|
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs?
|
Stand aside guys, we have a virgin over here.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
I'm not religious so again, take my opinion on it with a grain of salt.
On religion, people value it because it gives them a sense of place in the world. People are scared of what they don't know and while science is still bridging the gap, religion tells everyone how exactly we came to be and why we are here. It gives a simple, convenient answer. People don't want to throw that away because having a purpose is chief in most people's lives. I will agree that I think we'd be better off without religion but many would argue against it, saying that it gives a sense of morality, a clear social structure, explanations of our creation, etc..
As for love, I'm a bit confused by your wording on the paragraph. Why do you think we should reject it? Why is love so tyrannical? I understand that marriage and relationships are not for everyone but you feel love outside of those things that you have elaborated on above.
|
On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs?
All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a truth and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth.
At its core, its the least arbitrary of your supposed arbitrary constructs. Being that the center of all religions is the passing down of history, and the sharing of a documented event.
You thinking the witness or the media as being invalid does not change that its simply the sharing of (usually) old information.
|
On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth.
|
On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth.
Do you have proof that it's a hallucination?
Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway.
An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence.
You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid.
|
On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs?
i think you misunderstand
love is a word we use to describe a set of emotions and feelings (hormonal,chemical, and electrical things)
religion is a word used to describe a set of (mostly) fictional beliefs (imaginary things)
edit - i can't say for certain that all religious beliefs are fictional, regardless of what i personally think, so i will say "mostly" fictional
|
On July 02 2013 08:01 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? i think you misunderstand love is a word we use to describe a set of emotions and feelings (hormonal,chemical, and electrical things) religion is a word used to describe a set of (mostly) fictional beliefs (imaginary things) edit - i can't say for certain that all religious beliefs are fictional, regardless of what i personally think, so i will say "mostly" fictional
Even if they were all fictional--believers of a religion see them as historical fact and true witnessing of events. The opposite of arbitrary constructs.
For it to be an arbitrary construct it has to be made up from scratch.
|
On July 02 2013 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth. Do you have proof that it's a hallucination? Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway. An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence. You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid.
It's taking an argument and structuring your viewpoint on it. There's no evidence...
EDIT: That's like me saying a lollypop is my god, which is arbitrary, and then someone believing me and it all of a sudden not being arbitrary.
People can feel love, they can't feel religion. So I say love isn't arbitrary, it's an actual phenomenon.
|
On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:
All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a truth and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth.
At its core, its the least arbitrary of your supposed arbitrary constructs. Being that the center of all religions is the passing down of history, and the sharing of a documented event.
You thinking the witness or the media as being invalid does not change that its simply the sharing of (usually) old information.
the truth? do you know anything about what the truth is? There is no truth. the truth is only a concept that is available in relation to something else. One universal truth can only be a Dogma, and that is what religion is based upon.
//on topic: Love, as irrational as you may perceive it, stems from chemical reactions in the brain.
|
On July 02 2013 08:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:01 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? i think you misunderstand love is a word we use to describe a set of emotions and feelings (hormonal,chemical, and electrical things) religion is a word used to describe a set of (mostly) fictional beliefs (imaginary things) edit - i can't say for certain that all religious beliefs are fictional, regardless of what i personally think, so i will say "mostly" fictional Even if they were all fictional--believers of a religion see them as historical fact and true witnessing of events. The opposite of arbitrary constructs. For it to be an arbitrary construct it has to be made up from scratch.
i don't care to argue the semantics of it (though i agree with you)
i just think OP's examples are bad (or he just is trying to find a way to hate on the idea of love due to teenage angst {my guess})
On July 02 2013 08:08 Maxhster wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:
All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a truth and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth.
At its core, its the least arbitrary of your supposed arbitrary constructs. Being that the center of all religions is the passing down of history, and the sharing of a documented event.
You thinking the witness or the media as being invalid does not change that its simply the sharing of (usually) old information. the truth? do you know anything about what the truth is? There is no truth. the truth is only a concept that is available in relation to something else. One universal truth can only be a Dogma, and that is what religion is based upon.
somebody's in philosophy 101!
|
On July 02 2013 08:06 ElvisWayCool wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth. Do you have proof that it's a hallucination? Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway. An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence. You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid. It's taking an argument and structuring your viewpoint on it. There's no evidence... People can feel love, they can't feel religion. So I say love isn't arbitrary, it's an actual phenomenon.
Holy texts are there evidence.
Holy texts are not just holy because "god said so" they're holy because they were written a long time ago by the people god supposedly talked to.
Believers see it as a historical artifact whose writings are real. Some believers read them literally, some try to read it within a historical context, others simply read it to look for what's relevant to them. But they all read it believing someone who saw it actually happen wrote it or told someone to write it.
To them, its a witness testimony.
Sure *you* don't believe the evidence is valid; but its not arbitrarily chosen if the people believe that the evidence is legit.
|
On July 02 2013 08:09 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:01 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? i think you misunderstand love is a word we use to describe a set of emotions and feelings (hormonal,chemical, and electrical things) religion is a word used to describe a set of (mostly) fictional beliefs (imaginary things) edit - i can't say for certain that all religious beliefs are fictional, regardless of what i personally think, so i will say "mostly" fictional Even if they were all fictional--believers of a religion see them as historical fact and true witnessing of events. The opposite of arbitrary constructs. For it to be an arbitrary construct it has to be made up from scratch. i don't care to argue the semantics of it (though i agree with you) i just think OP's examples are bad (or he just is trying to find a way to hate on the idea of love due to teenage angst {my guess}) Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:08 Maxhster wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:
All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a truth and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth.
At its core, its the least arbitrary of your supposed arbitrary constructs. Being that the center of all religions is the passing down of history, and the sharing of a documented event.
You thinking the witness or the media as being invalid does not change that its simply the sharing of (usually) old information. the truth? do you know anything about what the truth is? There is no truth. the truth is only a concept that is available in relation to something else. One universal truth can only be a Dogma, and that is what religion is based upon. somebody's in philosophy 101!
Yeah, they're pretty bad examples. I'll definitely agree on that.
|
On July 02 2013 08:06 ElvisWayCool wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth. Do you have proof that it's a hallucination? Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway. An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence. You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid. It's taking an argument and structuring your viewpoint on it. There's no evidence... EDIT: That's like me saying a lollypop is my god, which is arbitrary, and then someone believing me and it all of a sudden not being arbitrary. People can feel love, they can't feel religion. So I say love isn't arbitrary, it's an actual phenomenon.
Do you really think that people believing your lie makes their belief on said lie arbitrary? If they believe your lie they treat it as truth--heck, you even point to them who god is (the lollipop) so not only do they have a witness telling them who god is, they actually "saw" god himself with their own two eyes.
They then live their lives *knowing* that God is a lollipop. That's not arbitrary.
|
On July 02 2013 08:11 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:06 ElvisWayCool wrote:On July 02 2013 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth. Do you have proof that it's a hallucination? Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway. An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence. You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid. It's taking an argument and structuring your viewpoint on it. There's no evidence... People can feel love, they can't feel religion. So I say love isn't arbitrary, it's an actual phenomenon. Holy texts are there evidence. Holy texts are not just holy because "god said so" they're holy because they were written a long time ago by the people god supposedly talked to. Believers see it as a historical artifact whose writings are real. Some believers read them literally, some try to read it within a historical context, others simply read it to look for what's relevant to them. But they all read it believing someone who saw it actually happen wrote it or told someone to write it. To them, its a witness testimony. Sure *you* don't believe the evidence is valid; but its not arbitrarily chosen if the people believe that the evidence is legit.
On July 02 2013 08:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:09 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 08:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:01 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? i think you misunderstand love is a word we use to describe a set of emotions and feelings (hormonal,chemical, and electrical things) religion is a word used to describe a set of (mostly) fictional beliefs (imaginary things) edit - i can't say for certain that all religious beliefs are fictional, regardless of what i personally think, so i will say "mostly" fictional Even if they were all fictional--believers of a religion see them as historical fact and true witnessing of events. The opposite of arbitrary constructs. For it to be an arbitrary construct it has to be made up from scratch. i don't care to argue the semantics of it (though i agree with you) i just think OP's examples are bad (or he just is trying to find a way to hate on the idea of love due to teenage angst {my guess}) On July 02 2013 08:08 Maxhster wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:
All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a truth and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth.
At its core, its the least arbitrary of your supposed arbitrary constructs. Being that the center of all religions is the passing down of history, and the sharing of a documented event.
