For Brian37

digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
For Brian37

digitalbeachbum wrote:

 

Been slammed at work. First time online in over a week.

I didn't want to debate those items. We both agree all religion is false; same with a creator.

While buddhism is what I take as being factual, I do not follow any rituals nor do I walk around in a robe, use prayer beads, meditate for hours each day or give offerings to a buddha statue. None of this interests me because it is all dogma.

What I was wanting to discuss is your, what appears to me, is a hardline stance on every thing else that you don't believe in. You are unforgiving to others for their beliefs. I view you as an extreme point of view in this world.

The reason for the closed forum was to prevent others from disrupting the discussion.

 

brian37 wrote:

Buddhism is only factual in the historical sense that it is a historical whim that followers document. It is not factual in any scientific sense and is merely a club started long ago that has been passed down to generations, just like all religions. Things that are universal beyond labels don't need tradition or labels. Things that are universal are tested beyond personal bias.

This is getting off the subject I intended, but since you responded about it.

Remember this, Buddhism, the core of it, is 100% about ending the suffering of the mind. Every thing else that follows the 4 Noble Truths or the 8 Fold Path is dogma and politics. I don't care about any of that stuff and if you think it is a valid discussion point, it isn't.

Buddhism is no exception to corruption and many of the things which you are indirectly speaking of are due to years of ego fulfilling desires. There are monks who have gone off and started their own "Buddhist Training Facility" in SE Asia, California, NY and all over Europe. There are thousands of these centers which claim to teach meditation and enlightenment, but too many of them are bogus and misleading the public for the sole purpose of making a profit. These training facilities are no different than people who take five years of Kung Fu and then open up a school in a strip mall to train newbies.

Even Tibet has been filled with corruption for a thousand years as politics set off years of debate over which dogma should be followed for things like serving tea or what color to paint a building. Then as China invaded the country, these leaders escaped out in to the real world only to find that they needed to write books and speak at seminars in order to raise money for their sect.

But not all of the monks are corrupted; there are plenty of valid teachers who teach the core of Buddhism. This consists of meditation and control of the ego which is very important to stopping the suffering of the mind. There have been scientific studies done (see my post on Mindful Eating) as well as being able to control pain (which is currently being used in the US Military for helping disabled veterans who return from the wars: see US Military Pain Management Task Force).

So your comment that Buddhism is "only factual in the historical sense" & "it is not factual in any scientific sense" are incorrectly based assumptions made with out proper research on the subject.

While I disagree with others about their being a creator of this Universe, their religious freedoms are their own and I support them. Provided they don't come knocking at my door or try to change laws which benefit them and shun others, I really don't care if they believe in the FSM or Scientology.

Which brings me to a good question for you: What is beyond this Universe? and what is beyond that? and what is beyond that (if any thing)?

Buddhism does not teach "life after death". It teaches that the only constant in this Universe is change. Because nothing stays the same Buddhism teaches that all that we know is a falsehood based on the desires of the ego. These desires bring about suffering through many different emotions related to the ego. Once you control the ego and those emotions, suffering of the mind ceases.

Westerners have warped the idea that there is a "life" after death. It doesn't exist. I have no delusions that "I" will exist after my body dies. I will be dead.

There is a story about life and death which I think sums up my view on the subject. If you have a candle and it is burned down to the final portion of the wick and you take another candle and light it before the other candle goes out, is the flame on the new candle the same as the old candle? No. It is merely the transference of energy from one medium to another.

On the issue of labels, people label every thing, even when they label things "universal".

Universal things are not beyond the scope of being biased.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
As usual, my long work hours

As usual, my long work hours and lacking a full night of rest I got your name wrong. Sorry.

* Mod for the sake of this discussion could you change my Title to from Brian32 to Brian37?

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 and Bobspence both

Brian37 and Bobspence both often fail to exaggerate the disconnect between Scientific Narrative and actual fact likely thanks to David Hume and a bunch of philosophical mumbojumbo that has a very weak place within utilitarian rationality.

Honestly, I don't care as I don't come here to defend belief, philosophy, or "narrative". I mostly bounce around here to stroke my ego and learn about actual atheists rather than "what the world wants (me) to think" about atheists. (my inner 80s kid flares up every now and then)

If they are atheists who participate in religion, learn about them. If they are 100% secular, learn about them more.

If they are angry because of the treatment they have received at the hands of theistards, keep a safe distance. My philosophy is "you must practice "live and let live" before you can proselytize it".

I'll keep my "fangs", kthx.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Sage_Override
atheistBlogger
Sage_Override's picture
Posts: 582
Joined: 2008-10-14
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao, you and Vastet keep

Kapkao, you and Vastet keep this place light-hearted, not being long winded and create little to no pseudo-intellectual droning.  I like Brian37 and I'm glad he's passionate about his ideas; I just don't really read too deeply into what he says most of the time because he goes on and on and on it seems.

 

My inner 80s kid says "like, gag me with a spoon" and hums the Miami Vice theme among other things.   

"When the majority believes in what is false, the truth becomes a quest." - Me


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:What I was wanting to

Quote:
What I was wanting to discuss is your, what appears to me, is a hardline stance on every thing else that you don't believe in.

You can start by not calling me a "hardliner". Valuing science over tradition "Just because",  hardly makes me a "hardliner". Secondly, I have already said what I had to say in our PM discussion. I think this is only going to serve to upset you and it is going to simply become repetitive.

But for the record since you started this thread I will summarize my argument again.

1. NOT JUST YOU AND NOT JUST your religion, but any CLAIM that is not testable or falsifiable, cannot be called fact.

2. A history of tradition is only factual in the sense that the tradition is observed, it does not make the rituals or practices on equal par with scientific method. It merely means someone likes the club and rituals they partake in.

3. Individuals in a group can and do vary on their views of that group and "how" the traditions, practices, rituals or views "should be" held. That only means THAT individual has a particular view of the label they hold, that does not make the label a pragmatic universal tool.

4. People can be secular and partake in any label, that still does not make that label a universal tool. It just means that person likes partaking in that particular tradition.

Buddhism is not a university, or lab, anymore than Christianity, Hebrew, Hinduism or Islam are universities or labs. All of them are mere social clubs centered, not around pragmatic testing and falsification, but placebo conformation bias. All of them serve well as a social club only in a gap sense. Just like the Egyptians were successful for 3.000 years falsely believing the sun was a god.

Buddhists are just as varied in their views on Buddhism too, just like you have Catholics and Baptists, just like you have Sunnis and Shiites. They have their rituals, traditions, and superstitions as well. You are merely doing what every other person of other labels do, you view your own label to suit your own desires.

You want to make this about Buddhism but I apply all of the above to ANY CLAIM and any label.

That sums it up and is about all I have to say. I am not going to get pulled into the same quagmire other people of other labels do in trying to make details the issue. Now if you respond to this post I really don't know what I would have to add to this. Short and sweet, like I said in the PM.


 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:As

digitalbeachbum wrote:

As usual, my long work hours and lacking a full night of rest I got your name wrong. Sorry.

* Mod for the sake of this discussion could you change my Title to from Brian32 to Brian37?

That's no excuse, you are a Buddhist, MEDITATE MAN MEDITATE, and don't become a Redskins fan like me. That's why I am so tightly wrapped. Don't feel bad Beach, I do stuff like that far more than you do, believe me.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37

Brian37 wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

As usual, my long work hours and lacking a full night of rest I got your name wrong. Sorry.

* Mod for the sake of this discussion could you change my Title to from Brian32 to Brian37?

That's no excuse, you are a Buddhist, MEDITATE MAN MEDITATE, and don't become a Redskins fan like me. That's why I am so tightly wrapped. Don't feel bad Beach, I do stuff like that far more than you do, believe me.

After I got married I found out that I was sleep deprived. I was litterally a walking zombie. I had been getting 4 hours of sleep every day for 10 years. My wife got me on track for sleeping 8 hours or more which really changed my life.

When I sleep less than 7 hours I start to show signs of it through memory loss, glossy eyes and a 1000 yard stare.

Less than 5 hours and I'm worthless for the day.

Meditation helps but only to focus the mind on what it needs to complete and from controlling various areas of the body in pain. It does not help with swelling of the joints and muscles.

As for the Redskins, I've never liked them. When I was a boy I liked the Dallas Cowboys or the Miami Dolphins. Today I only follow the Dolphins.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

As usual, my long work hours and lacking a full night of rest I got your name wrong. Sorry.

* Mod for the sake of this discussion could you change my Title to from Brian32 to Brian37?

That's no excuse, you are a Buddhist, MEDITATE MAN MEDITATE, and don't become a Redskins fan like me. That's why I am so tightly wrapped. Don't feel bad Beach, I do stuff like that far more than you do, believe me.

After I got married I found out that I was sleep deprived. I was litterally a walking zombie. I had been getting 4 hours of sleep every day for 10 years. My wife got me on track for sleeping 8 hours or more which really changed my life.

When I sleep less than 7 hours I start to show signs of it through memory loss, glossy eyes and a 1000 yard stare.

Less than 5 hours and I'm worthless for the day.

Meditation helps but only to focus the mind on what it needs to complete and from controlling various areas of the body in pain. It does not help with swelling of the joints and muscles.

As for the Redskins, I've never liked them. When I was a boy I liked the Dallas Cowboys or the Miami Dolphins. Today I only follow the Dolphins.

Ok Buddy, you can equate me to Hitler, you can pick on my mom, but if you really want me to pull my fangs out, keep saying "Dallas". DEMS fighten words! Well, ok, no, but arrgggggggggg!

I am the same way as far as lack of sleep. I am worthless if I don't get enough sleep.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:1. NOT JUST

Brian37 wrote:

1. NOT JUST YOU AND NOT JUST your religion, but any CLAIM that is not testable or falsifiable, cannot be called fact.

I've already stated many things which can be tested. I make no other claim to non-testable items.

Brian37 wrote:

2. A history of tradition is only factual in the sense that the tradition is observed, it does not make the rituals or practices on equal par with scientific method. It merely means someone likes the club and rituals they partake in.

I reject all dogma and traditions specifically of Buddhism.

Brian37 wrote:

3. Individuals in a group can and do vary on their views of that group and "how" the traditions, practices, rituals or views "should be" held. That only means THAT individual has a particular view of the label they hold, that does not make the label a pragmatic universal tool.

I don't get this label stuff. People label every thing in their life, either internally or externally, including you.

Brian37 wrote:
Buddhism is not a university, or lab

Buddhism is the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path. Every thing else is crap.

Brian37 wrote:
Buddhists are just as varied in their views on Buddhism too, just like you have Catholics and Baptists, just like you have Sunnis and Shiites. They have their rituals, traditions, and superstitions as well. You are merely doing what every other person of other labels do, you view your own label to suit your own desires.

You want to make this about Buddhism but I apply all of the above to ANY CLAIM and any label.

That sums it up and is about all I have to say. I am not going to get pulled into the same quagmire other people of other labels do in trying to make details the issue. Now if you respond to this post I really don't know what I would have to add to this. Short and sweet, like I said in the PM.

You label things also. You aren't immuned to it. No one is. Every time we form an opinion on things we label.

I'm not sure why you seem to use this excuse to avoid discussions.

Also, you skipped over some very important questions of mine.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

1. NOT JUST YOU AND NOT JUST your religion, but any CLAIM that is not testable or falsifiable, cannot be called fact.

I've already stated many things which can be tested. I make no other claim to non-testable items.

Brian37 wrote:

2. A history of tradition is only factual in the sense that the tradition is observed, it does not make the rituals or practices on equal par with scientific method. It merely means someone likes the club and rituals they partake in.

I reject all dogma and traditions specifically of Buddhism.

Brian37 wrote:

3. Individuals in a group can and do vary on their views of that group and "how" the traditions, practices, rituals or views "should be" held. That only means THAT individual has a particular view of the label they hold, that does not make the label a pragmatic universal tool.

I don't get this label stuff. People label every thing in their life, either internally or externally, including you.

Brian37 wrote:
Buddhism is not a university, or lab

Buddhism is the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path. Every thing else is crap.

Brian37 wrote:
Buddhists are just as varied in their views on Buddhism too, just like you have Catholics and Baptists, just like you have Sunnis and Shiites. They have their rituals, traditions, and superstitions as well. You are merely doing what every other person of other labels do, you view your own label to suit your own desires.

You want to make this about Buddhism but I apply all of the above to ANY CLAIM and any label.

That sums it up and is about all I have to say. I am not going to get pulled into the same quagmire other people of other labels do in trying to make details the issue. Now if you respond to this post I really don't know what I would have to add to this. Short and sweet, like I said in the PM.

You label things also. You aren't immuned to it. No one is. Every time we form an opinion on things we label.

I'm not sure why you seem to use this excuse to avoid discussions.

Also, you skipped over some very important questions of mine.

Quote:
I reject all dogma and traditions specifically of Buddhism.

Then why do you call yourself a Buddhist?

Quote:
I don't get this label stuff. People label every thing in their life, either internally or externally, including you.

I repeat, then why do you call yourself a Buddhist? See I don't shy away from my label "atheist". But you shy away from Buddhism by saying "don't label me" but still you label yourself? Trying to have it both ways just like every other club fan of other labels.

Quote:
Buddhism is the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path. Every thing else is crap.

No, evolution does not require one to be a Buddhist, or Hindu, or atheist.

LIFE is not depended on nice sounding axioms.

Humans either are nice to others or cruel to others and everything between is a range. Labels do not change evolution. It is merely a nice sounding mantra you have swallowed because you mistake natural human empathy as being dependent on Buddhism.

Beach, you are no different in swallowing the "4 noble truths" as any Christian or Jew or Muslim claiming that by holding that label, humans can be kind to each other and live in harmony. Our natural evolution has always included the idea that it is better to avoid conflict than to risk harm to ourselves, which is how myths employ our natural human behavior and psychology and then falsely attribute it as being the invention of a particular club.

