Thread: Why do You believe?

Originally Posted by Keiju

im trying to say (and many others), the labelling is all bullshit dammit lol

religion is this, science is that, there are only ideas

f=ma is fact? no it is not, only an idea that is close, and one that is proven wrong, same for all, they are not facts, not absolute truths,

Well you edited so now I have to post again, ideas are the only things we have, prove something to me for certain! Present me with an absolute truth!

f=ma, why is it "proven" wrong?

absolute truth = you exist

nothing else is absolute

f=ma, why is it "proven" wrong?

google is handy

Originally Posted by Keiju

absolute truth = you exist

nothing else is absolute

google is handy

Well, prove to me that you exist! edit:Well if you do you have all my cred for life, I'll respond directly instead since it's beside the point. My point is that you can not live on absolute truths and therefore we have to make up reasonable explanations to fill the gap.
I will check...

edit:...done, ah yeah you mean, the problem with small matters and lightspeed, you're absolutely right however does it mean that we should-'ve thrown/trow away all previous calculations because of this, of course not, just that we have to alter the ideas of what the universe is slightly, or much.

um our conversation is proof enough to me, and to you no?

if not, i dont know how you have kept up this conversation without knowing you exist,

yes, i can not prove that you exist as i do, but i do not need to... that does not worry me.... i exist... this is enough for me

it is not just the f=ma, it is from this small assumption that many other larger assumptions will appear, the bigger the scale they attempt to apply it, the more evident its assumption becomes

My point is that you can not live on absolute truths

yes but the main issue was the lack of open mindedness, which is the topic, that is all i replied to o.O, anywho you do not live on absolute truths, but let it form the foundation from which all else derives, how you think of the "I" is the foundation, the "I" is infinite, we are not discovering anything, it is already here, we are unveiling what is already there... the "I"

Originally Posted by Keiju

um our conversation is proof enough to me, and to you no?

if not, i dont know how you have kept up this conversation without knowing you exist,

yes, i can not prove that you exist as i do, but i do not need to... that does not worry me.... i exist... this is enough for me

it is not just the f=ma, it is from this small assumption that many other larger assumptions will appear, the bigger the scale they attempt to apply it, the more evident its assumption becomes

I know I exist but that comes from me and I could just be a ghost created by your brain... ah shit the same. You too make up things everyday, to belive in the existence of your house, the universe and so on... all the time. Everyone has to do this in order to function as human, therefore it's vital that we search for truth and reason actively so that we know what to belive in

therefore it's vital that we search for truth and reason actively so that we know what to belive in

yes, search... and reason, this way you develope, why must you believe in something?

I believe that existence/god/I is infinite , that is all the belief i need, anymore only hurts development, everything else is an idea branching from infinity... the "I", all tools and instruments for my use

Originally Posted by Keiju

yes, search... and reason, this way you develope, why must you believe in something?

I believe that existence is infinite , that is all the belief i need, anymore only hurts development, everything else is an idea branching from infinity... the "I", all tools and instruments for my use

But you obviosly belive I exist! You NEED to belive a lot of things all the time in order to function, this is getting tiresome, you read my posts I asume?! Next time you wake up, don't belive that you're awake. Next time you meet a friend, ignore him because you can't be certain he exists. Now you see the point I'm desperatly trying to make?

thx for waking me up... =]

yes those beliefs or ideas rather are tools of the I, they are beneficial to my understanding of the I

Originally Posted by Dodopod

Cool where?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Kf0E9llkZIU&feature=related

It's less related than I remembered tho :p

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

fMRI, EEG, ..

MRIs only show structure, not activity. They don't show brainwaves at all. And an EEG machine requires electrodes to be physically attached directly to the skin in very precise locations on the head for them to register activity. If the lead is even slightly loose or off site, you'll not get a signal. So saying that brainwaves can only be picked up a few feet away is like saying a gallon of gas would only get you to the moon.

Please don't discuss science you do not understand.

I believe that to free your mind you must free yourself of religion. Without science we would still be living in the dark always having things fed to us being told that if we do not listen then we will burn forever. Sure science is not perfect but it is the best thing we have to figure out how the world works. Science is not a set of beliefs that dictate how we must act, but a tool to use so that we may understand how things work. Without science then we would not be able to understand how a child is born or even how to fly. Before science when a baby is born with a deformaty people thought it was the work of the devil. When people had psycological problems we thought that the devil or some spirit had taken them over. We use science to understand. Unfortunatly Religion is unfortunatly used when we lack evidence to give a natural explanation. If we cant just yet explain something it has to be supernatural right? I dont agree with this. If we lack some sort of evidence that does not mean some magical man in the skiy did it.