You thinking the witness or the media as being invalid does not change that its simply the sharing of (usually) old information. the truth? do you know anything about what the truth is? There is no truth. the truth is only a concept that is available in relation to something else. One universal truth can only be a Dogma, and that is what religion is based upon. somebody's in philosophy 101! Yeah, they're pretty bad examples. I'll definitely agree on that.
On July 02 2013 08:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:06 ElvisWayCool wrote:On July 02 2013 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth. Do you have proof that it's a hallucination? Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway. An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence. You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid. It's taking an argument and structuring your viewpoint on it. There's no evidence... EDIT: That's like me saying a lollypop is my god, which is arbitrary, and then someone believing me and it all of a sudden not being arbitrary. People can feel love, they can't feel religion. So I say love isn't arbitrary, it's an actual phenomenon. Do you really think that people believing your lie makes their belief on said lie arbitrary? If they believe your lie they treat it as truth--heck, you even point to them who god is (the lollipop) so not only do they have a witness telling them who god is, they actually "saw" god himself with their own two eyes. They then live their lives *knowing* that God is a lollipop. That's not arbitrary.
i recommend "edit" 
|
On July 02 2013 08:01 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? i think you misunderstand love is a word we use to describe a set of emotions and feelings (hormonal,chemical, and electrical things) religion is a word used to describe a set of (mostly) fictional beliefs (imaginary things) edit - i can't say for certain that all religious beliefs are fictional, regardless of what i personally think, so i will say "mostly" fictional
Well, one "definition" of religion (one of many, none of which really do religion justice) is the structured or organized system of beliefs. In a broad sense, religion is far less fictional than other social constructs. Take the New Testament, for example. Even the most diehard, internet warrior, pimply-teen-in-basement-posting-on-r/atheism can't really deny that the New Testament, taken at face value, is a good thing. The message is not complex nor complicated. It's the Golden Rule + some cute stories that, all together, just mean be a nice guy, a good neighbor, and don't be an asshole and good things will happen. Ignore the acts of divine intervention and the miracles, and the NT is just a text that says be nice to people. Can't really fault that.
If the core, fundamental values of something like Christianity are based on the issue of simply "be a good person" (yes, we all know that's not how Christianity has worked exactly in history, but that's irrelevant), does that make it fictional? Fictional in what sense? Arbitrary, perhaps? Sure. But it's a damn good arbitrary, isn't it?
|
On July 02 2013 08:19 Elegy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:01 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? i think you misunderstand love is a word we use to describe a set of emotions and feelings (hormonal,chemical, and electrical things) religion is a word used to describe a set of (mostly) fictional beliefs (imaginary things) edit - i can't say for certain that all religious beliefs are fictional, regardless of what i personally think, so i will say "mostly" fictional Well, one "definition" of religion (one of many, none of which really do religion justice) is the structured or organized system of beliefs. In a broad sense, religion is far less fictional than other social constructs. Take the New Testament, for example. Even the most diehard, internet warrior, pimply-teen-in-basement-posting-on-r/atheism can't really deny that the New Testament, taken at face value, is a good thing. The message is not complex nor complicated. It's the Golden Rule + some cute stories that, all together, just mean be a nice guy, a good neighbor, and don't be an asshole and good things will happen. Ignore the acts of divine intervention and the miracles, and the NT is just a text that says be nice to people. Can't really fault that. If the core, fundamental values of something like Christianity are based on the issue of simply "be a good person" (yes, we all know that's not how Christianity has worked exactly in history, but that's irrelevant), does that make it fictional? Fictional in what sense? Arbitrary, perhaps? Sure. But it's a damn good arbitrary, isn't it?
