Why Be Interested In Other Religions?

[goodlife]

Regardless of where you live, you have no doubt seen for yourself how religion affects the lives of millions of people.

[jomifl]

/It is not logically possible to base a conclusion on a lack of evidence / so how do you conclude that god exists if there is no evidence for his presence and no evidence for his absence. If I have no evidence for elephants not living in matchboxes it doesn't mean that they do.

[Khandro]

jomifl; Remember, it is you in the cul de sac (to use your own phrase). I have no problems and nothing to answer, you are the one in need of evidence, I am quite comfortable as I am.
Logically, assertions that there are flying teapots, elephants in matchboxes or that god exists or does not, are not logically sound propositions.
They are conclusions that lack premisses. A sound conclusion based on premisses might be;
All men are mortal,
Socrates is a man,
therefore, Socrates is mortal. The premisses entail the conclusion.


You are saying, I have never seen an elephant in a matchbox therefore it does not exist. I am saying, I believe in something and do not require what you call evidence, though I accept not logically sound, it is none the less true to me and requires nothing further.

[jomifl]

Khandro, my argument isn't that I haven't seen an elephant in a matchbox therefore they don't live in matchboxes but rather an elephant by it's very nature cannot fit in a matchbox. Do you see the difference? It is not absence of evidence but evidence of absence.

[jomifl]

/ I am saying, I believe in something and do not require what you call evidence, though I accept not logically sound, it is none the less true to me and requires nothing further. /
Well done, with one mighty leap (of faith) you have leapt out of the cul- de-sac. Why didn't you do that ages ago?

[Khandro]

Out of pure mischief, I'm tempted to say that the solid matter in every elephant, plus that of every human being on the planet, would fit comfortably in your matchbox, - but I'll let it pass :0)

[jomifl]

Ain't no such thing as solid matter Khandro.

[jomifl]

All men are mortal,
Socrates is a man,
therefore, Socrates is mortal. The premisses entail the conclusion.

The only proof we have that all men are mortal is when all men are dead.

[Hypognosis]

@Khandro

//I am quite comfortable as I am. //

Quite comfortable telling other people how stupid they are, simply for not sharing your beliefs?

If you were allowed to reach these beliefs through your own research and/or findings (eg personal experiences?) then why not grant other people the same luxury of making up their own minds?

Or did Einie make up your mind for you?

[Khandro]

Hypo; //Quite comfortable telling other people how stupid they are, simply for not sharing your beliefs?//

YOU LIAR!

[naomi24]

Come, come, Khandro. You do think Richard Dawkins is stupid.

[Answerprancer]

"you have no doubt seen for yourself how religion affects the lives of millions of people". Well I've seen how devastatingly destructive joeboism has been to my family. Luckily some of them escaped its EVIL.
There were of course some lasting effects and a couple of them are still fairly emotionally damaged, but that's one of the things you have to sort out when you've been forced to join a CULT.

[Hypognosis]

@Khandro

//birdie: If your full understanding of religion is a belief in your term "sky fairies",
it really would seem to be a demonstration of your own limitation in the I.Q. department. //

So this wasn't a euphemism for "stupid" then? Because that's how it came across, to me.

I note that birdie didn't seem to mind but that's probably because he's sure of his position, on the matter.

[Khandro]

Hypognosis; To say that someone who believes the sum total of religion is a belief in "sky fairies" is lacking in the IQ department, is not the same as saying that all atheists are stupid. This is something I have never said (and naomi, not even of Dawkins).
What I have said in my classifying of various positions, is to distinguish between different types; those who say, "there is no God", whom I have called 'stubborn atheists' and those who say "I don't believe in God" whom I have called 'intelligent atheists'.
But I have never called either of them 'stupid'. So unless you can show otherwise, I think you should withdraw the remark.

[naomi24]

Khandro, you're playing with words.

[Khandro]

When you can't substantiate your claim .... time for another of your meaningless non sequiturs

[naomi24]

Khandro, A rose by any other name ....

[Hypognosis]

@Khandro

I see; "stubborn", contrasted with "intelligent"?

Stubborn being the word we commonly associate with donkeys, of course.

Let's call that "euphemism for 'stupid'" number 2.

[birdie1971]

“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” ― Mark Twain

[Hypognosis]

Applicable how (here), birdie?

Sorry, but I am too stupid today.

[Khandro]

No it isn't a euphemism. And I'm sitting on the terrace of a Schloss at Meersburg