intelligent creator, is the best explanation. For there being a universe & life, etc.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom