What forum do we want?

@Sree I’ve examined the Bhagavad Gita. And the Tao Te Ching, Chuang Tzu, Nihongi, Kojiki, Quran, Dhammapada, Four Noble Truths, Gospel Of Buddha, Analects, Mencius, Pirqe Aboth etc. It’s not as daunting as one might think. It only requires a relatively small effort. I started out with the Bible as an unbeliever. That only took me 6 months.

Secularism seeks to interpret life on principles taken solely from the material world, without recourse to religion (Wikipedia). Perhaps, the phrase “critical thinking in examining religion” should be revised to mean “critical thinking in examining cultural practices”.
I need to find out more about this "Secularism" of which you speak and specifically the CFI's purpose etc. I don't really understand the point. If you want to interpret life on principles taken solely from the material world, without out recourse to religion . . . just do it. Why the need for any attention paid to religion or examining cultural practices either? What if you discover the obvious truth? That religion is the very foundation of the cultural practices? Then what?

@Lausten

I deleted the words that are considered off limits. They sometimes are allowed, but this post is designed to bait people into a heated discussion. You said you read the rules, maybe you need to review the section on trolling.

BTW, if you see anyone dismissing anyone’s intellect, or pretending to have knowledge of religion when really they don’t, or attempting to destroy the foundations of culture, point that out to me.


Yes, sir. I’m not one for running to the moderators, but I do respect your position. I wouldn’t want the hassle myself, but I do respect your authority. Sorry I stepped out of line.

Some cultural practices are harmful to us, David.

For example, Sati (also called suttee) is the practice among some Hindu communities by which a recently widowed woman either voluntarily or by use of force or coercion commits suicide as a result of her husband’s death. The best known form of sati is when a woman burns to death on her husband’s funeral pyre. (Wikipedia)

Religion is indeed the foundation of cultural practices, if you asked me. Perhaps, CFI wants to rid mankind of all bad cultural practices.

Wow, that was almost like visiting the Twilight Zone.

If you want to interpret life on principles taken solely from the material world, without out recourse to religion . . . just do it. Why the need for any attention paid to religion or examining cultural practices either? What if you discover the obvious truth? That religion is the very foundation of the cultural practices? Then what?
How the hell did we get from the material world to foundation of cultural practices?

Do you even understand what science studies?

How is religion, (oh and which religion pray tell), going to help us understand the biological, physical, material creation we live within?

 

How the hell did we get from the material world to foundation of cultural practices?
Apparently they're handing out prayer mats and funny hats on the veranda!
Do you even understand what science studies?
Mainly singing and pretending to be a tree. Oh . . . and dietary time travel.
How is religion, (oh and which religion pray tell), going to help us understand the biological, physical, material creation we live within?
Oh, nobody cares about that stuff.

Hey Citizen, even Dawkins acknowledged the irony that scientific studies was initiated by the Catholic Church way back. I lifted from the internet, for your enlightenment, the following:

For its part, the Catholic Church teaches that science and the Christian faith are complementary, as can be seen from the Catechism of the Catholic Church which states in regards to faith and science:

Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth. … Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are. (Wikipedia)

Sree quoted some Catholic dogma, which I will confront line by line (my response in bold):

“<i>Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason.</i>” No, I think that reason is above faith. Faith is merely a decision to believe something regardless of evidence. Reason can be assessed. Faith is done regardless of objective assessment. The subsequent beliefs (faith beliefs v reasoned beliefs) can be wildly disparate. So forget that flat out lie.

Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth.” Dogma MUST be true, because dogma says so???

"… Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. " Again, dogma is real because dogma says so.

The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.” How come God led humble people to believe BS for so long, and to deny reasoned understandings of the world for so long? This is a retroactive attempt by the Catholic Church to deal with reasoned facts that they can no longer obfuscate with dogma.

I am concerned about (what seems to me to be) that so many people come to the Paranormal forum with a seemingly genuine and desperate plea for help because of their self-perceived psychic abilities.

I like trying to help, and have tried various styles of responding with different ones. I have tried delicately getting over the idea to them that they are delusional. I have tried straightforwardly telling them they are delusional. I have tried just giving info by which they might eventually come to grips with their current delusionality. I have tried sarcasm. And, of course, none of this seems to help. I suppose I will just let them be.

I am concerned for these folks, and concerned that there seem to be so many. I am not suggesting that moderators should do anything differently with them. I just wanted to bring it up because it bothers me that they seem to be in pain and are likely to stay that way.

 

@TimB Interesting. I haven’t yet visited that forum so I can’t speak about it specifically. It has been my experience elsewhere that they want attention more than anything. You can explore the possibilities for helping them but honestly, I don’t think they want that. I don’t know if that means that their pain is fabricated or if their desire for attention causes them pain when they don’t get the kind of attention they are looking for. Again, my experience has been the latter.

I tend to ignore them because I think they are deluded and bringing that to their attention only causes them more pain for, again, it isn’t the kind of attention they seek and anyway, I’m not qualified to give any real help. However, for a time I was drawn to the same type of person who had the same problems with delusions of a religious nature.

No, not like me! I’m talking about someone thinking they are guided by hallucinations of a butterfly telling them they are Jesus, for one recent example. I kind of don’t do that anymore for the same reasons I advise not doing it with the paranormal types.

Just my two cents.

My brother who has a dx of schizophrenia, relates that once, he heard an orange snow cone singing “Jesus Loves Me”. Fortunately (or not) he has been on phenothiazines for decades, and now seems to realize that this was an hallucination.

Well in response to the faith argument isn’t there some points that are axiomatic when it comes to logic and science? That sounds like faith to me

I think that’s a fair statement Xian. The big difference is, scientists don’t worship them.

Well they seem to work better than the religious ones to be honest.

When you don’t like it, it’s condemned as faith; and when you do, it is applauded as critical thinking.

Science becomes religion when critical thinking is an act of faith, like prayer. Is that axiomatic to whom?

Not even close Sree

Faith and critical thinking are polar opposites. You have one or the other, never both.

I believe I heard it said that science uses faith as a starting point not as the end in and of itself

Tim, I’m still thinking about those paranormal folks.

BTW, nice work on the catechism. I’ve seen that before, but hadn’t looked at it like that

 

Tim:

Faith is merely a decision to believe something regardless of evidence


 

The scientist bases his reasoned theory on the faith that it has merit. Experiments are then conducted to prove the theory which may or may not meet the test.