What is your Belief? A statistic for RF

[InvestigateTruth]

How hard would it be to change the name of the "Non-Revealed Religions" forum to "Other Non-Revealed Religions"? Is that something that an admin has access to? It wouldn't require any major overhaul and might bring a bit more accuracy to the DIR categories so it wouldn't appear that those religions under that header are the only non-revealed religions there are.

I am sure there was a reason, they didn't put Hinduism in the Non-revealed section from beginning, don't you think so?! Lol

 

[SalixIncendium]

I am sure there was a reason, they didn't put Hinduism in the Non-revealed section from beginning, don't you think so?! Lol

Absolutely!

I find myself wondering why they didn't just put Hinduism along with all other such "revealed" religions under the Baha'i Faith section...

 

[Secret Chief]

I finally figured out what the debate is. First you ask people what they think, or in this case, how they categorize themselves. After they answer, you tell them they are wrong, and that starts the debate. So it would be like me trying to convince Salix that he doesn't actually live in the US, but he lives in Argentina, and it's his delusions about where he lives that only makes him think he lives in the US.

Bahais have to keep coming up with new ideas to peddle their usual disingenuous narrative. The disservice is just collateral damage.

 

[Vinayaka]

Bahais have to keep coming up with new ideas to peddle their usual disingenuous narrative. The disservice is just collateral damage.

And oblivious to the idea that it does far more harm than good. But hey, it's all more diversity.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

How hard would it be to change the name of the "Non-Revealed Religions" forum to "Other Non-Revealed Religions"? Is that something that an admin has access to? It wouldn't require any major overhaul and might bring a bit more accuracy to the DIR categories so it wouldn't appear that those religions under that header are the only non-revealed religions there are.

I haven't done any testing since the update so maybe it won't take ten minutes just buffering and hours for the change to take place like previous times. We'd probably have to discuss it and put it to the other people in that DIR if they want that change. But we could certainly look into it.

 

[PearlSeeker]

I agree. Hinduism (and all the Dharmic religions in general) are non revealed. They are more like mathematics. They eternally exist and can be directly grasped by a sufficiently prepared mind.

And the rishis revealed this "mathematics" or was it revealed to them?

 

[Muffled]

Buddhism is a non-revealed religion. Siddhartha was just some ordinary bloke who couldn't stand living with his parents anymore and went awol.

I believe he doesn't state his source but he does tell about his struggle with an evil entity and that could be considered a revelation.

 

[Muffled]

And the rishis revealed this "mathematics", didn't they?

I believe at least some of it is just philosophy.

 

[Muffled]

I chose the last option in that it is the closest, with caret:

"I believe in God, but I do not believe in any ^^ religion." -- ^particular^

I am an Omnist with Christian background and primary beliefs of 100% Liberal Quaker and 97% Jewish as defined by BN Quiz years ago.

As an Omnist, I believe all religions have some truth, but no religion has it completely. I contemplate all and make personal decisions of what to accept for further reflection, and what to respectively leave behind.

I believe there is only one truth that will get you eternal life.

 

[sayak83]

And the rishis revealed this "mathematics" or was it revealed to them?

It works precisely how mathematical or scientific laws are grasped. They are discovered...neither revealed nor constructed.
And they can always be rediscovered if lost.

 

[Polymath257]

It works precisely how mathematical or scientific laws are grasped. They are discovered...neither revealed nor constructed.
And they can always be rediscovered if lost.

Speaking as a retired mathematician, I am not at all sure this is the case. I think we invent the rules and discover the consequences of those rules. It is common in math to play with several different related concepts before settling on one, constructing the definition to match certain intuitions.

 

[Secret Chief]

I believe he doesn't state his source but he does tell about his struggle with an evil entity and that could be considered a revelation.

I've had various struggles. They might be considered revelations.

