You would make a good monk. You are smart but why are you so absolute about this rebirth thing? You have already realized that most everyone is delusional and do not use they're minds very effectively. What does Albert Einstein say about Buddhism? :) What about all the magical powers in Buddhism, I find that hard to believe too but so what? In Buddhism you are supposed to balance faith. You should check out The Abhidhamma
Refrain from arrogance as it breeds animosity. If you believe in some higher power, realize that not everyone wants or needs the same things that you do. It is a personal choice. No one person has all the answers to existence, but collectively we can work towards a better understanding of our place in this universe, and perhaps beyond that. I'm not a philosopher, or a scientist, or religious. This is how I try to live my life. Human, imperfect, but not afraid to learn. Peace and respect :)
Strive for knowledge and understanding. Ask questions. Respect the rights of others. Care for the hungry, the poor, the sick. Treat the earth with care as it is home to all of us, not just a fortunate few. Thank those who help you. Work for the common good of all, not just those that you personally know. Be open to new ideas. Don't be willfully ignorant. Encourage conversation/debate for better understanding. Be realistic in your goals. Don't lie or use force to change others.
Truth is subjective. Science changes as we learn more; what was once considered as fact can become fiction as new "truths" are discovered. Things once thought to be fantasy, can be proven when more, or better information becomes available, or we look at something from a different perspective. To find peace, and fulfillment, what is important is to take the best of all that we know, discard the destructive, and find the helpful and the productive that advances us as a whole.
There are so many things we do not know yet, or may never know. That is not a reason to simply stop and say "this is enough". To strive to know, to understand as much as we can, to be willing to change as we learn more.. These are the qualities that can make us the best primates, :), that we can possibly be. It is the misuse of information that harms humanity, our fellow organisms, and our planet. A wise person recognizes their own ignorance/shortcomings, and strives to improve themselves.
This video is provocative, and perhaps mildly enlightening....However, if we simply live our lives stating that we don't know things, and leave it at that, then we as individuals, and as groups, suffer stagnation. Humans look for answers to the why, and how of everything. Science helps answer some of those questions, at least on a "functional " level. Religion/philosophy try to answer the more spiritual purposes of life, without much reliance on hard physical data, rather on faith.
nothing can be wholly proven nor diss-proven without a single grain of doubt or certainty. all things, as can be perceived by humanity at this time, contain their own truths and falsehoods. nothing is wholly idiotic in belief or life, nor wholly wise.
i know, this all sounds odd, i suppose, but then again, that's how i view it all.
Ok well that is your opinion and perspective on the matter, but others of us hold completely different perspectives, looking from a completely different view. You're is just one interpretation of the world, while mine is another. Really, what is the problem with this? I think it's beautiful that everyone sees differently. Imagine if we were all the same and we all took this nihilistic approach to life that you are advocating? What a dull lot of folk we'd be!
Do you realise the implications of your statement about humanity's so called "stupidity"? You tar yourself with the same brush you tar your very own species: Stupid.
I like your statement:"The world would be a much better place if we just stuck to what we know and admitted our ignorance about what we don't know!"for example i don't know what happens after death,if there's an entity that goes on or not,so i can't claim that rebirth is a stupid thing or suppose to know what Dalilama thinks and call him idiot or deny Creation,i just don't know.So,according to your own judgement you are a first class idiot too,because your opposition is a blind faith too!
By definition Faith is trust in a thing. Logic may have more going for it and so be more trustworthy, but in the end you still have to put your faith in it. Also, logic only carries you so far and can let you down. I'm not big on Organized Religion but do know faith is important. Ultimately there's a place where blind faith, absolute trust, comes into play and makes all the difference.
@mallardhead Logic can never let you down. Only a failure of application of logic can let you down. Also, faith in logic need not be blind. It can be in full knowledge of what logic can do. Religion is based on unnecessary, blind faith.
Robert Frost- The Road Not Taken- enjoy the read.
The choice to use logic is still a leap of faith.
There is plenty of room for logic in religion (faith). It's only when politics interferes in faith that everything fails. Organized Religion is illogical.
@mallardhead There's nothing wrong with faith so long as it is fully justified. Faith in logic is justified since logic cannot fail when properly applied. The only problem is with blind faith.
@KevinSolway - I'm sorry, but I simply see things differently. I was raised in religion (some of which turned out to be false). I was also raised in the sciences (some of which turned out to be false). Most of the big science has come in the last two or three of decades. Unlike others, I was able to make the adjustments in thinking both ways, but have never found reason to disbelieve God. I rejected Organized Religion as a controlling govt entity as I reject Obama for the same reason.
How can you know that logic cannot ever fail? You have to have faith there. The only way to determine whether the faith(or truth) is justified or not is by your own judgment.
@jupiviv Logic can never fail because a thing can never be other than itself (A=A). You can have faith that a thing is itself, but it's not a blind faith - it's something you can be certain of. And yes, you can determine the truth of logic by your own judgment.
How can you prove A=A? Ultimately you have to have faith in it, which is the same as the "blind faith" of a fundamentalist.
What I'm saying is that it's impossible to externally grant any certainty(i.e, prove) to the principle of identity. It has to affirmed individually, in time.
@MenoftheInfinite yea ok that might not sound so amasing but rmeberhow many people respect him, it will have an affect and some people might just do it. how good would it be if the pope somthing to this affect insted of bashing gays and condoms
The Dalai Lama has inspired thousands of people to re-orient their lives in more skillful and compassionate ways. "Let's strive to be happy and care about each other" sounds like a better starting place for initiating positive change than: "People are mostly pitiful and stupid" if you ask me.
i like that you chose the D. lama as an example instead of the pope or some crazy jihadist because the lama carries with it less baggage and for some reason gets a free pass among the critical.
U know nothing about buddhism. Interpreting everything outside the circle. Well u cant say happiness is a delusion. Its real thing. Thats why ppl have religion and so on , cos they want to find a reassuring feeling.. so i guess it okay for ppl to have religion or beliefs (although u dont agree with them)
But anyway, u r free to state ur own belief. may u find ur way bfore u r too old to be happy (so many hatred from u old man). cheers
yes it is not an art talent but it is a talent. Intelligence really has its limit for some people.
Ok how about an example to present my thoughts. Even if you use high frequency CPU, if the bandwidth of the motherboard is a very small one, the computer performance will be improved but its very limited.
Aung1988, I think you are echoing my point, which is that we are, at core, apes, and our intelligence is not very evolved. But recognizing our own stupidity is the first step towards making an improvement.
KevinSolway... Not really because my argument is that some people are different from each other. Some like to care for their family, friends and etc. Some like to think about this world as a whole. Some are interested in politics. Some are family oriented. So basically, people going to work after shaving and people interested in sex don't neccessarily mean that they are stupid. Its just how they are built. They don't take life seriously probably like you and me.
Well it's certainly possible that a person can be intelligent and wise and also participate in a lot of sex, drugs, and rock and roll. It's just not very likely in my opinion.
It is conceivable that a wise person could be doing those things for a specific, wise reason. But it's difficult to think of what that reason might be. He might be pretending to be ignorant so as to avoid being killed by an oppressive government.
KevinSolway, "pretending" is not actually doing it so it doesn't count. I have to agree with jupiviv that people never do useless things when they absolutely, without a doubt, know that they are useless. Intelligence can be hidden but there is a certain limit to everyone and everyone can be intelligent in their own ways.
Thats right they need to make an effort. However, even if they try harder, they won't be as good as a person with innate nature of thinking properly. Its like someone trying to sing could become good to listen but there are people who are just born to sing.
Thats very true. We do listen to this video in a different manner because he misrepresented some facts just to degrade others especially Buddhism in other videos. So i do have a little less impression on him than you do.