Buddhism didn't exist 500,000 years ago and our species still evolved. If our species gives up on it completely today, we would still evolve. No different than any other label. Our species still continued without believing that the sun was a god.

I am quite sure your "4 noble truths" are nothing more than our human desire to live in peace and harmony. You don't have to be a Buddhist to desire that, or write it down like a dogma to seek it.

"Buddhism" is merely a tradition you like, your own predilection. But it is not the inventor of biological evolution nor is it an explanation to the nature of reality.

Buddhism is merely a tradition a club. It is no more required to reach the point of reproduction than any other label. My penis works the same as yours. If I make a baby, I have reached the point of reproduction, if I dont, my genes do not get spread.

The best thing you can say and the most honest thing you can say is "I like Buddhism", but do not try to claim it is superior when our species was evolving long before it's invention. When you do that you are NOT doing anything differently than anyone else.

"I am special because I am Buddhist"

"I am special because I am Jewish"

"I am special because I am Christian"

"I am special because I am Hindu"

"I am special because I am Muslim"

"I am special because I am atheist"

No, evolution will continue despite what labels any of us hold. Eventually all life will die and the universe will continue without any memory of any of us and eventually the planet and all life on it will die.

"We should get along"

"We should care about nature"

"We should help each other out"

"We should value self control"

ARE human desires and NOT the invention of a label, but a product of the compassionate side of our evolution.

Those motifs as expressed concepts have ALWAYS been around.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

1. NOT JUST YOU AND NOT JUST your religion, but any CLAIM that is not testable or falsifiable, cannot be called fact.

I've already stated many things which can be tested. I make no other claim to non-testable items.

Brian37 wrote:

2. A history of tradition is only factual in the sense that the tradition is observed, it does not make the rituals or practices on equal par with scientific method. It merely means someone likes the club and rituals they partake in.

I reject all dogma and traditions specifically of Buddhism.

Brian37 wrote:

3. Individuals in a group can and do vary on their views of that group and "how" the traditions, practices, rituals or views "should be" held. That only means THAT individual has a particular view of the label they hold, that does not make the label a pragmatic universal tool.

I don't get this label stuff. People label every thing in their life, either internally or externally, including you.

Brian37 wrote:
Buddhism is not a university, or lab

Buddhism is the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path. Every thing else is crap.

Brian37 wrote:
Buddhists are just as varied in their views on Buddhism too, just like you have Catholics and Baptists, just like you have Sunnis and Shiites. They have their rituals, traditions, and superstitions as well. You are merely doing what every other person of other labels do, you view your own label to suit your own desires.

You want to make this about Buddhism but I apply all of the above to ANY CLAIM and any label.

That sums it up and is about all I have to say. I am not going to get pulled into the same quagmire other people of other labels do in trying to make details the issue. Now if you respond to this post I really don't know what I would have to add to this. Short and sweet, like I said in the PM.

You label things also. You aren't immuned to it. No one is. Every time we form an opinion on things we label.

I'm not sure why you seem to use this excuse to avoid discussions.

Also, you skipped over some very important questions of mine.

Quote:
Also, you skipped over some very important questions of mine.

Yes I did, because you want to drag me into details, when I am pointing at the moon so you can excuse yourself from looking at my finger tip.

"BUDDHISM" is not required to have sex and make babies. Christianity is not required to have sex and make babies. Atheism is not required to have sex and make babies.

Humans are humans and we are all capable of doing nice things and cruel things, because our evolution has ALWAYS displayed a range of those actions. Buddhism is no more the inventor of peace nor does it explain the nature of reality. It is merely a club you like.

If suddenly all 7 billion people claimed the Label "Buddhists" you would STILL have people doing nice things and cruel things to each other. Not because of the label, but because REALITY is explained by evolution, not social clubs. Socializing is what evolution produces so it is independent of labels.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
There is no mystery to life,

There is no mystery to life, life is about two things.

1. Resources

2. Getting to the point of reproduction.

There are two ways you get those things. Force, or cooperation and BOTH can work and do work, but don't have to work for everyone all the time. Our empathetic side would lean to cooperation and harmony. Our species invents myths and social clubs to justify both force and cooperation because both work. Not always for everyone, and not always either/or.

Neither work for everyone all the time because evolution isn't about absolutes, evolution is merely about what works.

Your "sense of awe" and sense of compassion falsely allows you to buy "the 4 noble truths", when all is really going on is your natural desire for peace and harmony. Your label is not required for that to happen, it will either happen or it wont, because evolution has always reflected both compassion and cruelty.

Seriously READ Victor Stinger's "New Atheism". He covers this quite well.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
brian37

brian37 wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:
I reject all dogma and traditions specifically of Buddhism.

Then why do you call yourself a Buddhist?

Arrrrgh! This is the 3rd time I am trying to post. I keep getting those damn errors!

I follow the 4 noble truths. That is why I am a Buddhist.

There are people who call theirselves Buddhist but they don't follow the 4 noble truths and those people like the the crunchy granola vibe they get from it.

brian37 wrote:
I repeat, then why do you call yourself a Buddhist? See I don't shy away from my label "atheist". But you shy away from Buddhism by saying "don't label me" but still you label yourself? Trying to have it both ways just like every other club fan of other labels.

I never said "don't label me". I said that all labels are from the ego. We all do it, externally and internally. We do it for organizational purposes.

brian37 wrote:
No, evolution does not require one to be a Buddhist, or Hindu, or atheist.

LIFE is not depended on nice sounding axioms.

Humans either are nice to others or cruel to others and everything between is a range. Labels do not change evolution. It is merely a nice sounding mantra you have swallowed because you mistake natural human empathy as being dependent on Buddhism.

I agree.

Well, humans require it, but life itself can do with out axioms.

Never said that human empathy needed Buddhism, actually I believe that Buddhism needs human empathy to exist.

brian37 wrote:
Beach, you are no different in swallowing the "4 noble truths" as any Christian or Jew or Muslim claiming that by holding that label, humans can be kind to each other and live in harmony. Our natural evolution has always included the idea that it is better to avoid conflict than to risk harm to ourselves, which is how myths employ our natural human behavior and psychology and then falsely attribute it as being the invention of a particular club.

The 4 noble truths are an oberservation made by Siddhartha. They are not needed to have harmony but realizing the truth of them starts a person on the path to harmony.

brian37 wrote:
"Buddhism" is merely a tradition you like, your own predilection. But it is not the inventor of biological evolution nor is it an explanation to the nature of reality.

Buddhism is merely a tradition a club. It is no more required to reach the point of reproduction than any other label. My penis works the same as yours. If I make a baby, I have reached the point of reproduction, if I dont, my genes do not get spread.

The best thing you can say and the most honest thing you can say is "I like Buddhism", but do not try to claim it is superior when our species was evolving long before it's invention. When you do that you are NOT doing anything differently than anyone else.

