You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 09, 2016, 07:19:16 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Bwa hahahahha  (Read 4548 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #25 on: July 16, 2013, 04:14:17 PM »
The parochial school system for my state is quite advanced and is probably one of the strongest in the United States.  So I have seen the curriculum for a great many religious schools from the Catholic tradition and I would say the vast majority of them do advocate questioning and learning.  At my school one of the nuns was fond of saying that a true believer is one that questions and then believes, rather than believes without question.  I do think the unfortunate public face of religion has always been the “die hards” and the “screaming radicals.” 

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #26 on: July 16, 2013, 04:19:36 PM »
The use of story-telling to convey moral lessons isn't restricted to religion.  Crack open a copy of Grimm's (original and unsanitized if possible) if you doubt that.  The fact is that people are more apt to sit and listen to (or read) a work of fiction than a list of rules for proper behavior - as a result, stories showing bad consequences for bad decisions work better than simply telling them that those decisions are bad.

'Show, don't tell' is one of the first tips you hear for effective writing.  More people are likely to remember the story of the Good Samaritan (even if they have no clue what the significance of a 'Samaritan' is) than they are to remember which animals are permitted for consumption (Lev. 11)

Offline SakamotoHD

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #27 on: July 16, 2013, 04:24:21 PM »
No Religion has a monopoly on morality. There isn't a single lesson of right and wrong that can only be achieved through Faith. Better it be honestly taught without baggage. Be good for the betterment of yourself and those around you, not because of a fairy tale or a promised afterlife.

To quote another spirtualist.

"By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest." Confucius

By imitating what the bible claims is to be good, or by imitating the ten commandments (Which are, in essence, ten life lessons on how to not be a huge asshole), You may become a good person. That is, by defintion, a lesson of right and wrong that can be be achieved, using only faith.

But as with the other two methods, it certainly is not the only method by which we might learn what is moral. No religion, no group of people, and most definitely, no man may lay claim to what is moral and right in this world. Man by our inherent nature is flawed. That is what makes us so awesome, because we are open to interpretation. Thus, we are free to make our own choices.

If I saw any wisdom at all in diluting and muddling moral lessons, then I'd respect it.


Then you are not actually looking at religion, just the extremists  . Christianity, is not muddling moral lessons. Teaching someone how to be a kind and compassionate person, by my own faith, cannot be wrong. Ignore Leviticus, ignore whatever "stoning" or "anti-gay" sentiments that you believe the religion is teaching. It's not what being a decent human being is. Tolerance, is one of the primary beliefs in faith. Just faith. Christianty, as with any religion, is the examination of oneself and the betterment of human society.

However, like I said before.. Humanity is, by nature, flawed. We are not perfect. We fall, and we stumble. We will always fall down. We will always get back up too. So there's nothing wrong in following the teaches.

SakamotoHD -> Summed up my views neatly. I am a semi practicing Catholic my kids actually take it more serious than I do even if I graduated from Catholic high school. *shrugs* reasonable framework for life as one can find in many religions. But like me and the little woman tell our kids "god gave you a brain use it do not just blindly follow."

Yea see.. I went from 5th grade, catholic elementary school, to this "advanced academic school" that took place RIGHT in the most ghetto place in the city. Had a ton of kids slugging me in the face for "looking nerdy" cause I dressed preppy. It was just.. what I wore. I didn't know any better. It wasn't until 7th grade that I actually started becoming my own person. I wore more casual clothing.. But understand I was made to dress in a uniform since I was 3 years old. S'not really my fault. But yea I went from a private catholic school, to the ghettos. The scenario was incredibly jarring. I'd like to think it softened the edges I had about the world, and frankly, I was scared of what I might have turned into if I stayed all the way through to catholic highschool (which was where I was going to go if I hadn't been considered 'smart' by some piece of paper). I see what alot of my old friends that went through catholic highschool became. Their introduction to the "real harsh world" has really taken it's toll on them. I'm lucky that the shock settled in far earlier.

