Objective Reality

[Dawnofhope]

Personally, I just accept it. The planet is diverse, and there is no one right truth. Once an individual gets that idea in their head, it's relatively easy. But I confess to not being so tolerant of folks who want to convert me, or do think one size fits all. So in the phrase 'mutual respect' the operative word is 'mutual' and perhaps 'respect' should be changed to tolerance. So often the feeling I have isn't mutual. As Sunstone said, people have the absolute human right to believe in what they want to. I don't have to respect some views, as they're intolerant, but we can still tolerate the people holding these views.

This forum in my view, seems to be fair in determining how far one can go with their 'my way is the only way' view.

First up, I agree this forum is well run and fair. It can’t be an easy job managing the cacophony of disparate opinions.

Diversity of belief is the reality most of us in the West have become accustomed too. Canada is probably more Christian than New Zealand, but regardless for both of us most people we come in contact with do not share the same faith as us.

Ideological and religious fundamentalism are part of the landscape too, though the older I get, the less I see. Maybe it bothers me less and so I overlook it. Some days I feel a little like Louie Armstrong with the words to wonderful world, other times not so at ease with humanity.

Always good to hear your perspective.

 

[ajay0]

Often peoples of different faiths or no faith find themselves so enmeshed in their worldview they struggle to empathise with others who hold apparently contradictory views . How can we better appreciate how peoples of one ideology have reached very different conclusions about the nature of reality to ourselves?

Sometimes on RF it can feel like some live in intellectual silos, disconnected from those who believe differently from ourselves and unable to understand why others have reached very different conclusions about the nature of reality. Is this a common experience for many of us?

How is it that we arrive at these varied conclusions and by what measure do we determine what is true or false, right or wrong? How do we know our take on the universe is any better than anyone else?

In summary:

(1) How can we know?

(2) Should we be more empathetic towards those who view life differently from ourselves? If so, how?

There is a great saying by Vernon Howard, whom I regard as an enlightened being....

"Truth itself is the only unifying factor on earth. We are separated from love with others to the same degree that we are separated from Reality. We are in communion with others to the same degree as our closeness to Reality."

All religions strive to understand the one Reality, but the methods they arrive to understand Reality or Truth may be different. Some foolishly identify with these methods and create conflict and strife in this regard, perpetuating and aggravating evil.

Some use these methods sincerely and wisely, and consequently attain understanding of Reality and Truth, leading to natural harmony, goodness and love with all others.

 

[ChristineM]

The manner in which we use language is certainly vital to a shared exploration of truth as you suggest. That includes using words in a manner that is clear and consistent with common usage.

It is unfortunate that many faithful use "Truth" interchangeably with faith.

 

[Dawnofhope]

It is unfortunate that many faithful use "Truth" interchangeably with faith.

That sounds very frustrating. The conversation could then become:

I have faith in X

Faith = truth,

therefore X must be true.

 

[Dawnofhope]

There is a great saying by Vernon Howard, whom I regard as an enlightened being....

"Truth itself is the only unifying factor on earth. We are separated from love with others to the same degree that we are separated from Reality. We are in communion with others to the same degree as our closeness to Reality."

All religions strive to understand the one Reality, but the methods they arrive to understand Reality or Truth may be different. Some foolishly identify with these methods and create conflict and strife in this regard, perpetuating and aggravating evil.

Some use these methods sincerely and wisely, and consequently attain understanding of Reality and Truth, leading to natural harmony, goodness and love with all others.

Your universalist leanings are close to my heart.

Love, truth and reality are interrelated concepts in a sense, though love and truth may seem very different. When we search for love it is often truth we most need, and when we search for truth we may really be needing love.

 

[Vinayaka]

For me the word "tolerant" misses this "divine connection" that I can feel when using "respect".

Interesting post you made. 'Tolerance' to me is just allowing to exist without interference, or agreeing to disagree. You do your thing, and I'll do my thing. There is a ton of that on RF.

'Respect', OTOH, is a bit too much for me. Respect the person for sure. As you know, we Hindus believe all people have a spark of divinity in them. But the actions? Nah. I don't respect thieves, adulterers, rapists, etc. I don't think anyone should. But that's defined by the person's action, not their inner core.

 

[Vinayaka]

Always good to hear your perspective.

Yours too. It's a breath of fresh air. Are there any Hindus on the interfaith council you've become part of?

 

[ChristineM]

That sounds very frustrating. The conversation could then become:

I have faith in X

Faith = truth,

therefore X must be true.

Closer enough

"my faith is truth therefore it's fact"

 

[stvdv]

Interesting post you made. 'Tolerance' to me is just allowing to exist without interference, or agreeing to disagree. You do your thing, and I'll do my thing. There is a ton of that on RF.

'Respect', OTOH, is a bit too much for me. Respect the person for sure. As you know, we Hindus believe all people have a spark of divinity in them. But the actions? Nah. I don't respect thieves, adulterers, rapists, etc. I don't think anyone should. But that's defined by the person's action, not their inner core.

Thanks. "Respect Religion" means for me "Respect his thoughts/feelings to reach God". Like you say "spark of divinity in all".

I think I get it now. The problem is not in the word "Respect", but in the word "Religion". Not in the word, but in the violent actions associated with Religion.

So you are right, I do not respect other Religions [sum total of everything the Church/Islam++ stands for; the actions you pointed out]
BUT: "I Respect their different spiritual viewpoint to reach God" [spiritual being the keyword here]
a) Islam has "peace" as it's core
b) Christianity has "1st Commandment is highest = Love ALL" as it's core
c) All have somewhere "Love" as their core [I think].

I do remember reading once about the huge difference between Religion and Spirituality. This must be what was meant in that article I think.
Many people criticize me, when they know I like Hinduism, and question that BG is about a huge bloody war and lot's of killing going on. How can that be spiritual they always ask. Then Bible.Koran.BG are just the same.
My Master explained "This is an analogy to learn about your own `inner demons`. Nowadays people only take BG literally as `outer demons`, just thinking about families fighting, thereby they all are missing the inner significant story".
I see the same goes in Christianity and their belief in "Hell and Demon/Devil". I see also here the analogy `inner devil`, not `outer devil`.
I can only see good in Religion if the person applies the `inner meaning`, not when they are stuck on the `outer meaning`

 

[Vinayaka]

Thanks. "Respect Religion" means for me "Respect his thoughts/feelings to reach God". Like you say "spark of divinity in all".

I think I get it now. The problem is not in the word "Respect", but in the word "Religion". Not in the word, but in the violent actions associated with Religion.

So you are right, I do not respect other Religions [sum total of everything the Church/Islam++ stands for; the actions you pointed out]
BUT: "I Respect their different spiritual viewpoint to reach God" [spiritual being the keyword here]
a) Islam has "peace" as it's core
b) Christianity has "1st Commandment is highest = Love ALL" as it's core
c) All have somewhere "Love" as their core [I think].

I've never studied Abrahamic religions enough to form an opinion as to what is at their core. All I've done is observed the seemingly endless arguments about it. So I don't know, but also I don't feel any particular need to know. There is enough on my plate from my own sampradaya without expanding it.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Very nice. However, what does one do about scams and their victims?

Tolerating other people's views doesn't mean you let them take advantage of you. Do you believe otherwise? If you were to fall for a scam, do you attribute your gullibility to mere "tolerance?"

 

[Dawnofhope]

Yours too. It's a breath of fresh air. Are there any Hindus on the interfaith council you've become part of?

We have two Hindus on the council. One is Hare Krishna and the other would be more aligned with mainstream Hinduism. That’s probably not the best use of language but he is of Indian descent and is wanting to establish a Hindu Temple for the vast majority of Hindus in Dunedin who don’t identify with either the Hare Krishnas or Sai Babas. He seems like a really nice guy, similar age to myself and has four children. He’s involved with research and the university so it’s easy to engage in an depth conversation.

The Hare Krishna guy is a former colleague of mine when I was a psychiatry intern. He converted when we were both working together. Nice guy who has made himself a well known person in Dunedin with often being on the streets in robes and handing out small packets of peanuts and raisins. Unfortunately he recently lost his job at the hospital so I suppose he has more time for spreading the Trachings of Krishna.

The interfaith council is well established in Dunedin with a good mix of different faiths as well as plenty of Christians. We’re quite a strong voice for supporting religious diversity and tolerance.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Closer enough

"my faith is truth therefore it's fact"

It sounds depressingly all too familiar lol

 

[Vinayaka]

We have two Hindus on the council. One is Hare Krishna and the other would be more aligned with mainstream Hinduism. That’s probably not the best use of language but he is of Indian descent and is wanting to establish a Hindu Temple for the vast majority of Hindus in Dunedin who don’t identify with either the Hare Krishnas or Sai Babas. He seems like a really nice guy, similar age to myself and has four children. He’s involved with research and the university so it’s easy to engage in an depth conversation.