How do you think you can create an absolute utopia when people are not even perfect? May be you don't know how it is to be born stupid because stupid people can't help but be stupid. That is why I am saying this guy says things in a very negative way.
Well... for me, he couldn't prove anything but say stupid to so many things. I also find some of the things that he said stupid wrong. People wanting sex, family life and relationships with others are not stupid at all. I'm not saying its the smartest things that we do but all these things are needed for reproductive and protective behaviors of all living creatures. He's just repeating the conclusions of modern philosophers. He's not even original.
yes yes.... don't get me wrong misses... I didn't say he's lying. I am just saying, I am seeing Arrogance and Hatred towards others. He thinks he's right and others are stupid. Don't you think he's a bit arrogant?
Wow... your every video has one thing in common. Arrogance. Try to control your humiliation towards others even if you are partially true. If not you will become a pessimist and you will never be a genius. Only the impartial people will become a genius. You have way too much hatred right now.
God and religion is just some medieval superstitious nonsense that people cant let go of. because they wanted to feel secure and important but reality is only here and now
Medieval superstitious? Yet religion was the cause of the revival of human civilization in the medieval ages. We call that perfection of religion, a completed favor from the god - islam.
This woman was taught the above in the video, but realized and finally learned it was illogical. /watch?v=b1CHw5q7oWA
There are Buddhists who believe reincarnation is a part of life, kind of like the christian "born again" idea, accept it has nothing to do with sin or karma, just that you can finally be yourself. It is a bit more complicated then that through description and there isn't enough room here to get into it, but Buddhism doesn't have to be mystical, mythical or supernatural in any way, where as theism has to be all those things.
The overwhelming majority of Buddhists believe in separate streams of consciousness that somehow continue beyond physical death to another physical body, in a linear manner. There is neither scientific evidence nor philosophical reasoning to support such a view, which makes it a purely supernatural belief, just the same as theism. However, I am led to believe that some Zen Buddhists have a more sensible approach.
MotI said: "I would dispute that anything good can come from religion, on the grounds that nothing good can come from delusion and falsity. The "moral" good that religion supposedly grants us is judged that way because religion blindly asserts this for itself!"
Yes, i think that really gets to the heart of the matter.
It is the one really useful insight I got from that Jed McKenna dude: "No belief is true"
Yes, Jed makes/made a good point with that remark, though I think it has to be understood correctly. Have you seen AhabCaptn's channel? he has a couple of good McKenna vids. e.g.:
But I just want to say, Buddhism may have a it of crap, but meditation does work, so perhaps they are onto something. Not the "divine truth" or anything stupid like that, but a lot of their teachings and so forth do have a certain amount of value.
Well, a distinction should always be made between the teachings and method of the Buddha and the religious practices of "Buddhism". The Zen tradition in particular has a lot to offer that is of great value.
if u still havent'woken up and u feel *offended* by my abrasive style, then i will see if xiaogui who is the best expert on buddhism i found on youtube, can find time talk to you in a nicer way. :)
if the fallacy of this dialect isn't made apparent to you by now, then you don't have much hope.. i weep for you :_(
when i say things that *seem* cruel, it's in an effort to awaken you from your stupidity and ignorant and smug delusion -- which is what religion is... :_( makes me weep to see brainwashed apes... :_(
if you want to persist in "it's true until proven false" in the true fashion of your hero hegel's dialect, then you are welcome to believe that dalai lama was a bacteria happily living in a cow's dung in his previous life and you were his mama :)
defintion of scientific theories = "true until proven false" ??
so if i say to you, when you die you are going to be reborn as a cockroach, since noone can prove it false, i would be right?! i could say, dalai lama is a reincarnation of a homeless man who starved to death in nyc c. 1856, i would be right?
the idea that dalai lama is somehow *holier than thou* has permeated the western society, even among some atheists and it's a proof of what good marketing can do.
the dalai lama is a fake and a fraud just like all religious leaders... his "heavenly mandate" is based on buddhist *belief* that he is some sort of reincarnation of some earlier lama.
this awful and misguided idea behind reincarnation was responsible for heinous crimes in asia, justifying the inhuman slavery system in Tibet as well as the hateful caste system in India.
It's not repeatable. Many advanced meditators don't experience memories of past lives. And this would presumably include the Dalai Lama himself. Anyway, many experiences, while repeatable, are still delusions, or illusions.
dalai lama's clinging onto the idiocy of reincarnation actually is very useful and necessary for him -- it's through reincarnation that he claims his divine right to rule over other buddhist denominations (or whatever u call them in buddhism) with an iron fist. reincarnation was also what justified the horrific treatment of the slaves in Tibet by the lamas - they were told that they had sinned horribly in past lives and thus had to pay for it in current life by serving as slaves.
so not only the religious leaders teach absolute idiocy, but this very idiocy is what keeps them in power, so the whole thing is more than sinister -- it's pretty much plain evil :(
im not sure that religion can always be seen as blind idiocy. a lot of good things come from it in addition to a lot of negative things. sure it might not but be true and it might depend on faith but it still helps make a good moral foundation in terms of behavior. and as for inheriting faith, as a catholic i see faith as a journey. there are times when i have doubt and times when i believe strongly in my religion.
I would dispute that anything good can come from religion, on the grounds that nothing good can come from delusion and falsity. The "moral" good that religion supposedly grants us is judged that way because religion blindly asserts this for itself!
I would argue that all of the supposed "goods" that religion appears to confer upon us can be replaced with a rational disposition and greater consideration for what is actually true of reality.
i dont want to draw much of an argument from religious history on the grounds that it can often be biased but durning the beginning of christianity it was the romans who in fact persecuted the christians that deemed christians as good and just people. whether or not this still applies today is debatable but when i look from the outside perspective at a different religion, i can defiantly see morality that i value. the idea that religion advocates a strong sense of morality depends on perspective
That religion advocates a strong sense of "morality" is not in question. I cede that point. The question is whether its morality is actually ethical, it being founded in false ideas about reality.
That's ok. I figured you liked it. Your point could be said to be the start of Socratic wisdom - the acknowledgment that we do not know. It's certainly a very important step. Just as important is not filling the gaps in our understanding with convenient beliefs, like religionists do.
Yes, I see what you mean. Unfortunately, it is often the case that when people say this, they actually mean "We cannot know anything at all, therefore I'm just going to make things up." :-)
A concept if a finite manifestation of mind. No concept can be reality itself. We know reality and the infinite through negation rather than direct perception (which is, of course, not possible).
Hinduism is a polytheistic religion, so it doesn't qualify. Buddhism and Taoism (other than in their most explicit religious forms) are atheistic. Neither ought be considered religions (when expressed in their pure forms). True Taoism is the antithesis of religion and true Buddhism is a method, not a belief system.
I don't think atheists will agree on a definition of atheism because many aren't prepared to take a step into philosophical insight and conviction.
Nice to see someone tearing a strip of Buddhism for once. Folk pussyfoot around it because they think it's cool or whatever. But as you've shown, it can be just as dumb.
As long as we remember that their are schools like Zen (which many say isn't even a school) which is amazingly 'pure' in 'outlook' & takes no prisoners whatsoever...& is certainly not contrary to scientific common-sense.
Buddhism is certainly not beyond criticism. See my vid "Am I a Buddhist?" Of course, the Dalai Lama no more represents Buddhism that the Pope represents Xianity.
And I agree that Zen is the best method that the tradition has produced. I suspect the Buddha would have agreed.
Have they already reached an absolute knowledge of everything?
As far as I know only dead people don't believe in something or nothing ! They are dead !!!
