Total Posts:47|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Defend your worldview/religion.

Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 5:39:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
In a paragraph or two (or several) explain why you hold your current views about the world.

On DDO there are at least 2 Muslims, 1 Mormon, 1 Sikh, 1 Buddhist(Geo?), numerous protestant Christians and many (atheists/agnostics/freethinkers/secular humanists/existentialists/materialists etc.). It would be interesting to hear people defend their views in a casual manner. So, just imagine that you are explaining/defending your views to others who know nothing about Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, Humanism etc.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 5:44:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Math / Physics / Science / Logic.

If there is a God, these will be the tools that lead me to Him/Her. If there isn't, these will be the tools that bring me closer to truth. Simple :) As of now, I consider myself atheist/agnostic because those tools have not led me to believe that God exists, thus I have no reason to.
President of DDO
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 5:53:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I'm Lutheran Christian.(Germanic Protestant Christian)

I was raised into an Anglican(father) Catholic(mother) family and baptized into Anglicanism. My family has this weird thing where we learn our bloodline of by heart so we retain purity but I can't go back more than 10 generations, lol. My family is Coptic Greek orthodox in linage, and before that a form of animism, native paganism. I converted to Lutheranism after reading some texts by Martin Luther.

I don't think Christianity is logical, but I love it that way. To the boundary of logic, or debate I see Gnosticism as preferable. As there is a god, ontology proves that, yet there is no morality ect so I sympathies with Nietzsche's Perspectivism, nor does he care.

I have never felt atheist or called myself.

I think alot of people on site would like to finally know this. :p
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 5:55:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
fix'd - removed last half clause.

I don't think Christianity is logical, but I love it that way. To the boundary of logic, or debate I see Gnosticism as preferable. As there is a god, ontology proves that, yet there is no morality ect so I sympathies with Nietzsche's Perspectivism.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:01:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Reason / Science / Naturalism

If God existed and loved humanity, I don't think she would be concerned with whether or not we could manage to believe in her on insufficient evidence. Moreover, I simply don't find any reason to believe in God or the supernatural. If either of those things exists, then they have managed to escape the greatest tools and insights of science.

Reason and science hold the keys to our survival as a species and should therefore be the foundation upon which all civilizations are constructed. Likewise, if any claim about the world cannot be demonstrated through either empirical evidence or logic then it should not be accepted as true. Finally, human life is precious and should therefore be cherished. After all, this is the only life we can be sure that we are ever going to get.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:02:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
But all my current views on the world are anti-government :(
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:08:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:02:54 PM, Rezzealaux wrote:
But all my current views on the world are anti-government :(

Seems we would get along great. Authoritarianism ftw! xD
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:12:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:08:20 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:02:54 PM, Rezzealaux wrote:
But all my current views on the world are anti-government :(

Seems we would get along great. Authoritarianism ftw! xD

He meant Anarchism. Authoritarianism has goverment.

--------------

Why did Lwerd sig me?
'sup DDO -- july 2013
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:13:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:12:52 PM, Zetsubou wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:08:20 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:02:54 PM, Rezzealaux wrote:
But all my current views on the world are anti-government :(

Seems we would get along great. Authoritarianism ftw! xD

He meant Anarchism. Authoritarianism has goverment.

I know what he meant. *sigh* Sarcasm never works in text...
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:19:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Hm. I'm a Christian. But, I don't know how else I would describe my perspectives.

I think I use Christianity as a frame of reference. I was brought up all kinds of ways and have exposure to a myriad of theologies, and while I tend to be highly pragmatic in nature, I still believe in God due to firsthand experience. This entity that I've interacted with, as well as all of the other entities that I've come in contact with, is undeniable, but there is no way that I can empirically prove this.

But, I don't think God is at all how people perceive Him and I believe that as humanity's capacity for understanding increases, God will make progressively more sense. Currently, we don't understand the world around us, reality, or ourselves. For all intents and purposes, we've hardly gotten past a conscious acknowledgment of self. Now, we're grappling with the bits and pieces we're coming to understand with each passing day.

In my opinion, humanity is currently in its adolescence. Ontologically speaking, I firmly believe that there will come day that we will realize the wisdom of our (Father) and come to respect (Him) as most of us (with a decent father or mother figure) do once we reach adulthood.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:27:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I like science, but I think that my ability to reason is being lost to pragmatism and gut instinct.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:31:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:27:19 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I like science, but I think that my ability to reason is being lost to pragmatism and gut instinct.