Buddhism is a label to identify who you are; or what you believe.

Buddhism is no more a tradition or a club than Atheism is; Buddhism is a word which describes a person and their belief. I'm not part of any Buddhist club no more than you are being of your Atheism.

brian37 wrote:
No, evolution will continue despite what labels any of us hold. Eventually all life will die and the universe will continue without any memory of any of us and eventually the planet and all life on it will die.

"We should get along"

"We should care about nature"

"We should help each other out"

"We should value self control"

ARE human desires and NOT the invention of a label, but a product of the compassionate side of our evolution.

Those motifs as expressed concepts have ALWAYS been around.

I agree completely.

Eventually every thing will cease, including this Universe. You are well on your way to becoming a Buddha!

You still didn't answer my question.

What exists outside this Universe? We can logically assume that there is "something" because this Universe didn't form from "nothing".

Since there is "something" outside, then what is outside that realm? And then so on, and so on.. eventually it must loop back around.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
OK. I've tried posting 4

OK. I've tried posting 4 times to your replies and each time I get a 504 error. I'm tired and need to get some sleep. I'll try again later.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I follow the 4 noble

Quote:
I follow the 4 noble truths. That is why I am a Buddhist.

No, you are a Buddhist because you think those "4 noble truths" are a unique invention of Buddhism.

THEY ARE NOT, you like the way the words were put down in that tradition, but the motifs in them are a product of evolution, not Buddhism. Humans did those things long before Buddhism was invented, and people outside Buddhism today can do those same things. Just like people outside Islam are capable of the motifs of the "pillars of Islam".

Pizza is considered worldwide mainly a unique American popular food. But the ingredients that we now call Pizza were around before "pizza" was popularized here. There were prior forms with different names and different "motifs".

You do the same thing theists of other labels do, you latch on to pretty words and pretty traditions forgetting that the "MOTIFS" are a product of the human condition, and were thought of before even if in different words, just like tomato sauce and dough existed before "pizza".

The history of our evolution DID NOT start with Buddhism simply because someone wrote "the 4 noble truths" on paper.

Thats like saying the flood of the bible really happened because floods in reality do happen. Being kind and wanting to live in harmony with  others is not new to our species and most certainly is not an invention of Buddhism.

The only honest thing you can say is you merely like Buddhisms stories and motifs, but they are NOT a requirement to live life or be good.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I just looked up those

I just looked up those "nobel truths"

1. Pain is part of life.....DUH, you don't think people before buddhism had the same thoughts?

2. Suffering happens because you attach yourself to things/people, that cause you suffering. AGAIN, you think people prior didn't have similar thoughts even if they didn't put them in those exact words?

3.You can detach yourself from those things. Again, people prior with other words even if not written most certainly had those types of thoughts.

4.Self improvement. Again, humans prior had those capabilites, and people outside buddhism have that capability today.

You are focused on the words used in a certain tradition, when the above are motifs that have always been ideas in our human condition and are written many different ways and expressed many different ways, but it all amounts to the same actions we are capable of.

We have always been capable of being in pain and wanting to get out of pain. We have always had some who manage to do that. And our species never would have advanced if humans never "self improved" and humans have been around for 500,000 years.

None of what that says is new, only the packaging and wording is unique to Buddhism but it still expresses the same human disires and actions we are all capable of.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I just looked up those

I just looked up those "nobel truths"

1. Pain is part of life.....DUH, you don't think people before buddhism had the same thoughts?

2. Suffering happens because you attach yourself to things/people, that cause you suffering. AGAIN, you think people prior didn't have similar thoughts even if they didn't put them in those exact words?

3.You can detach yourself from those things. Again, people prior with other words even if not written most certainly had those types of thoughts.

4.Self improvement. Again, humans prior had those capabilites, and people outside buddhism have that capability today.

You are focused on the words used in a certain tradition, when the above are motifs that have always been ideas in our human condition and are written many different ways and expressed many different ways, but it all amounts to the same actions we are capable of.

We have always been capable of being in pain and wanting to get out of pain. We have always had some who manage to do that. And our species never would have advanced if humans never "self improved" and humans have been around for 500,000 years.

None of what that says is new, only the packaging and wording is unique to Buddhism but it still expresses the same human disires and actions we are all capable of.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I just looked up those

I just looked up those "nobel truths"

1. Pain is part of life.....DUH, you don't think people before buddhism had the same thoughts?

2. Suffering happens because you attach yourself to things/people, that cause you suffering. AGAIN, you think people prior didn't have similar thoughts even if they didn't put them in those exact words?

3.You can detach yourself from those things. Again, people prior with other words even if not written most certainly had those types of thoughts.

4.Self improvement. Again, humans prior had those capabilites, and people outside buddhism have that capability today.

You are focused on the words used in a certain tradition, when the above are motifs that have always been ideas in our human condition and are written many different ways and expressed many different ways, but it all amounts to the same actions we are capable of.

We have always been capable of being in pain and wanting to get out of pain. We have always had some who manage to do that. And our species never would have advanced if humans never "self improved" and humans have been around for 500,000 years.

None of what that says is new, only the packaging and wording is unique to Buddhism but it still expresses the same human disires and actions we are all capable of.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I just looked up those

double post

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Sage_Override
atheistBlogger
Sage_Override's picture
Posts: 582
Joined: 2008-10-14
User is offlineOffline
FYI, guys, if it gives you

FYI, guys, if it gives you the "gateway 504" error, it'll still post your comment regardless of what it says.

"When the majority believes in what is false, the truth becomes a quest." - Me


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Quote:What I

Brian37 wrote:

Quote:
What I was wanting to discuss is your, what appears to me, is a hardline stance on every thing else that you don't believe in.

You can start by not calling me a "hardliner". Valuing science over tradition "Just because",  hardly makes me a "hardliner". Secondly, I have already said what I had to say in our PM discussion. I think this is only going to serve to upset you and it is going to simply become repetitive.

But for the record since you started this thread I will summarize my argument again.

1. NOT JUST YOU AND NOT JUST your religion, but any CLAIM that is not testable or falsifiable, cannot be called fact.

2. A history of tradition is only factual in the sense that the tradition is observed, it does not make the rituals or practices on equal par with scientific method. It merely means someone likes the club and rituals they partake in.

3. Individuals in a group can and do vary on their views of that group and "how" the traditions, practices, rituals or views "should be" held. That only means THAT individual has a particular view of the label they hold, that does not make the label a pragmatic universal tool.

4. People can be secular and partake in any label, that still does not make that label a universal tool. It just means that person likes partaking in that particular tradition.

Buddhism is not a university, or lab, anymore than Christianity, Hebrew, Hinduism or Islam are universities or labs. All of them are mere social clubs centered, not around pragmatic testing and falsification, but placebo conformation bias. All of them serve well as a social club only in a gap sense. Just like the Egyptians were successful for 3.000 years falsely believing the sun was a god.

Buddhists are just as varied in their views on Buddhism too, just like you have Catholics and Baptists, just like you have Sunnis and Shiites. They have their rituals, traditions, and superstitions as well. You are merely doing what every other person of other labels do, you view your own label to suit your own desires.

