Dali Lama scraps idea of reincarnation China not happy about this.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Dali Lama scraps idea of reincarnation China not happy about this.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-10/china-attacks-dalai-lama-over-bid-to-cease-reincarnation/6296420

I really hate the bullshit claim that China is "atheist" like say I am an atheist or Dawkins is. China's population is full of Buddhists, whom, like Jews, can partake in rituals and superstitions without believing in a personal god. This isnt about atheism at all, this is about competing sects of the same religion. No different than say liberal Catholics vs the right wing Catholic league. A personal god not being the center of Buddhism does not mean it is superstition free. Reincarnation is a superstition and China's Buddhist population does not like the head of their club bucking old social norms.

But I will give him credit baring ditching his religion completely, glad he isn't clinging to that bullshit claim. China is a very superstitious country and Buddhism is part of it regardless if it's club members don't subscribe to a god belief. They still believe in spirits and the magic of numbers and reincarnation. It is still a religion and this is simply a split in the interpretation of it.

"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


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
a., when people say "china


a., when people say "china is atheist," they obviously aren't talking about the population. they're talking about the fact that state-endorsed ideology in china is atheistic and aggressively anti-religion, and it is.

b., last i checked, reincarnation has not been scientifically falsified. it just hasn't been verified. therefore, to call it "superstition," unlike, say, the theory of a geocentric universe, is still purely a matter of opinion, even in the scientific field. in fact, i would argue it's completely outside the realm of science, as one cannot conceivably craft an experiment to falsify it.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote: a., when

iwbiek wrote:

a., when people say "china is atheist," they obviously aren't talking about the population. they're talking about the fact that state-endorsed ideology in china is atheistic and aggressively anti-religion, and it is.

b., last i checked, reincarnation has not been scientifically falsified. it just hasn't been verified. therefore, to call it "superstition," unlike, say, the theory of a geocentric universe, is still purely a matter of opinion, even in the scientific field. in fact, i would argue it's completely outside the realm of science, as one cannot conceivably craft an experiment to falsify it.

You are so fucking predictable. Just this morning right after I posted this, I went out and told my mom when I got back you would spew bullshit like this.

"Atheist" is not an ideology, it simply means "off" on god claims. It is not a political system, it is not a moral code, it is not a loyalty oath. China's government isn't "atheist", it is anti competition to one political party. The position of the government is communism. They are as sectarian as Iran and Saudi Arabia. It is monochromatic rule, not "atheism" itslef. Because I am an atheist too but not a Buddist. Now go servey every Chinese politician in the country and guess how many would identify as Buddhists and how many would identify as non religious atheists. 

Again, their politicians are as superstitious as any other country. You are using the same bullshit argument that Stalin's Russia was religion free. No, it was merely anti competition to the state. Religion never left Russia anymore than Buddhism doesn't exist in China.

China simply made the state the religion. But religion never left China.

 

"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


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:iwbiek wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

a., when people say "china is atheist," they obviously aren't talking about the population. they're talking about the fact that state-endorsed ideology in china is atheistic and aggressively anti-religion, and it is.

b., last i checked, reincarnation has not been scientifically falsified. it just hasn't been verified. therefore, to call it "superstition," unlike, say, the theory of a geocentric universe, is still purely a matter of opinion, even in the scientific field. in fact, i would argue it's completely outside the realm of science, as one cannot conceivably craft an experiment to falsify it.

You are so fucking predictable. Just this morning right after I posted this, I went out and told my mom when I got back you would spew bullshit like this.

"Atheist" is not an ideology, it simply means "off" on god claims. It is not a political system, it is not a moral code, it is not a loyalty oath. China's government isn't "atheist", it is anti competition to one political party. The position of the government is communism. They are as sectarian as Iran and Saudi Arabia. It is monochromatic rule, not "atheism" itslef. Because I am an atheist too but not a Buddist. Now go servey every Chinese politician in the country and guess how many would identify as Buddhists and how many would identify as non religious atheists. 

Again, their politicians are as superstitious as any other country. You are using the same bullshit argument that Stalin's Russia was religion free. No, it was merely anti competition to the state. Religion never left Russia anymore than Buddhism doesn't exist in China.

China simply made the state the religion. But religion never left China.

