• 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!

Your religious beliefs are probably wrong

dust1n

Zindīq
You're wrong in this case. Generally, not having an opinion about something metaphysical = having an opinion about that metaphysical subject.
Or, for example, not having an opinion about pizza does technically mean you have an opinion of pizza.

I've found that A = A, if I'm thinking logically. Never encountered an instance in which A =/= A
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
I don't think it's absolutely necessary to have religious beliefs, and I personally don't have any, but I do have some leanings that some might consider religious. It seems that if I were to have a set of religious beliefs, then I might be inclined to stop looking at things as objectively as I can, and I don't want to do that.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I don't think it's absolutely necessary to have religious beliefs, and I personally don't have any, but I do have some leanings that some might consider religious. It seems that if I were to have a set of religious beliefs, then I might be inclined to stop looking at things as objectively as I can, and I don't want to do that.
I don't really agree. My religious belief doesn't prevent me from looking at things objectively. I'm not exactly a strident 'religionist, but does that matter?
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
I don't really agree. My religious 'practice' doesn't prevent me from looking at things objectively. I'm not exactly a strident 'religionist, but does that matter?
I think it could play either way with some people, but "confirmation bias" can be a real obstacle to objectivity, and it sorta goes a great deal with the territory, especially since it tends to work strongly at the sub-conscious level.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I think it could play either way with some people, but "confirmation bias" can be a real obstacle to objectivity, and it sorta goes a great deal with the territory, especially since it tends to work strongly at the sub-conscious level.

I agree, but don't you practice religion? I assume you have holidays, and you observe shabat etc., afaik, so that is what I consider 'religious belief'.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
When I was involved in Tibetan Buddhism a lot of people thought of deities as real beings. Just saying.

I'm certain that is true. Deities are often if not always real for those who believe in them. That is fine.

But my issue was with the implication that some Buddhist traditions somehow lack religious content.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
When I was involved in Tibetan Buddhism a lot of people thought of deities as real beings. Just saying.
Guess it depends on whats real is to a person. It can be convincing enough where it goes in those directions i suppose, and run it until it cannot be run any more to complete exhaustion.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
It's basically Buddhism with all the religious content stripped out, including rebirth, kamma etc. Stephen Batchelor is probably the best known advocate of this approach.
See here for example: New to Secular Buddhism : Secular Buddhist Association

I remember a podcast called Secular Buddhists that I listened to time to time. Interesting guests and pleasant yet seems to focus on intellectualism more so that
I liken it to academia and analysis of Buddhism rather than Buddhism in practice.

That said, a stripped down bare form of Buddhism seems to me a very effective approach. Straight whiskey with no chaser.
 

Rick O'Shez

Irishman bouncing off walls
I remember a podcast called Secular Buddhists that I listened to time to time. Interesting guests and pleasant yet seems to focus on intellectualism more so that
I liken it to academia and analysis of Buddhism rather than Buddhism in practice.

From the discussions I've had they do come across as practitioners rather than armchair Buddhists.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
From the discussions I've had they do come across as practitioners rather than armchair Buddhists.
Yea. Could be. It's been quite awhile since I last listened in. As a side note, even armchair Buddhists tend to fall in the deep pond givin enough time "armchair-ing" heh..
 
Top