John Dewey's pragmatism?
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:39:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:27:19 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I like science, but I think that my ability to reason is being lost to pragmatism and gut instinct.

Welcome to life.

I think it's funny that people who aren't scientists claim that they "believe in science" as opposed to "religion" when they're equally as obscure.

As soon as a dream is born, realized, or crushed, as soon as you truly fall in love, as soon as you reach self-actualization... the last thing you think about is a Texas Instrument.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:44:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I deny the concept of faith. The very idea makes little sense to me. It's the accepting of what you do not know as certainty. Anyone with intellectual on honesty should be repulsed by it. I see it as humankind's greatest evil and I stand for everything against it.
I don't actually have any beliefs at all per say; only ideas. This is why I seem to be changing my stance on things every other day. When actually I'm quite solid.
I am this way simply because it's the only thing that makes sense to me.
My highest virtues are open-mindedness, skepticism, curiosity, intellectual-humility and intellectual-honesty.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 6:59:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:39:39 PM, Ren wrote:
as soon as you truly fall in love

I think this is what did it for me. I used to worship reason and logic as much as zealous fanatics worship their deity. Love makes you rearrange your priorities. Your entire method of interacting with the world changes when you become the #2 priority in your life.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:00:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:31:06 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:27:19 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I like science, but I think that my ability to reason is being lost to pragmatism and gut instinct.

John Dewey's pragmatism?

No, the kind where you're walking down the street and perform day-to-day activities without needing to recall philosophical notions.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:01:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:59:13 PM, Kleptin wrote:

Love makes you rearrange your priorities. Your entire method of interacting with the world changes when you become the #2 priority in your life.

Lol even when you're in love you're still the #1 priority. You love someone because of how they make you feel or how they affect your life, meaning you are still #1 and everything you do for them you do because it makes you feel good. Indeed love is truly a beautifully selfish thing :P
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:02:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:31:06 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:27:19 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I like science, but I think that my ability to reason is being lost to pragmatism and gut instinct.

John Dewey's pragmatism?

Are you a pragmatist? Do you prefer Dewey to James? There's all kinds of interesting pragmatist arguments haha some more legit then others, obviously :P
President of DDO
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:03:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:01:33 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:59:13 PM, Kleptin wrote:

Love makes you rearrange your priorities. Your entire method of interacting with the world changes when you become the #2 priority in your life.

Lol even when you're in love you're still the #1 priority. You love someone because of how they make you feel or how they affect your life, meaning you are still #1 and everything you do for them you do because it makes you feel good. Indeed love is truly a beautifully selfish thing :P

lol... you sound like Ayn Rand.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:04:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 6:19:20 PM, Ren wrote:

This entity that I've interacted with, as well as all of the other entities that I've come in contact with, is undeniable, but there is no way that I can empirically prove this.

This seems to be a heavily contradictory statement. If you have absolutely no empirical evidence of something, then I would suggest that it is indeed deniable, wouldn't you?
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:05:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:03:28 PM, Freeman wrote:

lol... you sound like Ayn Rand.

There are worst people I can sound like :P

Besides, it's true.
President of DDO
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:12:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:01:33 PM, theLwerd wrote:
Lol even when you're in love you're still the #1 priority. You love someone because of how they make you feel or how they affect your life, meaning you are still #1 and everything you do for them you do because it makes you feel good. Indeed love is truly a beautifully selfish thing :P

I myself have made the "Selfish Gene" argument dozens of times, and obviously, the prioritization has selfish roots.

The issue has nothing to do with the objective truth found by way of psychology/bology, but rather, in how actions are performed, the real-life application. Not the underlying biological/psychological aspects of it.

Regardless of the true selfish nature of the re-prioritization, the fact remains that it changes the way one functions. The act of giving spare change to a homeless person, regardless of the "selfishness" underneath, still results in a homeless person receiving change, and in you losing change :P

In other words, so long as the illusion is upheld, and the person remains ignorant, what appears on the surface is essentially no different from the absolute truth, because there is no practicality or applicability in delving that deep.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:13:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:02:43 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:31:06 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:27:19 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I like science, but I think that my ability to reason is being lost to pragmatism and gut instinct.

John Dewey's pragmatism?