 




again, if a political ideology espouses the "off" position on god claims, then that ideology is atheistic, by definition. i'm not saying atheism is a political ideology. i'm saying a political ideology can be atheistic. or are you too stupid to see the difference? marxism-leninism espouses the "off" position--more than that, marxism-leninism espouses what is today commonly called "strong atheism." therefore, marxism-leninism is atheistic. marxism-leninism was the official ideology of the soviet union, and still is the official ideology of china. this ideology is atheistic. therefore, politically speaking, it is absolutely correct to call both the soviet union and the PRC atheist countries. i'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable (no, i'm not really).


and you calling someone else "predictable" is beyond funny. you might have predicted i'd spew "bullshit," but i can predict the precise words you'll use.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Now go servey

Brian37 wrote:
Now go servey every Chinese politician in the country and guess how many would identify as Buddhists and how many would identify as non religious atheists.



every goddamn one of them would identify as "non-religious atheist." their party membership depends on it. and i have never, not even once, not even remotely, not even circumspectly, so much as implied that either the soviet union or the PRC was ever "religion-free." and you know that. but you're straw manning again because you are incapable of dealing with my arguments. and because you're a lying sack of shit. also i suspect you are totally incapable of understanding most of my arguments, which is sad, because they are not complex.


still, i'm happy to see you've at least accepted there is such a thing as a religious atheist. i suspect, however, it was a slip on your part...

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Brian37

iwbiek wrote:
Brian37 wrote:
Now go servey every Chinese politician in the country and guess how many would identify as Buddhists and how many would identify as non religious atheists.

every goddamn one of them would identify as "non-religious atheist." their party membership depends on it. and i have never, not even once, not even remotely, not even circumspectly, so much as implied that either the soviet union or the PRC was ever "religion-free." and you know that. but you're straw manning again because you are incapable of dealing with my arguments. and because you're a lying sack of shit. also i suspect you are totally incapable of understanding most of my arguments, which is sad, because they are not complex.
still, i'm happy to see you've at least accepted there is such a thing as a religious atheist. i suspect, however, it was a slip on your part...

No shit sherlock. Oscar Shindler had to pretend to be a suck up to the Nazis too. 

Still not getting it. China does NOT lack religion, it lacks diversity in the political system. The state itself is the religion. Just like Russia under Stalin still had religion. What it banned was competition to the state because the state was the religion.

You are right religious and political and economcic views ARE complex. The stupid part humans don't want to face is that they are NEEDLESLY complex. 

Humans all want the same things. The labels we concoct as a species don't change that.

 

 

 

"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: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:I really hate

Brian37 wrote:
I really hate the bullshit claim that China is "atheist" like say I am an atheist or Dawkins is. China's population is full of Buddhists, whom, like Jews, can partake in rituals and superstitions without believing in a personal god. This isnt about atheism at all, this is about competing sects of the same religion. No different than say liberal Catholics vs the right wing Catholic league. A personal god not being the center of Buddhism does not mean it is superstition free. Reincarnation is a superstition and China's Buddhist population does not like the head of their club bucking old social norms. But I will give him credit baring ditching his religion completely, glad he isn't clinging to that bullshit claim. China is a very superstitious country and Buddhism is part of it regardless if it's club members don't subscribe to a god belief. They still believe in spirits and the magic of numbers and reincarnation. It is still a religion and this is simply a split in the interpretation of it.

I had all these points I was going to make about how fucking stupid your post was but it was taking up too much of my precious time.

Nothing you said was worthwhile or backed by any evidence. In fact I'd place it in the the area of being bait to see if you could start an arguement with either iwbiek or me.

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:China does NOT

Brian37 wrote:
China does NOT lack religion



thank you for agreeing with me.


Brian37 wrote:
it lacks diversity in the political system.



since when is this a conversation about what china lacks?


Brian37 wrote:
The state itself is the religion.



utterly, utterly meaningless drivel that i've been debunking on this site since i joined in 2008. it's nothing more than a cheap, pseudo-intellectual platitude peddled by new atheist apologists, with nothing but the shallowest familiarity with soviet history, in an attempt to distance the term "atheism" from a genuinely atheistic ideology that has since proved unpopular. it shows a complete misunderstanding both of the meaning of the state in the soviet union and the meaning of religion in general. it also shows, ironically on your part (though not for those of us who've been paying attention to your horseshit), an undue obsession with labels.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Just this

Brian37 wrote:
Just this morning right after I posted this, I went out and told my mom when I got back you would spew bullshit like this.



wow, you sure mention me to a lot of people. you've mentioned you keep bob posted on our exchanges and now your mom is in on it too? i've never mentioned you to a single soul, just like i don't generally talk about my games of spider solitaire with anyone else.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Brian37

iwbiek wrote:
Brian37 wrote:
Just this morning right after I posted this, I went out and told my mom when I got back you would spew bullshit like this.

wow, you sure mention me to a lot of people. you've mentioned you keep bob posted on our exchanges and now your mom is in on it too? i've never mentioned you to a single soul, just like i don't generally talk about my games of spider solitaire with anyone else.

