The Philosophy of Chasing Ghosts and Demons (souls, hell, genesis)

[rifleman]

I've realized and now recognize some common responses here to most all of the hotly debated posts. So, here's some of my point-form observations, and a general request for your open responses:

1. There are many cases of absolute right and wrong as regards a particular topic.

2. There may be good evidence for or against an hypothesis or claim.

3. This has nothing to do with how discussions of such topics proceed, because...

4. There are simply too many who cannot abandon their life's belief system, no matter what it is.

So, we're permanently stuck on several key issues, in, for example, debates on theism versus atheism. We atheists are accused of being bull-headed and arrogant when we simply present good ideas or logical deductions, while we see theists as unwilling to even briefly consider alternate ideas, even those which are of recent vintage and well-documented by elegant research methods. They cannot ever present empirical evidence because their beliefs are based primarily on faith. Or on ambiguous observations.

So, when there are holes in the logic of one side's argument that you could easily fly a Space Shuttle through, should that not be enough to finish off the discussion for good? Why rehash the same-old same-old?

Question is this: if a hot-button hypothesis, let's say the hypothesized Big Bang concept, or the Moderator cut: edited Genesis Creation account, are shown to be faulty or inadequate, why the persistence in holding on to them versus advancing to another, more plausible idea?

It does not explain why one side in such arguments continues to stick to their jammed-up guns, when their point, their "evidence" and their perspective, in the face of a complete logical dismissal of really bad evidence, has effectively been killed off. Dead. Cold.

Their mock amazement at the continued dismissal of their now-disproven pet ideas is interesting, but in the end, fruitless. It's still a dead idea they cling to, and it always will be.

[Reverend1111]

Most people aren't open to other possibilites when they have been taught by their parents, teachers and priests of what their own beliefs are. They believe it's the truth even though we all know no one is perfect. Most people believe their truth is absolute even if someone else presents a higher or better truth.

I believe everyone should love each other no matter what. Our beliefs are our own and when we try to convince them on another, that is not love. Some say they fear for others. Well, fear is a negative emotion and should not be one to exhibit toward another. Yes, we can fear being shot or what have you but to fear for another even if we don't know if our beliefs are true or not, is just plain stupid. Fear for another because of what they believe is not love.

We each have a path. We chose it for a reason. To have another dispell that belief won't do any good for either party. I like to stay open minded as there have been a few times when what I believed one day was disproved another day. If we lead with love and forget about what another is learning, we can see a better life for all since we all have to live here.

Most religions like to lead with fear. They put conditions on the way we should live our lives. I don't fear hell nor do I fear for another soul. What we do, we do to ourselves. It's our own souls we need to worry about.

Everything in life evolves. That includes science, religion and life in general. What is true today, may not be true tomorrow.

[dobeable]

Originally Posted by Reverend1111

Most people aren't open to other possibilites when they have been taught by their parents, teachers and priests of what their own beliefs are. They believe it's the truth even though we all know no one is perfect. Most people believe their truth is absolute even if someone else presents a higher or better truth.

I believe everyone should love each other no matter what. Our beliefs are our own and when we try to convince them on another, that is not love. Some say they fear for others. Well, fear is a negative emotion and should not be one to exhibit toward another. Yes, we can fear being shot or what have you but to fear for another even if we don't know if our beliefs are true or not, is just plain stupid. Fear for another because of what they believe is not love.

We each have a path. We chose it for a reason. To have another dispell that belief won't do any good for either party. I like to stay open minded as there have been a few times when what I believed one day was disproved another day. If we lead with love and forget about what another is learning, we can see a better life for all since we all have to live here.

Most religions like to lead with fear. They put conditions on the way we should live our lives. I don't fear hell nor do I fear for another soul. What we do, we do to ourselves. It's our own souls we need to worry about.

Everything in life evolves. That includes science, religion and life in general. What is true today, may not be true tomorrow.

well said
but on the other hand-just to ad-truth is truth no matter what
an apple is an apple today or tommoro unless it magicaly evolves into some super human apple
what im tryin to say is what youve already said -sometimes we think somethin is true but then find out that its not-just like when people "knew" the earth was flat,but sometimes people dont budge from their opinions even if it seems 100% right to do so
real truth will always be truth today and tommorro whether one has a clear picture of that particular truth is depends on the individuals knowledge-but yes we can always learn somethin new-
well said

[Eresh]

Rifleman, your 4 points sum it up nicely, particularly #4.
There are a lot of studies in the science education literature that show how people's beliefs affect how they view/interpret/dismiss evidence. People can give evidence until they are blue in the face, but it's pretty much like banging one's head against a wall.