FAITH means : 'a belief in something UNPROVABLE'. right?
So, if there are naturalist atheists and materialistic or determinist atheists as religious atheists, could that means that their differences are based on different faiths ?
Many atheists will state that their atheism is simply the acknowledgment that there is no cogent evidence, empirical or logical for God or the supernatural in general. Their atheism is contingent, however, because they cannot know that all arguments have been exhausted.
My atheism is absolute and non-contingent because it's based on actual definitions and logic that cannot be overturned. Atheists need to be more philosophical in their approach.
Here, let me grow you some more neurons, originating from stem cells, of course. However, I don't imply that you have a low level of intelligence, just differing opinions.
Reason is to make a coherent puzzle and not add pieces that must be rationalized to seem to fit with the rest of what one has come to know. The larger consistent world view, the more reason lies behind its development.
> How you define sanity in terms of neurons?
You don't
> is Eugenics a good motive to dispose people with sick neurons?
Nature knows better than humans what is actually sick. We may do ourself a disservice. Empathy in general also serves us more than not.
I believe light is bright because my consciousness makes light be experienced that way. Neurons do not believe light-waves are bright because they aren't conscious by themselves. We do all believe all things. It is not what you believe that makes it faith or reason. It is weather the belief fit in the whole puzzle which constitute your world view and weather your world view can extend when what you recognize as a fact is presented or weather you ignore those to not have your world fall apart.
As the difference between ice, water and steem on a smaller scale only is a difference in speed of electrons, we cannot say that the parts of consciousness is any more conscious than the amount of wetness the parts of water are, which is no wetness at all.
Well put together video. I would just like to critique-not-criticize the substance. From your point of view faith is a sham, a pacifier of sorts for the intellectually challenged so to speak. Now if I were viewing faith from your point of view, I would draw the same logical conclusion, but I don't. The paradoxical reality of faith is, that you have to have it to realize it, and since you don't, or choose not to have it, you can't see its value or verity.
Faith is not a consumer product or a tv infomercial item, although most see it that way because the mainstream has been hijacked by the moneystream. Until you separate God from religion - Faith from window dressing and cultured normalcy, you will never see the value or witness true faith in action. It is the reason why the rich man woefully turn away from Jesus in Matthew 19:16-30 Most attribute these passages to wealth, but the truth lies much deeper, as is the case with faith.
It's very easy to see its value. Its verity, however, is judged purely by way of the feelings derived from it. That's not a legitimate means by which to judge the validity of something. We can feel *anything* to be true. Pedophiles feel their love of children to be genuinely virtuous.
All non-Xians religionists have the same faith in Gods you would reject as false. Where did they go wrong?
This is why there is and always will be an impasse in these types of partisan debates, you assign no verity to God and treat it as an article of the debate, whereas a person of faith assigns verity to things spiritual and to things physical. It is also why these debates either cycle endlessly or end in heated exchanges.
They do so because the purveyors of faith can never offer any cogent reason for a rational person to take the notion seriously. I am not an empiricist; I know reality is more than simply the information we receive through the senses.
I asked you what you have faith in. Can you at least answer that?
Jesus said; "Many sheep I have not of this fold, them too I will come for also." I could also counter that you find strength in an ardent defense of intellectual conciseness, but that too is in essence your comfort, and telling only of the finite state of your being not the probability of a realm greater than your current conscious capacity can provide a remedy or answer for. Our journeys are the same, while you count your footsteps, I am content to let my feet walk, while I ponder.
"There is and can be no realm greater than my current capacity"
And through out the centuries, how many have suffered because of that inane statement. how many armies have fallen, how many scholars balked at, and how many evolutionary idealisms thwarted. live long and prosper.
You think the statement arrogant only because you don't comprehend is meaning. It is not merely true of me, but also of any person who understands what is meant by the finite and infinite. With this understanding, there is no realm that is beyond one's capacity to comprehend.
So since you don't possess the capacity to comprehend God, therefore God does not exist? And you argue this as truth, and you would seek to proliferate this to the masses as the only truth. I understand fully the statement, it exists well within the confines of a secular reasoning individual. But Faith is not confined by such narrowness. If you could grasp the juxtaposed nature of faith/non-faith systems of belief, then maybe you would alter your 'one size fits all' reasoning.
As if I could do this in 500 characters or less. By your own admission, if it doesn't conform to the pre-existent confines of your current conscious domain, cannot be quantified or verified in the dimensional space and time we now share, your logic denies it. So the question is in truth not of God's existance, But of God's existance to you, and with in the confines of your logic God truly does not exist. I can not alter your perception, I can only offer mine. There is no right answer?
Theoretically no, Infinity dwells within God, by declaring some thing to be infinite, it must be comprehensibly discernible even if not plausibly identifiable. God is beyond comprehension. But but... the good news is there is one who has seen God and has affirmed God's existance for us. The catch, yea there's always a catch, you must like Abraham be willing to lay down that which you cherish most for it to be revealed to you, unfortunately most like the rich man in the book of Matthew can not
Mathew 19:21 21Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." 22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.
It is best then to keep your wealth, its only ever been about choices, and you've obviously made yours.
You want shroud yourself in indignant rebuttal because the probability of your infinite self righteousness being flawed is to great a burden to bear, so lashing out presents you your only solace. What is our next digression standing on opposing branches and starring while beating our chests.
we are 50% banana yet I dont think we evolved from a banana evolution is stupid the theory was taken from easten religions by darwin looks like we will never be rid of religion people just keep creating new ones
Sir, with the greatest of respect, your ignorance of the evolutionary process borders on 100%. I suggest you learn at least the basics. Even I have much to learn about the finer points of evolutionary theory. It's a complex theory involving multiple disciplines.
You have more faith than a believer. It takes an enormous amount of faith to believe that the world was created by accident when there is so much evidence of design all through it.
The world was not created by accident. There's no such thing as an accident in Nature. Are you proud of your ignorance or what?
There is no evidence for design in Nature at all. Design is an *interpretation* of phenomena, not an intrinsic fact of them. And it's a false interpretation at that.
Every human on earth shares 99% of their DNA with every other human.
Identical twins share the exact same DNA - meaning their DNA is 100% identical.
We share 60% of our DNA with a fruit fly.
Researchers at Cambridge University are convinced that the mud worms not only share DNA with humans but that they are also our closest invertabrae relatives
It is interesting how you say things with such conviction - conviction is a greater enemy of truth then lies. Who are you to say its a false interpretation? Give me one intrinsic fact of nature - anything you can say is an interpretation on phenomena. Sure some interpretation may be "closer" to the truth in a pragmatic sense, but for romanempire intelligent design is pragmatic.
We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they are never going to be born... never see the light of day... Certainly those unborn ghosts include greater poets than Keats, scientists greater than Newton. We know this because the set of possible people allowed by our DNA so massively exceeds the set of actual people. In the teeth of these stupefying odds it is you and I, in our ordinariness, that are here.
Dawkins is right that the possibility for humans far exceeds any practical reality that will emerge. The rest of that quote, however, is really poetic blather. DNA does not make a Keats or a Newton or a Buddha.
I think the conflict between faith and reason is largely a modern contrivance. The thinkers who initiated the enlightenment were all deeply religious, and in fact gained their confidence in reason because they trusted God would not deceive them. Absent some form of faith (whether in a God or just the benevolence of the cosmos), is knowledge possible? It takes a bit of existential affirmation on our part before reason is trusted, doesn't it?
Now, we can and should have a provisional faith about specific lines of reasoning. But to even expect answers from reason at all, we need faith in the method itself. I do not know for sure that knowledge is possible, but I have faith or trust that what we as a species discover about the universe is at least true enough to act upon now, even if in the future new facts are revealed.
