How do you deal with religious fanaticism?

[thirst4metal]

Hello F(r)iends,

How do you deal with religious fanaticism?
“One bullet at a time.” - some internet guy.

-Thirst

[scythekain]

@thirst4metal

Hello F(r)iends,

How do you deal with religious fanaticism?
“One bullet at a time.” - some internet guy.

-Thirst

Where does one draw the line at fanaticism and “loyal observer”?

[theonefroberg]

Thezeus18- I’m gonna get back to your inquiry soon.

robo sapien-

Uccisore wrote:
Quote:
Any religion that puts the humans at the centre of everything is fundamentally flawed.

If I had to toss an answer out there without suffecient information, I’d have to say that Christianity actually doesn’t put humanity ‘at the center of everything’, but let me hold off until you explain yourself.

Uccisore, please prove your statement and also consider this.

From Genesis 1:26

Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth

From Genesis 6:5-7

And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Why is that only human have a special relationship with this god (imago dei)?

Why is that if humans did some nonsense, this god had to destroy every thing on the Earth along with the humans?

Pagan religions which are also created by humans, do not focus on humans as Christianity does. They are cosmic rather than anthropocentric.

Ok… so not all religions are ridiculous, just the ones that aren’t based upon the occult or magic? Wow… welcome to the ways of thinking of medieval peasants. And what about the Jewish Faith and Islam? Are the people who follow them unenlighted fools too?

[robo_sapien]

@theonefroberg

Pagan religions which are also created by humans, do not focus on humans as Christianity does. They are cosmic rather than anthropocentric.

Ok… so not all religions are ridiculous, just the ones that aren’t based upon the occult or magic? Wow… welcome to the ways of thinking of medieval peasants. And what about the Jewish Faith and Islam? Are the people who follow them unenlighted fools too?

I am using pagan in the context of non-Judeo-Christian-Islamic, for example-Hinduism. Upanishads of Hinduism is a very abstract philosphy about the existence/universe and it does not at all focus on humans. It is very cosmic. And it is not even Androcentric like Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions. The central entity of Upanishads is gender-neutral.

EDIT: I have used the words ‘ridiculous’ or ‘stupid’ only for describing the beliefs. I never used them to describe the people. That was Uccisore’s unfair interpretation of my words (Uccisore wrote: "You, in your ego, already KNOW that all religions are stupid, (you use a different words),.“What you want is to find some way to wear a happy face even though you’re surrounded by idiots (to you)” ) I can’t be responsbile for his interpretation or you continuing on that in a very careless way. (You wrote: “Are the people who follow them unenlighted fools too?”) I am here to learn about philosophy not to be bullied. So, please stop behaving like that and act like a mature person.

[thirst4metal]

Hello F(r)iends,

@scythekain

Where does one draw the line at fanaticism and “loyal observer”?

When everyone but yourself is dead…
Then put one in your own head.

The end of fanaticism.

-Thirst

[robo_sapien]

From Forum Rules

i) No ad hominem arguments

This is not a playground. In order to produce high quality philosophical discussions we expect the posts to contain a good level of courtesy and respect. If something has angered you, walk away from the computer and come back when you have a clear head. It helps no-one to start throwing insults around the place. This rule is two-fold: Do not use personal attacks to further your argument (argumentum ad hominem) and don’t use insults at all.

@Uccisore

Unless by ‘ridiculously fanatical religious belief’ you meant ‘all religious belief’, and then you can just go to hell.

@Uccisore

You can take my ‘go to hell’ not as a literal suggestion, but more of a comment like “I find the cocky way you dismiss the beliefs of just about everybody but you, combined with the half-assed way you try to conceal said cocky dismissiveness, to be unpalatable”

That says more about you than me. I liked your argumentation skill, but not your personal attacking.

My statement "All religious beliefs are ridiculous’’ is my opinion. That’s not a personal insult against you. I am sure I can have my opinion. I couldn’t prove that but you couldn’t prove that the other way either.

[thirst4metal]

Hello F(r)iends,

@robo_sapien

I have opinions and not beliefs.

Bwahahahahaa
Your opinions are faith based…

-Thirst

[Alun_Aedicita]

@robo_sapien

Pagan religions which are also created by humans, do not focus on humans as Christianity does. They are cosmic rather than anthropocentric.

You later refer to Hinduism specifically, but the reality is that Hinduism uses Brahman in a way that is, for all intents and purposes, playing the same role as God in Christianity. While God is understood by many who interpret “in His image” to mean God is humanoid, incarnations of Brahman are viewed by many Hindus as humanoid. While Hinduism includes the concept of reincarnation, and thus places a lot of value in cows, for example, the focus is generally still upon ideas directly stemming from consciousness (samsara, nirvana, atman, etc.), the fundamental distinction between the human perspective and the rest of the universe.

Religion is human beings believing in the divine, sacred, or otherwise metaphysical, and tying themselves to it emotionally; it makes little sense to expect humans to be taken out of the equation. Religion isn’t a science that tries or should try to avoid all of the biases of our perspective.

[robo_sapien]

@thirst4metal

Hello F(r)iends,

@robo_sapien

I have opinions and not beliefs.

Bwahahahahaa
Your opinions are faith based…

-Thirst

It seems some people know for sure what everything precisely means for others. For me, an opinion is a working hypothesis, a tentative explanation for an observation for which I haven’t come to a final conclusion yet but need further analyses to do so.

For me, beliefs are faith based. I will change my opinion if I find valid contrasting evidence against my opinion, but beliefs may hardly change for no amount of evidence can change a belief because it is faith based.

I would be more careful before saying what things mean to others.

[robo_sapien]

@Alun Aedicita

@robo_sapien

Pagan religions which are also created by humans, do not focus on humans as Christianity does. They are cosmic rather than anthropocentric.

You later refer to Hinduism specifically, but the reality is that Hinduism uses Brahman in a way that is, for all intents and purposes, playing the same role as God in Christianity. While God is understood by many who interpret “in His image” to mean God is humanoid, incarnations of Brahman are viewed by many Hindus as humanoid. While Hinduism includes the concept of reincarnation, and thus places a lot of value in cows, for example, the focus is generally still upon ideas directly stemming from consciousness (samsara, nirvana, atman, etc.), the fundamental distinction between the human perspective and the rest of the universe.

Religion is human beings believing in the divine, sacred, or otherwise metaphysical, and tying themselves to it emotionally; it makes little sense to expect humans to be taken out of the equation. Religion isn’t a science that tries or should try to avoid all of the biases of our perspective.

You are right about the characteristics of Hinduism. I was more specific about the Upanishads. Hinduism as such has many sects like Saivaism, Vainavism etc., among which Upanishads is an abstract philosophy. I was refering only to the Upanishads.

Brahman: (From Wikipedia.com)
Brahman in the Vedantic (and subsequently Yogic) schools of Hinduism, is the signifying name given to the concept of the unchanging, infinite, immanent and transcendent reality that is the Divine Ground of all being in this universe.
It doesn’t make any special distinction for the humans. I am not trying to prove that it excludes humans but it does not focus on the humans as the centre of everything. Anthropocentrism is the issue here.

[Alun_Aedicita]

I’m pretty sure all Christian forms would all name God or Jesus (who is a form of God) as the center of everything. Whether He holds humans in a special place is dependent on the sect, so it still isn’t a fundamental issue of Christian thinking.

To answer the coming point that Jesus is held to be human and divine, this still doesn’t necessarily impy that Christians hold humans above the other things in the universe, just that God sent a messenger they could relate to.

[thirst4metal]

Hello F(r)iends,

@robo_sapien

For me, beliefs are faith based. I will change my opinion if I find valid contrasting evidence against my opinion, but beliefs may hardly change for no amount of evidence can change a belief because it is faith based.

You have potential and this is what you give? What a waste.

-Thirst

[scythekain]

@thirst4metal

Hello F(r)iends,

@scythekain

Where does one draw the line at fanaticism and “loyal observer”?

When everyone but yourself is dead…
Then put one in your own head.

The end of fanaticism.

-Thirst

lmao…

ah classic thirst.

[scythekain]

How to deal with religious fanaticism in five easy steps:

1. Identify the group.

2. Isolate the group.

3. Drop off “kool-aid”

4. Drop off pamphlets that “the great one is returning in 5 days”.

5. when the prophet doesn’t return they’ll drink the kool-aid, problem solved.

you can’t deal with a fanatic. They aren’t faithful, they are fanatic. Which for the right reasons is related to the word lunatic.