Is it possible that people can share dreams. Can the body do amazing feats of strength, endure things that are thought impossible, yes it is. To say a god does this is weakening our internal strength and power. Be the best you can be because of yourself not some external pressure of punishment. Depend on yourself not a god to help you through life. This is what I believe.

I guess I want it to be true. Also, sometimes I don't need evidence. I have experienced very little material proof of a God and yet I'm Chistian*. Another example could be that I have never seen (on TV or otherwise) a £100 note but I take people's word for it and believe it. Just because I have not experienced "Beyond Dreaming" before, I am not a non-believer. I have heard about others' experiences and I just have some kind of feeling...


* Let's not turn this thread into a religious argument. That was just one of my examples.

Originally Posted by Nazzul

I believe that to free your mind you must free yourself of religion. Without science we would still be living in the dark always having things fed to us being told that if we do not listen then we will burn forever. Sure science is not perfect but it is the best thing we have to figure out how the world works. Science is not a set of beliefs that dictate how we must act, but a tool to use so that we may understand how things work. Without science then we would not be able to understand how a child is born or even how to fly. Before science when a baby is born with a deformaty people thought it was the work of the devil. When people had psycological problems we thought that the devil or some spirit had taken them over. We use science to understand. Unfortunatly Religion is unfortunatly used when we lack evidence to give a natural explanation. If we cant just yet explain something it has to be supernatural right? I dont agree with this. If we lack some sort of evidence that does not mean some magical man in the skiy did it.

Is it possible that people can share dreams. Can the body do amazing feats of strength, endure things that are thought impossible, yes it is. To say a god does this is weakening our internal strength and power. Be the best you can be because of yourself not some external pressure of punishment. Depend on yourself not a god to help you through life. This is what I believe.

I'm sorry your experience with the Religion you were brought into was so negative. That being said, you seem to have found a perfectly suited replacement Religion; Science.

Yes - Science is a religion. And BTW - most religions are also scientific.

A religion is any method or set of actions or beliefs that one uses to help themselves understand and be connected to the Great Mystery. Another hallmark of religion, is the innate sense that one's own ideas are either the only ones that are right or are at least more right than others. Those who cling to Science as the sole answer to the mysteries of existance are just as narrow-minded as the "religious fruitcakes" they rant against.

"Science" is all about forming, testing and retesting hypothesis, right? So, if I hold a belief that praying to God helps me be more successful, and on a daily basis I pray and I am more successful, does not science tell us that we have a positive correlation? Perhaps not cause and effect, but a correlation nonetheless?

If I believe that I can separate my mind and Spirit from my body and travel in an ethereal form to a time or place I've never physically been, and I collect data and information in this form and then verify it through personal experience in a corporeal form at a later time, does this not scientifically validate the experience?

If I believe that Prayer has the power to heal, and I turn to an article in the American Medical Association's Journal and see that those patients who have people praying for them are 20% more likely to recover more fully and faster than those who don't, does that not substantiate my beliefs?

To separate "science" and "religion" or talk about them as if they are something different is an exercise in futility.

I have experienced very little material proof of a God and yet I'm Chistian

very confusing to me,

i thought existence was proof of god because existence... is god

i thought christian meant to be aiming for christ conciousness, not argueing, just wanna see what you mean by that sentence, then we might... discuss

Originally Posted by Keiju

i thought existence was proof of god

i thought christian meant to be aiming for christ conciousness,

Well... "my" understanding of being Christian is that you believe that Jesus Christ was the ONLY Son of God, that he was devine in-and-of himself, that he died - was executed - and was resurrected in the physical sense, and was taken bodily into "Heaven" to "...sit at the right hand of God."

If I go with your definition, I'm a Christian.

Well... "my" understanding of being Christian is that you believe that Jesus Christ was the ONLY Son of God, that he was devine in-and-of himself, that he died - was executed - and was resurrected in the physical sense, and was taken bodily into "Heaven" to "...sit at the right hand of God."

ya this is what i would of expected, then was gonna reply thats just bullshit religion
bunch of meaningless facts, this is where the anger/misconception for religion stems from i think,

If I go with your definition, I'm a Christian.

and that true christian/hindu/bhudda religion (and many others) is the aiming for christ/krishna/bhudda conciousness but anyway , it is turning into an argument isnt it..

faith is not required for real religion, the proof of the validity of any teaching is in the fruits they bear.... =], but yes it would be nice to stop using religion/science labels all together, only using them because i know the general "line" people draw between them, which can be seen in the posts on this thread

Originally Posted by Super Duck

Let's not turn this thread into a religious argument. That was just one of my examples.

I basically meant that I have not met God or seen a leper be cured in the name of God but I still believe. I knew I should never have used that example.

