Originally posted by FMF I lost my faith and yet I still have purpose and a fulfilling life (and I have encountered many ex-believers who have had a similar life arc), so while faith can create meaning for people it is not necessarily indispensable.
Such as it is.
One wonders what it could be.
Talk to those who have experienced the reverse of your arc and ask them if it is indeed indispensible.
Originally posted by apathist Could we please talk about this. We cannot reject stuff that isn't there.
What makes you think "it isn't there"?
Yeah, I know, you feel more comfortable thinking that "it isn't there", but does that make it true?
Once you get past the "isn't there" part of it, and see that it "might" be there, can you see why you can be said to "reject" it? Some who reject it claim that they cannot reject what they do not believe (in). Having faith can be compared to having sight. Just because you cannot see something, doesn't mean it is not there. At least part of your rejection is based on your inability to "see" it.
Originally posted by FMF On this we mostly agree although I don’t think we can categorically know that people leading fulfilling lives and finding purpose through faith could not have discovered these things through their own efforts if they settle for religion and stop making "their own efforts".
"Settling for religion" certainly does NOT mean "stop making your own efforts".
Blind people can cross the street just fine. It's much, much easier and safer if they have a guide dog.
Originally posted by Suzianne What makes you think "it isn't there"?
Yeah, I know, you feel more comfortable thinking that "it isn't there", but does that make it true?
Once you get past the "isn't there" part of it, and see that it "might" be there, can you see why you can be said to "reject" it? Some who reject it claim that they cannot reject what they do not believe (in). Havin ...[text shortened]... esn't mean it is not there. At least part of your rejection is based on your inability to "see" it.
Looking for your gods, and there is nothing but nature.
Originally posted by Suzianne "Settling for religion" certainly does NOT mean "stop making your own efforts".
Yes, I understand that this would be your view. But religion serves up a package of pre-existing answers and analysis that most religionists - to varying degrees - subscribe to, internalize, and (if they proselytize) regurgitate for the benefit of others. So while subscribing and proselytizing etc. might well involve someone making their own efforts, as far as the 'finding purpose' etc. you were talking about, religion provides that and makes "making your own efforts" to find a solution to one's problems rather obsolete.
Originally posted by FMF It's still water though regardless of the specific source, isn't it?
But the source is pure. The further you get from it, the more likely you'll find contaminants.
Yes, it's still water, but would you drink it? Right. Not without boiling it first. And you can't boil out radiation. But again, yes, you're perfectly free to drink anything you want.
Originally posted by Suzianne Talk to those who have experienced the reverse of your arc and ask them if it is indeed indispensible.
Well, if they were helped by religion, and it achieved what was sought, and they then stuck with the religion and looked no further, we will never know whether it was, in fact, indispensable.
Originally posted by Suzianne Blind people can cross the street just fine. It's much, much easier and safer if they have a guide dog.
Yes, but the "guide dog" in your analogy can be any of a whole range of beliefs, religions, philosophies, perspectives, orientations, purposes and not just the religion that you happen to have ended up being an adherent of.
Originally posted by FMF Yes, I understand that this would be your view. But religion serves up a package of pre-existing answers and analysis that most religionists - to varying degrees - subscribe to, internalize, and (if they proselytize) regurgitate for the benefit of others. So while subscribing and proselytizing etc. might well involve someone making their own efforts, as far as t ...[text shortened]... s that and makes "making your own efforts" to find a solution to one's problems rather obsolete.
No religion I know of advocates that people should "stop making their own efforts" to make their lives better. Surely you understand that there are stupid people everywhere, but to blame a religion for them, or even on them, is just as stupid.
Suzianne: The further away you get from a water source, the less likely any water you find will belong to that source.
FMF: It's still water though regardless of the specific source, isn't it?
Originally posted by Suzianne But the source is pure. The further you get from it, the more likely you'll find contaminants. Yes, it's still water, but would you drink it? Right. Not without boiling it first. And you can't boil out radiation. But again, yes, you're perfectly free to drink anything you want.
I think you are now torturing your own analogy because you are subconsciously angry at how it has let you down.
Originally posted by Suzianne No religion I know of advocates that people should "stop making their own efforts" to make their lives better.
In the exchange we are having the "stop making their own efforts" thing was referring to efforts to find a solution to a set of problems ~ the best solution being, in your estimation, Christianity. It has been my experience that most people who find solace and meaning in Christianity "stop making their own efforts" to find a different set of solutions, a different religion, a different paradigm.
Originally posted by Suzianne Surely you understand that there are stupid people everywhere, but to blame a religion for them, or even on them, is just as stupid.
Please copy paste the post of mine where you think I have blamed religion for "stupid people everywhere".
Most Evolutionists have not read Origin of Species
16 Apr '17 00:26
Back to Top