So yea, as a result, I use both my logic, and my faith to figure things out.

Offline Retribution

  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: First star to the right straight on till morning
  • Gender: Male
  • When I'm good I'm good when I'm bad I'm better
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #28 on: July 16, 2013, 04:38:28 PM »
SakamotoHD -> I had actually the opposite path. Public schools till high school and I was from a rural area sent into urban schools. Then toss in a side of there were issues with the schools at the time due to implementation of busing. It was a bad scene I talk with a funny accent by urban standards and I until age 11 I was an only child. I think get tough or die is how they describe such things lol. It all came to a head 33 years ago when I took a razor blade down the leg while sitting on the bus. The fellow who did it should have cut my throat because he was not feeling too well when I got done with him. Long story short my parents said -enough- and sent me to Catholic school and I had more culture shock!

Long story short I ended up a lot like you. I like to refer to myself as a social chameleon.

Offline SakamotoHD

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #29 on: July 16, 2013, 04:42:45 PM »
Long story short I ended up a lot like you. I like to refer to myself as a social chameleon.

Ha! that's awesome. I'd imagine myself similar had I gone from one spectrum to the other. Funny how we met in the middle. Yea I tend to do what the other people like. Cause I'm open to trying new things. I've never been to a music festival, or a concert, cause the crowds I ran with didn't do that.

But if I met people that said "Hey let's go to one" I'd sign up. It's all about what they are into. Cause I can just as easily get into anything if I find the appeal in it.

Offline Sabby

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2013, 04:48:16 PM »
So yea, as a result, I use both my logic, and my faith to figure things out.

I don't believe you do at all. You use your logic to figure the world out. You just like your faith. It can't serve you in the way you claim it does. To reason out a conclusion and to have faith in a conclusion are night and day, so you can't lump them together in that way, as good as doing so makes you feel.

Quote
Then you are not actually looking at religion, just the extremists  . Christianity, is not muddling moral lessons. Teaching someone how to be a kind and compassionate person, by my own faith, cannot be wrong.

This is the part people keep forgetting to answer. What does faith have to do with being a good person? You clearly value your faith, and that's fine, but this is the second time I'm going ask for the relationship between morality and faith to be demonstrated. You can attribute one to the other all you like, but that doesn't show to my satisfaction you actually derived one from the other.

As for the 'that's just the extremists' stance, I'll never understand it. They seem to be the more religious, where as good, thinking Christians tend to rid themselves of so much of their Religion it ceases being a factor. They just do as good people do but pay lip service here and there so they can continue to feel like a Christian, as they we're brought up to.

The parochial school system for my state is quite advanced and is probably one of the strongest in the United States.  So I have seen the curriculum for a great many religious schools from the Catholic tradition and I would say the vast majority of them do advocate questioning and learning.  At my school one of the nuns was fond of saying that a true believer is one that questions and then believes, rather than believes without question.  I do think the unfortunate public face of religion has always been the “die hards” and the “screaming radicals.” 

So, private schools provide better teaching then public schools? Already knew what. Seems the only response I ever get to 'what is the value of religious lessons' is 'Look! This is a good school, and they believe'. You've only demonstrated that solid education and religious upbringing can exist side by side, not that one is derived from the other.

Offline SakamotoHD

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #31 on: July 16, 2013, 05:02:31 PM »
Then we are at an impasse sabby, and nothing I can say, or do, will change your opinion, because, as you say, it's grounded in logic. I'm fine with that.

Though if you want an answer, I'll say this.

Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (or right) and those that are "bad" (or wrong). The philosophy of morality is ethics

Given this defintion, which is also an act of belief. I can easily tell you that Morality is the belief that an action we perform, is right or wrong. Morality is Belief. And Belief is Faith.

If anything I've convinced myself of this. I'm glad I got the chance to speak with you and argue my point. I will say no more on this subject though.

