|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
What do you want to see? - 7/29/2008 10:28:36 PM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 853
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
There are enough threads centering on "The Debate". What I am interested in is a thread where we can discuss our common concerns. I ask that we (including myself) stay away from arguments and instead focus on things we actually agree on where it concerns "Science & Origins" and this forum. I ask everyone to stay away from baiting, veiled insults, etc. You know what I mean. This is a thread to offer an olive branch to those who you normally disagree with.
Just one example to get us started:
1. Education. I, for one, think that the No Child Left Behind Act has really done an injustice to science education, not to mention education in the arts and humanities. When the future of a school is based on test results in reading, spelling, and math it is not the fault of the school that the focus on these subjects while letting other subjects suffer. Technology of all kinds are becoming a very, very important part of our everyday lives. We are expected to make better decisions about our health and health care, to name just one example. We are bombarded every day by ads selling such-and-such medicines, and we are advised by doctors who are wooed by the very companies that sell these drugs. It saddens me to say this as a scientist in the medical research field, but the line between company lackey and "objective" research scientist has become blurred to such an extent that it risks all of our health. The best medicine (pun intended) against such activity is a populace with a strong science education. It's hard to sell snake oil to a populace that understands medicine.
Anyone else?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/29/2008 11:04:36 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
I've been trying to advance a discussion from commonality for years and it never goes well. Excuse me if I get a little wordy.
My issue is with the "social" implications of religion more than the personal. I honestly wish I could have the personal implications/benefits in my life for the most part, but I find the social cost to be too high to justify it.
I think we all use real every day science almost exactly the same way regardless of our faith. In fact I know we do. It'll take a little setup to make the point though.
Presumably we all function within the confines of normal society and behave in a way that generally draws no special attention to ourselves from day to day. In this way we are the same. We avoid said special attention by being keenly aware of what is "generally ok" to do in the world. By living in society, we have all come to understand society and we have also come to take things we hear with what we call a "grain of salt"... In most parts of our lives, except our faith, we are all relatively equally exacting in our demands for proof PRIOR to belief. Believers don't forgo the elevator for a "leap and a prayer" off the 5th floor. Their faith in God does know bounds.
A believer is also like me in that he or she will be aware that we can all believe something that is false. If you doubt this simply imagine that you feel ill and visit the doctor. After looking you over and running some blood tests he calls you into his office and explains that you will soon die from abdominal mesothelioma, or some other terrible sounding thing you've never heard of. You will go through various psychological stages that are rather well understood and predictable, as will I, but you will eventually internalize this information. You will "believe in science" no matter what you think about God.
What science "does for us" goes unquestioned so long as it poses no threat to our faith. It is worth noting that if you described your symptoms to a friend, who then diagnosed you as having very little time to live, you would be very unlikely to be very seriously effected by your friend's opinion. From the doctor though, from a respected authority figure, you will eventually have no choice but to internalize your new expected life span. Your behaviors will be changed forever. You will weep, and you will perhaps attempt to do all the things you ever wanted to do in your limited time on earth. On a personal level, your earthly life matters to you, but as far as your responsibility to others is concerned, you and I both consider ourselves generally "not responsible". And the further away they are, the less responsible we feel. As for the doctor's prognosis though, you will call old friends and loved ones and you might apologize profusely to everyone you ever offended. You might make a "bucket list". It won't matter one bit if the doctor was right, or if he read you the diagnosis from the "next" patient he was scheduled to see, or even if he was playing a sick joke. You basically just trust the doctor. It will be your reality, and you might never have been given proof. If you did demand it, the proof that was available might have been medical gibberish beyond your "ability to understand" from the blood tests.
You might have no choice but to accept the trusted doctor's opinion, and you might do this without ever educating yourself to be able to interpret the data yourself. By this method a falsehood can clearly become your reality. You can relate to this. With this understanding you must at least admit that it is POSSIBLE to believe a thing that is not true.
Another way, my favorite way, to explain my stance is from the perspective of responsibility that I mentioned before.
Humans see it this way almost utterly universally. WE ARE ALMOST ALL ALIKE in this regard. I hope this is to the point of the OP.
If your child needs surgery, you will trust science, and take your child to the best surgeon you can find.
If that surgeon suddenly puts down his earthly instruments in the middle of the surgery and begins to invoke the spirit of Christ through prayer to lay his hands upon this child and save him. You won't tolerate this behavior. The doctor has a responsibility to you and to your child to live within certain confines of rational and logical behavior and thought. You will sue the Doctor, and the hospital and everyone in the room who failed to slap the doctor back to reality.
When I finally began to grasp what I considered to be the true beauty of our existence, I gained a new sense of responsibility. When I really grasped the vastness of the universe and the rarity and beauty of human life, I gained an unbelievable feeling of responsibility to my fellow humans to be as true to myself and to everyone around me as I could be. I began to live with a new outlook on life that required or at least desperately longed for this same sense of responsibility from the people around me. Much like the responsibility you and I both know the doctor has, I think you and I both have a responsibility to each other to aggressively seek real knowledge and to be sure, not hopeful, not dismissive of earthly problems as "part of God's plan" but responsible to live our lives in a manner that does as much as we can do to ensure this thing called humanity goes on and on for as long as possible so that more people get to experience the beauty of life.
When all things beautiful are dismissed as "not earthly" people feel no such responsibility and you are not pulling your weight in my opinion. My unbelief costs you nothing, because your salvation is assured in your mind, and if I can't believe it then to you that is just between me and God. Your belief costs me dearly though, through your failure to contribute to the collective conscience of humanity with the TRUE inquisitive nature that is within all of you. If true inquiry ever did happen to reveal that Jesus Christ was our lord and savior then I would happily believe in Him and love him. As a person, he's pretty easy to love, based on what I've heard about him.
To me, what belief in Him does for you is absolve you of your earthly responsibilities. It gives you a purpose, and an afterlife and makes your grieving processes easy, downright simple in fact. Death becomes more of a "seeya later". If I didn't see believers behaving all around me as if they had no responsibility to each other I wouldn't feel a duty to argue against faith.
Perfect timing, this was just posted in another thread.
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
....what better use can there be for our minds than in contemplating the one who crafted it?
I can think of a few things. When MrFribbles needs brain surgery, "God forbid", I bet he'll be glad someone else (the brain surgeon) used his mind for something other than "contemplating the one who crafted it"
< Message edited by wayward1 -- 7/29/2008 11:16:40 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 11:52:10 AM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7759
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
wayward, given your entire post is devoted to casting doubt on the veracity of Christianity, I am not sure how it can be seen as an attempt to, "advance a discussion from commonality". You seem to have not only missed the point of the thread, but decimated it in the second post, eliminating any hope for civil discussion on shared concerns.
_____________________________
Jack
It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first..
- Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 12:27:32 PM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 538
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
Good thread, Method!
To salvage something wayward was saying:
Perhaps we do have in common that it is encouraged to ask questions of one another, even if only out of a spirit of dialogue.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another thing we can perhaps all agree on:
There MIGHT be a god.
??
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 12:32:42 PM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 538
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
Also, Method, to respond to the rest of your post, education (especially one that trains children to ask questions sensibly and perform research and read existing research, etc.) is very valuable.
I don't know if we can all agree on such, but I don't feel that the emphasis on testing of No Child Left Behind necessarily contributes to the goal of producing intelligent learners and inquirers. (It seems to me that children, actually, are naturally intelligent inquirers.)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 12:34:30 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1062
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Method
I ask that we (including myself) stay away from arguments and instead focus on things we actually agree on where it concerns "Science & Origins" and this forum.
This could become the world's shortest thread.
Anyway, since you started with education...
No Child Left Behind has not only taken emphasis away from science, but also music, art, physical education... essentially anything apart from english and math test-taking skills. Having tutored a lot of kids in SAT prep, I know there are a lot of tricks you can use to do well on multiple choice tests without really having mastered a subject. Sadly, the results seem to show that we're failing at even teaching kids how to take tests well.
At the same time, evidence suggests that music programs increase SAT scores and other measures of student ability. (Of course, it's entirely possible, even likely, that schools with music programs are in more affluent areas that receive both more funding for all subjects and better-prepared students.)
I can certainly understand students being frustrated and bored by an all-encompassing focus on math/english and testing. No field-trips to the museum (or anywhere else), no music, no art, no food for their little nonexistent souls. Oops, my materialism slipped out. Sorry.
In the spirit of really holding out an olive branch, I too would welcome some instruction in 'critical thinking' in the schools. Very few schools do anything of the sort. My own exposure was probably limited to some elementary logic in high school geometry, which was then put to use in the construction of geometric proofs. Again from my tutoring experience, I know that nowadays many schools teach geometry without making the students construct proofs at all. Geometry appears to be a year-long exercise in memorizing formulae. I love formulas, but really they can just as well be looked up in a table as stored in your head, but there is no royal road to logical proofs.
I don't demand that students be made into expert logicians, but I think they could benefit from exposure to formal and informal fallacies, truth tables, the modus tollens, and a trip across the pons asinorum.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 12:45:05 PM
|
|
|
Aristocrat
Posts: 410
Joined: 8/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
To me, what belief in Him does for you is absolve you of your earthly responsibilities. If that were true, all Christians would live under bridges and on the streets. They would be poor citizens, murderers, rapists and bad parents. Don't you think?
quote:
It gives you a purpose, and an afterlife and makes your grieving processes easy, downright simple in fact. Death becomes more of a "seeya later". If I didn't see believers behaving all around me as if they had no responsibility to each other I wouldn't feel a duty to argue against faith. If Christians had the ability to take death that lightly they would not cling so passionately to thier faith. I think you have things backwards.
quote:
Perfect timing, this was just posted in another thread.
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
....what better use can there be for our minds than in contemplating the one who crafted it?
I can think of a few things. When MrFribbles needs brain surgery, "God forbid", I bet he'll be glad someone else (the brain surgeon) used his mind for something other than "contemplating the one who crafted it"
Do you know how many leading surgeons are devout Jews and Christians? Putting your faith in something bigger than yourself, call it destiny, providence or God, seems to be inspirational to most of us. I'd hate to see you miss out on that.
_____________________________
I find it odd that ID proponents call evolution materialistic and then take the materialistic approach to finding the ID or Creator.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 2:34:47 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aristocrat
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
To me, what belief in Him does for you is absolve you of your earthly responsibilities. If that were true, all Christians would live under bridges and on the streets. They would be poor citizens, murderers, rapists and bad parents. Don't you think?
I think you are conflating different groups here. Do murderers and rapists and bad parents necessarily live under bridges and on the streets? Does having to live under a bridge or on the street mean one is irresponsible or a bad parent, much less a murderer or rapist?
(In my neck of urban jungle, a street person is much more likely to be a person with untreated mental and emotional disabilities. But even that is a statistical correlation. )
Personally, I think it is responsible Christians who one ought to be finding under bridges and on the streets; just as Jesus was.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 2:47:09 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7759
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
Personally, I think it is responsible Christians who one ought to be finding under bridges and on the streets; just as Jesus was.
Really - have you ever lived under a bridge?
_____________________________
Jack
It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first..
- Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 3:09:16 PM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
Personally, I think it is responsible Christians who one ought to be finding under bridges and on the streets; just as Jesus was.
Really - have you ever lived under a bridge?
I didn't say Iwas that responsible. In that respect, my faith is a bit on the weak side.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 3:44:22 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1374
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Method
When the future of a school is based on test results in reading, spelling, and math it is not the fault of the school that the focus on these subjects while letting other subjects suffer.
Some people argue that we focus too much on quantitative measurements instead of qualitative measurements. Things like test scores are something that we can quantitatively measure. Things like critical thinking skills, social skills and interaction, common sense, etc... are more qualitative. While it's much harder to test/measure qualitative skills (and hence, it's harder to teach such skills since you can't evaluate how well it's being taught), I tend to agree that these qualitative skills are important and should be taught.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 3:54:38 PM
|
|
|
Aristocrat
Posts: 410
Joined: 8/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: gluadys
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aristocrat
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
To me, what belief in Him does for you is absolve you of your earthly responsibilities. If that were true, all Christians would live under bridges and on the streets. They would be poor citizens, murderers, rapists and bad parents. Don't you think?
I think you are conflating different groups here. 'Do murderers and rapists and bad parents necessarily live under bridges and on the streets? Does having to live under a bridge or on the street mean one is irresponsible or a bad parent, much less a murderer or rapist?
Does being a Christian believer necessarily mean one absolves oneself from earthly responsibilities? Can you speak to that comment first, as it was the one I was responding to?
What does avoiding responsibility as an adult mean to you? Where would Christians live who "absolved themselves from all earthly responsibilities" as law-abiding citizens, caretakers, defenders of our Constution, wage earners and bill payers? You are conflating different groups. I am enumerating the problems associated with those adults who absolve themselves of earthly responsibilities.
quote:
(In my neck of urban jungle, a street person is much more likely to be a person with untreated mental and emotional disabilities. But even that is a statistical correlation. ) How do you think emotional disabilities begin?
quote:
Personally, I think it is responsible Christians who one ought to be finding under bridges and on the streets; just as Jesus was.
Jesus had alot of rich friends. He told His disciples that they would always have the poor with them, as He allowed expensive oil to be poured on his feet to clean them.
Are people with money bad people in your eyes? Is that why Christians who profess their faith should live like paupers? To show you they aren't bad?
_____________________________
I find it odd that ID proponents call evolution materialistic and then take the materialistic approach to finding the ID or Creator.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 4:28:42 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aristocrat
Does being a Christian believer necessarily mean one absolves oneself from earthly responsibilities? Can you speak to that comment first, as it was the one I was responding to?
What does avoiding responsibility as an adult mean to you? Where would Christians live who "absolved themselves from all earthly responsibilities" as law-abiding citizens, caretakers, defenders of our Constution, wage earners and bill payers? You are conflating different groups. I am enumerating the problems associated with those adults who absolve themselves of earthly responsibilities.
I'll speak to it since it was my writing. By how you've taken it I can see it was a touch careless. You took it as "absolves you of all responsibilities". I wrote it slightly more loosely than that but not much. I wrote that "to me, it absolve you of your earthly responsibilities". I should have written that it "absolves you of some earthly responsibilities that are very important to me".
The amount of explanation I went into really started to feel so wordy that it wasn't going to be read by very many people so I was lazy with my word choice because I was hurrying. Now, with that though, there comes the issue of "the amount of explanation I went into" and how that explanation made it reasonable for you to deduce exactly which responsibilities I thought Christians were absolved of. It was probably also reasonable for you to gather that I didn't think they were a bunch of tyrants raping and pillaging.
If I didn't know better I'd take this as a typical "oh so persecuted" Christian diversionary tactic. But we'll move on with the assumption that it was no such thing.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 4:43:35 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aristocrat
If Christians had the ability to take death that lightly they would not cling so passionately to thier faith. I think you have things backwards.
Whose point are you trying to make, mine or yours? Unable to look my dieing wife in the eyes on her death bed and say "please wait for me in heaven", I must FACE death, all of it, in all its horrifying reality and heart breaking PERMANENCE! You just made my point. You said "Christians wouldn't cling so passionately to their faith if they had the ability to take death lightly".
quote:
Do you know how many leading surgeons are devout Jews and Christians? Putting your faith in something bigger than yourself, call it destiny, providence or God, seems to be inspirational to most of us. I'd hate to see you miss out on that.
