What Is Your Religion or Worldview?

[The Hammer]

I voted other, as Hellenism is very definitely not neopagan *mod edit*!

Sure it is. Imo

 

[Ella S.]

I have changed my perspective since my first reply.

Now, I am a Utilitarian and a Rationalist. I strive to use logic as a tool to maximize utility, adhering to logical epistemology and using tools derived from mathematical statistics.

I am loosely inspired by Stoic methods of emotional regulation and disciplined thought, collectively referred to as "apatheia" or "dispassion." However, I do not adhere to Stoic virtue ethics, Stoic logic, or believe in the Stoic conception of Zeus.

Instead, I am a gnostic atheist. I think I can prove to a high degree of certainty that minds are an emergent phenomenon of matter, thus providing good evidence against the existence of immaterial minds. I think I can also provide evidence for humans having "over-active agency detection" which better explains the appearance of agency behind abstract forces than theistic models, therefore providing good evidence that spiritual forces do not exist, either. Thus, I can say that I know that gods do not exist, because the facts indicate that they almost certainly don't.

 

[Eli G]

I used to hear a lot about the precedence of the matter over consciousness in dialectical materialism classes that I was required to take in my home country as part of the compulsory education system.

How can the effects of thoughts on the body be explained if it is the body first and the mind later? Psychosomatic illnesses and the so-called "religious stigmas" and psychological pregnancies come to mind.

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

My "faith" is the acknowledgement and knowledge of The Omniverse, which is the Prime Existence and God, that we all fractals of this God, and that all action comes in two forms: entropy and extropy. In the beginning there was much more entropy than extropy, but with accordance of the God particle; the Higgs-Boson; I can safely conclude that even non-living things exist from some sort of rudimentary extropy, even if the atoms themselves cannot replace themselves.

So, my "faith" is a trinitarian sense of pantheism, gnostic view of God and divinity, and its foundation a bedrock of knowledge of our creation of divinity, developing and ushering a new sense of life and holiness. In a very real sense all Gods in all religions exist in the behavior of non-apatheistic and non-ignostic theists, whether they are monotheistic, polytheistic or henotheistic. My ultimate identity is infused with these concepts that no established religion can fully grasp.

In the future I do see myself growing from this, and using my syncretism to develop a wide variety of sub-sets of syntheist schools of knowledge. Since my syntheism can be addressed as our way of creating divinity within God, it is my sworn oath to help people understand the importance of this species we call wise man. Truth is my creed and change its sacrament. The afterlife exists only if we create it for ourselves and divinity is not a person or even a being but the cumulation of actions exerted by our species.

 

[YoursTrue]

I didn't read all of the posts, but I wonder -- how did you come to be in, of, or a member of your religion, however it's properly expressed?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I'm afraid to call myself a Hindu because I don't know enough about the religion, but my worldview deeply resonates Advaita Vedanta beliefs, especially the concept of Brahman, karma, and Dharma (as I understand it).

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I have changed my perspective since my first reply.

Now, I am a Utilitarian and a Rationalist. I strive to use logic as a tool to maximize utility, adhering to logical epistemology and using tools derived from mathematical statistics.

I am loosely inspired by Stoic methods of emotional regulation and disciplined thought, collectively referred to as "apatheia" or "dispassion." However, I do not adhere to Stoic virtue ethics, Stoic logic, or believe in the Stoic conception of Zeus.

Instead, I am a gnostic atheist. I think I can prove to a high degree of certainty that minds are an emergent phenomenon of matter, thus providing good evidence against the existence of immaterial minds. I think I can also provide evidence for humans having "over-active agency detection" which better explains the appearance of agency behind abstract forces than theistic models, therefore providing good evidence that spiritual forces do not exist, either. Thus, I can say that I know that gods do not exist, because the facts indicate that they almost certainly don't.

What caused the mind to emerge from matter?

 

[Ella S.]

What caused the mind to emerge from matter?

I think it emerged gradually and incrementally alongside the evolution of the brain.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I think it emerged gradually and incrementally alongside the evolution of the brain.

Ok, so from what and where did the mind emerge?

 

[Ashoka]

I've changed a lot. I consider myself to be a naturalistic pantheist.

 

[Ella S.]

Ok, so from what and where did the mind emerge?

If you would like to tag me in a debate thread in Science & Religion, I can explain in detail. I don't think this is the appropriate thread for this discussion.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Ok, so from what and where did the mind emerge?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I mean mind itself, not a specific type of mind. Where did mind emerge from?

 

[Aupmanyav]

I mean mind itself, not a specific type of mind. Where did mind emerge from?

Where there is brain, there is 'mind' also. 'Mind', as they say, is an emergent property of brain. That is true of all animals with brain (including humans).

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Where there is brain, there is 'mind' also. 'Mind', as they say, is an emergent property of brain. That is true of all animals with brain (including humans).

So if the mind is an emergent property of the brain, the brain must have come first yes? So where did the brain come from?

 

[Aupmanyav]

So if the mind is an emergent property of the brain, the brain must have come first yes? So where did the brain come from?

Rather than I give you a 'copy & paste', kindly read these two articles: Evolution of nervous systems - Wikipedia, Evolution of the brain - Wikipedia.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Rather than I give you a 'copy & paste', kindly read these two articles: Evolution of nervous systems - Wikipedia, Evolution of the brain - Wikipedia.

I would like to be able to have an exchange in the event I disagree with or question a given explanation.

As it is, if someone says mind was an emergent property of 'something', it is logical to want to know from where that 'something' emerged or came into being.

It will be a learning process for us both, if you agree with the articles, we can question any points that need further clarification.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I would like to be able to have an exchange in the event I disagree with or question a given explanation.
As it is, if someone says mind was an emergent property of 'something', it is logical to want to know from where that 'something' emerged or came into being.
It will be a learning process for us both, if you agree with the articles, we can question any points that need further clarification.

Yeah, I agree with the articles to a great extent, though there may be one or two minor points on which I may disagree. Your questions will be welcome.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yeah, I agree with the articles to a great extent, though there may be one or two minor points on which I may disagree. Your questions will be welcome.

Actually, the article does not appear to answer my question, where did the brain come from? Iow, if the brain came before the mind (mind being an emergent property of the brain), how did it come into existence.

There is no doubt an evolving principle involved in the creation, but it seems to me that there must be some yet unknown to science non-material guidance to the process.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Actually, the article does not appear to answer my question, where did the brain come from? Iow, if the brain came before the mind (mind being an emergent property of the brain), how did it come into existence.

There is no doubt an evolving principle involved in the creation, but it seems to me that there must be some yet unknown to science non-material guidance to the process.

Even a virus has a mind. It searches for an entry point. That is because of its molecular arrangement.
Scientists Record a Virus 'Prowling' Cells in Search of a Way Inside

Even your white blood cells have a mind (so to say). They destroy what is harmful for you but do not attack your own cells.
"Phagocytosis is the process by which a cell uses its plasma membrane to engulf a large particle, giving rise to an internal compartment called the phagosome. It is one type of endocytosis."
Phagocytosis - Wikipedia
File:Нейтрофил крови человека фагоцитирует бактерию.webm - Wikipedia (VIDEO-action)

White blood cell enveloping a bacteria (Wikipedia, has a nice large image too)
Virus Interactions With the Cell (National Library of Health)
Clip D1243_1_193, from Dissolve