• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.

Cog's Case Against Religion

onesteptwostep

Think.. Be... ..buzz buzz :)
Local time
Today, 10:14
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
2,801
Kant really is the cure to people who can only understand the world in an empiricist manner.
How's that? Wasn't it the whole point of the Critique that reasoning not grounded in empirical experience is meaningless?
Not sure about that, but the entirity of Kant was a reaction towards the radical skeptism that was brought on from empirists like Hume.
 

onesteptwostep

Think.. Be... ..buzz buzz :)
Local time
Today, 10:14
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
2,801
He wore some Sikh-like hat though, that's all I remember about him.



lol he kinda looks like Sam Smith if you look a bit closer
 

Cognisant

Condescending Bastard
Local time
Yesterday, 14:14
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
7,842
330px-Painting_of_David_Hume.jpg


XD
 

The Grey Man

Active Member
Local time
Yesterday, 20:14
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
418
Location
Canada
Hume was certainly a much better writer than Kant. Reading the Critique of Pure Reason is, for the most part, a chore, and understanding it entirely is virtually impossible without the assistance of other philosophers. Hume's works, by contrast, demonstrate his mastery of English prose, and he deserves to be counted among the first rank of British thinkers for his penetrating skepticism. Still, Kant outdid Hume in reconciling empiricism and rationalism by arguing the apriority of the faculty of the synthesis of the raw data furnished by the senses in time and space (and, negatively, by denying that time and space necessarily exist except as the condition of possibility of this synthesis), and is probably the most original philosopher the West has yet produced.

2jvzcd.jpg


Again, I will have more to say about this intellectual badass in my next thread, which I will post soonish.
 
Local time
Today, 03:14
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
96
well if you're working assumption is that it's a "lie" then there's little to discuss with you cause such a jarring level of cognitive dissonance isn't something one becomes accustomed to in a hurry.
why would physical science provide evidence for that which is beyond the physical that we know of? makes no sense to me but the church of atheism and anti-theism seem to believe this illogical logic they've provided.
heavens forbid one mentions that universal creation stories from the ancient scriptures have already been proven to be true by WMAP.

cases against religion can't be taken seriously at all btw, you have the law because of religion and without that you don't get to a point where you are typing out whatever response you may type out to this.
heck you might be robbed while reading this in a world without religion cause i can't see how you would justify anyone following the law without religion.

you might follow it, i might follow it, why would "they" follow it if following it doesn't do them any good and there's no "god" to make it all better?
granted my reasoning at the end here is lazy but the atheists and anti-theists have to recognise that you are dealing with the full bell curve of society, without a fundamental force at the base of society which serves to equalise everyone (because genetics literally renders us different) what fundamental force would you replace "god" with.

and dont say you would replace it with "truth" because you don't actually know what the truth is. you're just flesh and bone man without any divine truths delivered from up high that resonate with the collective and you will struggle to find any worthwhile reason to tell the "truth" because everyone believes satan can be tamed while jesus is forgotten about.
 

Cognisant

Condescending Bastard
Local time
Yesterday, 14:14
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
7,842
cases against religion can't be taken seriously at all btw, you have the law because of religion and without that you don't get to a point where you are typing out whatever response you may type out to this.
Is that a death threat?

heck you might be robbed while reading this in a world without religion cause i can't see how you would justify anyone following the law without religion.
I don't fear eternal damnation and yet I'm a lawful citizen, your point seems to be that you don't break the law because you do fear eternal damnation, does this mean that without the threat of eternal damnation you wouldn't be a law abiding citizen?

Indeed we're not really talking about the laws of man are we? Man's law doesn't dictate god's law, correct me if I'm wrong but there's nothing in the Bible to say not paying your taxes is a sin. I think what we're really talking about is morality, that you're saying the legal system was built on a foundation of morality established by religion, does that mean that without the threat of eternal damnation you wouldn't be a moral person?

Why is it that I can be a moral personal without the threat of eternal damnation when you can't, is there something inherently moral about me, is there something inherently wrong with you? Are you a bad person?
 
Local time
Today, 03:14
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
3,728
cases against religion can't be taken seriously at all btw, you have the law because of religion and without that you don't get to a point where you are typing out whatever response you may type out to this.
heck you might be robbed while reading this in a world without religion cause i can't see how you would justify anyone following the law without religion.
What? You can totally make a value system based on human values. If we say empathy and respect for other people should be core values, we can make values and laws based on that. We don't need religion to tell us that being robbed is really shitty and that we don't want that to happen to ourselves or other people. Even if you're just protecting your own ass, you'd still want robbery to be against the law.

