namelesstavern.net

You have a good point about attachment and western lifestyle Lyion, I wouldn't like that and it wouldn't be good for the country. However, as a MAJOR religion, I'd still find it preferable, since it tends to manifest itself most in thoughtfulness and peacefulness of its followers.

As psychological health goes, just looking at the averaqe Buddhist versus the average christian says a lot. Buddhism also doesn't say that having and acting on natural desires makes you a SINFUL person (though they obviously aren't fully supportive of them either). It doesn't make you fear for your soul if you have questioning thoughts about your religion. It makes your spiritual journy one of choice, not one out of fear.

I would argue Buddhism advocates more isolation and insight, versus the fellowship and joy pushed by Christianity and therefore it is less healthy in all regards.

Also, Buddhism promotes karma and the belief you 'get what you deserve'. That is similar to Christianity in that there is indeed consequences for ones action and the same type of 'ending' mentality.

The basis of Buddhism to me seems to be percieving yourself as 'unreal', so you can let go of your probelms and become happier. This mindset allows for a more 'nihilistic' approach to the world which is neither good, healthy or spiritually enhacing, in my opinion.

I'd pick Buddhism as well but that probably isn't a shocker to anyone.

Yamori wrote:As psychological health goes, just looking at the averaqe Buddhist versus the average christian says a lot.

This kind of unsupportable generalization isn't going to help your case much.

i would like to be a better jew

dammuzis wrote:i would like to be a better jew

who's stoping you

The Man(c)

After reading a little about Buddhism I think I'll pass. I don't think they fully understand psychology.

xaoshaen wrote:

mofish wrote:So, youre telling me that my morality comes from a god. I dont care which god youre talking about. Please then, enlighten me as to your religion.

For now, let's say I worship literacy, which would make you a fucking infidel.

I never, ever told you that your morality comes from a god. I never even implied as much.

Let me rephrase for the literalists. I can say, with as much certainty as I can say about anything, that Yahweh, the god of the OT, NT, Book of Mormon, what have you, does not exist. People claim he exists. People claim he has direct influence over my life, and the decisions I make and how I make them. Yet there is zero evidence for this.

So, essentially what you're saying is that you're incapable of actually proving anything? You've essentially admitted that you can't disprove the existence of a god, but you can't say anything with greater certainty than that?

It isnt my responsibility to prove he doesnt exist. If that was the way it worked, why dont you believe in the tooth fairy? Im pretty sure you cant prove she doesnt exist.

It wasn't your responsibility until you claimed that you could in fact say that Yahweh did not exist. This is what is known as your mouth writing a check that your ass can't cash. I have never claimed that the ability to categorically state that the Tooth Fairy does not exist. This is because I have an elementary grasp of logic and comprehend the rank stupidity of attempting to prove a negative.

Wow, insulting my grammar. Nice one chief. Isnt that automatic forfeiture of debate?

You can slide all over the argument and move the goalposts if you like. Thats par for the course here at the NT. You didnt say morality comes from god. You certainly fucking implied it. Any sense of morality not inspired by a 'divine figure' (or whatever you want to substitute there) is 'arbitrary' re: inferior. You didnt say there was an absolute morality, yet you did say that morality would be 'arbitrary' if it werent inspired by a god (oh excuse me, you didnt say god). So, if my sense of right and wrong doesnt come from me, where does it come from? God? Trees? Fish? Same thing.

You appear to be claiming that my sense of right and wrong comes from something outside of my brain, my reason, my logic (Reality doesnt care what you believe yadda yadda going to hell blahblah). Yet what you claim is totally unfalsifiable, totally unprovable. The only one having to prove anything here is you. And every other christian, muslim, hindu, wiccan, satanist, etc on the planet.

edit: went back and re read some of your posts. Youre right, you never actually make the claim that there is anything other than an arbitrary internal morality (although you seem to argue from that position without stating it, clever). Is that what you believe? If so, we are actually in agreement I guess.

Right and wrong is decided mainly by the society and environment you are raised in. Period.

Harrison wrote:Right and wrong is decided mainly by the society and environment you are raised in. Period.

Wow, 100% agree here~

I even agree that some of these values are codified in the Bible. Just dont agree as to the source material, as it were

mofish wrote:

xaoshaen wrote:

Let me rephrase for the literalists. I can say, with as much certainty as I can say about anything, that Yahweh, the god of the OT, NT, Book of Mormon, what have you, does not exist. People claim he exists. People claim he has direct influence over my life, and the decisions I make and how I make them. Yet there is zero evidence for this.

So, essentially what you're saying is that you're incapable of actually proving anything? You've essentially admitted that you can't disprove the existence of a god, but you can't say anything with greater certainty than that?

It isnt my responsibility to prove he doesnt exist. If that was the way it worked, why dont you believe in the tooth fairy? Im pretty sure you cant prove she doesnt exist.

It wasn't your responsibility until you claimed that you could in fact say that Yahweh did not exist. This is what is known as your mouth writing a check that your ass can't cash. I have never claimed that the ability to categorically state that the Tooth Fairy does not exist. This is because I have an elementary grasp of logic and comprehend the rank stupidity of attempting to prove a negative.

