PsiPog.net
View topic - why are ghosts considered religious?
PsiPog.net Forum Index » General Discussion » why are ghosts considered religious?
| why are ghosts considered religious? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author | Message | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Posted on Wed Jun 07, 2006 5:34 pm | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MarcusT
Joined: 17 May 2006 |
Kief,
Evidently I didn't get my point across well enough.. Think of science by itself. What are the guidelines, what basic steps do you have to follow, how many people believe in science? It is things like these that defines at least a cult by my interpretation. What about baseball, basketball, all these other sports. There are specific guidelines set down that has to be followed, and those that don't follow the guidelines get penalized for it. It's the same damn thing as religion!! People just don't look at it that way hence my saying that everything could be class as a religion or "cult" if you prefer. Also, it appears to me that your a bit fanatical about this subject anyway, all I ask you to do is just for one day, put your self in other peoples minds, try to see and feel what they think, expand your awareness, don't be so critical of other viewpoints if you don't agree with them. I'm not saying don't say you disagree, just asking you to be reasonable and talk like an intelligent being, as much as I disagree with you I try to keep the tone calm and collected, bring out points why I may disagree without trying to imply insults- everybody got different viewpoints. It's a matter of finding a middle ground where we can relate to each other and be able to respect each other's viewpoints. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back to top | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted on Wed Jun 07, 2006 7:37 pm | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yamamaya
Joined: 18 Jan 2006 |
wow. great posts guys. i didn't expect such a response from a topic like this. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back to top | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted on Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:15 pm | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peebrain
Site Admin |
Science does not typically deal in explanations that involve or invoke deities, supernaturalism, spirits, superstition, dogmas, myths, and other such fanciful things.
That is not the definition of religion we use at PsiPog. I've already explained our definition. Some science topics do fall under the PsiPog definition of religion. Stating the big bang is a fact would be a religious statement. Stating that humans evolved from apes would be a religious statement. Stating that when we die, we rot in the ground, is a religious statement (however, stating that our body rots in the ground is not a religious statement). We don't know what happens to consciousness. One can talk about religion in a scientific context, but science is not a religion and the basic laws of nature that we have discovered are not in any way religious. This includes evolution. You are confusing two different uses of the word "evolution", and you do it a lot in your posts. The fact that evolution occurs in nature has been proven. Yes. The fact that humans came from apes has not been proven. So if you say, "evolution is a fact", then you are right if you are meaning, "we have seen some organisms evolve". You are NOT right if you mean, "humans evolved from apes". And if you are saying that humans evolved from apes, and it is a fact, then that is a religious comment, under the PsiPog definition of religion. "What makes you any different than a person who says "We came from Adam and Eve... this is just a basic fact of life."?" EVIDENCE. Lots and lots of evidence. Congratulations. The fundamentalist would say the same thing. Thanks for proving my point. It doesn't matter what I think or they think, but it IS a basic fact of life This is why we have the rule, 7. Avoid preaching "the truth". Why do you think you get so much resistance when you post things? It's because you present your BELIEFS as if they are ABSOLUTE TRUTHS. You never talk about, "I believe this", or "I think this makes more sense"... it's always, "I am right. You are wrong. This is a FACT." Answers to that question are not always religious in nature. Religion implies dogmas, a centralized leader, deities, etc. I have clearly stated PsiPog's definition of a religious statement. So yes, under the PsiPog definition, answering those questions is a religious statement. As a slight tangent... let's look at science. Religion implies dogma, a centralized leader, deities. Hmmm. Dogma like "the big bang created the universe"? Centralized leaders like Newton, Bohr, and Einstein? Deities equlivalent to the athiest religion? Even under your definition of religion, science still doesn't escape it's label. Brain and bodily functions cease, and tissues and cells decay. That is not religious, but does explain what happens when we die. That statement isn't religious, you're right. But the statement doesn't explain what happens when "we" die if you define "we" as "consciousness". If you define "we" as our brain and body, then you are right, it does explain it. But if you define "we" as "consciousness" (which most people do), then your statement doesn't explain what happens when we die, and therefore isn't religious. We did not have to be there to witness the event to know it happened. Yeah, you do. According to the rules of PsiPog. Likewise we do not have to see exactly how we evolved from lesser primates to humans to know it happened. Yeah, you do. According to the rules of PsiPog. If you disagree with the rules, or you find that you can't help but break them, then you're free to leave. However, if you think you can control yourself, and not post about things that break the PsiPog rules, then you can stay. I'm sure you're trying to play a little bit of devil's advocate, but this is 2006. People need to accept the basic facts of life, because they are not going to change. I'm not playing a devil's advocate. This is what I believe in. Part of science is religious in nature, under PsiPog's definition of religion. No one was around when that guy murdered his wife, but there was plenty of evidence. Blood, fingerprints, a weapon, motive, hair. We don't have to have been there at that moment in time to figure out and know what happened. And we aren't a judge and jury deciding the fate of a murderer. We are an online organization focused on psionics and personal experience. So the minute PsiPog starts throwing murderers in jail, we can change the rules of PsiPog. UNTIL THEN, the rules about religion are staying the same. Creation implies a creator, a deity. Life was not "created" by evolution, it invokes no deities or creators. When we die, our brains stop working, we stop breathing and pumping blood, and our bodies decay. I know these 2 things from personal experience and evidence found in nature. Neither of these explanations are religious yet they do explain "where we come from" and "where we go". Evolution does involve a creator. Instead of a deity, the creator is "the laws of the universe that bring about evolution". However, saying that our bodies decay isn't an explaination to "where we go" if you define "we" as consciousness, which I stated earlier. We do know where our bodies and brains go when we die. We don't know where consciousness goes. You can argue about it all day. The rules are staying the same when it comes to religion. To answer Dbizket's question: you can talk about ghosts as long as you aren't implying that there is life after death. And just because lots of people vote for something doesn't mean I'm changing a rule. Sorry. ~Sean |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back to top | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted on Sun Jun 11, 2006 10:50 am | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kief
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 |
"Sorry Kief but if something is part theory, how can it be fact? I'm not trying to pick holes in your argument, just interested."