Even wolves has rules in their pack, and they certainly aint religious.
 
Local time
Today, 03:14
Joined
Sep 11, 2016
Messages
473
heavens forbid one mentions that universal creation stories from the ancient scriptures have already been proven to be true by WMAP.
ok i'm baited. sources?
could you quote where on NASA site is mentioned that WMAP mission proved ancient scriptrures?
Or is it some interpretation? Who, where, what why?
 

Serac

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 02:14
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
1,485
Location
Stockholm
you might follow it, i might follow it, why would "they" follow it if following it doesn't do them any good and there's no "god" to make it all better?
granted my reasoning at the end here is lazy but the atheists and anti-theists have to recognise that you are dealing with the full bell curve of society, without a fundamental force at the base of society which serves to equalise everyone (because genetics literally renders us different) what fundamental force would you replace "god" with.

and dont say you would replace it with "truth" because you don't actually know what the truth is. you're just flesh and bone man without any divine truths delivered from up high that resonate with the collective and you will struggle to find any worthwhile reason to tell the "truth" because everyone believes satan can be tamed while jesus is forgotten about.
So basically, we have to instate a religious ruling class which decides for the population what everyone should believe in, regardless of the epistemic status of that belief? Just for the sake of keeping people under control? We had that shit before, in the middle ages. Needless to say, that sucked big time (except for the religious authorities, naturally).
 

Animekitty

(ISFP)-(E)(N)(T)(P)
Local time
Yesterday, 19:14
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
5,773
Location
subjective
biologically we are genetically disposed to group dynamics.

we follow the law because cooperation is the best strategy for survival

everyone is socially conditioned from birth to want to be accepted by the tribe

npc characters / sheep / the masses always follow the herd lol
 
Local time
Today, 03:14
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
96
So basically, we have to instate a religious ruling class which decides for the population what everyone should believe in, regardless of the epistemic status of that belief? Just for the sake of keeping people under control? We had that shit before, in the middle ages. Needless to say, that sucked big time (except for the religious authorities, naturally).
you are living under this state of control right now, very literally, you might have some complaints about it but you aren't flipping the table over and resetting the game are you?
ergo it must be doing more right than wrong.
a lot more right than wrong to be precise.
and we amend it as we go generally speaking, you do this with the law in reality but people tend to ignore why the law is actually functional at a fundamental level.
this is why the leader of the freeworld is sworn in using a bible, god, whatever that is, will level the scales if you so choose to imbalance them.

the cases against religion, in their entirety, tend to rely on the phenomenon known as "complexity" and how this relates to human motivations, albeit ignoring the "human" aspect of this in favor of arguments that suit a purpose or narrative instead of simply being observations.
there are plenty of bad examples that can be brought up for non-religious systems and the horrors there are likely scarier than what happens when religion goes wrong, as we're seeing now with the popular narratives running the airwaves and ethernet cables with lightweight horrors and half a billion dollars worth of propaganda.

alternatively people want to attack the concept of "god" but how can this be done when an understanding of the concept hasn't even been grasped yet, seems silly to me when people attempt to limit the limitless with limitation so as to lift the self imposed limitations on their own realities.
it's funny cause reality literally mimics this idea, look at sports, without limitations on what the field of play is and what is permitted in the field of play there is no game.
heck not even just the sports, the amoebas and atoms do this too, the universe itself is an example of this and it's all simply mirrored in everything else, religion simply seeks to communicate the rules of the game to whomsoever is inquiring.
yes there are different interpretations of how the game works but those difference are minimal and generally only serve to influence mating decisions...but i digress.

it is also problematic when an "equalizer" is not suggested but the current one is being attacked by thoughtless arguments in a thoughtless era and good rebuttals that are more scientifically considered aren't held in high esteem by the new age church of atheism.
my cynicism is likely showing.

but i digress, not all "believers" are the same and that's where narrative comes in to fill the gaps.
it doesn't matter if the lower half of the bell curve can't elucidate to you what god is or how the metaphysical landscape is setup so long as it get's them to follow the rules of the game in a productive manner.
in the best case scenario they don't even know it's a game.
 