You want to make this about Buddhism but I apply all of the above to ANY CLAIM and any label.

That sums it up and is about all I have to say. I am not going to get pulled into the same quagmire other people of other labels do in trying to make details the issue. Now if you respond to this post I really don't know what I would have to add to this. Short and sweet, like I said in the PM.

Harsh, but fair. Brian37 has "fangs" too... and he's not as lazy about using them, as you can see. He's a bit of a 'Tazzie Devil' about them, in fact.

"Crikey she's a beaut!" (I like to pester him every now and again)

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Sage_Override wrote:FYI,

Sage_Override wrote:

FYI, guys, if it gives you the "gateway 504" error, it'll still post your comment regardless of what it says.

Ah! But clicking the post button once... especially if you take welbutrin, can be a moderate challenge. I have some slightly shakey hands when I take it. Eye-wink

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:No, you are a

Brian37 wrote:

No, you are a Buddhist because you think those "4 noble truths" are a unique invention of Buddhism.

No I don't. They are not an invention of Buddhism. They are an observation from Siddhartha.

Brian37 wrote:

THEY ARE NOT, you like the way the words were put down in that tradition, but the motifs in them are a product of evolution, not Buddhism. Humans did those things long before Buddhism was invented, and people outside Buddhism today can do those same things. Just like people outside Islam are capable of the motifs of the "pillars of Islam".

Yet another example of how your logic baffles me.

Sure that which makes up the 4nb's existed before it was observed, but no one else in the history of mankind put those pieces of the puzzle together then taught others how to use the information to better their lives.

All this stuff about labels and motifs is only a smoke and mirror on your part to avoid the truth. You should practice what you preach. Stop using labels and motifs and then maybe you and I will be on equal ground.

Brian37 wrote:

Pizza is considered worldwide mainly a unique American popular food. But the ingredients that we now call Pizza were around before "pizza" was popularized here. There were prior forms with different names and different "motifs".

Just because some thing existed or the ingredients existed before a [subject] was invented doesn't dismiss the discovery of those [subject]. You could dismiss every thing in science or for that reason, the entire history of humankind because no one actually ever invented any thing or discovered any thing because it existed before the discover of said [subject].

Brian37 wrote:
You do the same thing theists of other labels do, you latch on to pretty words and pretty traditions forgetting that the "MOTIFS" are a product of the human condition, and were thought of before even if in different words, just like tomato sauce and dough existed before "pizza".

Practice what you preach.

Brian37 wrote:
The history of our evolution DID NOT start with Buddhism simply because someone wrote "the 4 noble truths" on paper.

Actually, Buddhism exists because some one observed, realized, then taught these observations to others, then died, then since the word "Buddha" (which means one who is awake), -ISM was then added to form the word "Buddhism" was used to describe those who followed a specific philosophy.

Brian37 wrote:
That's like saying the flood of the bible really happened because floods in reality do happen. Being kind and wanting to live in harmony with  others is not new to our species and most certainly is not an invention of Buddhism.

You think that since flood happen in real life that people who follow the bible use that as proof that the "flood" mentioned in the bible was real? I've never heard any one use that logic before to defend the bible.

I also never said Buddhism invented anything. Siddhartha discovered these truths through observation. Nothing from his observations is any different than a scientist making an observations.

Brian37 wrote:
The only honest thing you can say is you merely like Buddhisms stories and motifs, but they are NOT a requirement to live life or be good.

Actually I don't merely like Buddhism, I have tested the teachings in real life and they are valid and logical. They are not a requirement to live life or be good as I have previously mentioned.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:I just looked

Brian37 wrote:

I just looked up those "nobel truths"

1. Pain is part of life.....DUH, you don't think people before buddhism had the same thoughts?

2. Suffering happens because you attach yourself to things/people, that cause you suffering. AGAIN, you think people prior didn't have similar thoughts even if they didn't put them in those exact words?

3.You can detach yourself from those things. Again, people prior with other words even if not written most certainly had those types of thoughts.

4.Self improvement. Again, humans prior had those capabilites, and people outside buddhism have that capability today.

You are focused on the words used in a certain tradition, when the above are motifs that have always been ideas in our human condition and are written many different ways and expressed many different ways, but it all amounts to the same actions we are capable of.

We have always been capable of being in pain and wanting to get out of pain. We have always had some who manage to do that. And our species never would have advanced if humans never "self improved" and humans have been around for 500,000 years.

None of what that says is new, only the packaging and wording is unique to Buddhism but it still expresses the same human disires and actions we are all capable of.

Suffering is a part of life. Don't get it mixed up with the word pain.

Again. suffering existed with out buddhism just like the thought that gods don't exist with out atheism.

You are focused on words that have certain traditions. Start practicing what you preach.

Your packaging is no different than mine.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Sage_Override wrote:FYI,

Sage_Override wrote:

FYI, guys, if it gives you the "gateway 504" error, it'll still post your comment regardless of what it says.

I lost several. Might not have been because of the 504 error, but I definitely lost posts.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

I just looked up those "nobel truths"

1. Pain is part of life.....DUH, you don't think people before buddhism had the same thoughts?

2. Suffering happens because you attach yourself to things/people, that cause you suffering. AGAIN, you think people prior didn't have similar thoughts even if they didn't put them in those exact words?

3.You can detach yourself from those things. Again, people prior with other words even if not written most certainly had those types of thoughts.

4.Self improvement. Again, humans prior had those capabilites, and people outside buddhism have that capability today.

You are focused on the words used in a certain tradition, when the above are motifs that have always been ideas in our human condition and are written many different ways and expressed many different ways, but it all amounts to the same actions we are capable of.

We have always been capable of being in pain and wanting to get out of pain. We have always had some who manage to do that. And our species never would have advanced if humans never "self improved" and humans have been around for 500,000 years.

None of what that says is new, only the packaging and wording is unique to Buddhism but it still expresses the same human disires and actions we are all capable of.

Suffering is a part of life. Don't get it mixed up with the word pain.

Again. suffering existed with out buddhism just like the thought that gods don't exist with out atheism.

You are focused on words that have certain traditions. Start practicing what you preach.

Your packaging is no different than mine.

 

Dude I am part of evolution. YOU are part of evolution. The difference between you and I is that I seem to accept that. You somehow make your label special. I only treat my atheism as a position, I don't quote other atheists as if they are cult leaders or holy people of religious traditions. Dawkins states  a lot of "truths", but I don't treat him as special or assume that atheists are above nature because some atheists may state facts of nature.

Your "noble truths" are merely a predilection you cling to because it sounds nice to you. Humans to whatever degree, no matter how well or poorly they do things, have always displayed the ability to do those things, it doesn't mean they always do, it merely means human actions are a range and NOT dependent on a religious label.

You are merely falling for a tradition because of pretty words. Evolution will happen and both success and failure are part of that evolution. Again, Buddhism didn't exist 500,000 years ago, and we still as a species managed to evolve. If it was never invented, someone or some group would have said something similar wrapping it up in some other religious tradition with different packaging.

