Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
That is 'God enlightened'. Glad to meet you. I am 'science enlightened'.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
WHY do you believe?
- Thread starter Questioning
- Start date
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, as a strong skeptic I don't deny the existence of objective reality. Nor do I claim I know what it is independent of my experince of it. Rather for objective reality in itself as per metaphysics/ontology/epistemology I believe it is real, fair, orderly and knowable.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Agree with you, though my concept of reality is different from yours.
I learned it myself through self-effort. And it is all based on evidence and argumentation.
One can have enough physical evidence of something to make it unreasonable to question ATM at least. What seems reasonable to accept as true could change but I see no reason to worry about that until the reasonable-ness comes to pass.
Questioning
*Banned*
No. ACCEPTED it!
Questioning
*Banned*
I find your finding flawed, but you're honesty refreshing!
In that case, you find my finding flawed and my honesty refreshing.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
I grew up in a culture shaped by traditional Christianity (England, 1940/50s, Church of England) but I think that even then much church attendance was related to cultural norms rather than any belief. My parents didn't attend church or push any particular belief (pro or con) on me.
I was always a curious child that wanted to know the "why" and "how" of everything and when confronted by the various "supernatural" beliefs of Christianity my reaction tended to be "that doesn't make sense". It took a while for me to discover science, that gave me a reason for that conclusion. I still consider the scientific method to be the best way to discover facts about the world.
Something that has shaped my beliefs is what is called "the god of the gaps". Basically the idea is that over the years the domain of things that were considered to be supernatural has shrunk as science explains them as being quite natural. It seems likely that the supernatural domain will shrink more as time goes by, though expecting it to reach zero is probably unreasonable.
Hopefully that answers the question.
I was always a curious child that wanted to know the "why" and "how" of everything and when confronted by the various "supernatural" beliefs of Christianity my reaction tended to be "that doesn't make sense". It took a while for me to discover science, that gave me a reason for that conclusion. I still consider the scientific method to be the best way to discover facts about the world.
Something that has shaped my beliefs is what is called "the god of the gaps". Basically the idea is that over the years the domain of things that were considered to be supernatural has shrunk as science explains them as being quite natural. It seems likely that the supernatural domain will shrink more as time goes by, though expecting it to reach zero is probably unreasonable.
Hopefully that answers the question.
I Am Hugh
Researcher
No. My dad was atheist and my mom irreligious. I was raised atheist/irreligious, although those are just labels, I apply now in hindsight. We never gave it a thought, never thought it worth the effort. So, really, I was agnostic. I would prefer the term unbeliever.
No. Most of my friends growing up were unbelieving/irreligious but with parents who were half-heartedly church goers. One was a typical Catholic altar boy hypocrite type. The tradition, the church his true God. A lot of my friends somehow turned out to be preacher's sons or that altar type. You know what they say about the preacher's son. Worst of the bunch. Sex, drugs, alcohol, fighting, etc.
I became a believer much later, at 27, when I thought I would finally pick up the Bible, the alleged source of all of that nonsense, and actually study it. I became a believer in that, rather than any religion. Even though most of the study material I had was Watchtower - what else would it be? I didn't choose to become one of them.
Real? There is always real EVIDENCE for and against. I weigh evidence, I don't test it with what we may consider, right or wrong, to be real or reality. So, I'm wrong, I change. I'm right, I wait to see where I'm wrong. No dogma, no ideology.
But is the doctrine ontologically true, or have they just perfected an inspiring ritual?
Where does discussion end and debate begin? What's the difference? Both involve the application of reason to facts. Both involve assessment of factual veracity and logical conclusions.
I heard that a lot during my rotation in the Shepard-Pratt mental hospital....
If it's been proven, why isn't it universally accepted, like heliocentrism or the germ theory?
Has anyone informed Diogenes?
Isn't creation explained by unconscious, unguided physics and chemistry?
A belief may be well evidenced or not. It's a neutral word.
Objective, generally observable, reproducible, testable, falsifiable.
Regiomontanus
Eastern Orthodox
uh, no, not IMHO.
I Am Hugh
Researcher
"Two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong" Dire Straits.
The racoon is my favorite animal of all time. As a kid I read Sterling North's Rascal. I raised an orphan kit into the wild on two different occasions growing up.