« Last Edit: July 16, 2013, 05:03:47 PM by SakamotoHD »

Offline Sabby

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #32 on: July 16, 2013, 05:08:42 PM »
If we're really going to go down the whole 'faith and belief are the same thing' route, then I'm done here. I'd really rather not entertain Apologetics.

I'll just say to the opening poster, you did get a chuckle out of me xD thanks.

Offline Cyrano Johnson

  • Lord
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2012
  • Location: The Occidental Wilds of the Realm of Canadia.
  • Gender: Male
  • "Do what thou wilt" shall be the whole of the law.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #33 on: July 16, 2013, 05:09:06 PM »
To reason out a conclusion and to have faith in a conclusion are night and day

I wish would-be freethinkers would stop saying this, as it is factually just utterly wrong. Reason and faith are not opposites; the latter can and historically has been a handmaiden of the former, that's how science emerged from religious philosophy in the first place. (Some of us have had this discussion before on the Elliquian Atheists thread, I believe.)

Offline Sabby

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #34 on: July 16, 2013, 05:13:45 PM »
Reason and faith are not opposites;

the latter can and historically has been a handmaiden of the former

And why does the second quote nullify the first? I don't see your reasoning.

Offline Cyrano Johnson

  • Lord
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2012
  • Location: The Occidental Wilds of the Realm of Canadia.
  • Gender: Male
  • "Do what thou wilt" shall be the whole of the law.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #35 on: July 16, 2013, 05:16:31 PM »
I don't see your reasoning.

Faith can motivate someone to reason out a conclusion; having reasoned out a conclusion can increase faith in that conclusion. Stating that faith and reasoning are mutually exclusive is nonsensical. (What you may be getting at is that blind faith is inimical to reasoning, which if so would be correct... if one accepts that all faith is necessarily blind and unreasoning. But one does not need to accept it, and it is not true of all religious faith.)

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #36 on: July 16, 2013, 05:17:18 PM »
Sabby, your use of the phrase Apologetics is paramount to belittling and name calling.  A seriously immature and pathetic way to finish or have an adult conversation.

Offline Sabby

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #37 on: July 16, 2013, 05:33:21 PM »
Faith can motivate someone to reason out a conclusion; having reasoned out a conclusion can increase faith in that conclusion. Stating that faith and reasoning are mutually exclusive is nonsensical. (What you may be getting at is that blind faith is inimical to reasoning, which if so would be correct... if one accepts that all faith is necessarily blind and unreasoning. But one does not need to accept it, and it is not true of all religious faith.)

Ah, there's the confusion then >.< Faith and belief are different things to me. Belief is justifiable, where as faith is blind. That's how I differentiate the two. Probably should have been clearer on that :/ apologies.

Sabby, your use of the phrase Apologetics is paramount to belittling and name calling.  A seriously immature and pathetic way to finish or have an adult conversation.

You value Apologetics. I don't. Our stances have been made clear on that multiple times. But I hardly think disliking Apologetics is bullying :/ That's a tad dramatic.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #38 on: July 16, 2013, 05:56:23 PM »
Your use of the phrase is in a manner consistent with bullying.  You use the word apologetic to dismiss the arguments of another and make generalizations about a group of arguments that you disagree about.  Then you attach the word with negative connotations to other people with whom you disagree such as saying I value apologetics.  By definition Christian apologetic is the presentation of rational arguments for the Christian faith which is something you consistently state you want to hear and argue.  By definition the word apologetic simply means “reasoned arguments or writings in justification of something, typically a theory or religious doctrine.”  Yet you then refuse to have a discussion with apologetic which means that you either don’t know what the word actually means or are not interested in having a rational conversation with someone religious. 