Yes you obsess every aspect of my life, I have a poster of you on my wall and well, do you really want to know what I do looking at it? You are my dreamboat, my loverboy, I cant live without you. 

Listen dipshit, I have not given away your real identity so grow up. My mom has an interest in my life and likes listening to the things I do. It has little to do with you other than your name. It is about your logic. I also tell her about other conversations and debates, things I see in the news as well. We also talk about GASP the NFL. We also talk about politicians. 

Do you think I would give one shit if you went outside this thread and talked about me? Now unless either of us were accusing the other of a crime which we are not, and unless we are outing each other's real names and locations, which we are not, merely using others as a sounding board about ANY subject in life, is quite normal.

You are not the center of my universe. 

 

 

"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: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
I really hate the bullshit claim that China is "atheist" like say I am an atheist or Dawkins is. China's population is full of Buddhists, whom, like Jews, can partake in rituals and superstitions without believing in a personal god. This isnt about atheism at all, this is about competing sects of the same religion. No different than say liberal Catholics vs the right wing Catholic league. A personal god not being the center of Buddhism does not mean it is superstition free. Reincarnation is a superstition and China's Buddhist population does not like the head of their club bucking old social norms. But I will give him credit baring ditching his religion completely, glad he isn't clinging to that bullshit claim. China is a very superstitious country and Buddhism is part of it regardless if it's club members don't subscribe to a god belief. They still believe in spirits and the magic of numbers and reincarnation. It is still a religion and this is simply a split in the interpretation of it.

I had all these points I was going to make about how fucking stupid your post was but it was taking up too much of my precious time.

Nothing you said was worthwhile or backed by any evidence. In fact I'd place it in the the area of being bait to see if you could start an arguement with either iwbiek or me.

 

What is lacking evidence? Buddhism isn't a religion? So we can't fly to China and find buddhists or buddhist politicians? So if we polygraph every Chinese citizens we wont find one single person who goes to a temple or holds a superstition? Or maybe just like Issac Hayes fans of Buddhism don't have a problem picking on others but flip out when criticism is aimed at them. 

ALL religions are EVERY SINGLE ONE in human history are nothing more than comic book forms of politics. They are artificial constructs used to create social order. "Its complecated" is a cop out, YES it is complecated, NEEDLESSLY .

There is nothing at all special about Buddhism, it is simply a group, one group in one period of time in the history of evolution. It has the same long term value as the dinosaurs.  Getting stuck on the pretty parts of a label is all that humans do. 

 

 

"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: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
 If you value the claim

 If you value the claim that your soul magically survives you then moves to another body after you die, how is that any different than claiming Jesus servived his own death? What is good about clinging to bad claims? I am sorry it bothers you that I pick on Buddhism, too bad. I also go after Muslims and Christians and Jews and atheists as well. 

Religion never left China. Buddhism is a religion. Buddhists have their own superstitions. Reincarnation is a superstition. And if you read the OP you must have missed the part where I gave the Lama credit for doubting that. Outside ditching the religion outright, it is a step forward. Much in the same light as  some Christians accepting evolution. 

"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


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:...just like i

iwbiek wrote:
...just like i don't generally talk about my games of spider solitaire with anyone else.

Lol!

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
 If Buddhism was a cure,

 If Buddhism was a cure, then why does China have prisons like every other nation? Because Buddism isn't cure anymore than any other human invented placebo. They have prisons because humans respond negitively to crime and have a evolutionary sense of social stability. Religion explains nothing about our natural reality outside our ability to make shit up. It has pretty motifs in it sure, but so does every religion. 

"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: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
I really hate the bullshit claim that China is "atheist" like say I am an atheist or Dawkins is. China's population is full of Buddhists, whom, like Jews, can partake in rituals and superstitions without believing in a personal god. This isnt about atheism at all, this is about competing sects of the same religion. No different than say liberal Catholics vs the right wing Catholic league. A personal god not being the center of Buddhism does not mean it is superstition free. Reincarnation is a superstition and China's Buddhist population does not like the head of their club bucking old social norms. But I will give him credit baring ditching his religion completely, glad he isn't clinging to that bullshit claim. China is a very superstitious country and Buddhism is part of it regardless if it's club members don't subscribe to a god belief. They still believe in spirits and the magic of numbers and reincarnation. It is still a religion and this is simply a split in the interpretation of it.

I had all these points I was going to make about how fucking stupid your post was but it was taking up too much of my precious time.

Nothing you said was worthwhile or backed by any evidence. In fact I'd place it in the the area of being bait to see if you could start an arguement with either iwbiek or me.

