121
   

How can we be sure that all religions are wrong?

 
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 04:40 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Quote:
.We could only be who we are with the ways things went down.


What makes you so certain that this is not the present case?

Have you ever woke up in the morning and thought about going into a 1st grade class and shooting all the kids but decided not to or are you who you are and never had a thought like that ever cross your mind?

Have you ever though about sucking a penis or having one put in your ass as being something you would enjoy? this questioning only applies if you are heterosexual that is. What I am saying is that you are somewhat of a robot regardless. I am sorry if that sounded crude but it seemed eye opening.
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 05:29 pm
@reasoning logic,
Give me one example of something you do not know empirically, that you believe is true...but are not positive because you would have to empirically experience?

Would you have to shoot up a school to know why you think it is wrong?

Would you have to suck another dudes dick to know why you are a heterosexual?

Or is a belief sufficient?

There is nothing in being a robot, in knowing what you believe and why you believe it, without experiencing it empirically...
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 06:25 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Quote:
Give me one example of something you do not know empirically, that you believe is true...but are not positive because you would have to empirically experience?


Evolution, meaning that we all came from the same thing.
I do not believe it completely because it may be incorrect but it seems as though it may be true.
Not that I have to empirically experience it but rather understand it.


Quote:
Would you have to shoot up a school to know why you think it is wrong?


No I would not but if I were a sociopath with the mind set that it would be exciting I would not care if it was wrong or right.

Quote:
Would you have to suck another dudes dick to know why you are a heterosexual?


No and that is what I was suggesting, you do not have to do it but rather find pleasure in it and I can only guess that you are like me and never thought about it because we are some what like heterosexual robots.

Quote:
Or is a belief sufficient?


I do not need to believe that a dick is unattractive to me but I rather know that it is not because I find it to be something I am not interested in.

Do you have to make yourself believe that sucking a dick is against your so called nature or does it seem as if it is already programed in you like a robot or a computer?

Quote:
Or is a belief sufficient?


I do not need to believe my experiences but rather live them.

Quote:

There is nothing in being a robot, in knowing what you believe and why you believe it, without experiencing it empirically.


Would you care to elaborate and share any empirical evidence that you care to?

Spade I may have shared this intellectual with you before but I do not remember you commenting on him.

He is a gentleman and I think that you will agree as well, He may be the most informed person I ever known. What do you think about his short 12 minute "lecture"?


georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 06:41 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:

As the title reads "How can we be sure that all religions are wrong?" I have my ideas and I would like to hear some of yours before I share mine.


I don't doubt your ability to be certain about whatever you chose. However, you haven't yet begun to prove your point here.

More importantly, your proposition is vague in the extreme. It's a safe bet that all religions, as well as all schools & disciplines in science are wrong ... about something. However that doesn't itself invalidate any of them.

You are just taking pot shots here and have failed to make a serious point.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 06:48 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
You are just taking pot shots here and have failed to make a serious point.


Why would I need to when I have others like you who have validated my claim by your post below?

Quote:
It's a safe bet that all religions, as well as all schools & disciplines in science are wrong ..
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 07:03 pm
@reasoning logic,
If you claim was that there is something wrong in just about everything then you are indeed correct. However, in saying that, you haven't said anything important or even interesting.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 07:06 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
you haven't said anything important or even interesting.


georgeob1 Why should I say anything important when I have others such as yourself who are more important than me sharing their wisdom with the rest of us?
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 07:08 pm
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
Evolution, meaning that we all came from the same thing.
I do not believe it completely because it may be incorrect but it seems as though it may be true.
Not that I have to empirically experience it but rather understand it.

This is not an example of something you think is true, but can not empirically experience...unless you can explain how you know it is empirical...and as you have said, you are not sure because it may be wrong, though it seems very highly correct...This is an example of something you believe is empirical...but do not want to call it a belief...(my perspective of your views) because you do not believe but reject...and see that it is a problem because you can not reject something you believe or think is empirical...