I basically meant that I have not met God or seen a leper be cured in the name of God but I still believe.

you have some pretty limited ideas of god

existence is in your face proof of god....faith is not required here....god is infinite.. that is all we know, to say that any one of those things you mention above somehow validates the proof for god anymore than this existence... blasphemous!

but yeh just an example anyway right.. this is just an example reply :p

Originally Posted by Keiju

you have some pretty limited ideas of god

existence is in your face proof of god....faith is not required here....god is infinite.. that is all we know, to say that any one of those things you mention above somehow validates the proof for god anymore than this existence... blasphemous!

but yeh just an example anyway right.. this is just an example reply :p

I know, I know! I was sent to Church every single Sunday without fail for 14 years of my life. I know what belief in God is all about and that a true Christian should not require proof. But, like I say, I was giving an example of something someone else might require physical or visual proof of, my athiest mother for example.

LMAO! So much for:

Originally Posted by Super Duck

* Let's not turn this thread into a religious argument. That was just one of my examples.

I know what belief in God is all about and that a true Christian should not require proof.

im still not getting what you mean, sounds like you need to burn that bible and start from scratch o.O, look elsewhere.. not just what your spoon fed, the church is doing you no good

But, like I say, I was giving an example of something someone else might require physical or visual proof of, my athiest mother for example.

what does athiest mean?

LMAO! So much for:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Duck
* Let's not turn this thread into a religious argument. That was just one of my examples.

i havent seen any arguments, did you make one yet? the church does not work on logic, they can not argue because they have no argument =]

churches are based on concreting ideas, solidifying the idea of god.... how can this ever be "correct"? it cant, so churches should not be followed because you think its "correct", only if you have a preference for the ideas that they take as conclusions and final answers.... like god = "this", weak imo

Originally Posted by saxonharp

I'm sorry your experience with the Religion you were brought into was so negative. That being said, you seem to have found a perfectly suited replacement Religion; Science.

Yes - Science is a religion. And BTW - most religions are also scientific.

A religion is any method or set of actions or beliefs that one uses to help themselves understand and be connected to the Great Mystery. Another hallmark of religion, is the innate sense that one's own ideas are either the only ones that are right or are at least more right than others. Those who cling to Science as the sole answer to the mysteries of existance are just as narrow-minded as the "religious fruitcakes" they rant against.

"Science" is all about forming, testing and retesting hypothesis, right? So, if I hold a belief that praying to God helps me be more successful, and on a daily basis I pray and I am more successful, does not science tell us that we have a positive correlation? Perhaps not cause and effect, but a correlation nonetheless?

If I believe that I can separate my mind and Spirit from my body and travel in an ethereal form to a time or place I've never physically been, and I collect data and information in this form and then verify it through personal experience in a corporeal form at a later time, does this not scientifically validate the experience?

If I believe that Prayer has the power to heal, and I turn to an article in the American Medical Association's Journal and see that those patients who have people praying for them are 20% more likely to recover more fully and faster than those who don't, does that not substantiate my beliefs?

To separate "science" and "religion" or talk about them as if they are something different is an exercise in futility.

I have not had much negative impact of religious Ideas most of my indoctranation was more of the soft christianity.

By reading your posts I think you are confused on what science is.

You are going to have to show me how religion is scientific. Again science is not a religion science tests things religion takes things on faith. Science asks how religion asks why something is. There is no testing in religion remember the christan god does not want to be tested . Anecdotal evidence is not scientific evidence. You say prayer makes you more sucssesful perhaps you are successful again this is anecdotal evidence it is not scientific evidence. I can come to my own conclusions saying that I am happier now then when I used to pray but it isnt scientific. You are going to have to show me that study because there was a study I have seen where prayer didnt help patients at all

"In the study, the researchers monitored 1,802 patients at six hospitals who received coronary bypass surgery, in which doctors reroute circulation around a clogged vein or artery.

The patients were broken into three groups. Two were prayed for; the third was not. Half the patients who received the prayers were told that they were being prayed for; half were told that they might or might not receive prayers.

The researchers asked the members of three congregations — St. Paul's Monastery in St. Paul; the Community of Teresian Carmelites in Worcester, Mass.; and Silent Unity, a Missouri prayer ministry near Kansas City — to deliver the prayers, using the patients' first names and the first initials of their last names.

The congregations were told that they could pray in their own ways, but they were instructed to include the phrase, "for a successful surgery with a quick, healthy recovery and no complications."

Analyzing complications in the 30 days after the operations, the researchers found no differences between those patients who were prayed for and those who were not." http://www.boston.com/news/globe/hea...er_for_health/


Do not compare science and religion because they are two diffrent things If you need some info on it "A religion is a set of beliefs and practices, often centered upon specific supernatural and moral claims about reality, the cosmos, and human nature, and often codified as prayer, ritual, and religious law."