Simply put, there is no motif under the sun humans have not conflated into a religion, that didn't exist as a prior expression that simply got expounded upon and marketed. But our existence has always been independent of the myths and religions we create. Your Buddhism is merely your predilection that gets you by, but it is not required to live life.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Dude I am part

Brian37 wrote:
Dude I am part of evolution. YOU are part of evolution. The difference between you and I is that I seem to accept that. You somehow make your label special. I only treat my atheism as a position, I don't quote other atheists as if they are cult leaders or holy people of religious traditions. Dawkins states  a lot of "truths", but I don't treat him as special or assume that atheists are above nature because some atheists may state facts of nature.

Your "noble truths" are merely a predilection you cling to because it sounds nice to you. Humans to whatever degree, no matter how well or poorly they do things, have always displayed the ability to do those things, it doesn't mean they always do, it merely means human actions are a range and NOT dependent on a religious label.

You are merely falling for a tradition because of pretty words. Evolution will happen and both success and failure are part of that evolution. Again, Buddhism didn't exist 500,000 years ago, and we still as a species managed to evolve. If it was never invented, someone or some group would have said something similar wrapping it up in some other religious tradition with different packaging.

Simply put, there is no motif under the sun humans have not conflated into a religion, that didn't exist as a prior expression that simply got expounded upon and marketed. But our existence has always been independent of the myths and religions we create. Your Buddhism is merely your predilection that gets you by, but it is not required to live life.

I accept evolution and that I am a part of it. Don't recall rejecting it or claiming a difference.

I do not claim any thing special about my opinions or what I follow in life. It's my path as your path is your path to follow.

Did I quote any one who I claim to be above others? I don't see any one else, including a buddha, has been any one but a human who rationalized and solved suffering of the mind.

The 4nb's don't sound nice to me. They are logical and can be tested and proved in real life.

Everything you have claimed can be thrown back at you for your view point on life. You failed numerous times to answer questions I put forth to you. Instead you rebound with hyperbole which dismisses any other form of belief if it isn't your own. This only brings the discussion back to you as being a hardlined atheist. You claim not to be this way with your view point, but time and time again your posts prove differently.

 

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
Dude I am part of evolution. YOU are part of evolution. The difference between you and I is that I seem to accept that. You somehow make your label special. I only treat my atheism as a position, I don't quote other atheists as if they are cult leaders or holy people of religious traditions. Dawkins states  a lot of "truths", but I don't treat him as special or assume that atheists are above nature because some atheists may state facts of nature.

Your "noble truths" are merely a predilection you cling to because it sounds nice to you. Humans to whatever degree, no matter how well or poorly they do things, have always displayed the ability to do those things, it doesn't mean they always do, it merely means human actions are a range and NOT dependent on a religious label.

You are merely falling for a tradition because of pretty words. Evolution will happen and both success and failure are part of that evolution. Again, Buddhism didn't exist 500,000 years ago, and we still as a species managed to evolve. If it was never invented, someone or some group would have said something similar wrapping it up in some other religious tradition with different packaging.

Simply put, there is no motif under the sun humans have not conflated into a religion, that didn't exist as a prior expression that simply got expounded upon and marketed. But our existence has always been independent of the myths and religions we create. Your Buddhism is merely your predilection that gets you by, but it is not required to live life.

I accept evolution and that I am a part of it. Don't recall rejecting it or claiming a difference.

I do not claim any thing special about my opinions or what I follow in life. It's my path as your path is your path to follow.

Did I quote any one who I claim to be above others? I don't see any one else, including a buddha, has been any one but a human who rationalized and solved suffering of the mind.

The 4nb's don't sound nice to me. They are logical and can be tested and proved in real life.

Everything you have claimed can be thrown back at you for your view point on life. You failed numerous times to answer questions I put forth to you. Instead you rebound with hyperbole which dismisses any other form of belief if it isn't your own. This only brings the discussion back to you as being a hardlined atheist. You claim not to be this way with your view point, but time and time again your posts prove differently.

 

 

Buddha DID NOT SOLVE SHIT, he merely wrote that down and the packaging  became popular. None of what he said or wrote was done as a psychologist or neurologist. And none hose 4 truths are behaviors that didn't exist prior to the invention of the religion by buddha and evolution does not require us to be buddhists. The only thing he did was create pretty packaging.

Just like before Coke and Pepsi, there was carbonization and water.

Otherwise if I am a cave man, I invent the wheel, does that make deer god's real? Buddha was just a man, he was no one special and he did not invent morality or evolution. He simply said some pretty stuff you like.

Buddhism is merely a club. It is not a required club to live life. There are 7 billion people on this planet, most of them ARE NOT buddhists. Humans existed long before buddhism.

Really all this amounts to is taking the DUH statement of "living a clean life, and avoiding people and things that make you sad" can help you be more balenced and happy. DUH!

BUT SO WHAT, if you do all that, and I come up and shoot you and rob you, all that superstition didn't save your ass at that point did it? So bad wins and good loses. But that is the nature of reality and evolution. You can do all the healthy and right things, but you can still, despite all that, get murdered, get robbed, die from a disease., die in a war.

NOW you keeps saying you accept evolution, but your words defy you. If our species does not need buddhism to evolve, then other than liking it, what good reason do you have? It works for you, yea it does, just like a sugar pill does.

Buddhism started in the same scientifically ignorant past as all the rest of the religions in the world. Buddha was not a scientist or psychologist. He merely said some pretty stuff you like. And it is your placebo that gets you by.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Buddha DID NOT

Brian37 wrote:
Buddha DID NOT SOLVE SHIT, he merely wrote that down and the packaging  became popular. None of what he said or wrote was done as a psychologist or neurologist. And none hose 4 truths are behaviors that didn't exist prior to the invention of the religion by buddha and evolution does not require us to be buddhists. The only thing he did was create pretty packaging.

Just like before Coke and Pepsi, there was carbonization and water.

Otherwise if I am a cave man, I invent the wheel, does that make deer god's real? Buddha was just a man, he was no one special and he did not invent morality or evolution. He simply said some pretty stuff you like.

Buddhism is merely a club. It is not a required club to live life. There are 7 billion people on this planet, most of them ARE NOT buddhists. Humans existed long before buddhism.

Really all this amounts to is taking the DUH statement of "living a clean life, and avoiding people and things that make you sad" can help you be more balenced and happy. DUH!

BUT SO WHAT, if you do all that, and I come up and shoot you and rob you, all that superstition didn't save your ass at that point did it? So bad wins and good loses. But that is the nature of reality and evolution. You can do all the healthy and right things, but you can still, despite all that, get murdered, get robbed, die from a disease., die in a war.

NOW you keeps saying you accept evolution, but your words defy you. If our species does not need buddhism to evolve, then other than liking it, what good reason do you have? It works for you, yea it does, just like a sugar pill does.