[Reverend1111]

Originally Posted by dobeable

well said
but on the other hand-just to ad-truth is truth no matter what
an apple is an apple today or tommoro unless it magicaly evolves into some super human apple
what im tryin to say is what youve already said -sometimes we think somethin is true but then find out that its not-just like when people "knew" the earth was flat,but sometimes people dont budge from their opinions even if it seems 100% right to do so
real truth will always be truth today and tommorro whether one has a clear picture of that particular truth is depends on the individuals knowledge-but yes we can always learn somethin new-
well said

Absolute truth never changes. Imperfect truth always changes. Thanks for the clarification.

[Bud235]

I agree there are unbridgeable gaps between theists and atheists.

However, let me clarify it: I am an atheist -- like any atheists in the world -- I am open to any theist's ideas (absolutely, yes). But I must be convinced by evidences (not faith) supporting their ideas. I accepted many, many ideas in my life, but all of them have some evidence supports. When we are talking about evidence supports here, we are not talking about mathematical/scientific proofs, it simply means some logical connections -- very simple and basic demands.

Here's the unsolvable problem: theists say "there is a God", but refuse to offer any logical verifiable evidence; atheists demand such evidence.

Yes, there is a permanent problem. But we are on a public forum, let everyone be a judge: which side is reasonable? Which side do you want to be in?

I think the internet is a religion killer. In the past, people went to the same church all their lives, and never heard any alternative ideas. Now everyone does.

[rifleman]

Originally Posted by Bud235

I think the internet is a religion killer. In the past, people went to the same church all their lives, and never heard any alternative ideas. Now everyone does.

Very true. In fact, it's a "truth source" for everything, as the Chinese government is now discovering. Being able to see the thousand alternate opinions, well argued and reviewed, will eventually kill off most singular thinking. I look forward to it. You may have hit on something important Bud; the ongoing decline in church attendance witnessed world-wide, the rise of several alternate "wack-a-loon) religious fringes, at least for a short while until another one comes along.

When / if the church's administration, and the fundamentalist fringe, realize this, they may yet decide to attack the 'Net as the Spawn of Satan, much worse than that old debil snake.

Avert Your eyes, my child!

[Reverend1111]

And then there will the handful that are so stuck in their own beliefs that they will eventually have to fall in line with the reest of the sane world. In the end, the fundamentalists will lose out to the open minded of mankind. Until then, we have to put up with the ridicule and insane notion of burning in hell.

[baket]

Originally Posted by dobeable

sometimes we think somethin is true but then find out that its not-just like when people "knew" the earth was flat,but sometimes people dont budge from their opinions even if it seems 100% right to do so
real truth will always be truth today and tommorro whether one has a clear picture of that particular truth is depends on the individuals knowledge-but yes we can always learn somethin new-
well said

well about the flat earth. before galileo's breakthrough discovery, do not tell me it is irrational for people to say earth is flat that time because they walk on flat lands. what i marvel about is the fact that the earth is round but we walk on flat lands. i am constantly told we walk on flat lands because the circumnavigation of earth is wide... anyway, i want to see the rover go to the edge of the circle on mars, to see what happens. does it fall off mars? if it does, why does no one fall of earth? gravity again? but gravity is a mystery right? is gravity ONLY present in earth? which brings me to landing on moon. why is the shuttle used by the astronauts not floating but when the astronauts "walk" they seem to be jumpfloating wat the hell is that about? is that logical? also rovers in mars clearly dont float. so there is gravity in other planets too?

[Eresh]

Originally Posted by baket

well about the flat earth. before galileo's breakthrough discovery, do not tell me it is irrational for people to say earth is flat that time because they walk on flat lands. what i marvel about is the fact that the earth is round but we walk on flat lands. i am constantly told we walk on flat lands because the circumnavigation of earth is wide... anyway, i want to see the rover go to the edge of the circle on mars, to see what happens. does it fall off mars? if it does, why does no one fall of earth? gravity again? but gravity is a mystery right? is gravity ONLY present in earth? which brings me to landing on moon. why is the shuttle used by the astronauts not floating but when the astronauts "walk" they seem to be jumpfloating wat the hell is that about? is that logical? also rovers in mars clearly dont float. so there is gravity in other planets too?

Huh? Gravity is just the force of attraction between two objects that have any mass at all. The greater the mass, the greater the attraction (and the distance between the two also factors in). This applies to everything, including other planets. The moon does have gravity, but it isn't as great as that on earth because the moon has way less mass. Humans don't have a lot of mass, so they aren't as affected by the moon's gravity as something much heavier (such as a space shuttle) would be.