Interesting how you quoted this whole thing Mofish, but never adressed it.
As someone who belives contrary to what you post, i would like to hear your arguments

Harrison wrote:Right and wrong is decided mainly by the society and environment you are raised in. Period.

So if a society says rape and murder are ok, then they are?

I personally say no, they would say yes.

mofish wrote:Wow, insulting my grammar. Nice one chief. Isnt that automatic forfeiture of debate?

Haw! Thank you for proving my point. I wasn't insulting your grammar. I was insulting your inability to actually understand what I wrote. If I was insulting your grammar, the line in question would have read more like, "let's say I worship proper grammar, which would make you an infidel".

You can slide all over the argument and move the goalposts if you like. Thats par for the course here at the NT. You didnt say morality comes from god. You certainly fucking implied it.

No, I did not. Show me one single time I said something that would logically imply that morality comes from a god. One single time. I've been logically and internally consistent in my arguments so far. If you care to claim otherwise, I suggest you point out an example.

Any sense of morality not inspired by a 'divine figure' (or whatever you want to substitute there) is 'arbitrary' re: inferior.

Hey, I never said arbitrary was equivalent to inferior, that's an inference you added. What's more, you've done absolutely nothing to address or counter that claim.

You didnt say there was an absolute morality, yet you did say that morality would be 'arbitrary' if it werent inspired by a god (oh excuse me, you didnt say god). So, if my sense of right and wrong doesnt come from me, where does it come from? God? Trees? Fish? Same thing.

I said that internally generated morality is, by necessity, arbitrary. This implies that an internally generated morality must in fact exist. It's quite difficult for that which does not exist to be arbitrary.

You appear to be claiming that my sense of right and wrong comes from something outside of my brain, my reason, my logic (Reality doesnt care what you believe yadda yadda going to hell blahblah).

No. I didn't say anything that could be logically construed as even remotely meaning that.

Yet what you claim is totally unfalsifiable, totally unprovable. The only one having to prove anything here is you. And every other christian, muslim, hindu, wiccan, satanist, etc on the planet.

Haw! You mean other than your grandiose rhetorical claims about how you can disprove the existence of Yahweh? Funny how absolutely nobody here has been able to counter what I've actually said. People have made up shit and pretended that I said it and then argued about that, but that's been the extent of it. As far as being impossible to prove, well I'm not the one trying to prove a negative...

edit: went back and re read some of your posts. Youre right, you never actually make the claim that there is anything other than an arbitrary internal morality (although you seem to argue from that position without stating it, clever). Is that what you believe? If so, we are actually in agreement I guess.

No, I never argued that absolute morality cannot exist. I just pointed out, once more for the record, that any internally generated morality must be arbitrary in nature. If anyone wishes to address that point feel free to do so.

I would join The Church of Jolism whose primary belief is that Angelina Jolie's lips are actually an incarnation of the Almighty Herself and that you can achieve ultimate self actualization by having her place them on various parts of your anatomy.

I worship vaginas now...it isnt much of a stretch really

Harrison wrote:Right and wrong is decided mainly by the society and environment you are raised in. Period.

Oh look, Harrison just made a knowledge claim.

A wrong one, too.

Slavery, rape, and murder were wrong even back when they were commonplace. People were just idiots, it had nothing to do with morality itself.

Harrison wrote:Right and wrong is decided mainly by the society and environment you are raised in. Period.

Right and Wrong are 100% personal ideas. Your personal ideas can be shaped by some or all of Society, the enviornment you were raised in, your religions beliefs and a whole bunch of other things.

Yamori wrote:

Harrison wrote:Right and wrong is decided mainly by the society and environment you are raised in. Period.

Oh look, Harrison just made a knowledge claim.

A wrong one, too.

Slavery, rape, and murder were wrong even back when they were commonplace. People were just idiots, it had nothing to do with morality itself.

You say it was wrong, I say it was wrong. Other people said that it was perfectly natural. Whose morality wins out? Whomever could supply enough firepower to enforce it.

Yamori wrote:

Harrison wrote:Right and wrong is decided mainly by the society and environment you are raised in. Period.

Oh look, Harrison just made a knowledge claim.

A wrong one, too.

Slavery, rape, and murder were wrong even back when they were commonplace. People were just idiots, it had nothing to do with morality itself.

I've given my reasons and explanations for why morality is objective in other discussions, and I've described my idea of what that objective morality is in good enough detail. It would be useless to go on, I'd just be repeating myself.

Harrison wrote::banghead:

In place of adding something relevant just use the head bang emoticon again!

I've addressed all that needs to be addressed. He still has his blinders on.

Therefor I use the emoticon to express my frustration to those who just don't look at things from another perspective.

Yamori wrote:I've given my reasons and explanations for why morality is objective in other discussions, and I've described my idea of what that objective morality is in good enough detail. It would be useless to go on, I'd just be repeating myself.

Well, you could actually try answering the objections raised to your rationale.