Buddhism started in the same scientifically ignorant past as all the rest of the religions in the world. Buddha was not a scientist or psychologist. He merely said some pretty stuff you like. And it is your placebo that gets you by.

By your definition, Einstein didn't solve shit. Copernicus didn't solve shit. None of them did. All they did was package it.

Science, yet another club. Atheism, yet another club.

Ah, there was a moon, star, solar system, all if it existed before it was discovered.

Finally! You've said some thing that made sense. All buddha's are just human. They are nothing special.

Duh? I'm not sure you understand what you are doing yet. I'll give you more time to think about it.

If you come and shoot me, and rob me, then that is life. Your atheism doesn't save you any more than any other religion does for any one else.

Evolution does not exist with out life. Life evolves because it must to survive. I accept this; but that doesn't change the fact that you need atheism no more than I need buddhism.

I have a placebo, you have a placebo, we all have placebos.

 

 

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
You are comparing Buddha to

You are comparing Buddha to Einstein? Really?

All Buddha did was say, "The sky is blue". Buddha had no fucking clue as to why people suffer at a biological level. Einstein had slightly more than "The sky is blue"

. Stating the obvious doesn't mean you know what is going on. This is the same shit "floods happen" which is a NO DUH, that leads humans to create flood myths.

I've heard the same bullshit from Star Trec fans who claimed Roddenberry invented the cell phone. NO HE DID NOT.

According to the "noble truths", all he did is say "suffering sucks", "avoid suffering by staying away from it", that is all that convoluted tripe amounts to.

AGAIN, Buddha had no fucking clue as to WHY people have addictions, or psychologically why humans cling to people who are harmful to them. All he said was "Avoid this shit".

People back then I am sure throughout the world got bit by snakes. Observing someone die from the poison back then didn't mean they knew what poison was.

He said some pretty shit and you fell for it. If I am the first human in history to put on paper "the sky is blue" that does not mean I know fucking shit scientifically about WHY humans use the word "blue" in describing the sky?

Buddha was just a man. He put down in words his idea of what he thought would help other humans out. Since evolution existed before, and would have existed if he had never been born, all he was doing was making an observation of what can work SOMETIMES. But in no case was he a scientist like Einstein, not even close.

You have a placebo that gets you by. If it were more than a placebo, evolution would not have taken place because it would have depended on Buddhism to happen. Since evolution does not depend on Buddhism, you are merely arguing for a predilection.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I have a placebo, you

Quote:
I have a placebo, you have a placebo, we all have placebos.

No, I have likes and dislikes. Unlike you I admit to mine as merely such.

BUT, evolution is not a placebo, it is a FACT. And for someone who claims to accept it, you surely act like all the other labels who want it both ways. Evolution to you, as it does for all others who I challenge, you accept up and until I say your label is not required for human existence. Then, without exception, you all get pissy.

Evolution is a fact, Buddhism and Christianity, And Capitalism and Communism and Islam are the placebos. Evolution was around before all those labels and if our species goes extinct, just like the dinos, if other life outlives us, that life will continue without our labels.

Buddhism is what gets you by, but it is as much a sugar pill as any other. Evolution existed before it's invention and will continue without it if it never existed.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Buddhism: Enlightenment or Priests

Before enlightenment one carries water and hews wood. After enlightenment one carries water and hews wood.

Before enlightenment one is a charlatan. After enlightenment one is a charlatan.

If they are not enlightened how did they get into the priest business? If they are enlightened how did they get into the priest business?

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

digitalbeachbum wrote:
...

By your definition, Einstein didn't solve shit. Copernicus didn't solve shit. None of them did. All they did was package it.

Is it reasonable to include Pasteur in that list?


 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

digitalbeachbum wrote:
...

I have a placebo, you have a placebo, we all have placebos.

Don't knock placebos. They are about 30% effective in treating every disease and illness known to man. This has been proven in every clinical trial ever conducted. It is in all the literature.

Similarly all religions including buddhism are about 30% effective.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Jean Chauvin
Theistard
Jean Chauvin's picture
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2010-11-19
User is offlineOffline
Hi Opie

Hi Opie,

Wait, so you're a buddhist? What kind? Roman Cathlicism now a synchronazation ofbuddhism for the past 20 years or so. Many priests are discreet buddhists and infiltrate their Roman Cult into Buddhist thinking in which the ignorant parishers are clueless about.

But you have to define what kind  of buddhist you are. The Northern Buddhists are pretty much categorized as atheistic. So if you're northern Buddhist, this would make a little more sense.

If you're southern Buddhis, the big fat guy buddha, this is more religious and has closer ties to Hinduism.

But interesting though, is Sidhartha Guatama's original buddhism is really not know. The gap in history between Sidhartha and the recorded documents of his voyage are gapped in large ways and as a result, there are many many buddhist sects that are night and day from each other.

In short, you cannot be sure that the buddhism that you adhere to, is the Buddhism of the realy buddhist your'e religion is based on. If Sidhartha were to wake up, he would most like have no clue what the hell you're doing.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote:Hi

Jean Chauvin wrote:

Hi Opie,

Wait, so you're a buddhist? What kind? Roman Cathlicism now a synchronazation ofbuddhism for the past 20 years or so. Many priests are discreet buddhists and infiltrate their Roman Cult into Buddhist thinking in which the ignorant parishers are clueless about.

But you have to define what kind  of buddhist you are. The Northern Buddhists are pretty much categorized as atheistic. So if you're northern Buddhist, this would make a little more sense.

If you're southern Buddhis, the big fat guy buddha, this is more religious and has closer ties to Hinduism.

But interesting though, is Sidhartha Guatama's original buddhism is really not know. The gap in history between Sidhartha and the recorded documents of his voyage are gapped in large ways and as a result, there are many many buddhist sects that are night and day from each other.

In short, you cannot be sure that the buddhism that you adhere to, is the Buddhism of the realy buddhist your'e religion is based on. If Sidhartha were to wake up, he would most like have no clue what the hell you're doing.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

Digital, Jean is the very reason I challenge you as well. You will NEVER be a prick, like Jean is.

However you both have the same thing in common. You both START from a past that cant even come close to what we know now.

His whim started in an unscientific age, but so did yours. He thinks, just like you do, that because a claim was made, and it sounds good to each of you, it must be worth defending.

Buddhism is not immune to violence. Buddhist countries HAVE been as dogmatic and violent as any other religion in human history. You only view Buddhism as being non violent now because it has not dominated politics at this point in history.

MY POINT IS, what causes Jean to ignore human behavior is the same as what causes you to ignore it as well. Labels will never make someone automatically good or bad. Our evolution will produce both cooperation and harm, no matter which label ends on top.

Human evolution is NOT dependent on Christianity, Buddhism or atheism. It is only dependent on fucking. If the placebo of label and safety in numbers produces that, that can win, no matter how false the belief is in and of itself.

Digital, take a good look. I am harsh to you not because I hate you, but if you look at people like Jean, I am merely pointing out his actions are a product of evolution, not label.