 

What is lacking evidence? Buddhism isn't a religion? So we can't fly to China and find buddhists or buddhist politicians? So if we polygraph every Chinese citizens we wont find one single person who goes to a temple or holds a superstition? Or maybe just like Issac Hayes fans of Buddhism don't have a problem picking on others but flip out when criticism is aimed at them. 

ALL religions are EVERY SINGLE ONE in human history are nothing more than comic book forms of politics. They are artificial constructs used to create social order. "Its complecated" is a cop out, YES it is complecated, NEEDLESSLY .

There is nothing at all special about Buddhism, it is simply a group, one group in one period of time in the history of evolution. It has the same long term value as the dinosaurs. Getting stuck on the pretty parts of a label is all that humans do. 

 

Can you tell me what percentage of Chinese are Buddhists? Can you give the percentages of the other religions? Which one is number one? number two? Why the number one religion is what it is? Who placed it in to the hearts and minds of the chinese? Yes. You. Lacking evidence.

And go back to the OP and look at the original subject then you'll understand why I'm so confused how you instantly go off track from the original subject.

I can not spend all this time trying to correct you when you haven't done the research.

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
a cure for what? the only

a cure for what? the only thing buddhism claims to "cure" is the cycle of rebirth.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: If you value

Brian37 wrote:

 If you value the claim that your soul magically survives you then moves to ho another body after you die, how is that any different than claiming Jesus servived his own death?




because science can demonstrate that corpses cannot reanimate. science can't demonstrate jackshit about reincarnation.


Brian37 wrote:
Reincarnation is a superstition.



already demonstrated how that's entirely your opinion. but you're welcome to prove me wrong. how would you go about crafting an experiment to verify or falsify reincarnation?

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:I have not

Brian37 wrote:
I have not given away your real identity so grow up.



just what is my real identity?


and yes, i'll grow up now, mr. 40-something unemployed divorcee who is supported by his mother (and claims it's the system's fault).

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:a cure for

iwbiek wrote:
a cure for what? the only thing Buddhism claims to "cure" is the cycle of rebirth.

And how did he get 'a cure' out of the original article?? Why is he going from the Dalai Lama not wanting to be reincarnated because of what the Chinese will do when they claim to have "the 15th Dalai Lama" which is exactly what they have been planning since they stole away the Pacha Lama over a decade ago. It's because they want to control the Tibetan people.

Why is it Brian can't understand the his original post? Did he not read the article? How does he instantly go on to a completely different subject, ranting about shit that has nothing to do with the subject?


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: If you value

Brian37 wrote:

 If you value the claim that your soul magically survives you then moves to another body after you die, how is that any different than claiming Jesus servived his own death? What is good about clinging to bad claims? I am sorry it bothers you that I pick on Buddhism, too bad. I also go after Muslims and Christians and Jews and atheists as well. 

Religion never left China. Buddhism is a religion. Buddhists have their own superstitions. Reincarnation is a superstition. And if you read the OP you must have missed the part where I gave the Lama credit for doubting that. Outside ditching the religion outright, it is a step forward. Much in the same light as  some Christians accepting evolution. 

You need to research the subject and stop talking about reincarnation like you are Shirley MacLaine. Reincarnation has nothing to do with a 'soul'.

You couldn't pick your own nose much less pick on Buddhism, Islam or Judiasm.

 

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:iwbiek

digitalbeachbum wrote:

iwbiek wrote:
a cure for what? the only thing Buddhism claims to "cure" is the cycle of rebirth.

And how did he get 'a cure' out of the original article?? Why is he going from the Dalai Lama not wanting to be reincarnated because of what the Chinese will do when they claim to have "the 15th Dalai Lama" which is exactly what they have been planning since they stole away the Pacha Lama over a decade ago. It's because they want to control the Tibetan people.

Why is it Brian can't understand the his original post? Did he not read the article? How does he instantly go on to a completely different subject, ranting about shit that has nothing to do with the subject?




it's his typical modus operandi. he keeps changing the subject because he never actually responds to a single argument. seriously, not once. if you don't believe me, go back and look all you like. his response to a cogent argument is always either to, a., repeat his original point with total disregard for the counterpoint (like in this thread where, several posts after i showed him that reincarnation cannot conclusively be called a superstition, he just again repeated, "reincarnation is superstition," without addressing anything i said), or b., totally change the subject and/or create a straw man.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:it's his

iwbiek wrote:
it's his typical modus operandi. he keeps changing the subject because he never actually responds to a single argument.
 

"The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous."  

--Neither Marx nor Stalin

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:digitalbeachbum

iwbiek wrote:
digitalbeachbum wrote:

iwbiek wrote:
a cure for what? the only thing Buddhism claims to "cure" is the cycle of rebirth.

And how did he get 'a cure' out of the original article?? Why is he going from the Dalai Lama not wanting to be reincarnated because of what the Chinese will do when they claim to have "the 15th Dalai Lama" which is exactly what they have been planning since they stole away the Pacha Lama over a decade ago. It's because they want to control the Tibetan people.

Why is it Brian can't understand the his original post? Did he not read the article? How does he instantly go on to a completely different subject, ranting about shit that has nothing to do with the subject?


it's his typical modus operandi. he keeps changing the subject because he never actually responds to a single argument. seriously, not once. if you don't believe me, go back and look all you like. his response to a cogent argument is always either to, a., repeat his original point with total disregard for the counterpoint (like in this thread where, several posts after i showed him that reincarnation cannot conclusively be called a superstition, he just again repeated, "reincarnation is superstition," without addressing anything i said), or b., totally change the subject and/or create a straw man.

To switch off topic so quickly is ridiculous.

The story in the OP is about the Dalia Lama wants to take away the control of the Chinese by preventing them from claiming a new Dalai Lama under their control after he dies. The Chinese has already stolen the original Panchen Lama (Gedhun Choeky Nyima) and refuse to let any one see him or speak to him. He is obviously either dead or a political prisoner. In his place they have put another "Lama" who was already friendly with the Chinese and who was at odds with the current Dalai Lama. Personally, I think this is a sign that his Holiness is not fairing well. He must know there is a problem and he must get control on this situation by pulling the rug on the Chinese.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
yeah, and that's another one

yeah, and that's another one of the million things brian doesn't understand. the dalai lama isn't really questioning reincarnation as such, but, as a bodhisattva, he has the choice whether or not to reincarnate as another dalai lama. he has often ruminated in the last decade or so about whether or not he will reincarnate. he seems to be getting closer to a decision. now, i personally think reincarnation is rubbish, but, unlke brian, i won't try to push that anything more than opinion.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
This guy was in it, but what

"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: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
 Then there is this

"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: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
 http://www.extibetanbuddhis

 http://www.extibetanbuddhist.com/

"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: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:yeah, and

iwbiek wrote:
yeah, and that's another one of the million things brian doesn't understand. the dalai lama isn't really questioning reincarnation as such, but, as a bodhisattva, he has the choice whether or not to reincarnate as another dalai lama. he has often ruminated in the last decade or so about whether or not he will reincarnate. he seems to be getting closer to a decision. now, i personally think reincarnation is rubbish, but, unlke brian, i won't try to push that anything more than opinion.

It is rubbish you moron. No different than claiming Jesus rose from the dead and will come back a second time. No one survives their death, there is no such thing as a soul. Once your brain dies you die. It is a supperstion like any other. It is is a reflection of our human ignorance reflecting our human egos and fears of being finite.

 

Buddhism is no more a science than the Bible or Koran. They reflect nothing about our modern scientific knowledge. All of them started in  an age of ignorance.

When you say "I won't try to push that as anything more than an opinion"...........That is your sense of empathy and fairness clouding your judgment. It would be the same if you said "Hey Galelio, don't be so mean to the church, your sun centered solar system is just an opinion".

It was understandable that people made these things up when they didn't know better. We know better now.

 

I don't care who is claiming they continue after their death. It would be quite easy to prove that (NOT RECOMMENDING IT) to blow one's head off with a shotgun, and communcate with those in a lab to prove they are still around. Funny how no one sane is willing to do that. But when it comes to religious claims all reason flies out the window. The idea of continuing beyond your death is not a motif owned by one religion. But that does not make it true no matter who is claiming it. There was a time when most humans thought the earth was flat. And even today there are idiots who still believe the sun revolves around the earth. 

"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


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
of course Buddhism isn't a

of course Buddhism isn't a science. as you've already said, it's a religion. religion and science are two entirely different things, with completely different goals and methodologies. that has to be at least the 50th time I've explained that to you, yet you keep saying "Buddhism isn't a science," as if you were actually addressing an argument I'm making. is it painful being so thick?

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
oh, and I'll ask for the

oh, and I'll ask for the third time: how would you craft an experiment to falsify reincarnation? feel free to get bob's help. because a flat earth can be and was falsified empirically. reincarnation cannot, therefore (try to pay attention now) your Galileo analogy is invalid.

 

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:of course

iwbiek wrote:

of course Buddhism isn't a science. as you've already said, it's a religion. religion and science are two entirely different things, with completely different goals and methodologies. that has to be at least the 50th time I've explained that to you, yet you keep saying "Buddhism isn't a science," as if you were actually addressing an argument I'm making. is it painful being so thick?

Right, so if it is not a science then why the fuck do you think it is ok to coddle the insecuriteis of humans? We no longer believe the Egyptian polytheistic gods, we no longer believe in Thor, so when you argue "leave them alone" all you are doing is allowing people to live in the past. It is the same stupid logic of confusing human rights with credibility of a claim. 

ALL RELIGIONS are simply trying to use a kaliedoscope in place of a telescope. The fact that you cant stop people from believing does not mean you should not get them to think. You are doing nothing but allowing humans to dwell in the past. Your good intetnt makes my dick itch. 

Religion is natural in the same context a buck will challenge it's reflection in a glass window or door. It is a missfire a missunderstanding of reality. It is nothing to cling to. It is why we don't throw humans in volcanos. It is why we don't own slaves. Buddhism deserves no taboos anymore than we give Christianity or Islam.

"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


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
because, believe it or not,

because, believe it or not, science is not the be-all end-all of human experience. "not a science" does not mean "worthless."

 

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: This guy was

You really need to learn how to post links

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
can someone other than brian

can someone other than brian please remind me of when i said buddhism deserves taboo status? just want to make sure i'm not going crazy...

 

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:This guy was

What's amazing about this person is that they sound just like you. Confused and with out common sense.

The rest of the post is a complete wash of mentally, unstable, bullshit. And you posted this as what? Evidence? Get the fuck out.

 

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

What's amazing about this person is that they sound just like you. Confused and with out common sense.

The rest of the post is a complete wash of mentally, unstable, bullshit. And you posted this as what? Evidence? Get the fuck out.

 

 

Nope, you sound like Beyond when you point to people in it because "what would you know you aren't in it" isn't good enough. Ok, so when I point to people in it, not even that is good enough. I guess they were not doing it right. Just like Nick Hanaoure isnt a real billionaire because he thinks his own class is fucking up.

All religions are the same. They are human inveneted constructs, there is nothing special about any of them. Whatever pretty stories in them are not evidence that people need them, they are evidence that humans get stuck on pretty. Our species ability to be cruel or compassonate is in us, not the labels we assing each other. Just like you can have compassonate wealth and greedy wealth. 

The dinosuars didn'[t pray to a fat guy. The water bear didn't pray to a fat guy and it survived 5 mass extinctions. The big bang wasn't caused by a guy nameed Buddha anymore than it is explained by Allah or Jesus. Religions are an outcome of flawed perceptions, they have never been a nessesity to understanding the nature of reality. They are merely the products of human immagination.

"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: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:  Then there

Another lost and confused person who spent too much time meditating and snorting incense.

Why do people keep mixing buddism with christianity? There is no soul. There is no life after death. Buddhism does not teach any of these things. Fucking Western bullshitters. They go over to Tibet or India and they practice for three months with some guru then come back to America to sell books and t-shirts preaching words.

"All religions, including Buddhism, stem from our narcissistic wish to believe that the universe was created for our benefit, as a stage for our spiritual quests"

Another bullshit opinion trying to be pushed on to every individual in the world. No where in Buddhism does it speak of the Universe being created for our benefit.

So yet again, you post some bullshit article as? proof? really is this all you have?

 


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37

Brian37 wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

What's amazing about this person is that they sound just like you. Confused and with out common sense.

The rest of the post is a complete wash of mentally, unstable, bullshit. And you posted this as what? Evidence? Get the fuck out.

 

Nope, you sound like Beyond when you point to people in it because "what would you know you aren't in it" isn't good enough. Ok, so when I point to people in it, not even that is good enough. I guess they were not doing it right. Just like Nick Hanaoure isnt a real billionaire because he thinks his own class is fucking up.

You are a bullshitter. You present this article as evidence but it is one person and one opinion. They sound really fucked up in the head. Really. Any one who thinks that Buddhism pushes you to suicide really has mental issues. Sounds like a complete bullshit article. I bet the writer never studied Buddhism or practiced it.

And you are off the topic which was about China and the Dalai Lama arguing over if he should reincarnated.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

 http://www.extibetanbuddhist.com/

I skimmed only a few paragraphs to know where it was headed and this is yet again? what? evidence? really? that we should never put other people on pedestals so high that we can't touch time or correct them? HAHAHA.

The people who caught HIV from this monk were ignorant. They got what they got and now they deal with it. That's the way life happens. You ever learn to experience and accept it or you fight it kicking and screaming. In the end you always end up where you were supposed to be anyway.

So please go back to the original article and look at the subject, because if you are ready to discuss it I'm sure many of us would love to discuss China's political manuvering to put another vise on the people of Tibet.

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:can someone

iwbiek wrote:

can someone other than brian please remind me of when i said buddhism deserves taboo status? just want to make sure i'm not going crazy...

 

Then stop fucking acting like it. Buddhism, Hinduism, the polytheism of Rome and Egypt, every fucking religion is placebo thinking. We have better knowledge of the world now as as a species. You stupidly make excuses for bad logic because you confuse human rights with credibiity of a claim. 

People like what they  believe, no shit. So? The problem with leaving religion alone is that people do stupid shit based upon their beliefs. Only an idiot would think that never happens.

Buddhism is a religion, and it is made up of humans, like every other group. It has had the same range of human behaviors as every other religion. It has had its conflicts within its ranks as well. Victor Stenger's book "The New Atheism" address the religions of Asia and the Orient including Taoism and Janism along with Mormonism as well as others in his later chapter. 

Ocham's razor alone points to what humans are really doing.

When given a a multitude of competing claims to fill in a gap of knoweldge, the attitude is that the one that has the least baggage and least complecated to fill in tha gap is going to be your most likely answer.

 

So here are your choices.

 

1. Religion is a good way to scientifically explain reality.

 

2. Humans merely like them so they make them up.

 

So now you say you are not giving Buddhism a pass. Bullshit, you give every religon a pass because your empathy won't allow you to rock the boat. "Pretty" can be found in all religions. Kindness can be found in all religions. Not because the religion is a requirement, but because human evolved with BOTH the ability to be compassonate and cruel.  Religion is taking our natural behavior and turning it into a comic book. So if you say Buddhism shouldn't get a pass either, and I agree, then put up or shut up and consider that is a placebo effect like all other religions.

 

 

 

 

"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: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Ocham's razor

Brian37 wrote:

Ocham's razor alone points to what humans are really doing.

When given a a multitude of competing claims to fill in a gap of knoweldge, the attitude is that the one that has the least baggage and least complecated to fill in tha gap is going to be your most likely answer.

Yep. Ocham's razor certainly points out what you are doing.

So are you considering your claims in those multitude of claims which are trying to fill the gap? I bet you have a ton of baggage you carry.

Do you think you have all the answers for every one?


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Ocham's razor alone points to what humans are really doing.

When given a a multitude of competing claims to fill in a gap of knoweldge, the attitude is that the one that has the least baggage and least complecated to fill in tha gap is going to be your most likely answer.

Yep. Ocham's razor certainly points out what you are doing.

So are you considering your claims in those multitude of claims which are trying to fill the gap? I bet you have a ton of baggage you carry.

Do you think you have all the answers for every one?

Saying there is no god, and saying that religion is not a requirement to explain anything does not mean science has all the answers. 

"I don't know" does not equate to clinging to the past. There is lots we do know, now if you want to stupidly cling to the past you can. It is ok to use the trash can of bad ideas. 

You are making this about me because you personally don't like my tactics in conversations.

I am talking about the difference between something humans utter and spread as a placebo, vs science which is the real tool. 

No credible scientist claims to know everything. But there is still better data know which points us in the right direction. Religion is kaliedescope thinking. Telescopes are where the real knowledge comes from.

You already accept that Thor does not explain lightening. You already accept Allah is not needed to explain the big bang. So why would Buddhism exlpain anything about reality either?

Stephen Hawking "A god is not required". And neither is the Dali Lama, or Pope anymore than we need the Oracls of Greek or Roman polytheism. Oracal is simply another name for holy person. Trying to water down a title to a more natural level does not change that it still amounts to a hollow position. 

Religion explains nothing other than the human ability to make shit up.

When you can prove to me that the Lama is a scientist like Neil Degress Tyson. Or Buddhism is a required tool like physics or a telescope, then we can talk. But holy people are just men in costumes who have managed to convince others to follow them. 

No one owns a patent on our species behavior. Religious writings and holy people are products of flawed perceptions giving power to people based on naked assertions. Nothing a Buddist does that is kind, is limited to buddhism. Nothing a Rabbi says that is kind is limited to Jews. Nothing the Pope says that is kind is limited to Catholics.

Religion is a result of flawed perceptions. It is the same as a baseball player assigning his home run to his lucky bat, instead of his ability and actually hitting the ball. We are the ones being compassonate, we are the ones being cruel. That is in our evolution. Not in the religions humans invent. Religion takes our natural behavior and turns it into a comic book. The downside is that it allows us to infect that comic book thinking on a political level and that does have real negative impact on  humans.

 

 

 

"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: 15747
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

You really need to learn how to post links

 

I actually think I have figured out what I was doing wrong here. I was using the "source" button, instead of simply using copy and paste a box pops up when you want to paste. I also need to work on previewing before I submit. Nobody is perfect. 

"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: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: You are

Brian37 wrote:

You are making this about me because you personally don't like my tactics in conversations.

