@ CrazyMofo I think I understand what you mean now: [video=youtube;BMU8oUnaW4c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMU8oUnaW4c[/video] They're saying a music video is encouraging Satanic beliefs LOL. A damn music video. Anyways, I'd like to link a pdf that is interesting: http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books6/Bhante_Dhammananda_Human_Dignity_in_Buddhism.pdf If it's too lengthy to read, aside from the main points that Buddha says about wanting people to live a happy life, he says: Buddhism even states that people should not blindly believe Buddhism (nvm other religion) simply for the purpose of believing. Buddhism praises human intellect, and encourages people to critically think about things before believing in them. In fact, I kind of see now that Buddhism, though it may be considered a "religion", is really non-theological. There really isn't any rituals that emphasize on the belief of a higher deity. I think Buddhism is more aligned with philosophy, rather than a theistic religion. Having said that, it's a shame that many Atheists and Agnostics group Buddhism along with other theological religions like Islam and Christianity. On the topic of philosophy, I do have a question for Atheists. I'm not questioning nor provoking in the belief of God non-existence, but what is your view on the fact that many of our prominent scientific geniuses, say Descartes, Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Max Planck and William Thomson Kelvin, do believe in the existence of God? The latter three scientists are the pioneers in modern physics, which they would have a much better understanding than any Atheists in the possibility of God existence or non-existence. So why do these scientific leaders believe in God, whereas Atheists don't believe in God because God can't be proven scientifically? God can't be disproven either so it is logically flawed to say that God doesn't exist. Right? (Not that the existence or non-existence of God matters to me much. I'm interested in understanding why people believe/don't believe in the idea of God)
1st of all, Einstein is an atheist, and you know that because you agreed to it in some of our past discussions. Using these scientist as example is a poor example. Just because they are smart people doesn't mean they have to reject their believes. Some people uses their believe as a foundation for their lives. If religion makes them feel good that's what they would hold dear to their hearts. Just like people who believes in Fung Shui, if they believe having a tank of goldfish in a certain area of their home will make them rich, they will do that in every house they live in. It's all superstition. If you look at some recent surveys and polls. Only 30% of scientist believes in god compared to the general public 80% believes in god. So why are you surprised that some scientist believe in god? As for Buddhism being a religion or not. That depends if you are talking to someone who knows about the religion or not. In your case, you obviously have a strong sense what Buddhism is. Although you don't see it as a religion and more philosophical or a way of life. Others sees it as a major religion. they see Buddha as a god, you guys have temples like churches, you guys go to temples to worship, pray and donate money just like a church. Those who are strong believers becomes monks like priest, they have a set of rules they have to follow, just like those who follow the 10 commandment (LOL...yeah right!). So you see why we call Buddhism a religion? Yes atheist can't prove that god exist but the burden of proof is not on us.
Okay I'll take this one back. According to some research, Einstein's definition of "God" is not the same as the Christian's definition of "God", so that nullifies the use of Einstein's belief in God in my argument. My mistake there. Touche again. What was I thinking lol. I take that argument back. And to further support your claim, I've just read a scientific paper that states that analytical thinking demotes belief in God. So you're right, using scientists is a poor example. From that point of view, then your argument is infallible. Unfortunately, it's a shame that this argument only applies to those who misunderstand Buddhism lol. - Buddha is a man, not a God, and he himself stated that followers should not treat him as a God. So the followers who do treat him as a God are wrongly doing so. - It is definitely true that we have temples, similar to churches. However as temples are a product of human kind, there are bound to have corrupted temples, just like churches. I know of a few, and it's a shame that the perception of Buddhism is falsely portrayed by these corrupted temples. - Furthermore, for temples which are not corrupted, the purpose for having temples is more than just worship. Some go there not to worship Buddha, as Christians worship God. The temple is home to the talisman of the dead. It's a place where people go to pay respect to the dead. It also serves as a community center. If you take out the worshipping part, the role of the temple is MUCH more than that of the church to the Christian. The role of the temple not only serves as a mini cemetery, but is essentially a community center. - Like community centers, temples still have to pay for the rent (lol). Aside from corrupted temples, proper temples use the donated money to purchase food, pay the rent, pay maintenance. There is no profit to be made. So to say a building can run without money is really illogical. Anyway, I have not been to a temple in over 15 years, yet I am a devout Buddhist. Christianity requires you to religiously go to mass. Buddhism doesn't. And if you check out reddit's Buddhism subreddit, you will find that there are in fact a large number of Atheists who are Buddhist. You can be Buddhist and not believe in God. You can be a Buddhist without believing in spirituality. So if there is no belief in a God, and Buddhism is not focused on Theism, how can it be a religion? I guess my point is that Buddhism encourages you to question your beliefs. It encourages you to critically think for yourself. It does not want you to blindly follow a belief just for the sake of the religion. So if this flexibility is granted in Buddhism, how can it be considered a religion? edit: Buddhism really doesn't concern itself with the beyond (i.e. God). Ask any Buddhist. What Buddhism concerns itself with, is human values, human morality. You can say Buddhism is fairly similar to humanism. And humanism is a philosophy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism Correct. The burden of proof is on Christians. However, the burden of disproof is on Atheists. Anyway, it's a shame that the conflict between Christians and Atheists are dragging other religions that have nothing to do with the Christian God... Atheists hate Christians due to the Christian's pressure and rejection of Atheists. And in turn, many Atheists group Christianity with all of the other religions, and take their hate on the rest, when other religions have done nothing to the Atheist. And Christianity follows such a dictatory process that it blasts anyone and everyone who don't believe in the Christian God, even other religion. And even if this conflict did not occur, who cares if one believes in God or no God? Who cares if one believes in Fairies? Who cares if once believes in Santa Claus? If they do nothing to you, then let them be. In this case, Christians did something to Atheists. Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Confucianism nor Islam did not. So why pull Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Confucianism and Islam in this lol BTW I'm not saying it's you, rather there are many atheists who reflect the description I provided above, which prompted my rant.. I ask myself this all the time: Why can't we all just coexist together, regardless of one's religious or non-religious preference? Who really cares as to what people believe? As long as people respect each other, that's all that matters. There's really no need to have this superiority complex.
If I may ask, do you have a scientific/mathematical background? Or training in scientific/mathematical research? If you have, you would know that for a theory to be considered valid, you must either prove it or disprove it. If you begin your experiment by already adopting the mindset of either belief or disbelief, you have already introduced a biased variable into your experiment, which renders the experiment invalid. Given the example "x + 3 = 4". Let's assume I am ignorant and believe that x = 2. Another will disprove me, by stating that 2 + 3 != 4. Though this is too simplistic an example, the analogy applies to philosophical matters. You can disprove unicorns by stating that there are no evidence that supports the existence of unicorns. Therefore the statistical likelihood of the existence is [currently] minimal, therefore we take it that it is unlikely that unicorns exist. If you read philosophical papers, you will find compelling argument as to why the "idea" of a God is valid. I did not say God does exist, I say the concept of God is valid. Secondly, the Earth is so small, relative to the universe, that it is impossible for us to be absolute of a claim. We can state "based on our currently knowledge, it is unlikely for this to exist". But to say that we are 100% sure it doesn't exist is a logical fallacy. Unless you have knowledge of the universe, it is impossible to make an absolute claim. Notice that I am not arguing that God exists. I am investigating the idea of God from a scientific standpoint, a point of view Atheists highly praise. And on a side note, I am slightly offended that you said "That is so wrong, I have to correct you". I am merely stating the point of view of a scientist (as I am a scientist myself). Do point out if I am wrong in my process of investigation. Very fair. In that case Buddhism should not be subjected to the Atheist's voice, as Buddhism does not concern itself with God. You are right, I apologize, allow me to retract that statement regarding hate. If you permit, let me submit to you one argument. The resentment by Atheists towards all religions that are theistic is caused by the rejection and hatred by extremists in Christianity. In this point of view, yes, the resentment is validated. However it seems like Atheists are positioning themselves as the victim (which is understandable considering the actions of the Christians). But you see, there are many Atheists who, at the same time, are ridiculing and mocking those who believe in God, and have done no harm to the Atheists. The mere belief in a God (whether he exists or not) is enough to justify the ridicule and the mocking. So to say that Atheists (though their disbelief in God may be correct) are faultless is unfounded. The non-existence of God may definitely be true (and only based on our CURRENT knowledge of the universe), but the decision-making, the actions, and your intent against religious theists identically mirrors that of the Christian on Atheists. You may be correct in believing that God does not exist and I'm not arguing that. I am arguing that extremists Christians and many Atheists share the same human flaw of wanting to be right. It all boils down to "I am right, you are wrong". The topic in which you are debating does not matter. God does not matter. Both sides demonstrate the same "I am right, you are wrong" mindset. In the end, it's humanity that's the problem; you, me and every single being that populates this Earth. Proof: I got offended when you stated you need to correct me. That's my human nature that is coming out, and that is something I need to strive to rid myself of. I still have a lot to learn. P.S.: If my position wasn't clear, it doesn't matter to me whether God exists or not. If he exists, that's nice. If he doesn't not exist, well, that's nice too. I am merely open to the idea of a God, for scientific purposes. But that does not mean I believe in God.
what does religion have to do with any logical reasoning/mathematics/science? well maybe some of that logic bullshit hahaha. u cant disproof but you cant prove therefore A (cant disproof) or B not (can't prove) and just because A they exist! omg!
rearranging your logic expression A=can't disprove B=can't prove A V ~B => A => they exist Why did you negate the B? That's like saying you can prove... so the logical equivalent is "you can't disprove or you can prove, therefore it is not not-exist" no? So by that logic, you're expression is logically valid lol (wrong, but valid) Anyway, religion has nothing to do with any logic/math/science. I was applying the process of scientific reasoning to approach the idea of a God. The only reason why religion came into the discussion was because he groups religions that don't believe in a God, with religions that do believe in a God.
well i'm not that good with logic so yes correct me but i negate b because u cant prove true so 0 and made a valid because you cant disprove so it cant be invalid. Anyways whatever believe in god its good mmmkay! i just don't so i'm bad mmmkay :trollface2:
Interesting discussion by atheists on Buddhism http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/t1xs9/buddha_had_it_right/
Dan, I'm still traveling on business. I still owe you a reply to your post from a few days ago, I'll get to it once I'm back home. I came across an article today on compassion and I remember you saying that religious people have more compassion than atheists.....I think you should see the link below. http://now.msn.com/living/0504-atheists-compassion.aspx
^ Very good, thank you. Edit: Though it's an extremely fascinating study, it's a shame that article is so abstracted. I do recall reading this article a while back. I would be very interested to see the specifics of the study, such as the methodology and the statistical sample (how the sample was picked, and how much of the sample represents each religion). Though I haven't seen the specifics, my initial hypothesis is that I would be very inclined to agree with the study. Also, I am very curious as to how they would classify Buddhism in this study. Many people (atheists included), believe that Buddhism is a way of life, rather than a religion. I would assume this study would define whether the study is specific to theological religion, or general religion.