Literalistic religious belief does qualify as idiocy in my book as well. But I do not think human beings can be psychically healthy without some relationship to the numinous. So the trick is to find a way to express the spiritual side of our humanity absent dogmas accepted on authority alone. Spirituality should be based in experience, whether meditative, contemplative, or entheogenic. Otherwise it is all just empty verbal moralizing.
I would agree that spirituality, as with philosophy, is supposed to be about the *inner* things. But religion all too often fails to be spiritual - hence the blind faith. I also agree that spirituality should be based on personal experience, but this experience must include the experience of reason.
I basically agree with that, but find that serious philosophy, as opposed to arid academic scholarship, is more than capable of addressing the need that consciousness expresses.
Anyway, the only faith that one requires, if faith it even be, is that the mind can comprehend things aright. When you break reason/logic down to its constituent parts, its fundamental basis, you can see that one is faced with *necessity* rather than faith.
The Law of Identity, as symbolised by A=A, is, for me, that foundation and it's one of the aforementioned necessity.
I'm not sure what a "belief in meditation" is, but if meditation provides convincing evidence of rebirth (eg, as a fish), then where is the evidence? None has come to light.
Abstract states of mind can be attained by all manner of means, such as drugs. I don't think they're proof of anything much.
We should take care not to confuse different realms of knowledge. Spiritual experience is obviously subjective in nature. Scientific knowledge strives to be empirical. I don't think that either science or spirituality should attempt to make claims which conflict with the other. They really don't need to, as they operate in different domains of our experience: science faces outward and tells us about the world, while spirituality faces inward and tells us about the soul.
This picture of science and spirituality as operating within "non-overlapping magisteria" is only a temporary way forward, though. Ultimately, I think there is much exciting progress to be made actually integrating the contemplative understanding of interior reality developed by wisdom traditions over the past few thousand years with the empirical understanding of exterior reality developed by science over the past few hundred. There must be a way of tying the two together...
This has been flagged as spam show
You would make a good monk. You are smart but why are you so absolute about this rebirth thing? You have already realized that most everyone is delusional and do not use they're minds very effectively. What does Albert Einstein say about Buddhism? :) What about all the magical powers in Buddhism, I find that hard to believe too but so what? In Buddhism you are supposed to balance faith. You should check out The Abhidhamma
uilium 1 month ago
Comment removed
uilium 1 month ago
Wait, Menoftheinfiniteare in the first minute of the video are you reccomending that we stop reproducing and just go extinct out of our own will?
mattmeup1 3 months ago
Refrain from arrogance as it breeds animosity. If you believe in some higher power, realize that not everyone wants or needs the same things that you do. It is a personal choice. No one person has all the answers to existence, but collectively we can work towards a better understanding of our place in this universe, and perhaps beyond that. I'm not a philosopher, or a scientist, or religious. This is how I try to live my life. Human, imperfect, but not afraid to learn. Peace and respect :)
1984potionlover 5 months ago
Strive for knowledge and understanding. Ask questions. Respect the rights of others. Care for the hungry, the poor, the sick. Treat the earth with care as it is home to all of us, not just a fortunate few. Thank those who help you. Work for the common good of all, not just those that you personally know. Be open to new ideas. Don't be willfully ignorant. Encourage conversation/debate for better understanding. Be realistic in your goals. Don't lie or use force to change others.
1984potionlover 5 months ago
Truth is subjective. Science changes as we learn more; what was once considered as fact can become fiction as new "truths" are discovered. Things once thought to be fantasy, can be proven when more, or better information becomes available, or we look at something from a different perspective. To find peace, and fulfillment, what is important is to take the best of all that we know, discard the destructive, and find the helpful and the productive that advances us as a whole.
1984potionlover 5 months ago
There are so many things we do not know yet, or may never know. That is not a reason to simply stop and say "this is enough". To strive to know, to understand as much as we can, to be willing to change as we learn more.. These are the qualities that can make us the best primates, :), that we can possibly be. It is the misuse of information that harms humanity, our fellow organisms, and our planet. A wise person recognizes their own ignorance/shortcomings, and strives to improve themselves.
1984potionlover 5 months ago
This video is provocative, and perhaps mildly enlightening....However, if we simply live our lives stating that we don't know things, and leave it at that, then we as individuals, and as groups, suffer stagnation. Humans look for answers to the why, and how of everything. Science helps answer some of those questions, at least on a "functional " level. Religion/philosophy try to answer the more spiritual purposes of life, without much reliance on hard physical data, rather on faith.
1984potionlover 5 months ago
Prove naturalism is correct, then you can ridicule others.
camy011 9 months ago
nothing can be wholly proven nor diss-proven without a single grain of doubt or certainty. all things, as can be perceived by humanity at this time, contain their own truths and falsehoods. nothing is wholly idiotic in belief or life, nor wholly wise.
i know, this all sounds odd, i suppose, but then again, that's how i view it all.
laughingthinker 9 months ago
very good video...............
joewittstock 10 months ago
Ok well that is your opinion and perspective on the matter, but others of us hold completely different perspectives, looking from a completely different view. You're is just one interpretation of the world, while mine is another. Really, what is the problem with this? I think it's beautiful that everyone sees differently. Imagine if we were all the same and we all took this nihilistic approach to life that you are advocating? What a dull lot of folk we'd be!
Sophiethefembot 1 year ago
Do you realise the implications of your statement about humanity's so called "stupidity"? You tar yourself with the same brush you tar your very own species: Stupid.
Sophiethefembot 1 year ago
want die blind!
HotZetiGer 1 year ago
I like your statement:"The world would be a much better place if we just stuck to what we know and admitted our ignorance about what we don't know!"for example i don't know what happens after death,if there's an entity that goes on or not,so i can't claim that rebirth is a stupid thing or suppose to know what Dalilama thinks and call him idiot or deny Creation,i just don't know.So,according to your own judgement you are a first class idiot too,because your opposition is a blind faith too!
Hasshasser 1 year ago
Look up the words: Faith and Idiot.
All faith is blind. You're and idiot not to know this.
Clean out the cesspool of your brain. The world would be a better place if you did.
mallardhead 2 years ago
@Mallardhead
Faith in logic is not blind.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@KevinSolway
By definition Faith is trust in a thing. Logic may have more going for it and so be more trustworthy, but in the end you still have to put your faith in it. Also, logic only carries you so far and can let you down. I'm not big on Organized Religion but do know faith is important. Ultimately there's a place where blind faith, absolute trust, comes into play and makes all the difference.
mallardhead 1 year ago
@mallardhead Logic can never let you down. Only a failure of application of logic can let you down. Also, faith in logic need not be blind. It can be in full knowledge of what logic can do. Religion is based on unnecessary, blind faith.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@KevinSolway
Robert Frost- The Road Not Taken- enjoy the read.
The choice to use logic is still a leap of faith.
There is plenty of room for logic in religion (faith). It's only when politics interferes in faith that everything fails. Organized Religion is illogical.
mallardhead 1 year ago
@mallardhead There's nothing wrong with faith so long as it is fully justified. Faith in logic is justified since logic cannot fail when properly applied. The only problem is with blind faith.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
@KevinSolway - I'm sorry, but I simply see things differently. I was raised in religion (some of which turned out to be false). I was also raised in the sciences (some of which turned out to be false). Most of the big science has come in the last two or three of decades. Unlike others, I was able to make the adjustments in thinking both ways, but have never found reason to disbelieve God. I rejected Organized Religion as a controlling govt entity as I reject Obama for the same reason.
mallardhead 1 year ago
How can you know that logic cannot ever fail? You have to have faith there. The only way to determine whether the faith(or truth) is justified or not is by your own judgment.
jupiviv 1 year ago
@jupiviv Logic can never fail because a thing can never be other than itself (A=A). You can have faith that a thing is itself, but it's not a blind faith - it's something you can be certain of. And yes, you can determine the truth of logic by your own judgment.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
How can you prove A=A? Ultimately you have to have faith in it, which is the same as the "blind faith" of a fundamentalist.
