+- Las Venturas Playground (https://forum.sa-mp.nl)
+-- Forum: Miscellaneous (https://forum.sa-mp.nl/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: General Talk (https://forum.sa-mp.nl/forum-24.html)
+--- Thread: [Serious Discussion] Religion (/thread-26936.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Slice - 06-13-2011
I'm really glad that I'm able to just sit back and watch completely fucking brainwashed idiots such as styla believing this ridiculous nonsense and that I'm not infected with whatever disease his mind must have.
I probably offended a bunch of people - yes, that's the point. Wake up!
Please, people! Go have a drink, get laid, get high, eat some pork chops/beef.. Enjoy yourselves, be free.
Don't let some phony book or malicious, and/or false believes stop you."If one person has an imaginary friend, it's crazy. If a lot of people have an imaginary friend, it's religion."
I'll probably get muted - well, someone had to say it..
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Dominator33 - 06-13-2011
lol oscar, you think, for example, christians can't get drunk and do other fun stuff? maybe you should wake up.. i have friends who are atheists and believers and they do the same shit, you can't tell the difference
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - [SAE]Grim - 06-13-2011
Other than that, yea, his post is pretty much spot on .
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Slice - 06-14-2011
I wasn't referring to a single religion, I was talking in general. The Islamic, for instance, may not have a single sip of alcohol their entire life because "it makes you lose judgement"!
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Gaahl - 06-14-2011
"Ludwig Feuerbach set out the idea that the process by which religion was invented was wish-fulfillment. God, according to Feuerbach, is a projection of the strongest desires of humanity.
Much of the appeal of Christianity or other religions lies in its promise of immortality. Human beings have many fears, but most of all they fear death. Christianity (or other religions), in promising eternal life, offer to take this fear away from us. If we are willing to buy into religion, then we can escape from our fear, and live in blissful ignorance of our mortality. This accounts for the attractiveness of religion, the strength of its grip on human minds.
Of course, for this process to work we cannot consciously decide to adopt a religion as a means of escaping from our fears. No, the decision must be unconscious; it is the unconscious mind that drives us to religion. Therefore a religious man will be firmly convinced about his beliefs, and won't accept the fact that to understand God, on this view, one must understand human psychology; theology is anthropology."
That's pretty much the most interesting theory I've read on religion and it was really similar to my initial thoughts, that's what made me change my mind about religion in high school.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Slice - 06-14-2011
That, indeed, is a great theory. Freud had a similar theory, based on that.
Interesting reading:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/674807/exploring_freuds_theory_of_religion.html?cat=38
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Tuism - 06-14-2011
(06-14-2011, 10:09 AM)Gaahl link Wrote: "Ludwig Feuerbach set out the idea that the process by which religion was invented was wish-fulfillment. God, according to Feuerbach, is a projection of the strongest desires of humanity.
Much of the appeal of Christianity or other religions lies in its promise of immortality. Human beings have many fears, but most of all they fear death. Christianity (or other religions), in promising eternal life, offer to take this fear away from us. If we are willing to buy into religion, then we can escape from our fear, and live in blissful ignorance of our mortality. This accounts for the attractiveness of religion, the strength of its grip on human minds.
Of course, for this process to work we cannot consciously decide to adopt a religion as a means of escaping from our fears. No, the decision must be unconscious; it is the unconscious mind that drives us to religion. Therefore a religious man will be firmly convinced about his beliefs, and won't accept the fact that to understand God, on this view, one must understand human psychology; theology is anthropology."
That's pretty much the most interesting theory I've read on religion and it was really similar to my initial thoughts, that's what made me change my mind about religion in high school.
you can put it up like that, or... you can just say that it's better to be believers
that quote just told me that believers fear nothing, tell me which one is better for your mental health? believing that your loved ones are going to a better place? or "knowing" that they are just going to decompose and that you lost them forever?
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Maka - 06-14-2011
The second. Note that I just went to the funeral of my grandfather today. He'll surely be missed, but 'lives on' in the hearts of those who've known him. That means we will never forget him.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - STyL4 - 06-14-2011
(it's actually laughable that Slice, the guy who actually doesn't have a clue what we're talking about stops by just to critise me. i've been trolling him enough (in sa-mp) , now this? yes victims have to approach xD)
@Grim he accuses me of MISINTERPRETATIONS. interesting indeed, because he can't really JUDGE me at that at all. he's been doing misinterpretations all the time. how can you have a proper debate with someone when he doesn't even know what a debate is ?
e.g.:
Quote:Grim link=topic=28190.msg391449#msg391449 date=1307788346]"Classic debate emphasizes logic and real-world discussion"
Sorry to burst your bubble, but this aint a debate.
(06-11-2011, 11:17 PM)0Target0 link Wrote: The wave function of the universe is a property of the universe, the self collapsing wave function is still a property of the mind. The conclusion is still a misinterpretation, and theres absolutely no way around it.i'm sorry 0target0, but you did not explain your argument therefore it's just your opinion. i mean, i can just claim Newton's law is misinterpretation because Force is a wrong term and claim to be true. thats what ure doing all the time. i can quote all the post i proven you wrong already, just for u.
I would kindly advise you to stop with the personal criticism, because that is only the behavior of a bad loser. This is supposed to be a discussion, not a flaming topic.
btw are you calling yourself a bad loser?
(05-30-2011, 08:20 PM)0Target0 link Wrote: What are you saying? Start making sense monkey man.
good to know, im having a debate with a bad loser.
Quote:Grim link=topic=28190.msg391542#msg391542 date=1307823211]
So basically what you're saying is that the universe is a mind, and the mind = God? Thats how it works?))
So why are you connecting Orch or and God, while barely anyone else does?
I know you can't reply my question dedicated to 0target0, because so far everything u' had shown in that topic was "ur opinion", with no special arguments. but if universe is a mind then that approves creationism, for e.g. if MIND was created, then that's officialiy an intelligent design. but can the mind be created with "Big Bang" only? or is it already needed more than that, Someone who is even smarter than us ? obviously a creator.
now, i see u did not question the universe and mind comparations as 0target0 (but i had proved him wrong according to previous posts), i'd like to say that in ur previous post u've mentioned something like this : "ORCH OR is theory of conciousness, a term most of us know" , wait wait wait ... Big Bang theory is theory of universe's creation, a term most of us know. ehm, what makes it wrong then? nothing.
0target0, you still didn't reply this. why are you avoiding the question? perhaps because all ur arguments were misinterpretations and that's just proves that u're clueless about the following question? if you're a bad loser that does not mean you perhaps dont know (or is it...
)"Since collapse is ontologically identical with protophenomenal observation (meaning the same thing that occurs in both mental observation and observation by non-mental equipment), how can self-collapse not equal self-observation? Since self-observation is equal to consciousness how is self-collapse ontologically different in any way shape or form from self-observation?"
answer or just admit it. by avoiding the question it's just doubtful , how many false arguments can you yet provide.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - STyL4 - 06-14-2011
Maka no trolling but when my grandpa passed away, i did do some research about afterlife .. some of them are very promosiving. i can share (on PMs because there are way too many misinterpretators here) and i can promosive you that you'll have different view on NDE sightings, life after death and so on... and it's not like it relies on Religion or something (the ""evidences"", more likely some interesting facts, not evidences).
RIP to your grandpa.