Human behavior is what is going on here Digital, and our evolution will continue no matter who wins. I simply suggest we stop dwelling in myth, and focus on common condition. Lables did not invent common condition, not his not yours.

 

 

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Jean Chauvin
Theistard
Jean Chauvin's picture
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2010-11-19
User is offlineOffline
Hi Brian 32

Hi Brian 32,

So wait, you're NOT an empiricist but a RRationalist? You're always crying and screaming when we talk, you've never said otherwise to me.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Digital, Jean

Brian37 wrote:
Digital, Jean is the very reason I challenge you as well. You will NEVER be a prick, like Jean is.

However you both have the same thing in common. You both START from a past that cant even come close to what we know now.

His whim started in an unscientific age, but so did yours. He thinks, just like you do, that because a claim was made, and it sounds good to each of you, it must be worth defending.

Buddhism is not immune to violence. Buddhist countries HAVE been as dogmatic and violent as any other religion in human history. You only view Buddhism as being non violent now because it has not dominated politics at this point in history.

MY POINT IS, what causes Jean to ignore human behavior is the same as what causes you to ignore it as well. Labels will never make someone automatically good or bad. Our evolution will produce both cooperation and harm, no matter which label ends on top.

Human evolution is NOT dependent on Christianity, Buddhism or atheism. It is only dependent on fucking. If the placebo of label and safety in numbers produces that, that can win, no matter how false the belief is in and of itself.

Digital, take a good look. I am harsh to you not because I hate you, but if you look at people like Jean, I am merely pointing out his actions are a product of evolution, not label.

Human behavior is what is going on here Digital, and our evolution will continue no matter who wins. I simply suggest we stop dwelling in myth, and focus on common condition. Lables did not invent common condition, not his not yours.

I agree with most of what you say, but with several exceptions. What I start off with is basic facts, no matter who said them, no matter when they were said, they are factual.

Unfortunately you fail in several areas for concluding that what you say, believe or follow in this life is any different or better than I or any one else.

Humans don't have immunity to violence, even the Buddha said it would often come in to his mind. The difference is that he did not respond/act on it.

It is the human ego which promotes violence.

You fail to see that human behavior is caused by the human ego.

Human evolution is dependent on change, not fucking, but I'll assume you are talking about reproduction.

I also suggest that we stop dwelling on myths.

I'm still waiting for you to respond to my original question and the fact that you keep ignoring them shows signs of your weakness.

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13652
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
Digital, Jean is the very reason I challenge you as well. You will NEVER be a prick, like Jean is.

However you both have the same thing in common. You both START from a past that cant even come close to what we know now.

His whim started in an unscientific age, but so did yours. He thinks, just like you do, that because a claim was made, and it sounds good to each of you, it must be worth defending.

Buddhism is not immune to violence. Buddhist countries HAVE been as dogmatic and violent as any other religion in human history. You only view Buddhism as being non violent now because it has not dominated politics at this point in history.

MY POINT IS, what causes Jean to ignore human behavior is the same as what causes you to ignore it as well. Labels will never make someone automatically good or bad. Our evolution will produce both cooperation and harm, no matter which label ends on top.

Human evolution is NOT dependent on Christianity, Buddhism or atheism. It is only dependent on fucking. If the placebo of label and safety in numbers produces that, that can win, no matter how false the belief is in and of itself.

Digital, take a good look. I am harsh to you not because I hate you, but if you look at people like Jean, I am merely pointing out his actions are a product of evolution, not label.

Human behavior is what is going on here Digital, and our evolution will continue no matter who wins. I simply suggest we stop dwelling in myth, and focus on common condition. Lables did not invent common condition, not his not yours.

I agree with most of what you say, but with several exceptions. What I start off with is basic facts, no matter who said them, no matter when they were said, they are factual.

Unfortunately you fail in several areas for concluding that what you say, believe or follow in this life is any different or better than I or any one else.

Humans don't have immunity to violence, even the Buddha said it would often come in to his mind. The difference is that he did not respond/act on it.

It is the human ego which promotes violence.

You fail to see that human behavior is caused by the human ego.

Human evolution is dependent on change, not fucking, but I'll assume you are talking about reproduction.

I also suggest that we stop dwelling on myths.

I'm still waiting for you to respond to my original question and the fact that you keep ignoring them shows signs of your weakness.

 

Here is my problem.

"Buddha said"

SO WHAT.

If I say, "Plants die" does that mean I know what photosynthesis is?

Buddha was not an evolutionary biologist or a psychology PHD.

"This happens" does not demonstrate that you know the scientific reason  as to why it happens. Again, he said pretty things and you bought into those pretty things. But what he said that you buy into are flowery words describing his observation, but those words DID NOT demonstrate anything scientific, nor do those words cover the full scope of biological reality.

Otherwise when a theist quotes the bible or koran "mountains moving" which you can find in both, would mean the person who wrote it knew about plate tectonics.

Evolution was around prior to Buddha, and would still happen if it was never invented.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3188
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:I agree with

Brian37 wrote:

I agree with most of what you say, but with several exceptions. What I start off with is basic facts, no matter who said them, no matter when they were said, they are factual.

Unfortunately you fail in several areas for concluding that what you say, believe or follow in this life is any different or better than I or any one else.

Humans don't have immunity to violence, even the Buddha said it would often come in to his mind. The difference is that he did not respond/act on it.

It is the human ego which promotes violence.

You fail to see that human behavior is caused by the human ego.

Human evolution is dependent on change, not fucking, but I'll assume you are talking about reproduction.

I also suggest that we stop dwelling on myths.

I'm still waiting for you to respond to my original question and the fact that you keep ignoring them shows signs of your weakness.

Here is my problem.

"Buddha said"

SO WHAT.

If I say, "Plants die" does that mean I know what photosynthesis is?

Buddha was not an evolutionary biologist or a psychology PHD.

"This happens" does not demonstrate that you know the scientific reason  as to why it happens. Again, he said pretty things and you bought into those pretty things. But what he said that you buy into are flowery words describing his observation, but those words DID NOT demonstrate anything scientific, nor do those words cover the full scope of biological reality.

Otherwise when a theist quotes the bible or koran "mountains moving" which you can find in both, would mean the person who wrote it knew about plate tectonics.

Evolution was around prior to Buddha, and would still happen if it was never invented.

I think your post is missing some thing? The first line appears to have been cut by accident.

Yet I think I understand what you are saying, so here is my reply:

The buddha didn't say "ok plants die, so here is how photosynthesis works".

The buddha said, "Everything dies. This is a word of decay. There is suffering because of our attachment."

The buddha never claimed to know how plants use sunlight to produce energy, he claimed something completely different.

Huh, now you are taking things out of context. The line in the bible which was about "mountains moving" is a metaphor. It's a figure of speech about "faith" in that religion. Only people who think that it actually means you can move mountains with faith are being ignorant.

Evolution exists with life only. It doesn't exist if there is no life. Planets don't "evolve".

You still are avoiding my questions. Why do you not want to answer them?

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams