• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why I Cannot Abide Organized Religion

PureX

Veteran Member
So, maybe that is the point where we diverge. I don't see any Great Mystery (my caps) to my existence. I think its a mystery and I think it is wondrous, but I don't see any evidence of an underlying agency.
I presume you are able to recognize that existence as we know it is being manifested through some 'laws' that we humans have not yet managed to fully decipher (you probably call them the "laws of nature" or physics or something). Aren't those an excellent example of 'agency'? And not only are they an example of agency, but of organized intent. The intent being the manifestation of existence. It's almost as if those 'laws of physicality' (or whatever) are the blueprint from and through which a massive burst of energy is building a universe. And yet you are not seeing any agency in any of this? I find that to be unlikely unless you are actively try not to see it.
Interesting. Please don't take this as derision. But that seems to me more like desperation. Like if I am on the top of a burning building, and my only chance to survive is by leaping 12 feet to the next building. I make the leap because that is the only choice I have, and I HOPE that I will make it. But if the building is not burning, why make the leap?

This is not to say that I deplore exploration into the unknown. I am all in favor of it. I just need some reason to think that there is a "there" to explore.
More like asking a girl for date based on nothing but the hope that she'll agree and meet you, and maybe like you. And then because you asked her out, she does agree to go, and she does like you for having asked her. Why are you making this so absurdly extremist? Faith is not some heinous crime, or insane course of action. In fact, we all engage in it throughout much of our lives.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
No, not "in my worldview" - by the rules of logical argumentation and rational rigor that we both have implicitly agreed upon for the duration of this discussion. If you think you have a stronger case than me, you need to be able to argue this within the boundaries of those rules.



Of course, outside those rules, the gloves are off - and outside those rules, I can just tell you that you're wrong and believe it, and there is nothing you can do to change that, and since per your own understanding you're only a figment of my own imagination with no intrinsic qualities, that's all I ever need to do.

So we all play by the same rules and you decide them? Okay, as long as you don't hold any actual power, I don't care. ;)
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
So there is no values in any part of the universe? How did your values as you hold them come as a part from something that has no values?
So there is no cause and effect and you aren't a part of series of cause and effect since the Big Bang? Or are you Ex Nihilo?
I thought you two were discussing whether values are derived from objective existence, not whether values exist at all, or did I miss that leg of the argument?
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Yes, you don't question your own position in regards to objective reality. You take it for granted. You are only skeptical of other forms of subjective understanding, but not your own.
I promise you that I will never take the wise-old-man-on-the-mountain act seriously. If you have something to say to me then say it clearly, plainly and in a way that I will likely find to be productively communicative. If that is not something you want to do, that is fine. That is your choice. But I will ignore (or deride) the guru act, as per my mood.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
So we all play by the same rules and you decide them? Okay, as long as you don't hold any actual power, I don't care. ;)
As with everything, the rules of logically sound argumentation we abide together are obviously subject to negotiation (explicit or implicit) and there isn't really anything that stops you from simply ignoring them altogether. Indeed you would be in good company here on RF.

I admit that my original answer was something of a rhetorical sleight of hand to browbeat you into agreeing to these rules, but I ultimately can't make you do anything you don't want, and I can't make you want anything you don't already desire.

Sorry. I owe you an apology.
You really don't. I was just confused about what the conversation was actually about for a short time.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Purpose and meaning varies with every individual, they have nothing to do with out there somewhere.
I agree that we each determine meaning and purpose for ourselves. But we are afforded that ability because meaning and purpose have not been dictated to us, and because we have been inspired to ask for it by the nature of existence, itself.

Very clever all that, when you think about it! I, personally, am very grateful for this predicament. And it's why I don't like religions imposing their 'meaning and purpose' on the rest of us.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Well, either you are a part of the whole and as such caused by the whole back to the Big Bang or you are Ex Nihilo. Take your pick.
You said that. And you know what a fallacy of composition is. Restating your previous post does not change that.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
I promise you that I will never take the wise-old-man-on-the-mountain act seriously. If you have something to say to me then say it clearly, plainly and in a way that I will likely find to be productively communicative. If that is not something you want to do, that is fine. That is your choice. But I will ignore (or deride) the guru act, as per my mood.

