-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
Free versions of recent episodes:
I dont think man is "hard wired" for religion either, if that were so we would all be religious.
I think mankind is hard wired to seek answers and knowledge.
For a long time the god of the gaps (in knowledge) worked as a gap filler, but in more recent times science and our knowledge base has been replacing religious answers with proper ones.
So its apples and oranges really, we are hard wired to seek knowledge, which for the intellectually lazy, religion did well enough.
And spirituality is a result of a neurological impairment.
I think mankind is hard wired to seek answers and knowledge.
For a long time the god of the gaps (in knowledge) worked as a gap filler, but in more recent times science and our knowledge base has been replacing religious answers with proper ones.
So its apples and oranges really, we are hard wired to seek knowledge, which for the intellectually lazy, religion did well enough.
And spirituality is a result of a neurological impairment.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
Here is a major part of the heartburn I think. There are those who seem to believe that because something is under the umbrella of religion that it should be given special treatment.
It's called special pleading.
There is no difference between the way the Abrahamic religions get treated here than say, the claims of Robbert B., Nancy T., or Billy Meier.
The burden of proof is on Robbert B. to prove his outlandish claims that he masks with a false spirituality. It is the same thing with ideologies, institutions, groups, or individuals that want to pass off their own misguided beliefs or confidence games on others.
It's called special pleading.
There is no difference between the way the Abrahamic religions get treated here than say, the claims of Robbert B., Nancy T., or Billy Meier.
The burden of proof is on Robbert B. to prove his outlandish claims that he masks with a false spirituality. It is the same thing with ideologies, institutions, groups, or individuals that want to pass off their own misguided beliefs or confidence games on others.
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
Absolutely!!!!
Thank you Trainedboserver you hit the nail right on the head and between the eyes.
trainedobserver
Paranormally Disenchanted
I would change that to read:
The burden of proof is on Robbert B. to prove his outlandish claims that he masks with a false spirituality. It is the same thing with ideologies, institutions, groups, or individuals that desire to have their claims and assertions respected.
For the most part this isn't about wanting "to pass off their" anything to anyone else and that wasn't what I meant to say anyway.
Well in defending their faith against what imo is valid criticism, they do in a defacto sense pass off their misguided beliefs onto others, much in the same way michael horn tries to pass off his faith in meiers validity to others by defending what is clearly nonsense.
And what weve seen here, yet again is not a scenario where a critical data point is defended with another data point.
But rather an attack on the persons presenting critical comentary.
I dont need to read the post that prompted this response
To recognise the mechanism employed, unable to refute the data they will have to resort to trying to censor and silence the ones presenting it.
You expect that sort of head in the sand logic at religeous sites, but im always amazed how at sites like this where people can quickly spot a tossed hubcap and know its not a UFO, to suddenly support the absurd idea that a god man was born of a virgin and could turn water into wine with his magic
We see criticisms of "angry" athiests, and militant athiesm, but not one shred of data to negate the data points presented by athiests.
It really is the last refuge, the last bastion of those who defend superstition in the face of rational criticism, they cant refute the data points, so they try and silence those presenting them, like they did with Galileo
They counter data points like noahs ark cant be a real story because if you do the math....... with your just an angry athiest.
Because they are unable to bring to the discussion the math, the data points that counter the criticism.
If there was the math to demonstrate how in a single day, 8 people could feed , water and shovel the tons of manure (let alone 377 days worth) they would present it faster than you could say jehovah's witness.....
But there is no math that can prop up such an obvious fairy tale.
In defending the undefendable, whats unspoken is the underlying "passing off" of their opinion that its true
You expect that sort of head in the sand logic at religeous sites, but im always amazed when at sites like this we have people who are not fooled by a tossed hubcap, who then think a story about a god man who was born of a virgin and could turn water into wine by magic, is legit
And what weve seen here, yet again is not a scenario where a critical data point is defended with another data point.
But rather an attack on the persons presenting critical comentary.
I dont need to read the post that prompted this response
To recognise the mechanism employed, unable to refute the data they will have to resort to trying to censor and silence the ones presenting it.
You expect that sort of head in the sand logic at religeous sites, but im always amazed how at sites like this where people can quickly spot a tossed hubcap and know its not a UFO, to suddenly support the absurd idea that a god man was born of a virgin and could turn water into wine with his magic
We see criticisms of "angry" athiests, and militant athiesm, but not one shred of data to negate the data points presented by athiests.
It really is the last refuge, the last bastion of those who defend superstition in the face of rational criticism, they cant refute the data points, so they try and silence those presenting them, like they did with Galileo
They counter data points like noahs ark cant be a real story because if you do the math....... with your just an angry athiest.
Because they are unable to bring to the discussion the math, the data points that counter the criticism.
If there was the math to demonstrate how in a single day, 8 people could feed , water and shovel the tons of manure (let alone 377 days worth) they would present it faster than you could say jehovah's witness.....
But there is no math that can prop up such an obvious fairy tale.
In defending the undefendable, whats unspoken is the underlying "passing off" of their opinion that its true
You expect that sort of head in the sand logic at religeous sites, but im always amazed when at sites like this we have people who are not fooled by a tossed hubcap, who then think a story about a god man who was born of a virgin and could turn water into wine by magic, is legit
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
I found that video by accident listening to Tull on YouTube lol
Ive been told then when i play my flute, i look like a younger anderson.
Not entirely inapproriate
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
haha awesome man!! I just look like an older me when I play shows now days
That is a very cool song
V
Voyager
Guest
I must commend all of you for having invested so much time and energy into the study of religion. Whereas I find value in some of the eastern religions, I have never read a full page of the bible. In fact, I don’t own a bible. I don’t find Christianity to be credible enough to waste my time on. Religion is still firmly established throughout the world, and no amount of logic will change that. It’s like a dog chasing its own tail. Round and round it goes, where it stops nobody knows.haha awesome man!! I just look like an older me when I play shows now days
That is a very cool song
haha awesome man!! I just look like an older me when I play shows now days
That is a very cool song
Hes had a lot to say on religion over the years
Wind up and hymn 43 are good examples
Bungle in the jungle has the classic lines
But as far as philosophy goes my favourite is from lick your fingers clean
stonehart
Paranormal Adept
Nice post and I agree with you on the credibility side of things.. But I do see a future where religion is no longer with us, far off as that maybe it will come with time.
I find comparative theology a fascinating study, as facets of anthropology go its imo an interesting one.
But being able to look at all its expressions from a topological pov is essential, you cant be objective otherwise.
In much the same way as a Doctor is better suited to look at the case studys in an asylum.
Its not a task any of the inmates could undertake with any expectation of sucess
That would be like the blind trying to lead the blind, indeed the adage in the kingdom of the blind the one eyed man is king, rings very true imo
V
Voyager
Guest
I understand what you mean. At the risk of going off topic: What do you do when the inmates are running the asylum?
V
Voyager
Guest
We did manage to climb out of the Dark Ages. Humanity is still in its infancy on a cosmic time scale. During the Dark Ages people feared the Catholic Inquisition. Now our enemy is the National Security State. They can lock up our bodies but not our minds.