Are atheists being more illogical than agnostics?

@igm,

Hmmm... Wouldn't you be more certain of it, if indeed it was the case?

@igm,

Quote:

[Frank] is a bore in my opinion. I

Agreed. His substantive contribution to debates is usually quite poor, but he takes up a lot of space to make it. He is also very vain.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Hmmm... Wouldn't you be more certain of it, if indeed it was the case?

He will soon bore you with just how much "unconditioned happiness" he possesses...despite all the misery in his life.

And he will explain why what you consider happiness is not real happiness.

It will be more fun than you think.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
[Frank] is a bore in my opinion. I

Agreed. His substantive contribution to debates is usually quite poor, but he takes up a lot of space to make it. He is also very vain.

Nah...not boring at all. In fact, often anything but.

And most of my contributions are reasonably substantive...which probably is why you both have so much trouble with the..

I haven't given that much thought to whether or not I am vain. I do some introspection, but actually looking at myself for characteristics like vanity seems a waste to me.

I think the "vain" charge is just a throw-away insult on your part.

I don't mind or resent throw-away insults, Olivier. In fact, I rather like them. They show I am getting under a person's skin...and helps explain the kinds of reactions I get from people like you. Wink

This IS fun. I am really going to miss it when I go back to playing golf in the spring.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Did you say something, Frank? Something not about you you you, per chance? Smile

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Did you say something, Frank? Something not about you you you, per chance?

Nope. Let me say something about you, you, you!

You listen to everything I say, Olivier...and try to think up something clever to say in response...which is not your strong suit.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

I can't be certain of anything that will arise in the so called future... can anyone (please resist the 'death and taxes' quote)?

It is just worth saying that 'letting go' is said to have this benefit and I agree that it does have this benefit and may continue to do so but apart from that, my saying that this experience has arisen has no value to others IMO. I resisted for quite some time mentioning it as I don't think it helps others... much... to hear it.

1 Reply

For the record I've never posted a single instance of personal misery that I've had in my life... if I have had one... why mention it here? Anyone who says I have is mistaken and definitely wrong... and will never prove that not to be the case.

Someone is showing a complete lack of integrity... just to get my attention... I'd never encourage someone by replying, as that would just encourage and maintain those delusional character flaws. I do have some sadness and pity for such people though (of course this person is none other than Frank who has again failed to provide proof of his assertions). We all tell him to try and go bother someone else... but he persists... unfortunately.

1 Reply

@igm,

igm wrote:

For the record I've never posted a single instance of personal misery that I've had in my life... if I have had one... why mention it here? Anyone who says I have is mistaken and definitely wrong... and will never prove that not to be the case.

Someone is showing a complete lack of integrity... just to get my attention... I'd never encourage someone by replying, as that would just encourage and maintain those delusional character flaws. I do have some sadness and pity for such people though (of course this person is none other than Frank who has again failed to provide proof of his assertions). We all tell him to try and go bother someone else... but he persists... unfortunately.

Ahhh...you are responding to me again.

Good, the pretense that you are not doing so must be a terror to maintain.

Anyway...if you look through your thread asking for questions about Buddhism...you will find a posting of yours where you mentioned that no matter how much trouble comes your way...you are immersed in “unconditioned happiness”…as a result of your meditation. You also indicated that the rest of us who do not attain “unconditioned happiness”…are merely experiencing the far inferior “conditioned happiness.”

The conversation went on for a while…and I realized you were into your nonsense…and that you were untrustworthy in your replies. If you did not actually use the word “misery”…whatever word or words you did use was inclusive of “misery.”

I remember clearly suggesting that I do not actually use happiness when talking about what we were discussing...I use "contentment" in its place.

We both know the truth...and it really doesn't matter whether the others accept your falsehood or my truth...so...

So stop the nonsense.

0 Replies

@igm,

Your experience has the same value as anybody else's. No reason to hide it, nor to trumpet it either. But if you achieved unconditioned happiness, many around here would be interested in it. Of course, I suspect you didn't. In my experience, constant happiness is neither doable nor in fact desirable. Frustration and pain play an important motivating function.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Fact is, just in case you missed the sarcasm...I am right here and will be every step of the way. I will never leave you, CM...not for a second. I never have. If you think that I have run away from you...you really are living a dream existence.

you misunderstand me and take my phrases literally. the only thing you run away from is honest investigation into what i am saying, and into life/reality/universe/god and whatever else may or may not exist.

of course you will never 'run away' from me, you are always with me 'every step of the way' because you need me. you need to keep 'facing' me by 'staring my absurdity straight in the face', and running away from it internally out of fear. and continually doing so, to slowly build up your courage to eventually and finally actually 'face' it properly.

Quote:

The fact that I acknowledge I do not know the answers to Ultimate questions...does NOT mean I am not searching. You are really grasping at straws with nonsense like that. I acknowledge I do not know those kinds of answers....BECAUSE I DO NOT KNOW THEM.

But good luck with that kind of thinking. It's gotten you this far, which is to what...sixth grade?

so you say you are searching, but you acknowledge you don't know the answers now. so how are you searching? you are discussing on these forums, reading other material, doing whatever. you have been doing so your whole life. yet you still are sticking to not being able to know the ultimate reality.

you have been living 70+ years, searching for ultimate reality but not finding it. i am simply saying that your 'search' is always impeded by your own belief system, ie that you exist as a separate individual who's mind needs to understand ultimate reality, and because this appears impossible (and is impossible), you conclude that living in this 'i don't know' state is the only possibility.

but the 'i don't know' state dissolves in non duality, when the individual realises that it DOES know that it doesn't exist on its own, separately. that individuality is always an illusion, and this becomes a direct, experiential knowledge, experienced by the non dual noumenon, and not the individual phenomenon.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Agreed. His substantive contribution to debates is usually quite poor, but he takes up a lot of space to make it. He is also very vain.

Quote:

Nah...not boring at all. In fact, often anything but.

ROFL. funniest moment i've witnessed on this board. just before this post, frank is talking to olivier all friendly and trying to pay out igm together with him. then he realises that olivier has just paid him out, and has to switch to defence mode. ROOOOFL. i love how frank tries to seamlessly pretend he doesn't care, but ends up just going on and on about himself...which olivier then calls him out on eventually. funny ****.

0 Replies

If people want to run around like fairies seeking "happiness" they better choose a soft easy mickey-mouse religion like this one-

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/The_Art_of_Happiness.jpg

Personally i'll take Christianity because it teaches us how to roll with the punches life throws at us and still come up smiling.. Smile

"All creation groans in pain from the beginning til now" (Romans 8:22)
"We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22)
Waddya say Bob?

"Take the pain! TAKE THE PAIN!"

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/Barnes.jpg

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Your experience has the same value as anybody else's. No reason to hide it, nor to trumpet it either. But if you achieved unconditioned happiness, many around here would be interested in it. Of course, I suspect you didn't.

yes, you SUSPECT he didn't. yet you talk to him, and continue to question, leaving the possibility open that he has achieved it in your mind. or you wouldn't say you suspect, you would say you know he didn't.

the actual truth here is that YOU are one of the 'many around here' who would be interested in this constant happiness.

Quote:

In my experience, constant happiness is neither doable nor in fact desirable. Frustration and pain play an important motivating function.

this is where igm has failed to define the actual 'constant happiness' that i PRESUME he is talking about:

when the knowledge of nonduality emerges as the deeper truth behind the belief in individuality, a deeper bliss/happiness which CANNOT actually be defined as such (but must be for lack of better words) emerges with it.

the superficial duality of normal happiness vs sadness/frustration/pain continues to operate at its lower level. the deeper 'constant happiness' is simply the eternal freedom of knowledge that one is beyond that level.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Frank will not get the "message." LOL

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

There are many things I could explain, describe and share but no one here is truly interested in a way that would make that sharing worthwhile... they should only be said to those making or wanting to make the same spiritual endeavour. Therefore my hands are tied and I am realising that I have very little left to say or even repeat...

1 Reply

@igm,

Ok but what are YOU GETTING FROM OTHERS? Are YOU ready to listen?

Seems to me Buddhists like you tend to rain your dogma on us non Buddhists, without much thought given to 1) the fact that in western culture, philosophical ideas must be derived from observation and logic, not dogmatically asserted, and therefore that to us, you look like Jehovah witnesses knocking on doors; 2) the possibility that you are saying the same thing as we are saying but using a different vocabulary; 3) the possibility that you might simply be wrong.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

I mostly listen... how many times per month do I post?

You asked me a question in this recent exchange and I answered, that is not, 'raining dogma' on you.

You say that, in 'Western culture, philosophical ideas must be derived from observation' ... you did think before you wrote that... e.g. idealism etc.. and you infer that Buddhism doesn't use logic, wrong... I get 0.5 million hits from google and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_logic is one of them.

It is against Buddha's teachings to accept dogmatic assertions.

Everything you've said Oli shows that because understandably you know nothing about the subject in any depth you are wrong about almost everything you've said in this post. If you want to understand, ask questions, don't show how little you know about a subject by posting it as if you knew what you are talking about... unless it is purely rhetoric or bluff.

2 Replies

@igm,

igm wrote:

I mostly listen... how many times per month do I post?

You asked me a question in this recent exchange and I answered, that is not, 'raining dogma' on you.

You say that, in 'Western culture, philosophical ideas must be derived from observation' ... you did think before you wrote that... e.g. idealism etc.. and you infer that Buddhism doesn't use logic, wrong... I get 0.5 million hits from google and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_logic is one of them.

It is against Buddha's teachings to accept dogmatic assertions.

Everything you've said Oli shows that because understandably you know nothing about the subject in any depth you are wrong about almost everything you've said in this post. If you want to understand, ask questions, don't show how little you know about a subject by posting it as if you knew what you are talking about... unless it is purely rhetoric or bluff.

?????

0 Replies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_logic

Buddhist logic obviously contains the forms and nature of syllogism, the essence of judgement, etc. for which it deserves the name of logic. But that logic is not only logic it also establishes the doctrines of the Buddhists. Thus the philosophical tenets were the fulcrum and the logic developed as tools to establish those.

0 Replies

Are atheists being more illogical than agnostics?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know