Serac

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 02:14
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
1,485
Location
Stockholm
people tend to ignore why the law is actually functional at a fundamental level.
this is why the leader of the freeworld is sworn in using a bible, god, whatever that is, will level the scales if you so choose to imbalance them.
so you mean the bible is the reason the law works, or...? What about secular countries like sweden?
it is also problematic when an "equalizer" is not suggested but the current one is being attacked by thoughtless arguments in a thoughtless era and good rebuttals that are more scientifically considered aren't held in high esteem by the new age church of atheism.
my cynicism is likely showing.
well we had this thing called the enlightement a couple of centuries ago. That's what our laws and morality are currently based on. This new wave of atheism has had next to zero effect on our morality and laws – it's just a bunch of people on youtube talking.
but i digress, not all "believers" are the same and that's where narrative comes in to fill the gaps.
it doesn't matter if the lower half of the bell curve can't elucidate to you what god is or how the metaphysical landscape is setup so long as it get's them to follow the rules of the game in a productive manner.
in the best case scenario they don't even know it's a game.
so I guess it would be a fair assumption to say that you put religion in the same epistemic status as any metaphysical narrative – spaghetti monster or whatever – but see it as a useful tool for keeping the sub-100 IQ population in check?
 

onesteptwostep

Think.. Be... ..buzz buzz :)
Local time
Today, 10:14
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
2,801
Is Sweden really that secular in its political circles however? I imagine the political elite being religious. I'm really curious about the religiosity of Nordic countries tbh, that's where the Reformed tradition stemmed from (John Calvin, Netherlands etc).
 
Local time
Today, 03:14
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
96
so I guess it would be a fair assumption to say that you put religion in the same epistemic status as any metaphysical narrative – spaghetti monster or whatever – but see it as a useful tool for keeping the sub-100 IQ population in check?
yes secular countries that have strong mythological underpinings to their cultures.
it's the same thing just dressed up differently but people would rather pretend to be smart about observations than actually be smart about them.

spaghetti monster idea is terrible btw, patently terrible, i don't know why people want to keep on using it as an example when it's so terribly terrible that there's no other way to state how terrible it is aside from noting how terrible it is.
god is anthropomorphised because it makes it communicable to "the people", it doesn't help saying god is infinite energy across infinte time in infinite spaces and all that that entails in tandem with consciousness and balance and possibility vs impossibility and going about explaining these concepts in a manner that can be grasped by the majority and in a manner that applies to them as an individual.
all you'll end up doing is defaulting to the stories that have worked, perhaps we dress them up differently for your delectation. don't like the bible? don't worry you can watch the avengers and get the same thing.
don't like the quran? go read the bill of rights.
some might disagree on the latter but language of consumption makes a big difference, as does actual consumption of information.

a note on epistemology and the holy scriptures and metaphysics.
all these scriptures are doing is mapping out the metaphysical, this is why scientology can exist with a bevy of fiction as it's scripture because the metaphysics has been mapped out well enough to be useful to somebody, perhaps not you or me but somebody.
the religious aspects of anything will be present in how society is structured, people follow that structure not because you come out the womb ready to follow it but because it's better than being wild and aimless and living only by instinct and not knowing what the rules of the game are.
you know it
i know it
your belief system, as it were, is just a strategy for survival. none is inherently right or wrong over another or else you wouldn't have made it to the 21st century.
like i scratched out it's simply a tool for mating choice, a very powerful one and it is certainly not one people should be discarding as casually as they have been cause there's little else other than strong fiction, history and culture that keeps this game called society going.
i would posit that this is why we're seeing an increase in the mainstream coverage of unsuccessful mating strategies but that might offend someone.
 

Serac

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 02:14
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
1,485
Location
Stockholm
Is Sweden really that secular in its political circles however? I imagine the political elite being religious. I'm really curious about the religiosity of Nordic countries tbh, that's where the Reformed tradition stemmed from (John Calvin, Netherlands etc).
I cannot speak for the personal beliefs of politicians, but on paper, there's only one party that has anything to do with religion there, Christian Democrats, who have about 5% of the votes. Other than that it's comprised of a large part leftist-liberals (who obviously hate anything to do with chritianity), and right-center parties with more libertarian views – lower taxes etc. Virtually all politics in sweden revolves around economy and immigration. Religious narratives are virtually absent from the whole scene.

As a fun fact, the whole political structure in sweden pretty much imploded following the recent election, due to the emergence of the anti-immigration party Sweden Democrats (incidentally with Christian Democrats being the only party who don't consider them "nazis").
 

onesteptwostep

Think.. Be... ..buzz buzz :)
Local time
Today, 10:14
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
2,801
Ouch, sorry to hear that. Are the conservatives getting pushed out? That's usually bad news for a nation, especially if the country has a long history. Also I'm just curious, how relevant is the monarchy there? Does the PM have to report to the king and so forth?

Also I'm just curious as to why a nation of 5 mil can't handle that immigration problem. Korea's been extremely vigilant about our immigration so we hardly let anyone in lol. We've only allowed people to live on Jeju Island which is like 50 km off the southern coast or something.
 