He said there was no better thing he could think of to do with his mind. I merely pointed out that during their 8 years of medical school, it's a good thing some humans thought of something better to do with their minds and became doctors. I didn't say doctors were all atheists. Of course there are religious doctors. They face death all the time too, and they have the frequent and unfortunate duty of informing people of their loved ones' impending death. Can you imagine how much harder that would be without faith?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 5:02:03 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
wayward, given your entire post is devoted to casting doubt on the veracity of Christianity, I am not sure how it can be seen as an attempt to, "advance a discussion from commonality". You seem to have not only missed the point of the thread, but decimated it in the second post, eliminating any hope for civil discussion on shared concerns.
There was a danger of missing the mark for what was intended by Method but I mentioned it and explained why I thought we the members of this debate viewed science the same on some things and different on other things. If anything, I meant my post as a bit of explanatory background to springboard the conversation.
It is your insistence upon feeling as though your rights are somehow encroached upon that makes you miss so much of my post that was about commonality. How is it that when I criticize religion, it is received as a bold attack, "decimating the thread, eliminating any hope for civil discussion, and casting doubt on the truthfulness of Christianity".
But your criticisms of science are viewed by most as simply unfounded. I would criticize science exactly the same way I criticize religion if science set about to making extraordinary claims and insisting that the claims were unquestionable. If I asked those scientists, "what about these other scientists who say your wrong and we should believe their unquestionable claims" and they said to me, "no way, my claims are true, their's are false" with no further explanation worth hearing whatsoever, then I would simply never stop criticizing science. It still shouldn't be viewed as attacks though. It should be viewed as pursuit of truth, no matter where it lies.
Veracity is truthfulness. Do you expect me to come to the conversation with the same stance as you, thereby unwilling to question the truth of christianity? What kind of debate would that be? My post is no more "devoted to casting doubt on the truthfulness of Christianity" than most of yours seem to be "devoted to casting doubt on the truthfulness of science".
Science is my belief system but I don't feel attacked when you attempt to cast doubt on it. I listen to your reasons for doubting it and I ignore you for the most part for failing present sufficient grounds for doubting it. I'm forced to conclude, by what you write, that you are unable to put aside your biases and embrace its truth.
You could ignore me too if you chose, but instead you lash out about the fact that I intentionally "cast doubt on the truthfulness of you beliefs in a thread that was meant to be about "what we agree on".
Well most of my post was about what we agree on in science. We agree that doctor knows best, and that surgeons can't ask God for help instead of doing surgeries and that elevators are better than 5 story falls while praying.
These are "scientific" findings we all simply live by. Too often the discussion is about the specifics of science, when in reality, our daily lives are constantly touched by science and this is where I see the most common ground.
< Message edited by wayward1 -- 7/30/2008 5:11:52 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 5:20:21 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7759
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
There was a danger of missing the mark for what was intended by Method but I mentioned it and explained why I thought we the members of this debate viewed science the same on some things and different on other things. If anything, I meant my post as a bit of explanatory background to springboard the conversation.
It is your insistence upon feeling as though your rights are somehow encroached upon that makes you disagree. How is it that when I criticize religion, it is received as a bold attack, "decimating the thread, eliminating any hope for civil discussion, and casting doubt on the truthfulness of Christianity".
But your criticisms of science are viewed by most as simply unfounded. I would criticize science exactly the same way I criticize religion if science set about to making extraordinary claims and insisting that the claims were unquestionable. If I asked those scientists, "what about these other scientists who say your wrong and we should believe their unquestionable claims" and they said to me, "no way, my claims are true, their's are false" with no further explanation worth hearing whatsoever, then I would simply never stop criticizing science. It still shouldn't be viewed as attacks though. It should be viewed as pursuit of truth, no matter where it lies.