Quote:
No I would not but if I were a sociopath with the mind set that it would be exciting I would not care if it was wrong or right.

How could you know that this is true, or believe you know that this is true unless you believe this while not empirically experiencing it?

Quote:
No and that is what I was suggesting, you do not have to do it but rather find pleasure in it and I can only guess that you are like me and never thought about it because we are some what like heterosexual robots.

How could you have never thought about it when you have just asked me?

When someone is exposed to anything, they already know what and why they believe what they do...and they need no further evidence to validate that that is what they believe...

Quote:
I do not need to believe that a dick is unattractive to me but I rather know that it is not because I find it to be something I am not interested in.

But is that because you believe that this is true? Or something that you reject because you have validated that it is empirical?

Quote:
Do you have to make yourself believe that sucking a dick is against your so called nature or does it seem as if it is already programed in you like a robot or a computer?

I do not have to make myself believe...because a belief is a freedom of choice...I also do not need to validate what I do not believe, because I do not need to validate why I have no interest in giving another man oral sex...


It is not programmed in anyone, because if it was, then there is no good reason why anyone would have no interest in men or women...Or have an interest in men and women...And men interested in men, and women in women...

A belief is programmed, what you believe is not...

Validation is not programmed, and what you validate is not programmed...nor is it what you believe, unless one admits why they believe it...nor is it what you do not believe...unless one admits why they believe it...

Quote:
I do not need to believe my experiences but rather live them.

That is cool, I think that everyone does...but I think that people live them because they also believe them...and I do not believe that they live them, because they reject them, validate them...Or provide empirical evidence of everything that they believe/do not believe...

I am busy mate...and am here and there...but I will watch that video...
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 07:26 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Quote:
This is an example of something you believe is empirical...but do not want to call it a belief...(


No Spades this is something that I think "May be" empirical but I do not know and it truly is as there may be flaws in the working model that I understand.


Quote:
.This is an example of something you believe is empirical...but do not want to call it a belief.


This is not something I believe to be an absolute but rather something that I think may be true.

Why do I need to believe it to be an absolute?

Quote:
you do not believe but reject...and see that it is a problem because you can not reject something you believe or think is empirical...


I try to stay away from empirical-ism and absolutes because I have seen where I have been wrong on numerous occasions.

Quote:
How could you know that this is true, or believe you know that this is true unless you believe this while not empirically experiencing it?


Why cant I have these ideas without believing them to be absolutes?

Quote:
How could you know that this is true, or believe you know that this is true unless you believe this while not empirically experiencing it?


I am not certain. Can you know with certainty that there are not 1 trillion invisible gay leprechauns screwing you in your ears and you do not even notice it but rather you notice that your ears itch?
I am sorry for going of the deep end put you seem to push me in.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 07:28 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Quote:
This is an example of something you believe is empirical...but do not want to call it a belief...(


No Spades this is something that I think "May be" empirical but I do not know and it truly is as there may be flaws in the working model that I understand.


Quote:
.This is an example of something you believe is empirical...but do not want to call it a belief.


This is not something I believe to be an absolute but rather something that I think may be true.

Why do I need to believe it to be an absolute?

Quote:
you do not believe but reject...and see that it is a problem because you can not reject something you believe or think is empirical...


I try to stay away from empirical-ism and absolutes because I have seen where I have been wrong on numerous occasions.

Quote:
How could you know that this is true, or believe you know that this is true unless you believe this while not empirically experiencing it?


Why cant I have these ideas without believing them to be absolutes?

Quote:
How could you know that this is true, or believe you know that this is true unless you believe this while not empirically experiencing it?


I am not certain. Can you know with certainty that there are not 1 trillion invisible gay leprechauns screwing you in your ears and you do not even notice it but rather you notice that your ears itch?
I am sorry for going of the deep end put you seem to push me in.

Quote:
How could you have never thought about it when you have just asked me?


Could it be because others experience it?
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 07:58 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:

Quote:
you haven't said anything important or even interesting.


georgeob1 Why should I say anything important when I have others such as yourself who are more important than me sharing their wisdom with the rest of us?