"In its broadest sense, science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") refers to any systematic knowledge or practice. In its more usual restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research"

Again Science is not a set of beliefs but a tool to help us understand the world.

Originally Posted by Nazzul

I have not had much negative impact of religious Ideas most of my indoctranation was more of the soft christianity.

By reading your posts I think you are confused on what science is.

You are going to have to show me how religion is scientific. Again science is not a religion science tests things religion takes things on faith. Science asks how religion asks why something is. There is no testing in religion remember the christan god does not want to be tested . Anecdotal evidence is not scientific evidence. You say prayer makes you more sucssesful perhaps you are successful again this is anecdotal evidence it is not scientific evidence. I can come to my own conclusions saying that I am happier now then when I used to pray but it isnt scientific. You are going to have to show me that study because there was a study I have seen where prayer didnt help patients at all

"In the study, the researchers monitored 1,802 patients at six hospitals who received coronary bypass surgery, in which doctors reroute circulation around a clogged vein or artery.

The patients were broken into three groups. Two were prayed for; the third was not. Half the patients who received the prayers were told that they were being prayed for; half were told that they might or might not receive prayers.

The researchers asked the members of three congregations — St. Paul's Monastery in St. Paul; the Community of Teresian Carmelites in Worcester, Mass.; and Silent Unity, a Missouri prayer ministry near Kansas City — to deliver the prayers, using the patients' first names and the first initials of their last names.

The congregations were told that they could pray in their own ways, but they were instructed to include the phrase, "for a successful surgery with a quick, healthy recovery and no complications."

Analyzing complications in the 30 days after the operations, the researchers found no differences between those patients who were prayed for and those who were not." http://www.boston.com/news/globe/hea...er_for_health/


Do not compare science and religion because they are two diffrent things If you need some info on it "A religion is a set of beliefs and practices, often centered upon specific supernatural and moral claims about reality, the cosmos, and human nature, and often codified as prayer, ritual, and religious law."

"In its broadest sense, science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") refers to any systematic knowledge or practice. In its more usual restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research"

Again Science is not a set of beliefs but a tool to help us understand the world.

I don't misunderstand at all. Science is no different than religion and vice versa. Both use either personal experience or the experience of others to quantify and/or qualify the unkown. People who believe that Einstein's Theory of Relativity is an accurate representation of the physical universe operate on faith just as much as those who say that one can communicate with the dead.

Those who hold to scientific theory or "law" as the only correct way to view the universe are just as bigoted and close-minded as any religious zealot.

What you call science does not describe the "why" of things, it describes the "how" of things. It deals solely with the mechanical functionings of the universe and completely ignores anything that it can not categorize, define, label or digest.

Also, your definition of "religion" is alarmingly narrow. You seem to only be concerned with Christianity in your statement that "God does not wish to be tested." Even if we were only dealing with Christianity, that comment is taken out of context and does not have any bearing on the topic at hand. In my statement, I used the word religion to describe ANY planned, personal process for gathering and understanding information on the unknown. You used a similar definition and I'm shocked that you don't see the connection.

As for the study you quote, out of the 129,834 articles that come up when you search JAMA's archives using the search stream "Power of Prayer on Healing", I'm sure you can find one that says whatever you want.

Do not compare science and religion because they are two diffrent things If you need some info on it "A religion is a set of beliefs and practices, often centered upon specific supernatural and moral claims about reality, the cosmos, and human nature, and often codified as prayer, ritual, and religious law."

"In its broadest sense, science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") refers to any systematic knowledge or practice. In its more usual restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research"

Again Science is not a set of beliefs but a tool to help us understand the world.

yes.. this is just shocking, almost retarded

argueing for the sake of it or something coz there is no logic here, trapped in the world of words D:

words are a tool to get messages across, not to define things, and here you are attempting to define something that is not definable, words are based on the foundation of the definition of "me", "I", "you", its all in reference to those words, so please define those words for me, if you can..... if not then dont try to pass words off like they are defined in themselves, ur making no sense

if something does not exist in words, then it doesnt exist at all for some people, this is stupid

All facts are illusionary, facts are formulated by words which, as Keiju mentioned above, are meaningless - they only have meaning in relation to each other. It's like trying to find the meaning of something in a dictionary, only to be referred to the next set of words to look up, and so on in a circle.

To me, science and religion have the same purpose - to find out how the world works. One is based on looking inward, the other on looking outward. Both are methods, which can reveal a lot of information. (In this sense I am talking about spirituality, the method of investigation being prayer or meditation). Science can only describe the world, not our beings, nor what is ultimately important for our happiness. That is the domain of religion - the domain of inward exploration.