Veracity is truthfulness. Do you expect me to come to the conversation with the same stance as you, thereby unwilling to question the truth of christianity? What kind of debate would that be? My post is no more "devoted to casting doubt on the truthfulness of Christianity" than most of yours seem to be "devoted to casting doubt on the truthfulness of science".
Science is my belief system but I don't feel attacked when you attempt to cast doubt on it. I listen to your reasons for doubting it and I ignore you for the most part for failing present sufficient grounds for doubting it. I'm forced to conclude, by what you write, that you are unable to put aside your biases and embrace its truth.
You could ignore me too if you chose, but instead you lash out about the fact that I intentionally "cast doubt on the truthfulness of you beliefs in a thread that was meant to be about "what we agree on".
Well most of my post was about what we agree on in science. We agree that doctor knows best, and that surgeons can't ask God for help instead of doing surgeries and that elevators are better than 5 story falls while praying.
These are "scientific" findings we all simply live by. Too often the discussion is about the specifics of science, when in reality, our daily lives are constantly touched by science and this is where I see the most common ground.
Well, first off I am not 'criticizing science', though I am not particularly fond of certain theories - but science thankfully doesn't require that I accept every theory currently being proffered.
In fact, science itself can't even be rightly called a 'belief system' - it is a simply a tool for exploring nature. It relies on certain unprovable assumptions (some which are in full agreement with Christian assumptions, in fact I would argue are derived from it), and I think most Christians agree with those assumptions, even if they don't always agree with the conclusions reached by certain (or even 'most') scientists.
SO perhaps the grounds for commonality you seek are that 'Science as a tool has many benefits, and has provided many good things for our society' with which I think most Christians would heartily agree. The caveat I would add is that while it has certainly done so, as a tool it can also be employed to do evil, and so while we can be thankful for its uses, we can never rely on it to ultimately guide us in doing good.
_____________________________
Jack
It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first..
- Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 5:20:58 PM
|
|
|
Aristocrat
Posts: 410
Joined: 8/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
I'll speak to it since it was my writing. By how you've taken it I can see it was a touch careless. You took it as "absolves you of all responsibilities". I wrote it slightly more loosely than that but not much. I wrote that "to me, it absolve you of your earthly responsibilities". I should have written that it "absolves you of some earthly responsibilities that are very important to me". I see. Yes that would have made a difference. What responsibilities then were you referring to?
quote:
It was probably also reasonable for you to gather that I didn't think they were a bunch of tyrants raping and pillaging. When I don't know a poster very well, and they make a statement, I take it at face value. No other options are available to me. I took the time to read your comments and reply to what you wrote, not what you think.
_____________________________
I find it odd that ID proponents call evolution materialistic and then take the materialistic approach to finding the ID or Creator.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 5:31:47 PM
|
|
|
Aristocrat
Posts: 410
Joined: 8/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aristocrat
If Christians had the ability to take death that lightly they would not cling so passionately to thier faith. I think you have things backwards.
Whose point are you trying to make, mine or yours? Unable to look my dieing wife in the eyes on her death bed and say "please wait for me in heaven", I must FACE death, all of it,
We all do. Death is the same for all of us. We lose someone we love and it is a permanent loss for as long as we live. What happens to you after you die is another story but it does not change what we all must endure here.
quote:
in all its horrifying reality and heart breaking PERMANENCE! You just made my point. You said "Christians wouldn't cling so passionately to their faith if they had the ability to take death lightly". Does it make you angry that death is so permanent for you and seemingly not for Christians? Why?
quote:
Do you know how many leading surgeons are devout Jews and Christians? Putting your faith in something bigger than yourself, call it destiny, providence or God, seems to be inspirational to most of us. I'd hate to see you miss out on that.
quote:
Of course there are religious doctors. They face death all the time too, and they have the frequent and unfortunate duty of informing people of their loved ones' impending death. Can you imagine how much harder that would be without faith?
No, either way we are all subject to the same laws of nature and we all respond the same way. It is innate and we are all related in that way.