What I'm saying is that it's impossible to externally grant any certainty(i.e, prove) to the principle of identity. It has to affirmed individually, in time.
jupiviv 1 year ago
@jupiviv You can't prove that A=A, you can only know it. But it's not "blind" for the reason that nothing is hidden and you can see everything.
KevinSolway 1 year ago
How can I know something that I can't prove? A=A is the basis of all knowledge, but isn't knowledge itself.
jupiviv 1 year ago
Nothing that I'm aware of. "Let's strive to be happy and care about each other" is about as good as it gets.
MenoftheInfinite 2 years ago
@MenoftheInfinite yea ok that might not sound so amasing but rmeberhow many people respect him, it will have an affect and some people might just do it. how good would it be if the pope somthing to this affect insted of bashing gays and condoms
tmarritt 1 year ago
@MenoftheInfinite
The Dalai Lama has inspired thousands of people to re-orient their lives in more skillful and compassionate ways. "Let's strive to be happy and care about each other" sounds like a better starting place for initiating positive change than: "People are mostly pitiful and stupid" if you ask me.
stevenhorr 1 year ago
great video my man.
i like that you chose the D. lama as an example instead of the pope or some crazy jihadist because the lama carries with it less baggage and for some reason gets a free pass among the critical.
i like your logic as well, keep it up.
TheEarthAbides 2 years ago
U know nothing about buddhism. Interpreting everything outside the circle. Well u cant say happiness is a delusion. Its real thing. Thats why ppl have religion and so on , cos they want to find a reassuring feeling.. so i guess it okay for ppl to have religion or beliefs (although u dont agree with them)
But anyway, u r free to state ur own belief. may u find ur way bfore u r too old to be happy (so many hatred from u old man). cheers
MsAliceXXV 2 years ago
Love your videos
dramercedesg 2 years ago
Unfortunately I've run into a lot of Theravada Buddhists who believe in literal rebirth as well. . . . And even Zen Buddhists . . . aaaargh!
KevinSolway 2 years ago
yes it is not an art talent but it is a talent. Intelligence really has its limit for some people.
Ok how about an example to present my thoughts. Even if you use high frequency CPU, if the bandwidth of the motherboard is a very small one, the computer performance will be improved but its very limited.
Aung1988 2 years ago
Aung1988, I think you are echoing my point, which is that we are, at core, apes, and our intelligence is not very evolved. But recognizing our own stupidity is the first step towards making an improvement.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
KevinSolway... Not really because my argument is that some people are different from each other. Some like to care for their family, friends and etc. Some like to think about this world as a whole. Some are interested in politics. Some are family oriented. So basically, people going to work after shaving and people interested in sex don't neccessarily mean that they are stupid. Its just how they are built. They don't take life seriously probably like you and me.
Aung1988 2 years ago
@Aung1988
Well it's certainly possible that a person can be intelligent and wise and also participate in a lot of sex, drugs, and rock and roll. It's just not very likely in my opinion.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
Intelligent - maybe, but wise?
jupiviv 2 years ago
That's why it's not very likely, since it's very difficult to think of why a wise person would do such a thing.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
Maybe he'd do those things in the times when he's not wise.
jupiviv 2 years ago
It is conceivable that a wise person could be doing those things for a specific, wise reason. But it's difficult to think of what that reason might be. He might be pretending to be ignorant so as to avoid being killed by an oppressive government.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
KevinSolway, "pretending" is not actually doing it so it doesn't count. I have to agree with jupiviv that people never do useless things when they absolutely, without a doubt, know that they are useless. Intelligence can be hidden but there is a certain limit to everyone and everyone can be intelligent in their own ways.
Aung1988 2 years ago
Thats right they need to make an effort. However, even if they try harder, they won't be as good as a person with innate nature of thinking properly. Its like someone trying to sing could become good to listen but there are people who are just born to sing.
Aung1988 2 years ago
Thats very true. We do listen to this video in a different manner because he misrepresented some facts just to degrade others especially Buddhism in other videos. So i do have a little less impression on him than you do.
How do you think you can create an absolute utopia when people are not even perfect? May be you don't know how it is to be born stupid because stupid people can't help but be stupid. That is why I am saying this guy says things in a very negative way.
Aung1988 2 years ago
Well... for me, he couldn't prove anything but say stupid to so many things. I also find some of the things that he said stupid wrong. People wanting sex, family life and relationships with others are not stupid at all. I'm not saying its the smartest things that we do but all these things are needed for reproductive and protective behaviors of all living creatures. He's just repeating the conclusions of modern philosophers. He's not even original.
Aung1988 2 years ago
yes yes.... don't get me wrong misses... I didn't say he's lying. I am just saying, I am seeing Arrogance and Hatred towards others. He thinks he's right and others are stupid. Don't you think he's a bit arrogant?
Aung1988 2 years ago
Exactly. I didn't hear any hatred or arrogance in the video, either.
TheOtherSide100 2 years ago
Wow... your every video has one thing in common. Arrogance. Try to control your humiliation towards others even if you are partially true. If not you will become a pessimist and you will never be a genius. Only the impartial people will become a genius. You have way too much hatred right now.
Aung1988 2 years ago
Oh look at that, you've been blocking muslims.
ummey4j 2 years ago
I only block spammers and trolls.
MenoftheInfinite 2 years ago
Did you know that according to a robot smeller, human beings are a type of pig?
ummey4j 2 years ago
We don't use reason? Don't you realize that religion is the epitome of reason.
No people is not religion, that is "religionism".
faro0485 2 years ago
Comment removed
MrGoodday2 2 years ago
BUDDHISM IS A GOOD RELIGION.
MrGoodday2 2 years ago
Buddhism? Which one? The older one, or the secular mix one?
faro0485 2 years ago
The blind faith show here is this individual's belief that he's true.
faro0485 2 years ago
great video!!
TheUnmaskedMagician 2 years ago
hehehe, gotta love how he trashes the dalai lama and other religious icons.
yupiie 2 years ago
God and religion is just some medieval superstitious nonsense that people cant let go of. because they wanted to feel secure and important but reality is only here and now
I feel sorry for the delusional ones
sequential32 2 years ago
Medieval superstitious? Yet religion was the cause of the revival of human civilization in the medieval ages. We call that perfection of religion, a completed favor from the god - islam.
This woman was taught the above in the video, but realized and finally learned it was illogical. /watch?v=b1CHw5q7oWA
faro0485 2 years ago
Dinosaurs..
there your belief was debunked with one word lol
revival of medieval era, and the fall of modern civilization... thanks to the true devout Islams called Terrorists
sequential32 2 years ago
There are Buddhists who believe reincarnation is a part of life, kind of like the christian "born again" idea, accept it has nothing to do with sin or karma, just that you can finally be yourself. It is a bit more complicated then that through description and there isn't enough room here to get into it, but Buddhism doesn't have to be mystical, mythical or supernatural in any way, where as theism has to be all those things.
dichotomyofone 2 years ago
The overwhelming majority of Buddhists believe in separate streams of consciousness that somehow continue beyond physical death to another physical body, in a linear manner. There is neither scientific evidence nor philosophical reasoning to support such a view, which makes it a purely supernatural belief, just the same as theism. However, I am led to believe that some Zen Buddhists have a more sensible approach.
KevinSolway 2 years ago
hey i know people that looked like 3 of those chimps
AtheistAtLARGE 2 years ago
Were they Xians? :)
MenoftheInfinite 2 years ago
(The new figures are out)
With 78% of the US being xtian, I think so :)
AtheistAtLARGE 2 years ago
what is a xian?
yupiie 2 years ago
"Xian" is an etymological variation of Christian. As in "Xmas", the "X" is the old Greek symbol for "Christ".
MenoftheInfinite 2 years ago
werry nice video thanks for it MenoftheInfinite.. (easy 5star)
scicoe 2 years ago
You're welcome and thanks for the rating.
MenoftheInfinite 2 years ago
MotI said: "I would dispute that anything good can come from religion, on the grounds that nothing good can come from delusion and falsity. The "moral" good that religion supposedly grants us is judged that way because religion blindly asserts this for itself!"
Yes, i think that really gets to the heart of the matter.
It is the one really useful insight I got from that Jed McKenna dude: "No belief is true"
Negation.
EvoinOZ 2 years ago
Yes, Jed makes/made a good point with that remark, though I think it has to be understood correctly. Have you seen AhabCaptn's channel? he has a couple of good McKenna vids. e.g.:
watch?v=sDQX3MybtVA
MenoftheInfinite 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I have. It is in my favourites.
cheers.
EvoinOZ 2 years ago
why is this a video response to a satire of creationists?
Chewy427 2 years ago
I figured people who watched that vid might appreciate this one as well.
MenoftheInfinite 2 years ago
1,337 views
Chewy427 2 years ago
Awesome video!
But I just want to say, Buddhism may have a it of crap, but meditation does work, so perhaps they are onto something. Not the "divine truth" or anything stupid like that, but a lot of their teachings and so forth do have a certain amount of value.
You now have a subscriber.
Symbaoe 2 years ago
Well, a distinction should always be made between the teachings and method of the Buddha and the religious practices of "Buddhism". The Zen tradition in particular has a lot to offer that is of great value.
MenoftheInfinite 2 years ago
I agree.
Symbaoe 2 years ago
if u still havent'woken up and u feel *offended* by my abrasive style, then i will see if xiaogui who is the best expert on buddhism i found on youtube, can find time talk to you in a nicer way. :)
earthypig 3 years ago
if the fallacy of this dialect isn't made apparent to you by now, then you don't have much hope.. i weep for you :_(
when i say things that *seem* cruel, it's in an effort to awaken you from your stupidity and ignorant and smug delusion -- which is what religion is... :_( makes me weep to see brainwashed apes... :_(
earthypig 3 years ago
if you want to persist in "it's true until proven false" in the true fashion of your hero hegel's dialect, then you are welcome to believe that dalai lama was a bacteria happily living in a cow's dung in his previous life and you were his mama :)
earthypig 3 years ago
quoting einstein also, again only proves my point. what he said has absolutely no bearing on the stupidity of reincarnation.
earthypig 3 years ago
"he calls himself just a simple monk"
yeah, it's a great propaganda that western ignoramus often fall for -- exactly my point. thanks for proving how effective it works for you. :)
earthypig 3 years ago
"it's true until proven false"
i'm completely dismayed that idiotic comments like this are getting so many thumbs up... who are these braindead zombies anyhow?
earthypig 3 years ago
are you out of your mind?
defintion of scientific theories = "true until proven false" ??
so if i say to you, when you die you are going to be reborn as a cockroach, since noone can prove it false, i would be right?! i could say, dalai lama is a reincarnation of a homeless man who starved to death in nyc c. 1856, i would be right?
extraordinary claims require EXTRAORDINARY evidence!
earthypig 3 years ago
the idea that dalai lama is somehow *holier than thou* has permeated the western society, even among some atheists and it's a proof of what good marketing can do.
please watch HOLIER THAN THOU by Penn and Teller
earthypig 3 years ago
the dalai lama is a fake and a fraud just like all religious leaders... his "heavenly mandate" is based on buddhist *belief* that he is some sort of reincarnation of some earlier lama.
this awful and misguided idea behind reincarnation was responsible for heinous crimes in asia, justifying the inhuman slavery system in Tibet as well as the hateful caste system in India.
earthypig 3 years ago
It's not repeatable. Many advanced meditators don't experience memories of past lives. And this would presumably include the Dalai Lama himself. Anyway, many experiences, while repeatable, are still delusions, or illusions.
ksol000 3 years ago
He believes in it even though there's no evidence for it, nor any reason to think that it might or could be a reality. That makes it blind faith.
ksol000 3 years ago
dalai lama's clinging onto the idiocy of reincarnation actually is very useful and necessary for him -- it's through reincarnation that he claims his divine right to rule over other buddhist denominations (or whatever u call them in buddhism) with an iron fist. reincarnation was also what justified the horrific treatment of the slaves in Tibet by the lamas - they were told that they had sinned horribly in past lives and thus had to pay for it in current life by serving as slaves.
earthypig 3 years ago
so not only the religious leaders teach absolute idiocy, but this very idiocy is what keeps them in power, so the whole thing is more than sinister -- it's pretty much plain evil :(
earthypig 3 years ago
Serfdom under the Tibetan Lama system is something few people know about Tibet. They tend to think it's the land of peace, milk and honey.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
im not sure that religion can always be seen as blind idiocy. a lot of good things come from it in addition to a lot of negative things. sure it might not but be true and it might depend on faith but it still helps make a good moral foundation in terms of behavior. and as for inheriting faith, as a catholic i see faith as a journey. there are times when i have doubt and times when i believe strongly in my religion.
DieTrying14 3 years ago
I would dispute that anything good can come from religion, on the grounds that nothing good can come from delusion and falsity. The "moral" good that religion supposedly grants us is judged that way because religion blindly asserts this for itself!
I would argue that all of the supposed "goods" that religion appears to confer upon us can be replaced with a rational disposition and greater consideration for what is actually true of reality.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
i dont want to draw much of an argument from religious history on the grounds that it can often be biased but durning the beginning of christianity it was the romans who in fact persecuted the christians that deemed christians as good and just people. whether or not this still applies today is debatable but when i look from the outside perspective at a different religion, i can defiantly see morality that i value. the idea that religion advocates a strong sense of morality depends on perspective
DieTrying14 3 years ago
That religion advocates a strong sense of "morality" is not in question. I cede that point. The question is whether its morality is actually ethical, it being founded in false ideas about reality.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Excellent essay. 5* and fave.
Largo64 3 years ago
I believe true wisdom comes when one realizes that one does not know everything.
boxoftruth 3 years ago
That seems pretty remedial to me. I would have thought that simple step was the beginning of rationality.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
I like your video my comment is trying to show agreement with your statements. Cool video.
boxoftruth 3 years ago
That's ok. I figured you liked it. Your point could be said to be the start of Socratic wisdom - the acknowledgment that we do not know. It's certainly a very important step. Just as important is not filling the gaps in our understanding with convenient beliefs, like religionists do.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Yes, I see what you mean. Unfortunately, it is often the case that when people say this, they actually mean "We cannot know anything at all, therefore I'm just going to make things up." :-)
ksol000 3 years ago
Atheists says : "I don't have any responsibility for this universe."
Theists says :"I don't have any responsibility
either, because God is the Creator".
Well, how much an individual can be responsible for what he is observing ?
Understanding the Truth( for atheists)or God(for theists) has much to do with that question !
What is the difference between "0"( nothingness) and "infinite", anyway ?
We know that they are "CONCEPTS" of a Conceptual dichotomy, right?
