reasons given for religious belief

[Photonic]

Whoever RD is, that is only their opinion and does not make it fact. How would that person know those things to make such a statement? Do you have nothing to contribute on your own or must you post obscure quotes from initials?

RD is Richard Dawkins and it isn't really his opinion.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"

-DA

 

[Riverwolf]

RD is Richard Dawkins and it isn't really his opinion.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"

-DA

For some, yes. For others, no.

After all, a garden without fairies could be considered boring. :yes:

 

[Skeptisch]

Whoever RD is, that is only their opinion and does not make it fact. How would that person know those things to make such a statement? Do you have nothing to contribute on your own or must you post obscure quotes from initials?

Evidence based reasoning should be the “guiding light” in today’s world. And when someone is good at explaining reality in a scientific and easily understood language a direct quote is much better than trying to paraphrase the thought. Maybe you could tell us a bit more about your sources?

"There is something dishonestly self-serving in the tactic of claiming that all religious beliefs are outside the domain of science. On the one hand, miracle stories and the promise of life after death are used to impress simple people, win converts, and swell congregations. It is precisely their scientific power that gives these stories their popular appeal. But at the same time it is considered below the belt to subject the same stories to the ordinary rigors of scientific criticism: 'these are religious matters and therefore outside the domain of science.'"
Richard Dawkins

 

[Draka]

Evidence based reasoning should be the “guiding light” in today’s world. And when someone is good at explaining reality in a scientific and easily understood language a direct quote is much better than trying to paraphrase the thought. Maybe you could tell us a bit more about your sources?

"There is something dishonestly self-serving in the tactic of claiming that all religious beliefs are outside the domain of science. On the one hand, miracle stories and the promise of life after death are used to impress simple people, win converts, and swell congregations. It is precisely their scientific power that gives these stories their popular appeal. But at the same time it is considered below the belt to subject the same stories to the ordinary rigors of scientific criticism: 'these are religious matters and therefore outside the domain of science.'"
Richard Dawkins

Look, I am actually all for science. I took many a science course in college. Be it biology, geology, paleontology and so on, I have no qualms with any of it. However, Dawkins is full of **** if he thinks that all spiritual experiences are used to gain converts. Honestly, a great many of us really don't care if someone else believes or not. Our experiences are our own and for us alone. Otherwise everyone would have the exact same experiences. As for what is out of the domain of science, well that's just too freaking bad now isn't it? When science progresses to the point of being able to pick up and test for things outside of the purely natural realm then maybe there will be some advancement on that front. There are already some ways people have learned to test for and glimpse the other side. We'll probably get there eventually. However, it's not like I'm about to just ignore every experience I've had over the course of a lifetime just because Dawkins or a lab of scientists says I should or thinks me loony. What would be loony would be to repeatedly ignore and try to dismiss what I have seen with my own eyes again and again and again. How many times must one be smacked with a 2x4 in order to believe the 2x4 is real?

 

[Breathe]

Look, I am actually all for science.

It amazes me how just because we believe in something, we're automatically believed to be against science.


This crops up again and again and again. What on earth is happening across the pond to make this idea keep propping up?

 

[Photonic]

With wicca being one of the faster growing religions out there right now and the knowledge that you have already demonstrated about that religion, your opinion is easily tossed to the side as an uneducated and poor attempt at an insult.:tsk:

Yea, religious are people are pretty good at tossing stuff aside.

 

[Riverwolf]

Yea, religious are people are pretty good at tossing stuff aside.

I've seen tossing aside from both sides. :yes:

But it's true: he admitted to knowing nothing about Draka's religion, then proceeds to call it "unbelievable." Such inconsistency is worth tossing aside.

Besides ignoring my post asking if he can understand why she was so reluctant to share her experiences.

 

[Photonic]

I've seen tossing aside from both sides. :yes:

But it's true: he admitted to knowing nothing about Draka's religion, then proceeds to call it "unbelievable." Such inconsistency is worth tossing aside.

Well, I tend to research a religion before I dismiss it as unsupportable, I like to educate myself. Though I am quite familiar with Paganistic or Wiccan beliefs. Enough to see that while it is a MUCH nicer religion to have around, it still isn't supportable by fact.

Don't get me wrong, I rather like Wiccan, druidic and paganistic beliefs. Much more open minded to everything.

 

[turk179]

Yea, religious are people are pretty good at tossing stuff aside.