_____________________________
I find it odd that ID proponents call evolution materialistic and then take the materialistic approach to finding the ID or Creator.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 5:39:04 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aristocrat
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
I'll speak to it since it was my writing. By how you've taken it I can see it was a touch careless. You took it as "absolves you of all responsibilities". I wrote it slightly more loosely than that but not much. I wrote that "to me, it absolve you of your earthly responsibilities". I should have written that it "absolves you of some earthly responsibilities that are very important to me". I see. Yes that would have made a difference. What responsibilities then were you referring to?
quote:
It was probably also reasonable for you to gather that I didn't think they were a bunch of tyrants raping and pillaging. When I don't know a poster very well, and they make a statement, I take it at face value. No other options are available to me. I took the time to read your comments and reply to what you wrote, not what you think.
Fair enough. I think we have a responsibility to each other to work toward dropping our selfish attitudes for one. It is my belief that all of humanity could be blinked out of existence right this moment and nothing about the universe would change one bit.
It is also my belief that it is very likely that vast civilizations have come and gone before us in this and perhaps other universes. There having been "blinked out of existence" would mean absolutely nothing to us. We are such selfish creatures, insistent upon personal purpose and meaning and salvation and direction, that we make mountains out of mole hills nearly every minute of every day.
To me the faithful embrace those selfish desires and indulge in a belief system that caters DIRECTLY to our universal human need for all those things. As long as we continue down this path of valuing those things we can't ever really have above all other things, we will remain capable of ignoring the suffering of others. This habit of the mind of meeting our personal needs first and foremost is what I find to be untrue to our responsibilities to each other.
When I began to see the world this way the $3000 I was trying to save for a new HD TV found a better use. How any human, myself included, is able to enjoy even just ONE MORE meal at Applebee's while children starve all over the world is simply beyond my comprehension. Therefore, anything that could even accidentally cause someone to find those children's plight to be "someone else's problem", even God's, is something i can't allow myself to have just yet.
Embracing religion might not be causing the suffering in the world, but embracing religion isn't ending it either. Together, I think we could all find a way to scrape up enough money to feed everyone, but feeding is just one example. I've been to almost 40 countries, and we are OBLIVIOUS in this country to the conditions some people live in. I make a modest living by US standards but I am rich beyond imagination by the standards of most of the countries I've been to, as are most middle class Americans. What business does our money have in collection plates in this country? What business does anyone in this country have telling me what is important about my next life when so many humans can barely get by in this one?
I don't know what the answer is but I won't surrender myself and stop trying to find it. I'm not suggesting Christians don't do good things all over the world. I know they do wonderful things. I've always admitted that many if not most of my favorite friends and neighbors have been beautiful Christian people. But when Christians help others it's always "in the name of Christ". "Feed the children" endeavors don't belong "in the name of god". They belong in the name of doing it because it needs done.
< Message edited by wayward1 -- 7/30/2008 5:47:05 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 5:58:32 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aristocrat
We all do. Death is the same for all of us. We lose someone we love and it is a permanent loss for as long as we live. What happens to you after you die is another story but it does not change what we all must endure here.
Yeah but you face it here with the belief that this life pales in comparison to the next one, and that it is but a blink of an eye compared to the eternal peace that awaits you. If you're suggesting you get no consolation from your faith in the loss of a loved one then I suppose you are a rare exception. My experience has been that believers rely HEAVILY on their faith to pull them through such times.
quote:
Does it make you angry that death is so permanent for you and seemingly not for Christians? Why?
Isn't it obvious? Because an afterlife would be a wonderful thing when you first consider it. Death awaits us all. We know it from a young age but it doesn't sink in until midlife, when we think we're "nearing the half way point" or something. Being able to shift our minds quickly to the afterlife when we think about death would be a very nice means of consoling our psychological fears. And if it were true it would probably be a lot of fun. I admit it. I would love to go to heaven. The fact that the belief system has something to offer that we would basically all love to have is no coincidence I assure you. It is born of our universal need for exactly that psychological consolation I mentioned. To me this and a few other key things are exactly what explains the fact that all humans invent religions no matter how remote their domain.
quote:
No, either way we are all subject to the same laws of nature and we all respond the same way. It is innate and we are all related in that way.