No. I'm waiting for a single response which is related to the OP. You went off on some wild goose chase talking about shit which wasn't related.

Brian37 wrote:

I am talking about the difference between something humans utter and spread as a placebo, vs science which is the real tool. 

When are you not talking about this? You could be talking about a recipe for pancakes and you'd find a way to talk about evolution, religion and science.

Brian37 wrote:

You already accept that Thor does not explain lightening. You already accept Allah is not needed to explain the big bang. So why would Buddhism explain anything about reality either?

I hate getting off track but, while lighting was associated with Thor he is actually a Thunder God. When the people saw lighting and heard thunder it was specifically Thor fighting the Frost Giants.

Brian37 wrote:

Stephen Hawking "A god is not required". And neither is the Dali Lama, or Pope anymore than we need the Oracls of Greek or Roman polytheism. Oracal is simply another name for holy person. 

Poor analogy and purely an opinion. People who follow Buddhism often turn to the Dalai Lama (such as Catholics do with the Pope).

Brian37 wrote:

Religion explains nothing other than the human ability to make shit up.

The FSM exists to Pastafarian. Prove them wrong? Sure it is a joke, but they take that shit seriously. He really exists to them for the sake of their argument. Who are you to prove the FSM doesn't exist.

Brian37 wrote:
When you can prove to me...

You are filled with fallacies. When does it end with you?

The rest of your post is pointless and irrelevant. I'm still waiting for you to say something with is related to the OP. 


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:I actually

Brian37 wrote:

I actually think I have figured out what I was doing wrong here. I was using the "source" button, instead of simply using copy and paste a box pops up when you want to paste. I also need to work on previewing before I submit. Nobody is perfect. 

Now if you could just see your fallacy of trying to prove other people wrong about their god you'd be headed in a better direction.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:I am

digitalbeachbum wrote:
I am talking about the difference between something humans utter and spread as a placebo, vs science which is the real tool. 




i'm sorry, the real tool for what, exactly? will knowing evolution is the cause of absolutely everything ease my depression? will it help me be more productive in the world? will it give me the tools to deal with existential dread? will i find peace contemplating genetic theory? because so far it hasn't worked for me, nor have i heard of millions of people suddenly discovering a sense of purpose after watching cosmos. maybe some people have, but not everybody has, so therefore it must not be the tool for everything. science is the tool for describing and predicting empirical reality. that's it. it cannot lay claim to anything else. or should people just suffer? or should we take the psychiatric drugs science has provided us and be satisfied with foggy perceptions and decreased libidos? because frankly i'd rather feel better with a placebo than feel like shit, and i'd rather my neighbor felt the same.


can science offer an alternative to religion that is just as therapeutically efficacious for the majority of humanity? or do we all need to realize that depression, anxiety, existential dread, etc., aren't "real problems" and just get the fuck over it? sigh, i don't actually expect you to answer any of these questions...

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
That's why extinguishing

That's why extinguishing religion completely is absolutely impossible.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:digitalbeachbum

iwbiek wrote:
digitalbeachbum wrote:
I am talking about the difference between something humans utter and spread as a placebo, vs science which is the real tool. 

 


i'm sorry, the real tool for what, exactly? will knowing evolution is the cause of absolutely everything ease my depression? will it help me be more productive in the world? will it give me the tools to deal with existential dread? will i find peace contemplating genetic theory? because so far it hasn't worked for me, nor have i heard of millions of people suddenly discovering a sense of purpose after watching cosmos. maybe some people have, but not everybody has, so therefore it must not be the tool for everything. science is the tool for describing and predicting empirical reality. that's it. it cannot lay claim to anything else. or should people just suffer? or should we take the psychiatric drugs science has provided us and be satisfied with foggy perceptions and decreased libidos? because frankly i'd rather feel better with a placebo than feel like shit, and i'd rather my neighbor felt the same.
can science offer an alternative to religion that is just as therapeutically efficacious for the majority of humanity? or do we all need to realize that depression, anxiety, existential dread, etc., aren't "real problems" and just get the fuck over it? sigh, i don't actually expect you to answer any of these questions...

 

HUH? I didn't write that... it was Brian...


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
sorry, slipped up with the

sorry, slipped up with the quote coding. but it should be obvious to anybody reading who wrote it. not that it matters at this point. this has become yet snother thread brian abandoned after getting his ass handed to him.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
If he'd only increase the

If he'd only increase the efficiency with which he arrives at his destination...

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:sorry, slipped

iwbiek wrote:
sorry, slipped up with the quote coding. but it should be obvious to anybody reading who wrote it. not that it matters at this point. this has become yet snother thread brian abandoned after getting his ass handed to him.

I vote for 'abandonment with his belief that he won some technicality'