What is a Concept??
marcotai 3 years ago
A concept if a finite manifestation of mind. No concept can be reality itself. We know reality and the infinite through negation rather than direct perception (which is, of course, not possible).
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
If so, are Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism,..., atheistic beliefs ? They don't believe in any God. So why they are considered Religions ?
I think that all people that consider themselves atheists should sit down together and find a straight and universal definition of atheism.
Otherwise a great confusion is being created where bigotry, religious intolerance and hate crimes could further proliferate from
marcotai 3 years ago
Hinduism is a polytheistic religion, so it doesn't qualify. Buddhism and Taoism (other than in their most explicit religious forms) are atheistic. Neither ought be considered religions (when expressed in their pure forms). True Taoism is the antithesis of religion and true Buddhism is a method, not a belief system.
I don't think atheists will agree on a definition of atheism because many aren't prepared to take a step into philosophical insight and conviction.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Nice to see someone tearing a strip of Buddhism for once. Folk pussyfoot around it because they think it's cool or whatever. But as you've shown, it can be just as dumb.
As long as we remember that their are schools like Zen (which many say isn't even a school) which is amazingly 'pure' in 'outlook' & takes no prisoners whatsoever...& is certainly not contrary to scientific common-sense.
TWITfromURANUS 3 years ago
Buddhism is certainly not beyond criticism. See my vid "Am I a Buddhist?" Of course, the Dalai Lama no more represents Buddhism that the Pope represents Xianity.
And I agree that Zen is the best method that the tradition has produced. I suspect the Buddha would have agreed.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
This is something that I can't grasp:
" Atheism is just a lack of belief"
Have they already reached an absolute knowledge of everything?
As far as I know only dead people don't believe in something or nothing ! They are dead !!!
FAITH means : 'a belief in something UNPROVABLE'. right?
So, if there are naturalist atheists and materialistic or determinist atheists as religious atheists, could that means that their differences are based on different faiths ?
marcotai 3 years ago
Many atheists will state that their atheism is simply the acknowledgment that there is no cogent evidence, empirical or logical for God or the supernatural in general. Their atheism is contingent, however, because they cannot know that all arguments have been exhausted.
My atheism is absolute and non-contingent because it's based on actual definitions and logic that cannot be overturned. Atheists need to be more philosophical in their approach.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Cut the craps !!!
You are making this very complicate.
The only question that everyone should ask is:
Could this Universe exist without anyone observing it?
If your answer is "Yes", what a hell we are discussing for.
marcotai 3 years ago
Here, let me grow you some more neurons, originating from stem cells, of course. However, I don't imply that you have a low level of intelligence, just differing opinions.
MaBu888 3 years ago
What is a faith ?
Do you really think that you don't have one ?
What is "reason"?
Is reason an effect of brain's neurons activity?
If so, could faith be caused by the same neuronic activity ? How you define sanity in terms of neurons?
Last question: is Eugenics a good motive to dispose people with sick neurons ?
marcotai 3 years ago
> What is "reason"?
Reason is to make a coherent puzzle and not add pieces that must be rationalized to seem to fit with the rest of what one has come to know. The larger consistent world view, the more reason lies behind its development.
> How you define sanity in terms of neurons?
You don't
> is Eugenics a good motive to dispose people with sick neurons?
Nature knows better than humans what is actually sick. We may do ourself a disservice. Empathy in general also serves us more than not.
Censeo 3 years ago 2
My best friend is ME!
If you consider "Reason" as a logical thinking tool, well,
who is using that tool? Your brain's neuronic activity or just You?
Also, what is the difference between reason and faith?
Could a belief being established by reasoning ?
marcotai 3 years ago
I believe light is bright because my consciousness makes light be experienced that way. Neurons do not believe light-waves are bright because they aren't conscious by themselves. We do all believe all things. It is not what you believe that makes it faith or reason. It is weather the belief fit in the whole puzzle which constitute your world view and weather your world view can extend when what you recognize as a fact is presented or weather you ignore those to not have your world fall apart.
Censeo 3 years ago 7
As the difference between ice, water and steem on a smaller scale only is a difference in speed of electrons, we cannot say that the parts of consciousness is any more conscious than the amount of wetness the parts of water are, which is no wetness at all.
Censeo 3 years ago
How about a little faith in not knowing...
busheybushdawg 3 years ago
I have no idea what that could possibly mean. One knows that one does not know. Where is faith necessary?
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
A "little" faith in something we have good reason to expect real benefits from would be a justified provisional faith, and not a blind faith.
ksol000 3 years ago
Chimpanzees are cute! I am proud to be genetically related to them. I am a monkey, yay! :) IMA MAWNKAY!
ghostofdayinperson 3 years ago
Well put together video. I would just like to critique-not-criticize the substance. From your point of view faith is a sham, a pacifier of sorts for the intellectually challenged so to speak. Now if I were viewing faith from your point of view, I would draw the same logical conclusion, but I don't. The paradoxical reality of faith is, that you have to have it to realize it, and since you don't, or choose not to have it, you can't see its value or verity.
MrVisions 3 years ago
MrV,
Early2it here, just thought I would give a shout out to you and say what's up friend...
You are the best...
early2it 3 years ago
Cont...
Faith is not a consumer product or a tv infomercial item, although most see it that way because the mainstream has been hijacked by the moneystream. Until you separate God from religion - Faith from window dressing and cultured normalcy, you will never see the value or witness true faith in action. It is the reason why the rich man woefully turn away from Jesus in Matthew 19:16-30 Most attribute these passages to wealth, but the truth lies much deeper, as is the case with faith.
MrVisions 3 years ago
Faith in WHAT? It's the WHAT that matters. What do you have faith in?
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
It's very easy to see its value. Its verity, however, is judged purely by way of the feelings derived from it. That's not a legitimate means by which to judge the validity of something. We can feel *anything* to be true. Pedophiles feel their love of children to be genuinely virtuous.
All non-Xians religionists have the same faith in Gods you would reject as false. Where did they go wrong?
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
This is why there is and always will be an impasse in these types of partisan debates, you assign no verity to God and treat it as an article of the debate, whereas a person of faith assigns verity to things spiritual and to things physical. It is also why these debates either cycle endlessly or end in heated exchanges.
MrVisions 3 years ago
They do so because the purveyors of faith can never offer any cogent reason for a rational person to take the notion seriously. I am not an empiricist; I know reality is more than simply the information we receive through the senses.
I asked you what you have faith in. Can you at least answer that?
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Surely.
For God so loved the world, that he sent his son Christ Jesus, that whosoever believed on him should not perish but have everlasting life.
I have absolute faith in the Gospel of Christ and it's administration unto me by the celestial action of the Holy spirit.
MrVisions 3 years ago
So, you have faith in some emotionally comforting words written in a book that claims spiritual authority for itself.
Ok, now explain to me where the peoples of other faiths went wrong.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Jesus said; "Many sheep I have not of this fold, them too I will come for also." I could also counter that you find strength in an ardent defense of intellectual conciseness, but that too is in essence your comfort, and telling only of the finite state of your being not the probability of a realm greater than your current conscious capacity can provide a remedy or answer for. Our journeys are the same, while you count your footsteps, I am content to let my feet walk, while I ponder.
MrVisions 3 years ago
I find "strength" in reason, which is a *testable* and verifiable thing.
There is and can be no realm greater than my current capacity. There is only the finite and the infinite, and I know both.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
"There is and can be no realm greater than my current capacity"
And through out the centuries, how many have suffered because of that inane statement. how many armies have fallen, how many scholars balked at, and how many evolutionary idealisms thwarted. live long and prosper.