Are you a pragmatist? Do you prefer Dewey to James? There's all kinds of interesting pragmatist arguments haha some more legit then others, obviously :P

No, I'm not a pragmatist. I'm more familiar with the work of John Dewey than William James. Uhm... I guess I prefer James; his book "The Varieties of Religious Experience" is one of the more thought provoking books on religion that I've read.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:26:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Zen Buddhist.

I don't feel that there is anything to defend.

Some of the main precepts are:

- the path to Enlightenment
- impermanent self (no soul)
- cycle of death and rebirth
- dependent co-arising (everything arises because of something else; everything exists in relation to everything else; nothing exists on it's own.)
- dialectic monism (duality/paradoxes exist but everything is all one)
- Nothingness
- Nirvana (cessation of suffering, liberation from cycle of death and rebirth; losing sense of ego-self.)
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:41:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:26:18 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Zen Buddhist.

I don't feel that there is anything to defend.

Some of the main precepts are:

- the path to Enlightenment
- impermanent self (no soul)
- cycle of death and rebirth
- dependent co-arising (everything arises because of something else; everything exists in relation to everything else; nothing exists on it's own.)
- dialectic monism (duality/paradoxes exist but everything is all one)
- Nothingness
- Nirvana (cessation of suffering, liberation from cycle of death and rebirth; losing sense of ego-self.)

...and to add to that:

- there is no God
- no afterlife
- all beliefs are barriers to knowing the truth and all concepts are projections of the mind and inaccurate descriptions of reality
- obviously the teachings have to be transmitted via words, but the best way to describe the truth about reality is complete silence
- it focuses on what is and makes no impositions upon reality

For this, I really don't think that this needs to be defended, but if need be, I can.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:42:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:04:43 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:19:20 PM, Ren wrote:

This entity that I've interacted with, as well as all of the other entities that I've come in contact with, is undeniable, but there is no way that I can empirically prove this.

This seems to be a heavily contradictory statement. If you have absolutely no empirical evidence of something, then I would suggest that it is indeed deniable, wouldn't you?

No. Empirical evidence is contingent on experiences limited to the senses. It excludes even a priori arguments, which is what a debate is based on (since you cannot give actual demonstrations or experience something first-hand as a part of giving or receiving evidence).

Empiricism worshipers must suffer a whole lot during disillusionment.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:47:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:01:33 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 4/19/2010 6:59:13 PM, Kleptin wrote:

Love makes you rearrange your priorities. Your entire method of interacting with the world changes when you become the #2 priority in your life.

Lol even when you're in love you're still the #1 priority. You love someone because of how they make you feel or how they affect your life, meaning you are still #1 and everything you do for them you do because it makes you feel good. Indeed love is truly a beautifully selfish thing :P

People put others before themselves all the time. And, it doesn't always feel good.

You are clearly a homosexual, as a woman who doesn't have meaningful relationships with men cannot possibly fathom the torture they put men through with their dumbfounding ways.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:49:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:42:17 PM, Ren wrote:
No. Empirical evidence is contingent on experiences limited to the senses. It excludes even a priori arguments, which is what a debate is based on (since you cannot give actual demonstrations or experience something first-hand as a part of giving or receiving evidence).

Empiricism worshipers must suffer a whole lot during disillusionment.

Sounds like a sort of solipsism to me. Or that argument that Christians use to say that Atheists believe in faulty sensual perceptions because evolution did not provide them with perfect sense organs.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 7:56:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:49:29 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:

Sounds like a sort of solipsism to me. Or that argument that Christians use to say that Atheists believe in faulty sensual perceptions because evolution did not provide them with perfect sense organs.

I'm curious as to how you deduced that, can you elaborate?

Oh, and consider this: even with cognition comparable to a human, a mole could never comprehend or understand color.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2010 8:02:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/19/2010 7:49:29 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 4/19/2010 7:42:17 PM, Ren wrote:
No. Empirical evidence is contingent on experiences limited to the senses. It excludes even a priori arguments, which is what a debate is based on (since you cannot give actual demonstrations or experience something first-hand as a part of giving or receiving evidence).

Empiricism worshipers must suffer a whole lot during disillusionment.

Sounds like a sort of solipsism to me. Or that argument that Christians use to say that Atheists believe in faulty sensual perceptions because evolution did not provide them with perfect sense organs.

Lol of course atheists believe in faulty sensual perceptions (at least I hope so!) - so does nearly everyone on the planet!
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!