People on my list who are religious: Do you think you understand better?
I can understand dying for your faith (though never having come to the point of no return, I do not know whether I have the courage for it). But killing innocent people for it, in order to gain a better afterlife for myself? No. I can't imagine doing it, I don't understand those who do it, and I think it is just as morally bankrupt as any other sort of killing for personal gain.
I'm not sure if it is just a self-interest thing. I doubt they see it as a sort of loop-hole in holy law, at a guess (in so far as I could guess at the motives of people like that), I would think that they believed that they were doing something great for their people and their God, to make the world a better place, and that they were going to be rewarded in heaven because what they had done was so morally good.
The media likes to paint these people as people who know they are doing bad, but do bad anyway just to get into heaven. I severely doubt this is the case, from the reports that we have of previous bombers it seems that they feel that what they are doing is an act of great moral virtue.
Ok, but what kind of mind looks at blowing up a bunch of innocent people as a great moral good? I just can't figure it out. It comes back to the argument the whole divine command theory, which implies that nothing is intrinsically right or wrong except obedience to God. Which I suppose I can see as an outgrowth of the whole creator-creature relationship, but I just can't accept that as a basis of morality.
Well no I can't understand it either, really. But how to be religious and have a moral code is a bit beyond me anyway (though I'm sure at some point I must have been religious and had a moral code, I guess I just never thought about it). It is all so foreign to my own views, such a world away.
I don't know what kind of mind what condone the killing of innocents, but then again I also don't know what kind of mind can decide that gay marriage is wrong, or that contraception is evil, or that eating pork is a sin. The human predicament; you can study people all you will, but you will never be able to get into their minds.
Yeah, I meant an immaterial and immortal soul, rather than 'soul' in the naturalistic sense of mental activity which makes up you.
Also, I'm not sure if I agree with that guy's conclusions about becoming conscious again. I don't think that 'I' is a stable enough concept; to be honest, I suspect that the person I was 15 years ago was so different to the person I am now that that 5 year old is dead (under the definition of his state of characteristic organisation no longer existing), and will not come back to life readily.
That entry is friends locked. But, generally, arguing with fundamentalists by getting annoyed at them doesn't work. But, for that matter, laying down a strong logical case with evidence usually doesn't work either. I don't know what does work, to be honest. I hope to figure it out one day. I expect we can learn a lot from cult victim deprogrammers, if you know any...
I'm glad your field trip was fun. Will we be seeing you on Sunday?
I hope you enjoy your options next year. It can sometimes be a bit of a lottery. I've ended up doing a random special topic on Australian Legends because there wasn't enough room for me on the Short Story module which I desperately wanted to do. Ah well.
As to your question, I don't know if I would term myself religious currently, but my view seems to be similar to that of tubaboy81 in that I would understand dying for a cause (while desperately hoping I'm never put to the test on this, I like living), not killing for it. Although being willing to die for something indicates to me that you accept the possibility that someone may try to kill you for it. Expecting to be killed for a belief perhaps suggests that you would understand the other person's urge to kill you, as you would both view each other as implacable opponents. And maybe the person trying to kill you is no less willing to die for their cause had your positions been reversed. And incidentally, all the bombers who
( ... )
Nice to see you back. Glad you worked out your choice. Hope it goes well for you.
My comments on the why of the bombings, Wednesday, July 13. I think religion is a part of a whole set of causes and effects.
BTW, my religion doesn't condemn gay marriage or birth control and eats whatever is dead as long as it didn't suffer needlessly. Neither does my faith require anyone to die for it, including me.
I think religion is a part of a whole set of causes and effects.
Yeah, I agree with that. Anyone who says that Religion was the reason the bombings happened is wrong, but anyone who says Religion was only an excuse is also wrong. The truth is probably, as always, far more complex.
eats whatever is dead
Does that mean your religion obliges you to eat anything you find dead? If you find roadkill, are you under scriptural obligation to eat it? :-P
Comments 25
I can understand dying for your faith (though never having come to the point of no return, I do not know whether I have the courage for it). But killing innocent people for it, in order to gain a better afterlife for myself? No. I can't imagine doing it, I don't understand those who do it, and I think it is just as morally bankrupt as any other sort of killing for personal gain.
Reply
The media likes to paint these people as people who know they are doing bad, but do bad anyway just to get into heaven. I severely doubt this is the case, from the reports that we have of previous bombers it seems that they feel that what they are doing is an act of great moral virtue.
Reply
Reply
I don't know what kind of mind what condone the killing of innocents, but then again I also don't know what kind of mind can decide that gay marriage is wrong, or that contraception is evil, or that eating pork is a sin. The human predicament; you can study people all you will, but you will never be able to get into their minds.
Reply
Reply
Also, I'm not sure if I agree with that guy's conclusions about becoming conscious again. I don't think that 'I' is a stable enough concept; to be honest, I suspect that the person I was 15 years ago was so different to the person I am now that that 5 year old is dead (under the definition of his state of characteristic organisation no longer existing), and will not come back to life readily.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
http://www.livejournal.com/users/tallymatt/79037.html
I think I was too harsh calling the bible a book of fairies tales. That was out of line.
Reply
Reply
I hope you enjoy your options next year. It can sometimes be a bit of a lottery. I've ended up doing a random special topic on Australian Legends because there wasn't enough room for me on the Short Story module which I desperately wanted to do. Ah well.
As to your question, I don't know if I would term myself religious currently, but my view seems to be similar to that of tubaboy81 in that I would understand dying for a cause (while desperately hoping I'm never put to the test on this, I like living), not killing for it. Although being willing to die for something indicates to me that you accept the possibility that someone may try to kill you for it. Expecting to be killed for a belief perhaps suggests that you would understand the other person's urge to kill you, as you would both view each other as implacable opponents. And maybe the person trying to kill you is no less willing to die for their cause had your positions been reversed. And incidentally, all the bombers who ( ... )
Reply
My comments on the why of the bombings, Wednesday, July 13. I think religion is a part of a whole set of causes and effects.
BTW, my religion doesn't condemn gay marriage or birth control and eats whatever is dead as long as it didn't suffer needlessly. Neither does my faith require anyone to die for it, including me.
Reply
Yeah, I agree with that. Anyone who says that Religion was the reason the bombings happened is wrong, but anyone who says Religion was only an excuse is also wrong. The truth is probably, as always, far more complex.
eats whatever is dead
Does that mean your religion obliges you to eat anything you find dead? If you find roadkill, are you under scriptural obligation to eat it? :-P
Reply
Leave a comment