Why Should It Matter?

[SalixIncendium]

Well it matters to me in that I would feel the other person is causing confusion if the person espouses beliefs that do not fit the label of their beliefs. Others will be needlessly misled by the false so-and-so and think 'x' beliefs are compatible with religion 'z' when they are not!

Why do you feel it is your responsibility to prevent others from being misled? Does it matter to you what others think you believe? If so, why?

 

[SalixIncendium]

It matters to me because words have meaning. If someone believing in the divinity of Mickey Mouse calls themselves an atheist, they either don't understand the term or they're intentionally muddying the waters. Wouldn't it be irritating if a grocery store called apples a "grain" and sold them in the flour aisle? Ignoring the meaning words have will always **** off a significant number of people.

Pretty much the same question I asked George. Why do you feel it's your responsibility to defend the term 'athiest' correct the Mickey Mouse worshiper and prevent them from muddying the waters?

The apples are still being held at the room temperature and taste the same whether they are being sold into produce aisle or the flour aisle. You already know where they are and what they are mistakenly being labeled and located, so why do you feel it is your responsibility to have the apples relabeled moved since you're not employed by the grocer? Why is it your responsibility to keep people from getting ****ed off at the mislocation?

 

[Willamena]

If you identify with a particular religion or philosophy and label yourself as such, and another comes along with different ideas on what that religion or philosophy is and labels themselves the same as you, does it matter to you? If so, why? If not, why not?

Would you go as far as to tell them that they are a false (insert aforementioned label here)? What can be accomplished by doing so?

I can't even begin to figure people who only look at differences and don't see other people in kind.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Hinduism has a lot of diversity. That said, if somebody says that he believes that human sacrifice is an integral part of Hinduism, I would have a duty to object.

Why do you feel objecting to this idea is your duty or responsibility?

 

[stvdv]

Hinduism has a lot of diversity. That said, if somebody says that he believes that human sacrifice is an integral part of Hinduism, I would have a duty to object.

I might feel telling him that I am now going to sacrifice him believing in the principle "Do unto others what they want to do to unto you"

 

[SalixIncendium]

...of course we should still implore others to think critically...

To what end? If one doesn't want to think critically, why is it our duty to implore them to?

 

[SalixIncendium]

It will not matter to me unless the person tells me that my belief is wrong.

Is it? If you don't believe it's wrong, then why does it matter to you what others believe?

In that case, I will return the compliment. Every action has a reaction, Newton's law.I think so. My forum has people like you. I am a bit more touchy. Religions are beliefs, 'dharma' (one's duty and ethical action) is a necessity.

I personally see no other purpose to doing this other than to sate one's ego. Why do you feel it's necessary to "return the compliment?"

 

[Willamena]

I might feel telling him that I am now going to sacrifice him believing in the principle "Do unto others what they want to do to unto you"

'Sacrifice' is what the lamb does, not the person holding the knife. There is no guarantee to inspire it in others.

 

[stvdv]

'Sacrifice' is what the lamb does, not the person holding the knife. There is no guarantee to inspire it in others.

When someone is about to "sacrifice" you, you might be surprised how inspired you are to inspire him not to do this; even if there is no guarantee.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Is it? If you don't believe it's wrong, then why does it matter to you what others believe?

I personally see no other purpose to doing this other than to sate one's ego. Why do you feel it's necessary to "return the compliment?"

I do not object to what they believe, I object to their saying that my belief is wrong. No comment no discussion. A comment is a challenge and I enjoy the challenge.

 

[stvdv]

If you identify with a particular religion or philosophy and label yourself as such, and another comes along with different ideas on what that religion or philosophy is and labels themselves the same as you, does it matter to you? If so, why? If not, why not?
Would you go as far as to tell them that they are a false (insert aforementioned label here)? What can be accomplished by doing so?

Great to contemplate on: Comes down to "To Be or not to Be" versus "To Speak or not to Speak" or "To Act or not to Act" or "To Think or not to Think",

 

[SalixIncendium]

I do not object to what they believe, I object to their saying that my belief is wrong. No comment no discussion. A comment is a challenge and I enjoy it.

But if you are objecting that to what they're saying about your belief, then you are indeed objecting to their belief (that your belief is wrong).

But thank you for your honesty in your admission of the fact that you do it because you enjoy it. I suppose it's better that you do it for the purpose of entertainment rather than for the purpose of having been offended by what they believe about you.

 

[stvdv]

If you identify with a particular religion or philosophy and label yourself as such, and another comes along with different ideas on what that religion or philosophy is and labels themselves the same as you, does it matter to you? If so, why? If not, why not?
Would you go as far as to tell them that they are a false (insert aforementioned label here)? What can be accomplished by doing so?

Depends on the situation:
a) Some like to provoke me by purposely saying opposite things to get me angry or to point out my mistakes or ....
b) Some say these things because they want to know my view on it, so I might share my view
c) If I am in an emotional state, not the witness, I might start to debate even
d) If I am in a "no mind state" I would not even be there

I find this a very good question to ask myself. Leading to introspection and becoming more aware of what is really important to me

 

[Aupmanyav]

But if you are objecting that to what they're saying about your belief, then you are indeed objecting to their belief (that your belief is wrong).

It does not necessarily need to be. We have so many discussions among ourselves in the Hinduism forum. I never say that their belief is wrong. I respect their different beliefs. I am perhaps the only strident atheist Hindu there. And nearly everyone has sparred with me. I only explain my belief, without ever saying, or even thinking, that their belief is wrong. It is their belief, which is different from mine. That is another thing that my religion has taught me - 'Vipra Bahudha Vadanti' (I think you know the meaning).

