RootsBooster Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I'm sure you'd agree though, simply being without something is not that fulfilling. What I am against is a scientists who gloat over their successes over religion and fail to see any benefits within organisations that preach about and care for the welfare of others. I don't agree at all, I've never had the "God-shaped hole" that some people talk about, so I do not feel unfulfilled by being without belief in God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairDooz Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I don't agree at all, I've never had the "God-shaped hole" that some people talk about, so I do not feel unfulfilled by being without belief in God. I don't feel unfulfilled by not supporting Sheffield Wednesday ... It's not that clear where a sense of fulfilment might come from though is it? And no, I'm not advocating supporting the Owls for fulfilment(?) I was just making the point that it's not very fulfilling simply not doing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryedo40 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 ??? You're receiving me on a different wavelength from the one I'm transmitting on. No, I'm not. What you are doing is parroting the same arguments I hear from religious apologists - although, admittedly, you may not be aware of it. You are equating atheism with a cold, robotic, scientific, material view of the world. I don't know how you come to that view about atheism. As far as I'm concerned, being atheist is nothing more than a stance you hold in relation to the god question. That stance doesn't make you cold & heartless. It doesn't prevent you from having emotional needs - and it doesn't prevent you from fulling those needs. It also doesn't prevent you from having a sense of community. You also seem to have built-up a straw-man about science replacing religion. Well, science isn't about that. And even if it was, that still wouldn't prevent people from forming support networks, charitable organisations and a sense of community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairDooz Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 What you are doing is parroting the same arguments I hear from religious apologists - although, admittedly, you may not be aware of it. You are equating atheism with a cold, robotic, scientific, material view of the world. I used "aetheism" in a list. Having read that list you seem to have put the words in a different order and constructed a new meaning from them. Perhaps now would be a good time to take a look (if you haven't already done so) at the TED video I linked to earlier. You also seem to have built-up a straw-man about science replacing religion. Is this the right thread for a discussion about Science vs Religion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 Is this the right thread for a discussion about Science vs Religion? I had given up on that well before the end of the first page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairDooz Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Forgive me. What would be a better title? Sorry gotta go out now. Will be back later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryedo40 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Is this the right thread for a discussion about Science vs Religion? Science vs religion isn't exactly the same as science replacing religion, is it? I haven't seen anyone arguing that science should replace religion. You came up with that notion and then continued the argument that replacing religion with science would be a bad idea. You've basically built a strawman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Hey FJ - Ever heard of a life outside of SF? Work, social life, voluntary work ... I haven't had time to read all this let alone formulate a response.?!? I have a full-time job and I study in the evenings, so forgive me for not taking you very seriously when I can see that you've been on and off this thread all day. Plus your replies to me have been huge long posts (as long as any of mine), and you've been on and off this thread all day. The problem is that you've never addressed any of the points I've made. It's rather like talking to a bot, like you've just identified some key words in my posts and then composed a post based on them without any understanding of what I actually said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I don't feel unfulfilled by not supporting Sheffield Wednesday ... It's not that clear where a sense of fulfilment might come from though is it? And no, I'm not advocating supporting the Owls for fulfilment(?) I was just making the point that it's not very fulfilling simply not doing something. You said it when talking about atheism, now you're trying to pass it off as just making an unrelated point? Atheism isn't about "simply not doing something" it's about simply being without belief in God(s). You can live a very fulfilled live while being an atheist, or you can be.... well whatever it is you are, you don't seem to sure about it yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairDooz Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 ?!? I have a full-time job and I study in the evenings, so forgive me for not taking you very seriously when I can see that you've been on and off this thread all day. Oy vey! A guy takes a day off work! The problem is that you've never addressed any of the points I've made. It's rather like talking to a bot, like you've just identified some key words in my posts and then composed a post based on them without any understanding of what I actually said. I've just re-read your posts. Now correct me if I'm wrong (no invitation necessary I'm sure!) but the crucial point you seem to think I haven't addressed, is that you're not saying science should replace religion (I've already acknowledged and accepted that) but that reason, empathy and logic should. That may be fine in theory, but what I'm arguing for is that a little bit more of that theory gets put into practice. Now, whatever the faults of the church, the mosque, the synagogue (past and present) I see more people with faith helping the poor, the under priveleged and the homeless on a daily basis, than I do people from organisations professing reason, empathy and logic in their mission statement. Forgive me for being facetious, but how grateful are the world's poor, or Sheffield's homeless for your reason, empathy and logic? Einstein himself recognised the "limits of the purely rational conception of our existence." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.