Serac

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 02:14
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
1,485
Location
Stockholm
yes secular countries that have strong mythological underpinings to their cultures.
it's the same thing just dressed up differently but people would rather pretend to be smart about observations that actually be smart about them.
once again, I think your view of history seems to be that we went from the middle ages straight into the youtube-atheist era. You're missing a 300-year period of development of largely anti-religious, secular values.
 

Serac

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 02:14
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
1,485
Location
Stockholm
Ouch, sorry to hear that. Are the conservatives getting pushed out? That's usually bad news for a nation, especially if the country has a long history. Also I'm just curious, how relevant is the monarchy there? Does the PM have to report to the king and so forth?
all parties except Christian Democrats are indeed desperately trying to prevent the anti-immigration party from gettin any influence, which is what caused the chaos we're currently in. The Sweden Democrats are big enough to sort keep their hand on the scales and prevent any coalition from taking power without cooperating with them, yet no one wants to cooperate with them, so it's a complete deadlock situation.

The PM has to report to the king, yes, but it's pretty much just a token monarchy without any real influence on politics.
Also I'm just curious as to why a nation of 5 mil can't handle that immigration problem. Korea's been extremely vigilant about our immigration so we hardly let anyone in lol. We've only allowed people to live on Jeju Island which is like 50 km off the southern coast or something.
sweden has been ruled by leftist-liberals for the past century, and that ideology is extremely pervasive in the country (or has been, until this year's election). This election outcome was the worst outcome for the leftist-liberals in the past century, so in that sense, things are improving.
 
Local time
Today, 03:14
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
96
yes secular countries that have strong mythological underpinings to their cultures.
it's the same thing just dressed up differently but people would rather pretend to be smart about observations that actually be smart about them.
once again, I think your view of history seems to be that we went from the middle ages straight into the youtube-atheist era. You're missing a 300-year period of development of largely anti-religious, secular values.
yes the culture ebbs and flows between order and chaos.
when there is strong religious value you are in a period of order because the inherent structure that has been decided upon is rigid in order to accomplish a purpose.
likewise when there is loose religious value and a pining for materialism you are in a period of chaos where you can expect to see massive technological developments but can expect the social fabric of society to crumble.
religious values are any values that benefit everyone but you btw.

in times of war you have chaos being generated in order to perpetuate order or encourage order. massive tech developments with a strong social fabric loosely held together by what actually matters, but we aren't there so who knows what actually matters.

i mean...mentioning history is odd, is religious history all bloodshed and violence?
best we not mistake that with human history to be sure.
 

onesteptwostep

Think.. Be... ..buzz buzz :)
Local time
Today, 10:14
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
2,801
To be fair secularism really did take over the religious order, as in the hegemony of the religious order died with the rise of the Enlightenment. But we aren't really in an era of the Enlightenment either- after the Enlightenment we had the Romanticist era where liberal Christianity was flourishing (but then declining again) then the World Wars happened. The predicament we are in now with the mess that is religious pluralism, or basically the reign of postmodernism is the point in time we're in now.

Talking about the world in a political manner, we had a narrative up until Bush (War on Terror) but after him we went into a phase of pragmatism with Obama where there was no narrative (postmodernism) then back to this neo-fake-news-narrative with this Trump era. Dunno how much of this is any use since I'm pulling it out of my ass, but take it as you will.
 
Local time
Today, 03:14
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
96
To be fair secularism really did take over the religious order, as in the hegemony of the religious order died with the rise of the Enlightenment. But we aren't really in an era of the Enlightenment either- after the Enlightenment we had the Romanticist era where liberal Christianity was flourishing (but then declining again) then the World Wars happened. The predicament we are in now with the mess that is religious pluralism, or basically the reign of postmodernism is the point in time we're in now.

Talking about the world in a political manner, we had a narrative up until Bush (War on Terror) but after him we went into a phase of pragmatism with Obama where there was no narrative (postmodernism) then back to this neo-fake-news-narrative with this Trump era. Dunno how much of this is any use since I'm pulling it out of my ass, but take it as you will.
yes
we are in a period of materialism, though perhaps thelema is more accurate, where old ideas of order are being tested because there are all these churches and they all have their own gods so eventually the gods will go to war.
if we're smart about it it can all be done with speech, but then that actually requires unbiased reporting which is where the fake news thing comes in.
the narrative under obama, by my estimation, was humanitarianism. obamacare never goes through in any form with pragmatism being the order of the day.
likewise the pointless visits to africa.
 
Top Bottom