 

[stvdv]

Why should it matter?

It's not about "should it matter" I think. We are all beings in evolution. We have feelings, some more, some less and we act upon those. Some are free.

On RF it's all quite safe.

In real life you get more real life emotions. If someone tells me "I believe you should wear white clothes"
This would not upset me very much and I could think "Does it bother me? Nah, Why should it matter?"

BUT if someone dripping in blood from his fresh previous killing shouts at me "I believe my God wants me to kill you"
I could imagine that there will be different emotions flowing through me, so I might not think "Why should it matter?"

 

[SalixIncendium]

It does not necessarily need to be. We have so many discussions among ourselves in the Hinduism forum. I never say that their belief is wrong. I respect their different beliefs. I am perhaps the only strident atheist Hindu there. And nearly everyone has sparred with me. I only explain my belief, without ever saying, or even thinking, that their belief is wrong. It is their belief, which is different from mine. That is another thing that my religion has taught me - 'Vipra Bahudha Vadanti' (I think you know the meaning).

You misunderstand me. I never implied that you said their belief regarding Advaita was wrong. What I'm stating is that you are disputing their beliefs about the legitimacy of labeling what you believe Advaita.

Does it matter whether or not others believe your brand of Advaita is legitimate if you believe it is? Why or why not?

 

[shunyadragon]

all religions are false

I have none

Including your religion.

sooooooo my label....rogue theologian

Theologian?!?!?! You most definitely have a religion despite your egocentric denial.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What I'm stating is that you are disputing their beliefs about the legitimacy of labeling what you believe Advaita.

Does it matter whether or not others believe your brand of Advaita is legitimate if you believe it is? Why or why not?

Yeah, and that is why I give my reasons. Some have accepted my reasons (which does not mean that they have started thinking in my way), some have not. That has never bothered me.
My belief in Advaita is totally personal with its peculiar mix of science and spirituality. Why should I expect someone else to believe it? What I do not like is someone telling me that Advaita is only how they describe it - that is sort of Abrahamic. Advaita has many shades. I do not like fetters when it comes to philosophy.

 

[Windwalker]

If you identify with a particular religion or philosophy and label yourself as such, and another comes along with different ideas on what that religion or philosophy is and labels themselves the same as you, does it matter to you? If so, why? If not, why not?

This is a provocative question to consider. At first I was thinking for instance someone calling themselves a Christian. As a term, a follower of Christ, that is very wide open as to what someone's interpretation of that means to them. It's an open-ended thing, and can be understood in many different ways.

However, in thinking about it further, let's take for example a case where you are following a very specific discipline or practice such as Tai Chi Chuan (taijiquan), which I practice and pursue in knowledge. Sometimes in watching Youtube videos I see someone performing what they call Tai Chi, and it really is what I call "Faux Chi", where it's actually not following the rules of the form at all. Even though within Taijiquan you can have variations of the form, it will all generally follow certain rules, such as keeping the shoulders down, lead with the waist not the arms, wrists a certain ways, steps a certain way, etc. And of course there are different schools or styles, such as Cheng or Yang family taijiquan.

But when someone just free forms "something" that looks Tai Chi like, it's actually not taijiquan. At best it's an "exercise" or "stretching", but it's not playing the actual form. While I may give them credit for finding the form attractive and wanting to do something like it, it's really not Tai Chi and it shouldn't be considered just as valid as the actual form that follows specific rules. "You can do Tai Chi your way, and I can do it my way," is not valid if we're not just talking about how certain postures are done differently between various schools, but rather no foundational structures at all that make Tai Chi what it is to begin with.

So to answer your question, it really depends what someone is claiming, and whether or not it's claiming to follow a specific school or tradition. If it's just all made up stuff with no understanding of the discipline at all, then that's not valid to just call it that because you want to impress people with your flowery movements.

Would you go as far as to tell them that they are a false (insert aforementioned label here)? What can be accomplished by doing so?

In the above example, I would respectfully attempt to explain that what they are doing isn't actually taijiquan, while admiring their attempts, and then encourage them to explore that if it were a good fit for them. What would hopefully be accomplished by that would be their growth, learning from an ancient discipline handed down by various lineage holders to qualified students to become masters themselves and teach others.

Otherwise, I wouldn't push it, and just leave them to their illusions if it made them happy and they weren't actually interested in learning the real thing, like wanting to play the air-guitar at a party, versus knowing the actual scales of a real guitar and learning how to actually play one competently.

 

[shmogie]

If you identify with a particular religion or philosophy and label yourself as such, and another comes along with different ideas on what that religion or philosophy is and labels themselves the same as you, does it matter to you? If so, why? If not, why not?

Would you go as far as to tell them that they are a false (insert aforementioned label here)? What can be accomplished by doing so?

Protestant Christianity, in it's pure form, cherishes the concept of "the priesthood of all believers", that is, each believer has the responsibility to search the scriptures and determine the doctrines for themselves.This is their God given right. That doesn't mean that their truth is the correct one, only that it is theirs.

Of course, in discussing doctrines with another believer, I may tell them that based on my study, I believe they are in error, and make the case for my beliefs

I know their beliefs, ultimately are between they and God, and judged for authenticity there.

My sole responsibility is to share what I believe is the truth. I have no right to judge their relationship to God or condemn them in any way.