The Hare Krishna guy is a former colleague of mine when I was a psychiatry intern. He converted when we were both working together. Nice guy who has made himself a well known person in Dunedin with often being on the streets in robes and handing out small packets of peanuts and raisins. Unfortunately he recently lost his job at the hospital so I suppose he has more time for spreading the Trachings of Krishna.

The interfaith council is well established in Dunedin with a good mix of different faiths as well as plenty of Christians. We’re quite a strong voice for supporting religious diversity and tolerance.

Sounds like Dunedin has a lot of diversity. Must be a few great ethnic restaurants.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Sounds like Dunedin has a lot of diversity. Must be a few great ethnic restaurants.

Having 20,000 students at the university and polytechnic brings many students from overseas. We have a great range of ethnic restaurants. Indian, Japanese, Thai, Turkish and Chinese are my favourites.

As a city we are about to have our second intake of Syrian refugees which we consciously decided as a city we wanted.

 

[Looncall]

Tolerating other people's views doesn't mean you let them take advantage of you. Do you believe otherwise? If you were to fall for a scam, do you attribute your gullibility to mere "tolerance?"

I had in mind the professional promoters of creationism who I regard as con men. I think it would be inane to respect them. However, I find it harder to decide how to regard their victims.

 

[ChristineM]

It sounds depressingly all too familiar lol

Lol right back at ya! it can be very funny.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I had in mind the professional promoters of creationism who I regard as con men. I think it would be inane to respect them. However, I find it harder to decide how to regard their victims.

I guess I would say I still tolerate creationists, in that I don't shun them or ridicule them (at least not on purpose - or as my initial intent), but actively engage them and rebut their ideas/positions/beliefs. But I agree with you that it is harder to tolerate their spreading the creationist agenda on to other people and further generations, for sure. We wouldn't let go someone's attempt to teach our kids that 2+2=5... obviously. It's just that the ideas behind evolution (the common counter to creation) or something unverified like "abiogenesis" are so much more abstract, and understood to be harder to grasp. So the best we have is simply to set up counter-measures where possible (like keeping creationism out of school curriculum) and to keep chipping away at the remaining adherents to those ideas.

It is always funny when I come to point in the debate where I ask the creationist to provide even one single advancement to society/mankind/science that the creation story, or an understanding of "creation" has enabled. They've got nothing, and know it, and usually take that as their cue to stop responding and retreat - where I imagine they re-constitute their fortitude with a return to some good ol' religious fervor of some kind. I should probably start leading with that point... but then they probably wouldn't get anything else out of it.

 

[Dawnofhope]

We have two Hindus on the council. One is Hare Krishna and the other would be more aligned with mainstream Hinduism. That’s probably not the best use of language but he is of Indian descent and is wanting to establish a Hindu Temple for the vast majority of Hindus in Dunedin who don’t identify with either the Hare Krishnas or Sai Babas. He seems like a really nice guy, similar age to myself and has four children. He’s involved with research and the university so it’s easy to engage in an depth conversation.

The Hare Krishna guy is a former colleague of mine when I was a psychiatry intern. He converted when we were both working together. Nice guy who has made himself a well known person in Dunedin with often being on the streets in robes and handing out small packets of peanuts and raisins. Unfortunately he recently lost his job at the hospital so I suppose he has more time for spreading the Trachings of Krishna.

The interfaith council is well established in Dunedin with a good mix of different faiths as well as plenty of Christians. We’re quite a strong voice for supporting religious diversity and tolerance.

I recall you mentioning being involved with the interfaith movement in your community. What was your experience?

 

[Milton Platt]

Often peoples of different faiths or no faith find themselves so enmeshed in their worldview they struggle to empathise with others who hold apparently contradictory views . How can we better appreciate how peoples of one ideology have reached very different conclusions about the nature of reality to ourselves?

Sometimes on RF it can feel like some live in intellectual silos, disconnected from those who believe differently from ourselves and unable to understand why others have reached very different conclusions about the nature of reality. Is this a common experience for many of us?

How is it that we arrive at these varied conclusions and by what measure do we determine what is true or false, right or wrong? How do we know our take on the universe is any better than anyone else?

In summary:

(1) How can we know?

(2) Should we be more empathetic towards those who view life differently from ourselves? If so, how?

(1) We should pursue a life grounded in reality that can be verified factually.

(2) I have no problem with empathy, but that is not the same as permitting someone to insist that their deistic worldview acually has a factual basis.