 

[sayak83]

Speaking as a retired mathematician, I am not at all sure this is the case. I think we invent the rules and discover the consequences of those rules. It is common in math to play with several different related concepts before settling on one, constructing the definition to match certain intuitions.

Is it possible to be a mathematical relation to be other than what it is? Given a set of axioms, the relations that follow have to hold... correct? The body of math may contain many systems stemming from different types of mathematical objects and relations thereof. But it's difficult to see how they can be other than what they are stated to be.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Absolutely!

I find myself wondering why they didn't just put Hinduism along with all other such "revealed" religions under the Baha'i Faith section...

believe me, if in the poll, I hadn't separated "revealed" and "non-revealed", and had just said "Believers in a Religion", still some people would have argued, "we are not part of a religion". You know who are those, dont you? Lol

 

[Polymath257]

Is it possible to be a mathematical relation to be other than what it is? Given a set of axioms, the relations that follow have to hold... correct? The body of math may contain many systems stemming from different types of mathematical objects and relations thereof. But it's difficult to see how they can be other than what they are stated to be.

A simple example is group theory: we choose the axioms for the subject and then discover the consequences of those axioms. Were groups invented or discovered? Both, neither, meh. Change the axioms and we might be studying monoids or rings.

But, to answer your other question, the axioms don't answer all possible questions. In fact, we *know* of questions that cannot be answered by the axioms of set theory that have been agreed upon. For those questions, we can *assume* either answer to the question and get an equally consistent set of rules (sort of like what happens in non-Euclidean vs Euclidean geometry).


I see it like the game of chess: we invent the rules and discover what follows from them.

 

[sayak83]

A simple example is group theory: we choose the axioms for the subject and then discover the consequences of those axioms. Were groups invented or discovered? Both, neither, meh. Change the axioms and we might be studying monoids or rings.

But, to answer your other question, the axioms don't answer all possible questions. In fact, we *know* of questions that cannot be answered by the axioms of set theory that have been agreed upon. For those questions, we can *assume* either answer to the question and get an equally consistent set of rules (sort of like what happens in non-Euclidean vs Euclidean geometry).


I see it like the game of chess: we invent the rules and discover what follows from them.

I would say that there exists an abstract set of all possible valid rules and we are discovering parts of this set as we go along.

 

[Spice]

I believe there is only one truth that will get you eternal life.

Yes, many do. But, IMO, that's like saying your mother will only continue to love and protect you if you do everything exactly like she says and do not think for yourself unless she says you can. Of course you have the free-will of choosing to keep her love and protection by living her way, or shun her and she turns her back on you.

I believe God meets us where we are and gladly takes our hand as we explore what He has provided.

 

[Vinayaka]

And they can always be rediscovered if lost.

Precisely why it's eternal. It's always there waiting for some guy in a cave to sit down, close his eyes, see light, then pursue that light, then go deeper and deeper until he realises what the sages before him all realised.

 

[Heyo]

A simple example is group theory: we choose the axioms for the subject and then discover the consequences of those axioms. Were groups invented or discovered? Both, neither, meh. Change the axioms and we might be studying monoids or rings.

But, to answer your other question, the axioms don't answer all possible questions. In fact, we *know* of questions that cannot be answered by the axioms of set theory that have been agreed upon. For those questions, we can *assume* either answer to the question and get an equally consistent set of rules (sort of like what happens in non-Euclidean vs Euclidean geometry).


I see it like the game of chess: we invent the rules and discover what follows from them.

We should discuss this in a different thread, as it is off-topic here. Just as a short thought here, there are things in maths that are just playful thinking with a what-if scenario, but other things, at least the basics, are definitely discovered.

... and I think it is a bit more than just the natural numbers.

 

[Polymath257]

I would say that there exists an abstract set of all possible valid rules and we are discovering parts of this set as we go along.

Probably closer to there being an abstract set of all valid *sets* of rules where 'validity' can change meanings between sets of rules.

I'm happy to take this to a different thread.