Offline Sabby

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #39 on: July 16, 2013, 06:08:11 PM »
Your use of the phrase is in a manner consistent with bullying.  You use the word apologetic to dismiss the arguments of another and make generalizations about a group of arguments that you disagree about.  Then you attach the word with negative connotations to other people with whom you disagree such as saying I value apologetics.  By definition Christian apologetic is the presentation of rational arguments for the Christian faith which is something you consistently state you want to hear and argue.  By definition the word apologetic simply means “reasoned arguments or writings in justification of something, typically a theory or religious doctrine.”  Yet you then refuse to have a discussion with apologetic which means that you either don’t know what the word actually means or are not interested in having a rational conversation with someone religious.

I know what it is, and I find the very concept ridiculous. Its the rationalization of the irrational. Apologetics is the PR department of Religion, the scientific process in reverse, justifying conclusions instead of finding the real answers.

You want me to respect such a process? No, rejecting Apologetics doesn't hinder a rational conversation.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #40 on: July 16, 2013, 06:20:00 PM »
Sabby -

You view all religion as irrational.
Hence, anyone (Christian or not) who wants to present rational arguments on the topic is arguing something you feel is 'irrational'.
By your own definition, this makes them 'Apologetics' - rationalizing the irrational.
You do not wish to converse with Apologetics.
Therefore, you do not wish to engage in a rational conversation with someone religious on the topic of religion. QED.

If there is a flaw in my logic, please point it out to me.

Offline Sabby

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #41 on: July 16, 2013, 06:35:40 PM »
No, your pretty much correct, and I'll explain why. It's not that I don't wish to have the discussion, it's that I don't believe the discussion can be had at all. Religion is a sociological topic for me, and I don't see any value in discussing it as anything other then sociological. I'm more then capable of discussing religion as a phenomena, whether social, cultural, or psychological.

But Apologetics is not about Religion as a phenomena, it's, as I've already put it, the scientific process working in reverse. It's justification for belief, forming arguments to support a position that has already been adopted. This is the exact opposite of science, which is following the evidence to the answer.

Does that make sense?

Offline Sabby

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #42 on: July 16, 2013, 06:38:26 PM »
If anything I've convinced myself of this. I'm glad I got the chance to speak with you and argue my point. I will say no more on this subject though.

Missed the edit D= I enjoy these kinds of discussions as well. Religion as a mental process does fascinate me ^^

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #43 on: July 16, 2013, 06:43:10 PM »
No, your pretty much correct, and I'll explain why. It's not that I don't wish to have the discussion, it's that I don't believe the discussion can be had at all. Religion is a sociological topic for me, and I don't see any value in discussing it as anything other then sociological. I'm more then capable of discussing religion as a phenomena, whether social, cultural, or psychological.

But Apologetics is not about Religion as a phenomena, it's, as I've already put it, the scientific process working in reverse. It's justification for belief, forming arguments to support a position that has already been adopted. This is the exact opposite of science, which is following the evidence to the answer.

Does that make sense?

Missed the edit D= I enjoy these kinds of discussions as well. Religion as a mental process does fascinate me ^^

You would probably find more people willing to have these discussions if you weren't constantly calling them 'irrational'.  Tends to put people off, y'know?

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #44 on: July 16, 2013, 06:49:25 PM »
So essentially you do not seek any rational conversation regarding religion because you do not believe a rational conversation of religion can be had.  Therefore any engagement you have on the topic of religion is irrational and typically antagonistic whereby your goal and aim is to antagonize someone who is religious.  By extension you are ridiculing someone because of their faith, personal beliefs and opinions for your own amusement.  That would make you a bully in the eyes of most.

Offline Vanity Evolved

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #45 on: July 16, 2013, 07:05:49 PM »
So essentially you do not seek any rational conversation regarding religion because you do not believe a rational conversation of religion can be had.  Therefore any engagement you have on the topic of religion is irrational and typically antagonistic whereby your goal and aim is to antagonize someone who is religious.  By extension you are ridiculing someone because of their faith, personal beliefs and opinions for your own amusement.  That would make you a bully in the eyes of most.

