|
|
|
Satan
New Member
USA
27 Posts |
 Posted - 07/21/2002 : 13:07:34
|
Poll Question:
Which religion/religious philosophy is closest to the truth?
Edited by - Satan on 07/21/2002 13:10:52
|
| Results: |
| Christianity |
 [28%] |
22 votes |
| Islam |
[3%] |
2 votes |
| Judaism |
[3%] |
2 votes |
| Hinduism |
[0%] |
0 votes |
| Buddhism |
[5%] |
4 votes |
| Baha'i |
[0%] |
0 votes |
| Other (animism, Satanism, etc.) |
[9%] |
7 votes |
| None |
[53%] |
42 votes |
|
Poll Status:
Locked »» |
Total Votes: 79 counted »» |
Last Vote:
08/04/2005 21:07:11 |
|
|
|
|
Lars_H
SFN Regular
Germany
630 Posts |
 Posted - 07/21/2002 : 14:05:21 [Permalink]
|
There is no great Truth out there. There ain't no gods either. What you see is what you get. Everything else is just made up by people scared of reality.
|
 |
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2002 : 15:35:38 [Permalink]
|
You guys really need to think more about the answers you're likely to get on this site when you construct polls.
Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous.
-D. Hume |
|
|
|
Satan
New Member
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2002 : 16:36:14 [Permalink]
|
Well I guess I'd better explain myself . . .
The answer may seem so obvious - that "None" is the only answer that a skeptic would choose. But consider what you are saying.
To be truly "skeptical," one must carefully scrutinize every theory and philosophy and decide which one is the most logical, the most accurate, i.e., the closest to the truth of our existence.
Many so-called "skeptics" believe that they can explain everything in naturalistic terms. Perhaps this is so. But there is no truly complete and infallible naturalistic theory out there, and we are constantly improving our scientific knowledge.
To claim as materialists do that there is no existence aside from the physical, is to take an enormous (and fallacious) leap of logic. No one, to the best of my knowledge, has proven that a spiritual realm does not exist. (Please don't give me burden of proof crap, I know that one doesn't have to prove negative existentials.) Until it this negative existential is proven, however, there is always room to claim that something supernatural may be at work. It doesn't have to be, but it may be.
Now I am aware that most people on this site aren't going to pick a monotheistic religion (e.g., Islam, Judaism, etc.), but someone might. Likewise, someone might pick an earth-based religion/philosophy. There are also atheistic philosophies (Buddhism, and Satanism [a personal favorite  ]) to choose from.
Being "skeptical" doesn't mean one must reject all religion. I wanted to see if there were people who agreed.
Satan,
a.k.a. the Talking Snake Whom Atheists, Witches, Muslims, and Puerto Ricans Worship (If You Ask Anyone In This State) |
|
|
|
WindupAtheist
New Member
41 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2002 : 16:53:29 [Permalink]
|
Quoted: "Until it this negative existential is proven, however, there is always room to claim that something supernatural may be at work. It doesn't have to be, but it may be."
Who gives a fuck? I can't prove there isn't an Oscar Meyer Weinermobile orbiting Alpha Centauri either, but that doesn't mean the concept is anything other than laughable.
|
|
|
|
Lars_H
SFN Regular
Germany
630 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2002 : 18:49:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
To be truly "skeptical," one must carefully scrutinize every theory and philosophy and decide which one is the most logical, the most accurate, i.e., the closest to the truth of our existence.
Religious theories genrally have very little to with logic. They are not supposed to work like scientific models, so it would be hard to say wich of the many different religions come closest to describe the world as it really is. In fact most of them are terribly off when describing anything about this world. The other thing is that they tend to be extremly vague that you can interpret anything into it.
quote:
Many so-called "skeptics" believe that they can explain everything in naturalistic terms. Perhaps this is so. But there is no truly complete and infallible naturalistic theory out there, and we are constantly improving our scientific knowledge.
What other kind of logicla explanation are there. Either everything in this univeres can be explained in naturalistic and materialistic terms and in terms of logic or nothing can. If just on supernatural miracle where to happen our whole history of science skepticism and logic would all have been a for naught.
You can have all types of phenomena that defy our current understanding of how the iniverse works. No problem there. But an event that defies logical analysis in general and is not bound by any constraints would destroy the whole house of cards of our worldview.
Why would you care for a spiritual realmat all? If it exists and events there follow some kind of rules, then it would be as materalistic and naturalistic as our world.
|
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2002 : 20:11:04 [Permalink]
|
Naturalism is a method, pure and simple. Anyone who claims "metaphysical naturalism" is some immovable, a priori philosophical stance taken by "hardcore" skeptics is full of shit. Those skeptics who "believe" in naturalism simply see no reason that the forces and laws that govern everything we see, every day, all day, should be superceded by something created by imagination during "deep thinking" or whatever nonsense. The rest behave as if they have discarded supernaturalism, but are unwilling to say it, for whatever reasons.
All skeptics can be described by the sentence, "Show me the evidence; until then, I'm not believing anything." All this talk about how "strongly" one disbelieves in supernaturalism, religion, UFOs, Bigfoot is just hot air.
Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous.
-D. Hume |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2002 : 21:06:44 [Permalink]
|
This site used to be called "The Truth and Other Lies." Actually, that site gave birth to this site and is now defunct. This poll should be on that site, as it exists now...
I rest my case. <- Inside joke. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
The Evil Skeptic
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Yuquiyu
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 07/21/2002 : 21:49:36 [Permalink]
|
Hey "SATAN" whats wrong with you? What did you mean by saying that crap about us Puerto Ricans? What kind of state is that? I hope that not all the people in your state have the same intellect or brain capacity to see the world the same way you do you big fuck!