I'm not religious, however when one has no education about the subject matter, it's easy to toss aside their rude comments.

 

[Riverwolf]

Well, I tend to research a religion before I dismiss it as unsupportable, I like to educate myself. Though I am quite familiar with Paganistic or Wiccan beliefs. Enough to see that while it is a MUCH nicer religion to have around, it still isn't supportable by fact.

Don't get me wrong, I rather like Wiccan, druidic and paganistic beliefs. Much more open minded to everything.

That's good. ^_^

I've never come across a religion that didn't have any teachings that aren't supported by facts; I'd say the only two that come closest to this are atheistic Buddhism and Daoism.

 

[Breathe]

Well, I tend to research a religion before I dismiss it as unsupportable, I like to educate myself.

What religions have you researched?

There is no scientific evidence at all for the existence of anything supernatural and paranormal and no amount of praying or “wiccaning” will change that.

(Emphasis mine)
This seems like an elementary mistake. If you have researched Wicca, then why did you use this term wrongly, when it is a term for, effectively, a "Wiccan infant initiation rite" or "Wiccan infant baptism"?

Also, you're the only person I've ever heard use the term "Paganistic". Pagan would probably suffice. In the same way one needs not say Christianistic.

 

[Photonic]

That's good. ^_^

I've never come across a religion that didn't have any teachings that aren't supported by facts; I'd say the only two that come closest to this are atheistic Buddhism and Daoism.

I've usually found that hey are based on UNDERSTANDINGS of fact that, as time goes on, become less and less supportable with the advancement of that understanding through scrutiny.

 

[Photonic]

What religions have you researched?


(Emphasis mine)
This seems like an elementary mistake. If you have researched Wicca, then why did you use this term wrongly, when it is a term for, effectively, a "Wiccan infant initiation rite" or "Wiccan infant baptism"?

Also, you're the only person I've ever heard use the term "Paganistic". Pagan would probably suffice. In the same way one needs not say Christianistic.

pa·gan·is·tic, adjective. In the adjective form paganism in context means "of or relating to pagans or their faith or worship."

It suffices.

 

[Riverwolf]

I've usually found that hey are based on UNDERSTANDINGS of fact that, as time goes on, become less and less supportable with the advancement of that understanding through scrutiny.

I'm not sure I understand. This is kind of a weird sentence.

 

[Photonic]

I'm not sure I understand. This is kind of a weird sentence.

The facts that religion are founded on are usually based on the understandings at that given time of the facts they are founded on.

Over time these facts are understood more through scrutiny and garnering of greater knowledge. These understandings of the facts that theistic views once founded themselves on are found to be unsupportable views of those facts.

Is it clear enough yet? I know it's a little confusing but I'm trying. D:

 

[Riverwolf]

The facts that religion are founded on are usually based on the understandings at that given time of the facts they are founded on.

Over time these facts are understood more through scrutiny and garnering of greater knowledge. These understandings of the facts that theistic views once founded themselves on are found to be unsupportable views of those facts.

Is it clear enough yet? I know it's a little confusing but I'm trying. D:

Okay, I get it now. ^_^

I'd say this is generally true, at least when it comes to mythology.

 

[Breathe]

pa·gan·is·tic, adjective. In the adjective form paganism in context means "of or relating to pagans or their faith or worship.

I'm more than capable of looking up a term online if I don't know the meaning of it, or that it exists.

It may suffice, but it looks kind of clumsy and weird. Same as saying "linguistician" - linguist is fine.

However, it's your choice.


It would, also, have been nice if you'd answered my question.

 

[blackout]

The total lack of interest in nuanced understanding
gives me no reason whatsoever
to participate in these threads.

 

[turk179]

The total lack of interest in nuanced understanding
gives me no reason whatsoever
to participate in these threads.

Too late. You just did

 

[Photonic]

I'm more than capable of looking up a term online if I don't know the meaning of it, or that it exists.

It may suffice, but it looks kind of clumsy and weird. Same as saying "linguistician" - linguist is fine.

However, it's your choice.


It would, also, have been nice if you'd answered my question.

I apologize, I did not notice. I have read about 4 versions of the bible, the Qu'ran, I recruited my friend to teach me about Pagan and druidism, and a few Wiccan friends I am lucky to know. Vedic based religions, etc. I won't claim that I've looked into every religion as there are far too many. But I like to keep updated on theological topics of the more commonly found ones.