[robo_sapien]

@thirst4metal

Hello F(r)iends,

@robo_sapien

For me, beliefs are faith based. I will change my opinion if I find valid contrasting evidence against my opinion, but beliefs may hardly change for no amount of evidence can change a belief because it is faith based.

You have potential and this is what you give? What a waste.

-Thirst

Mind you this is my first full argument ever in philosophy/religion. I have already stated in the very begining of this thread that I am a newbie to philosophy. My philosophy experience/learning began almost at the same time when I registered in this forum which is only a month ago. I am only learning now how to argue and how to stay focussed on my arguments without yielding to or getting sidetracked by the dirty tricks ( like twisting what I haven’t said) of the emotional ones.

I am more in to learning rather than winning.

[thirst4metal]

Hello F(r)iends,

@robo_sapien

I am more in to learning rather than winning.

If you are serious about that, Uccisore can teach you the lessons you sorely lack.
He can point out the weakness in one’s argument(s).
He can help you learn to avoid errors in thinking.
He’s a bit rough around the edges, but a sharp guy.

I volunteer him…
Now, you just need to ask him.

-Thirst

[theonefroberg]

Mind you this is my first full argument ever in philosophy/religion. I have already stated in the very begining of this thread that I am a newbie to philosophy. My philosophy experience/learning began almost at the same time when I registered in this forum which is only a month ago. I am only learning now how to argue and how to stay focussed on my arguments without yielding to or getting sidetracked by the dirty tricks ( like twisting what I haven’t said) of the emotional ones.

I am more in to learning rather than winning.

This board does have a purpose. It allows you to test out your views and find holes in them, thus allowing you to help craft better views.

But really, the best way to try and do philosophy is to read analysis of philosophical opinions by experts (see Stanford’s Encyclopedia of Philosophy) and to read (and really try to understand, even if it takes a whike) philosophical classics. Internet discussion forums ain’t gonna cut it.

Also, teaching yourself logic and critical thinking is key. I’ve been reading philosophical classics for 9 or 10 months now, and TONS of articles analyzing them. I’ve also recently begun reading books about logic and critical thinking; they help A LOT.

So if you really want to do philosophy, I suggest reading and teaching yourself, rather than being completely dependent on the often flawed reasoning of strangers in cyberspace.

Just my opinion…

[robo_sapien]

@theonefroberg

Mind you this is my first full argument ever in philosophy/religion. I have already stated in the very begining of this thread that I am a newbie to philosophy. My philosophy experience/learning began almost at the same time when I registered in this forum which is only a month ago. I am only learning now how to argue and how to stay focussed on my arguments without yielding to or getting sidetracked by the dirty tricks ( like twisting what I haven’t said) of the emotional ones.

I am more in to learning rather than winning.

This board does have a purpose. It allows you to test out your views and find holes in them, thus allowing you to help craft better views.

But really, the best way to try and do philosophy is to read analysis of philosophical opinions by experts (see Stanford’s Encyclopedia of Philosophy) and to read (and really try to understand, even if it takes a whike) philosophical classics. Internet discussion forums ain’t gonna cut it.

Also, teaching yourself logic and critical thinking is key. I’ve been reading philosophical classics for 9 or 10 months now, and TONS of articles analyzing them. I’ve also recently begun reading books about logic and critical thinking; they help A LOT.

So if you really want to do philosophy, I suggest reading and teaching yourself, rather than being completely dependent on the often flawed reasoning of strangers in cyberspace.

Just my opinion…

Thanks very much for your advice and the pointers. I really appreciate it as I was not sure where to start.

[robo_sapien]

@thirst4metal

Hello F(r)iends,

@robo_sapien

I am more in to learning rather than winning.

If you are serious about that, Uccisore can teach you the lessons you sorely lack.
He can point out the weakness in one’s argument(s).
He can help you learn to avoid errors in thinking.
He’s a bit rough around the edges, but a sharp guy.

I volunteer him…
Now, you just need to ask him.

-Thirst

I am not sure whether your advice is given honestly or sarcastically. I will take that as a honest suggestion. Thank you very much.

[thirst4metal]

Hello F(r)iends,

@robo_sapien

I am not sure whether your advice is given honestly or sarcastically. I will take that as a honest suggestion. Thank you very much.

That was a genuine suggestion.
You’re welcome.

-Thirst