MrVisions 3 years ago
You think the statement arrogant only because you don't comprehend is meaning. It is not merely true of me, but also of any person who understands what is meant by the finite and infinite. With this understanding, there is no realm that is beyond one's capacity to comprehend.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
So since you don't possess the capacity to comprehend God, therefore God does not exist? And you argue this as truth, and you would seek to proliferate this to the masses as the only truth. I understand fully the statement, it exists well within the confines of a secular reasoning individual. But Faith is not confined by such narrowness. If you could grasp the juxtaposed nature of faith/non-faith systems of belief, then maybe you would alter your 'one size fits all' reasoning.
MrVisions 3 years ago
Tell me what God is and I'll tell you if I comprehend it.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
As if I could do this in 500 characters or less. By your own admission, if it doesn't conform to the pre-existent confines of your current conscious domain, cannot be quantified or verified in the dimensional space and time we now share, your logic denies it. So the question is in truth not of God's existance, But of God's existance to you, and with in the confines of your logic God truly does not exist. I can not alter your perception, I can only offer mine. There is no right answer?
MrVisions 3 years ago
Can you say a single thing about God in the character limit?
There is only the finite and infinite. Which of those is God?
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Before all worlds I was. In all worlds I am. I am the alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end world without end Amen.
MrVisions 3 years ago
Cool, God is the everywhere and everywhen. I concur! That means God is the Totality, THE Infinite.
This I know *completely*.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Theoretically no, Infinity dwells within God, by declaring some thing to be infinite, it must be comprehensibly discernible even if not plausibly identifiable. God is beyond comprehension. But but... the good news is there is one who has seen God and has affirmed God's existance for us. The catch, yea there's always a catch, you must like Abraham be willing to lay down that which you cherish most for it to be revealed to you, unfortunately most like the rich man in the book of Matthew can not
MrVisions 3 years ago
You have descended into idiocy, as I knew you would. Pity.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
Mathew 19:21 21Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." 22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.
It is best then to keep your wealth, its only ever been about choices, and you've obviously made yours.
Peace
MrVisions 3 years ago
You want to divest yourself of your intelligence because you can't handle the burden of it. That is cowardice.
Quoting scripture to make a point is the most insulting and unintelligent thing a person can ever do in a conversation.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
You want shroud yourself in indignant rebuttal because the probability of your infinite self righteousness being flawed is to great a burden to bear, so lashing out presents you your only solace. What is our next digression standing on opposing branches and starring while beating our chests.
MrVisions 3 years ago
we are 50% banana yet I dont think we evolved from a banana evolution is stupid the theory was taken from easten religions by darwin looks like we will never be rid of religion people just keep creating new ones
romanempiresucks 3 years ago
Sir, with the greatest of respect, your ignorance of the evolutionary process borders on 100%. I suggest you learn at least the basics. Even I have much to learn about the finer points of evolutionary theory. It's a complex theory involving multiple disciplines.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
You have more faith than a believer. It takes an enormous amount of faith to believe that the world was created by accident when there is so much evidence of design all through it.
romanempiresucks 3 years ago 7
The world was not created by accident. There's no such thing as an accident in Nature. Are you proud of your ignorance or what?
There is no evidence for design in Nature at all. Design is an *interpretation* of phenomena, not an intrinsic fact of them. And it's a false interpretation at that.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
A parent and child share 99.5% of the same DNA.
We share 40-50% of our DNA with cabbages.
Humans share 98% of their DNA with chimpanzees.
Every human on earth shares 99% of their DNA with every other human.
Identical twins share the exact same DNA - meaning their DNA is 100% identical.
We share 60% of our DNA with a fruit fly.
Researchers at Cambridge University are convinced that the mud worms not only share DNA with humans but that they are also our closest invertabrae relatives
romanempiresucks 3 years ago
And your point is..............?
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
It is interesting how you say things with such conviction - conviction is a greater enemy of truth then lies. Who are you to say its a false interpretation? Give me one intrinsic fact of nature - anything you can say is an interpretation on phenomena. Sure some interpretation may be "closer" to the truth in a pragmatic sense, but for romanempire intelligent design is pragmatic.
busheybushdawg 3 years ago
I speak with conviction because I know I'm right. To not speak with conviction when you know you're right is to be a liar.
A=A is an intrinsic fact of Nature.
Intelligent design has no basis and can hardly be called pragmatic, other than for people who don't value reason.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they are never going to be born... never see the light of day... Certainly those unborn ghosts include greater poets than Keats, scientists greater than Newton. We know this because the set of possible people allowed by our DNA so massively exceeds the set of actual people. In the teeth of these stupefying odds it is you and I, in our ordinariness, that are here.
-Richard Dawkins
MrVisions 3 years ago
Dawkins is right that the possibility for humans far exceeds any practical reality that will emerge. The rest of that quote, however, is really poetic blather. DNA does not make a Keats or a Newton or a Buddha.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
I'm not quite sure how you extrapolated that deduction from the quote, but at least you are consistent.
MrVisions 3 years ago
I think the conflict between faith and reason is largely a modern contrivance. The thinkers who initiated the enlightenment were all deeply religious, and in fact gained their confidence in reason because they trusted God would not deceive them. Absent some form of faith (whether in a God or just the benevolence of the cosmos), is knowledge possible? It takes a bit of existential affirmation on our part before reason is trusted, doesn't it?
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago 23
Now, we can and should have a provisional faith about specific lines of reasoning. But to even expect answers from reason at all, we need faith in the method itself. I do not know for sure that knowledge is possible, but I have faith or trust that what we as a species discover about the universe is at least true enough to act upon now, even if in the future new facts are revealed.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago 22
Literalistic religious belief does qualify as idiocy in my book as well. But I do not think human beings can be psychically healthy without some relationship to the numinous. So the trick is to find a way to express the spiritual side of our humanity absent dogmas accepted on authority alone. Spirituality should be based in experience, whether meditative, contemplative, or entheogenic. Otherwise it is all just empty verbal moralizing.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago 22
I would agree that spirituality, as with philosophy, is supposed to be about the *inner* things. But religion all too often fails to be spiritual - hence the blind faith. I also agree that spirituality should be based on personal experience, but this experience must include the experience of reason.
ksol000 3 years ago
I basically agree with that, but find that serious philosophy, as opposed to arid academic scholarship, is more than capable of addressing the need that consciousness expresses.
Thanks for the considered comments, btw.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
A modern "contrivance" or paradigm?
Anyway, the only faith that one requires, if faith it even be, is that the mind can comprehend things aright. When you break reason/logic down to its constituent parts, its fundamental basis, you can see that one is faced with *necessity* rather than faith.
The Law of Identity, as symbolised by A=A, is, for me, that foundation and it's one of the aforementioned necessity.
MenoftheInfinite 3 years ago
I'm not sure what a "belief in meditation" is, but if meditation provides convincing evidence of rebirth (eg, as a fish), then where is the evidence? None has come to light.
Abstract states of mind can be attained by all manner of means, such as drugs. I don't think they're proof of anything much.
ksol000 3 years ago
We should take care not to confuse different realms of knowledge. Spiritual experience is obviously subjective in nature. Scientific knowledge strives to be empirical. I don't think that either science or spirituality should attempt to make claims which conflict with the other. They really don't need to, as they operate in different domains of our experience: science faces outward and tells us about the world, while spirituality faces inward and tells us about the soul.
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago 28
This picture of science and spirituality as operating within "non-overlapping magisteria" is only a temporary way forward, though. Ultimately, I think there is much exciting progress to be made actually integrating the contemplative understanding of interior reality developed by wisdom traditions over the past few thousand years with the empirical understanding of exterior reality developed by science over the past few hundred. There must be a way of tying the two together...
0ThouArtThat0 3 years ago 26