I think the point being made is that it's rather hard to have a rational discussion about a guy cutting a dragon's head off as an explaination for the Earth being created as being an equal 'belief' to other explainations of the Earth being created. It's not something exclusive to religion; you'd be equally hardpressed to rationally discuss how magic works 'logically' in Harry Potter, or how Green Lantern's ring works in Marvel. It is generally rather impossible to take someone seriously when they try to 'rationally explain' their belief in a book which is moral also includes massive advocations of rape and immense sexist segregation, for example.

Offline Sabby

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #46 on: July 16, 2013, 07:09:40 PM »
So essentially you do not seek any rational conversation regarding religion because you do not believe a rational conversation of religion can be had.

If you're just going to disregard my responses and restate your assertions, I'm not sure what exactly I can do :/ I've answered you already on what kinds of discussions I value and which I don't, so repeating that I value none is just false.

You would probably find more people willing to have these discussions if you weren't constantly calling them 'irrational'.  Tends to put people off, y'know?

If that's how I come across, then there is a major communication issue on my end, and I need to opt out of this board for a while. I have no desire to personally insult anyone, and I apologize for the drama I've caused. I've only ever tried to address the arguments put forward, and I feel it's better to be blunt in my responses. Perhaps I need to revaluate that policy for a while :/

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #47 on: July 16, 2013, 07:16:56 PM »
Sabby, I am only stating the assertion that you are making.  No part of that statement is contradicting what you have already said in regard to your beliefs about discussing religion.

Also I find it hard to believe you do not intend to insult people when you continue to do so..even after being told you are being insulting.  Blunt, for you, is just a polite way of saying crass and rude.

Yes Vanity and if I go into a gaming store and start making fun of people having a discussion of how magic in Harry Potter works on the ring of the Green Lantern then I am being a bully.  If I do not believe there is any merit to the conversation and there is no rational discourse to be had and I claim to be looking for rational discourse, then my participation is only to disrupt.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2013, 07:25:40 PM by Pumpkin Seeds »

Offline Vanity Evolved

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #48 on: July 16, 2013, 07:34:55 PM »
Sabby, I am only stating the assertion that you are making.  No part of that statement is contradicting what you have already said in regard to your beliefs about discussing religion.

Also I find it hard to believe you do not intend to insult people when you continue to do so..even after being told you are being insulting.  Blunt, for you, is just a polite way of saying crass and rude.

Yes Vanity and if I go into a gaming store and start making fun of people having a discussion of how magic in Harry Potter works on the ring of the Green Lantern then I am being a bully.  If I do not believe there is any merit to the conversation and there is no rational discourse to be had and I claim to be looking for rational discourse, then my participation is only to disrupt.

The differences here is that when peopleare discussing the Bible? They expect you to take it seriously. If someone wants to 'rationally' explain how The Flash used the Speed Force to come back to life after three issues of DC or whatever, no-one would take them seriously. However, when they say the exact same thing about a book which says 'Rape is great! And this dude died and came back to life using the magic power of the ghost in the sky after the snake told a naked dude and woman not to eat an apple which damned the Earth', it's suddenly supposed to be accepted as rational because 'this is religion'. You ever seen a flat Earth Creationist trying to 'rationally' explain how evolution, the shape of the Earth and history 'totally works in line with the Bible'?

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Bwa hahahahha
« Reply #49 on: July 16, 2013, 07:42:38 PM »
Then why participate in their conversation if you believe there is no rational discourse to be had?  If you believe that their discussion has no merit, does not involve your own beliefs and has nothing pertaining to you or affecting you then participation on your part is meant to cause drama and be disruptive.  People discuss comic book heroes with scientific context, research and are fully engrossed in their discussions with the same fervor as one would debate religion.  If I do not believe there is rational conversation to be had then I simply do not participate. 

Does it matter if the people having the conversation about the Flash or about Jesus care if their concepts or ideas are real?