A theory in science is defined much differently from a layperson's or the general public's view of a theory. A theory in science consists of a body of facts and testable predictions providing explanations of those facts. "Now, 'myths' like Genesis may be rooted in the human imagination and no, the Hebrews did not have the same scientific knowledge that we do. However I find it hard to believe they hadn't heard the question, "Where do we come from?". So isn't it logical that they should think of an answer? Afterall, if we ask questions and pose ideas, then we can get somewhere. That is what scientific research is based on isn't it?" Well sure, they had the question and they also had an answer. Every culture tries to answer those questions through forms of religion, spirituality, and philosophy. It is just neither a good answer nor the correct one. Research is based on asking questions yes, but is also about generating data for one's hypothesis, if such data is even obtainable. Myths, especially ones pertaining to creation events by deities, have no evidence supporting them. "There is no need for this sort of insult." I don't think I really intended it as an insult, though I am routinly insulted every day for one stupid reason or another. If you are ignorant of what a scientific theory is, and evolution in general, you should go to school and learn about it, or read about it on your own. www.talkorigins.org is a good start. "What have I done? Have I hurt you in some way? Have I insulted or offended you?" You did offend me by saying some rather silly things about evolutionary theory that are on the level of creationist argumentation. "I might even point out you don't even know how old I am, so you can't be expected to know whether I am in school or not." Judging by what you say about evolution and the nature of scientific theory in general, I can make a rather accurate assessment about your level of schooling, and perhaps the failures of your schooling. The fact is, if you took highschool biology, you should know better. If you took any form of college level biology, I'd be ashamed at you with what you have said. "OK, so I made a mistake. All you needed to do was correct my error and we could move on. Perhaps if I made blunders like this all the time an insult might be considered a reasonable response, but on this occasion I don't think it is warranted." When mistakes arise about basic facts of life, like how to wipe one's ass, eating, and evolution, well, I just do not have room for any sort of BS. Especially when the arguments presented against it are right from the creationist's handbook. "Open hostility like this is going to get you banned." I am entirely unconcerned, considering the open hostitility I have directed at me simply because I know better than to believe in magic tricks. "I have no problem with your opinions, but the way you present them is offensive and unkind." I do not think so. In general I try to shy away from presenting my opinion unless I am expressing so. I find the way other people present their opinion is unkind to me. "We would all be willing to have a friendly discussion with you on this topic, as that is afterall part of why we are here." I love talking about evolution, I just have no tolerance for cookie-cutter christian creationist arguments that have been debunked for 150 years. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back to top | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted on Sun Jun 11, 2006 10:56 am | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kief
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 |
"It is things like these that defines at least a cult by my interpretation."
Science is a cult? Nay, psionics is a cult! Your interpretation of a cult is incorrect. I would look up the correct definition in a dictionary. "It's the same damn thing as religion!! People just don't look at it that way hence my saying that everything could be class as a religion or "cult" if you prefer." No you really can't classify everything in such a manner. "Also, it appears to me that your a bit fanatical about this subject anyway" Well, evolution is a basic fact of life that people deny, ignore, lie about, misrepresent, and attack. Someone has to stand up for reality. If you want to discuss evolution or tell me why it's wrong, I'd like to hear your scientific arguments against it or any other scientific theory. But if those arguments amount to vapid creationist claims, I am going to get heated. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back to top | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted on Sun Jun 11, 2006 11:10 am | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peebrain
Site Admin |
Locked because you (Kief) continue to ignore the rules. I have patiently explained to you PsiPog's definition of religion, and explained why we have the rules, yet you continue to break them.
~Sean |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back to top | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PsiPog.net Forum Index » General Discussion » why are ghosts considered religious?
All Content, Images, Video, Text, and Software is © Copyright 2000-2006 PsiPog.net and their respective authors. All Rights Reserved.
You must agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy to view this website. Click here to contact the webmaster.