Yeah, you ignore, if you are Western, 2500+ years of history about what knowledge is and don't know the history of evidence.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
I promise you that I will never take the wise-old-man-on-the-mountain act seriously. If you have something to say to me then say it clearly, plainly and in a way that I will likely find to be productively communicative. If that is not something you want to do, that is fine. That is your choice. But I will ignore (or deride) the guru act, as per my mood.
Mikkel has a point, though - it is infinitely easier to be skeptical of other people's claims to reality than our own, regardless of the latter's merits. I would argue that for most people, their identity is to a degree tied to their understanding of the world, and so we tend to implicitly take the reliability of that understanding for granted, when there really is nothing that makes us more qualified to opine about reality than anybody else.

Indeed, our own sense of self seems so strongly tied to our assumption of the objectivity of our own beliefs that we can experience great discomfort and suffering when that assumption is eroded. I don't think it is a coincidence, for example, that gaslighting - i.e. making somebody reject or doubt the facticity of their own experiences and memories in favor of somebody else's - is one of the most brutally effective and gruesome ways to break down another person's sense of self, to a degree that does actual harm to a person.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
I presume you are able to recognize that existence as we know it is being manifested through some 'laws' that we humans have not yet managed to fully decipher (you probably call them the "laws of nature" or physics or something). Aren't those an excellent example of 'agency'? And not only are they an example of agency, but of organized intent. The intent being the manifestation of existence. It's almost as if those 'laws of physicality' (or whatever) are the blueprint from and through which a massive burst of energy is building a universe. And yet you are not seeing any agency in any of this? I find that to be unlikely unless you are actively try not to see it.
Considering the thought behind the posts of yours that I have read, I suspect that you already know that I am going to recite the difference between prescriptive and descriptive laws. Is this something of which you are really unaware, or\are you just taking me thru the motions?

More like asking a girl for date based on nothing but the hope that she'll agree and meet you, and maybe like you. And then because you asked her out, she does agree to go, and she does like you for having asked her. Why are you making this so absurdly extremist? Faith is not some heinous crime, or insane course of action. In fact, we all engage in it throughout much of our lives.
I see how that is hope. I do not see how that is faith. Unless you are using the two words synonymously?
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Mikkel has a point, though - it is infinitely easier to be skeptical of other people's claims to reality than our own, regardless of the latter's merits. I would argue that for most people, their identity is to a degree tied to their understanding of the world, and so we tend to implicitly take the reliability of that understanding for granted, when there really is nothing that makes us more qualified to opine about reality than anybody else.

Indeed, our own sense of self seems so strongly tied to our assumption of the objectivity of our own beliefs that we can experience great discomfort and suffering when that assumption is eroded.

I don't think it is a coincidence, for example, that gaslighting - i.e. making somebody reject or doubt the facticity of their own experiences and memories in favor of somebody else's - is one of the most brutally effective and gruesome ways to break down another person's sense of self, to a degree that does actual harm to a person.

Well, I have been through that kind of self-doubt as a skeptic and learned to reconnected to the everyday world. I still learn thought and am still wrong from time to time, but I try to learn from it.
But yes, to some I am a properly a pain in the ***. :D
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Considering the thought behind the posts of yours that I have read, I suspect that you already know that I am going to recite the difference between prescriptive and descriptive laws. Is this something of which you are really unaware, or\are you just taking me thru the motions?
...

So how did descriptive laws cause prescriptive laws? Or are the prescriptive laws ex nihilo and not a part of the universe as such and not caused by something else?
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Mikkel has a point, though - it is infinitely easier to be skeptical of other people's claims to reality than our own, regardless of the latter's merits. I would argue that for most people, their identity is to a degree tied to their understanding of the world, and so we tend to implicitly take the reliability of that understanding for granted, when there really is nothing that makes us more qualified to opine about reality than anybody else.
Mikkel is just play-acting the guru. If someone else was saying it, they would have a point. In fact there is nothing in your paragraph in which I disagree.

Indeed, our own sense of self seems so strongly tied to our assumption of the objectivity of our own beliefs that we can experience great discomfort and suffering when that assumption is eroded. I don't think it is a coincidence, for example, that gaslighting - i.e. making somebody reject or doubt the facticity of their own experiences and memories in favor of somebody else's - is one of the most brutally effective and gruesome ways to break down another person's sense of self, to a degree that does actual harm to a person.
Interesting. I don't believe I was doing that. Are you speaking generally, or specifically?
 
Top