So just no? No you can't even imagine how it might be a tad bit harder as an atheist doctor to explain to a mother that her son could not be saved and you gave it your best effort but he was just gone now. Would you not wish you could learn the religious affiliation of the family and offer a sincere comment resembling "he is with God now"? Funny how during these times no one ever suggests the person is with the devil. Do the standards for entry into heaven relax as you age? It seems that when consoling a grieving survivor, every single person is heaven bound, but what we all have to say about each other's ungodly behaviors is quite different from that while we're still alive. Go figure.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 6:23:10 PM
|
|
|
Aristocrat
Posts: 410
Joined: 8/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
I think we have a responsibility to each other to work toward dropping our selfish attitudes for one. It is my belief that all of humanity could be blinked out of existence right this moment and nothing about the universe would change one bit. I think we all know that in our own way, but for you it appears to hold some significance.
quote:
We are such selfish creatures, insistent upon personal purpose and meaning and salvation and direction, that we make mountains out of mole hills nearly every minute of every day. We are like children that way. This is how we are made. Adulthood simply gives us more adult solutions but we are still children.
quote:
To me the faithful embrace those selfish desires and indulge in a belief system that caters DIRECTLY to our universal human need for all those things. I don't know about that. Ive never heard that said before about Christians. I'm not even sure what you mean.
quote:
As long as we continue down this path of valuing those things we can't ever really have above all other things, we will remain capable of ignoring the suffering of others. This habit of the mind of meeting our personal needs first and foremost is what I find to be untrue to our responsibilities to each other. But, don't you think all of mankind can take a lessonn from that, and not just Christians?
quote:
When I began to see the world this way the $3000 I was trying to save for a new HD TV found a better use. How any human, myself included, is able to enjoy even just ONE MORE meal at Applebee's while children starve all over the world is simply beyond my comprehension. Therefore, anything that could even accidentally cause someone to find those children's plight to be "someone else's problem", even God's, is something i can't allow myself to have just yet. Oh, I think I'm getting your drift now. You are right but this is how the world is. Do you realize that when Jesus said "love your neighbor as yourself" He said a profound thing? If all our 'neighbors' were added up, no one on Earth would go unloved and cared for! But, people just aren't that capable. Thier least efforts should be appreciated no matter what condition the world is in. In my opinion.
quote:
What business does anyone in this country have telling me what is important about my next life when so many humans can barely get by in this one? They have no business telling you what should be important to you. Some go overboard, while others just want you to know your options. It's a very fine line. I think too many people proselytize when God clearly has not called them for that particular purpose.
quote:
I don't know what the answer is but I won't surrender myself and stop trying to find it. I'm not suggesting Christians don't do good things all over the world. I know they do wonderful things. I've always admitted that many if not most of my favorite friends and neighbors have been beautiful Christian people. But when Christians help others it's always "in the name of Christ". "Feed the children" endeavors don't belong "in the name of god". They belong in the name of doing it because it needs done.
Christians give the credit to God for what they have done.
An example is that at Christmas I would find toys under the Christmas tree on Christmas morning. I thought they were from Santa, because my parents did not want to take the credit. Christians do the same thing when they do wonderful things. They want God to get the credit instead of themselves. Granted Santa isn't really a person but Christmas is an example of selfless giving. Another example is when someone gives something anonymously.
I think people can be awfully giving and loving, but the conditions have to be right for them to understand when and how to express it.
You seem to be saying the same thing in a way.
_____________________________
I find it odd that ID proponents call evolution materialistic and then take the materialistic approach to finding the ID or Creator.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What do you want to see? - 7/30/2008 6:25:57 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
| | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