Dame! I always come here to read the words of people who have good and interesting ideas, but it also lure some segregated, racist fool who probably thinks only but crap!
Have a nice day 
|
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2002 : 01:27:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Hey "SATAN" whats wrong with you? What did you mean by saying that crap about us Puerto Ricans? What kind of state is that?
Just to clear up any potential confusion, Satan is from Mississippi (which, taken out of context, is pretty amusing, eh) and his signature is trying to make fun of the ingnorant masses who reside there.
-me. |
|
|
|
Yuquiyu
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2002 : 13:38:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Just to clear up any potential confusion, Satan is from Mississipi(which, taken out of context, is pretty amusing, eh) and his signature is trying to make fun of masses who reside there
Well, that is a nice explenation, and if that is the case, well I take back what I said. Sorry for the confusion Satan and thanks for the tip, now I better forget about me visiting Mississipi
|
|
|
|
Yuquiyu
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2002 : 13:59:12 [Permalink]
|
About the poll,I am in the side of none, people created religion in order to explain things out and now that we have the ho grand science to figure things out they get in it just to feel special or part of something great.They don't understand that they are special and part of something much more greater than superstition.
The truth? What kind of truth? There is not such a thing like an ultimate truth.
|
|
|
|
Satan
New Member
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2002 : 18:21:58 [Permalink]
|
Thank you, Boron 10, for clearing up the confusion. And thank you, Yuquiyu, for the question. Sorry for the offense, even if it arose from a misunderstanding.
Satan,
a.k.a. the Talking Snake Whom Atheists, Witches, Muslims, and Puerto Ricans Worship (If You Ask Anyone In This State) |
|
|
|
Satan
New Member
USA
27 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2002 : 18:32:54 [Permalink]
|
And now, to pick up the debate:
quote:
The truth? What kind of truth? There is not such a thing like an ultimate truth.
"The truth" refers to anything that accurately describes reality. (I know I am going to get some of Hume's critique that the only things proven to exist are ideas and impressions, but that's a risk I'll have to run.) Just because we have yet to find the truth doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. In fact, by definition, I think it would have to exist. Just as the very occurrence of these thoughts is testament to the existence of thought, the definition of truth means that truth, in some form, must exist.
Since we have yet to fully account for the world we perceive, the truth of whose nature is that "truth" to which I am referring, I think it is only natural to explore those systems of thought (or perhaps superstition) that claim to account for the world.
That is where this poll question arises. If one of them is, in your opinion, more likely to be accurate or true, then you should logically vote for it. I did expect a disproportionately large number to vote for the "None" category. But the very fact that one person has voted for Christianity means that we have a divergence in opinion.
Who voted for Christianity anyway? I would think that if that person were to come and join the discussion, we might get somewhere interesting! Especially since the anti-divinity of Christianity is present!
Satan,
a.k.a. the Talking Snake Whom Atheists, Witches, Muslims, and Puerto Ricans Worship (If You Ask Anyone In This State) |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2002 : 21:38:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Just because we have yet to find the truth doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. In fact, by definition, I think it would have to exist.
Are you getting Platonic on me here?quote:
Just as the very occurrence of these thoughts is testament to the existence of thought
I'm sorry, I can't resist: are you sure about this?  quote:
the definition of truth means that truth, in some form, must exist.
I don't exactly follow your logic here. I believe a better analogy would be to compare the definitions and existence of truth and omnipotence. We can conceive of both, but they do not necessarily exist, eh?quote:
I think it is only natural to explore those systems of thought (or perhaps superstition) that claim to account for the world.
Sure. I can't think of any other possible way to look at "Truth."quote:
I did expect a disproportionately large number to vote for the "None" category.
Hmm.. would there have been other, more "skeptic-friendly" options to vote for, then? (I admittedly can't think of any right now, but this is a spur-of-the-moment post)quote:
But the very fact that one person has voted for Christianity means that we have a divergence in opinion....if that person were to come and join the discussion, we might get somewhere interesting!
I agree. If there are any Christian lurkers who can logically explain their faith, I think we would all like it. Be warned, though, look over some prior topics for some examples of what not to say (please)!
-me. |
|
|
|
Dr Shari
Skeptic Friend
135 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2002 : 03:27:36 [Permalink]
|
Most major religions started as a reaction to a certain circumstance that was happening at that time in history. The ancients who did not have the scientific knowledge we MAY feel we have now (even science seems to change as we know it from day to day)so when they had an eclipse they had to blame it on something other then themselves so they picked a "god" to blame or pass the buck to. Later certain people saw the power they could get by claiming to be in touch in with this "god" and started a religion based on what they felt would give them a most personal power. Even the early people who believed that giving all their possessions away were looking for a reward. St Francis and Buddist monks who lived in poverty were not doing it for any reason other then they thought they would get a higher spot in heaven or the nest reincarnation. All religion is looking for a payoff in the end.
For me I get by living with a terminal illness by enjoying what my life is now not what kind of reward I can get if there were an afterlife. For me probably because of my upbringing as a Christian and from self evaluation I get the best feeling for myself as a person by doing the least amount of harm to other people and the planet my grandchildren have to grow up on and I do believe in life you do get back more then you give. The more lives I touch in a positive way the more love I get from others and love is a good thing. I just don't need a promise of a reward in a next life to do it or feel good about it. It works for me. I wouldn't tell anyone else how to live their life (except my husband LOL). An eastern philosophy colored by my western life is the closest form of "truth" (truth most likely doesn't probably exist anyway)for my life style. Certainly being a certain type of person because someone told you it was what "god" wanted you to do may have some comfort for some people but in the end it is for most people a way not to have to think for themselves
Death: The High Cost of Living
It is easier to get forgiveness then to get permission! |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