Merely a snide retort: not an answer. My point stands. Do you believe you posed a serious question here???
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 08:05 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
Merely a snide retort: not an answer. My point stands. Do you believe you posed a serious question here???


I did not mean to share a snide retort but rather your answer because I thought that it was direct and to the point. Thank you for all of the help that you have shared enlightening others. Cool
0 Replies
 
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 08:13 pm
@reasoning logic,
Something is missing here, and I will attempt to prove my point...

I will use an example that I think we both have done...but think is immoral...correct me if I am wrong, and I will change my example...

I will also use an example that I think we both have not done but think is immoral...correct me if I am wrong and I will change my example...

I would venture out to say that you and I have both stolen something before...Now I will venture out to say that we both think it is wrong because we can empirically understand why we think it is...

Now, I will venture out to say that we both have never killed someone...but we also believe we know why we would never kill someone without doing it?

But because we believe we know empirically why it is wrong, though never experiencing it empirically...

If everything is not a belief, then what is the difference in those 2 examples, and why would we know that stealing is wrong empirically? And not because of a belief we can not prove? And not know the second is immoral? Because of a belief we can not prove? How can we know the second one is wrong if both examples are not because we believe them? If it is empirical, I understand why we think the first is wrong...How can anyone who has never killed someone think that the second is understood empirically? And not a belief, like the first one is? Though we have never empirically experienced the second example to understand why we believe it is wrong? But we have the first? Either, it is because we believe they both are wrong...either, it is because we do not believe they both are wrong...either, it is because we can prove they both are wrong, or we can not prove they both are wrong, or any combo of those answers...

Believe they both are wrong, do not believe they both are wrong, would require a belief, since we have not physically done both, and why I always say an "I do not believe" is the same thing as a belief...we can not prove they are both wrong since we have not done both...we can not prove they are both wrong = a belief...what other combination could it be?

My point is not to try to validate you or anyone is a closet murderer...but that it is always beliefs, and not about what we can validate empirically...

You seem to be saying that you believe things but know it may be wrong...fine, I agree...Then you say you attempt to validate things, but know it may be incorrect...fine, I agree...Then you say that you know things...but it is not because of either of these first 2 things...but it is because you do not need to believe it, or validate it, because you do not believe it? Or do not believe it needs to be validated, as it already is? How is it validated for you to know, if you do not believe it? Or have not physically, empirically validated it yourself?

I apologize for the long post...
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 08:34 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Quote:
If everything is not a belief, then what is the difference in those 2 examples, and why would we know that stealing is wrong empirically? And not because of a belief we can not prove? And not know the second is immoral? Because of a belief we can not prove? How can we know the second one is wrong if both examples are not because we believe them?


Spades I think that we all believe but what is the value of a belief if we are all wrong about the reality at hand? Sure we all have beliefs But why do you think that beliefs can not be incorrect? I do not think that you think this but yet you seem to think that beliefs should have some higher prestige than ideas, Why?

Quote:
I would venture out to say that you and I have both stolen something before.


Well at least you are being honest that you are a thief but I have never stolen anything. "just kidding Spades" Wink

Quote:
we know why we would never kill someone without doing it?


Are you suggesting that a God did not program us like sociopathic robots but yet programed others as such?

Quote:

If everything is not a belief, then what is the difference in those 2 examples, and why would we know that stealing is wrong empirically?


If you lived in a world where there were nothing but sociopaths that made slaves of your family would it be empirically wrong of you to steal a loaf of bread from them if it was a matter of life and death for you?

Quote:
"I do not believe" is the same thing as a belief...we can not prove they are both wrong since we have not done both...we can not prove they are both wrong = a belief...what other combination could it be?

My point is not to try to validate you or anyone is a closet murderer...but that it is always beliefs, and not about what we can validate empirically...


Why does it have to be a belief rather than a statistical odd? You will follow the most logical choice that your brain comes up with won't you?

XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 09:01 pm
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
Spades I think that we all believe but what is the value of a belief if we are all wrong about the reality at hand? Sure we all have beliefs But why do you think that beliefs can not be incorrect? I do not think that you think this but yet you seem to think that beliefs should have some higher prestige than ideas, Why?

All that I am saying is that we all believe and know why we do...I am not saying that we all could not be incorrect because I believe we can be...Anymore than what we all think we can validate? Not a chance...I think we could all be incorrect about what we believe, but I do not believe that this is most likely true, because I believe that what we all believe is what God and our afterlife is...Now can I prove that? Nope...but that is what I believe, why, and how I think I could be wrong, and why I do not...and why validation is not anymore reliable...because a validation is a belief...

Quote:
Are you suggesting that a God did not program us like sociopathic robots but yet programed others as such?

I was not getting into why I think this, or why I think that...I was just trying to be as objective as I could...If there is a God...Then I could never know what this God thinks unless I thought I was him/her/it/they...etc...I do not believe that this is true...So I do not believe that I know these answers...Others claim they are God...but we have talked about this before...A true savior to me would be one who would be willing to suffer forever if it meant saving everyone....Not someone who can walk on water or turn water into wine etc...but I happen to believe that Jesus is also this savior...I do not believe that a Devil exists, or that it would suffer to save us all if it does exist...I think it would suffer because it is evil, or wants us too...Or is the reason why others may suffer...

Quote:
If you lived in a world where there were nothing but sociopaths that made slaves of your family would it be empirically wrong of you to steal a loaf of bread from them if it was a matter of life and death for you?

I was not trying to get into grey area morals where it may be seen as acceptable to steal or murder or whatever the case may be...to one...or this God...all I was doing was explaining it as objective as I could...I do not know how this God may or may not judge people...Or if it does at all...

Quote:
Why does it have to be a belief rather than a statistical odd? You will follow the most logical choice that your brain comes up with won't you?

I think that whatever way someone wants/tries to label a belief...It is still a belief...

I think I know why people say it is not...and other times I would say that I do not know why...

But I think that everyone believes and knows why they do...and it is going to be very important to who we are...one day that no one knows...
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 09:35 pm
Are not all religions self-validating and do they not all believe that all other religions are wrong? I've never heard of cases where members of a religion claim to be wrong or that they are right and so are others.
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 09:43 pm
@JLNobody,
It is not just religious who do this...So it is not just religions/religious...
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Mar, 2013 10:21 pm
@reasoning logic,
reasoning logic wrote:

Spades I think that we all believe but what is the value of a belief if we are all wrong about the reality at hand? Sure we all have beliefs But why do you think that beliefs can not be incorrect? I do not think that you think this but yet you seem to think that beliefs should have some higher prestige than ideas, Why?


A bit of babble here. Ideas are not necessarily more true or valid than beliefs, though you appear to imply otherwise. You certainly have been sufficiently vague in both areas and others as well to convince a serious reader that you are merely expressing your own poorly thought out prejudices.

That's OK with me. Everyone has them. However, posturing to make it appear that you are above all that just makes you look foolish and in over your head.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sun 31 Mar, 2013 02:38 am
RL is usually in over his head. Then he laughs or sneers at others because he has failed to understand what they are saying to him. Why would anyone care to "be sure that all religions are wrong?" If you don't want to believe, then don't. It's no skin off my nose what others believe. To demonstrate that one contention or another is flawed for whatever reason--flawed premises, flawed reasoning, etc.--is not an unreasonable exercise. To make a sweeping generalization and then to invite others to join you in rationalizing the generalization is both futile and typical of what passes for thinking at RL's house.

If you don't believe, fine. You don't need others to justify your lack of belief; or, if you do, you're displaying a woebegone lack of confidence in your own thinking.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Mar, 2013 04:27 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
Ideas are not necessarily more true or valid than beliefs, though you appear to imply otherwise


I never made this claim, I have said before that ideas are thoughts and that understandings are approximations of reality.
If you wish to believe in your understanding be my guest.

 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 01/18/2021 at 11:25:49