i'm not sure what you are trying to argue
are you trying to say that religion (the set of beliefs about certain things, like moses parting the sea, happening - not the morals that they may or may not be based on) is fact? if so, please prove it
are you trying to say that the morals that religions may or may not be based on are not fictional? if so i agree with you to an extent, but that is not what OP (or I) am talking about
|
On July 02 2013 08:19 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:11 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:06 ElvisWayCool wrote:On July 02 2013 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth. Do you have proof that it's a hallucination? Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway. An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence. You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid. It's taking an argument and structuring your viewpoint on it. There's no evidence... People can feel love, they can't feel religion. So I say love isn't arbitrary, it's an actual phenomenon. Holy texts are there evidence. Holy texts are not just holy because "god said so" they're holy because they were written a long time ago by the people god supposedly talked to. Believers see it as a historical artifact whose writings are real. Some believers read them literally, some try to read it within a historical context, others simply read it to look for what's relevant to them. But they all read it believing someone who saw it actually happen wrote it or told someone to write it. To them, its a witness testimony. Sure *you* don't believe the evidence is valid; but its not arbitrarily chosen if the people believe that the evidence is legit. Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:09 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 08:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:01 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? i think you misunderstand love is a word we use to describe a set of emotions and feelings (hormonal,chemical, and electrical things) religion is a word used to describe a set of (mostly) fictional beliefs (imaginary things) edit - i can't say for certain that all religious beliefs are fictional, regardless of what i personally think, so i will say "mostly" fictional Even if they were all fictional--believers of a religion see them as historical fact and true witnessing of events. The opposite of arbitrary constructs. For it to be an arbitrary construct it has to be made up from scratch. i don't care to argue the semantics of it (though i agree with you) i just think OP's examples are bad (or he just is trying to find a way to hate on the idea of love due to teenage angst {my guess}) On July 02 2013 08:08 Maxhster wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:
All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a truth and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth.
At its core, its the least arbitrary of your supposed arbitrary constructs. Being that the center of all religions is the passing down of history, and the sharing of a documented event.
You thinking the witness or the media as being invalid does not change that its simply the sharing of (usually) old information. the truth? do you know anything about what the truth is? There is no truth. the truth is only a concept that is available in relation to something else. One universal truth can only be a Dogma, and that is what religion is based upon. somebody's in philosophy 101! Yeah, they're pretty bad examples. I'll definitely agree on that. Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:06 ElvisWayCool wrote:On July 02 2013 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth. Do you have proof that it's a hallucination? Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway. An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence. You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid. It's taking an argument and structuring your viewpoint on it. There's no evidence... EDIT: That's like me saying a lollypop is my god, which is arbitrary, and then someone believing me and it all of a sudden not being arbitrary. People can feel love, they can't feel religion. So I say love isn't arbitrary, it's an actual phenomenon. Do you really think that people believing your lie makes their belief on said lie arbitrary? If they believe your lie they treat it as truth--heck, you even point to them who god is (the lollipop) so not only do they have a witness telling them who god is, they actually "saw" god himself with their own two eyes. They then live their lives *knowing* that God is a lollipop. That's not arbitrary. i recommend "edit"
I will bear my tiping skarz like a champp  no phear!
|
On July 02 2013 08:23 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 08:19 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 08:11 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:06 ElvisWayCool wrote:On July 02 2013 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth. Do you have proof that it's a hallucination? Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway. An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence. You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid. It's taking an argument and structuring your viewpoint on it. There's no evidence... People can feel love, they can't feel religion. So I say love isn't arbitrary, it's an actual phenomenon. Holy texts are there evidence. Holy texts are not just holy because "god said so" they're holy because they were written a long time ago by the people god supposedly talked to. Believers see it as a historical artifact whose writings are real. Some believers read them literally, some try to read it within a historical context, others simply read it to look for what's relevant to them. But they all read it believing someone who saw it actually happen wrote it or told someone to write it. To them, its a witness testimony. Sure *you* don't believe the evidence is valid; but its not arbitrarily chosen if the people believe that the evidence is legit. On July 02 2013 08:13 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:09 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 08:06 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:01 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? i think you misunderstand love is a word we use to describe a set of emotions and feelings (hormonal,chemical, and electrical things) religion is a word used to describe a set of (mostly) fictional beliefs (imaginary things) edit - i can't say for certain that all religious beliefs are fictional, regardless of what i personally think, so i will say "mostly" fictional Even if they were all fictional--believers of a religion see them as historical fact and true witnessing of events. The opposite of arbitrary constructs. For it to be an arbitrary construct it has to be made up from scratch. i don't care to argue the semantics of it (though i agree with you) i just think OP's examples are bad (or he just is trying to find a way to hate on the idea of love due to teenage angst {my guess}) On July 02 2013 08:08 Maxhster wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:
All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a truth and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth.
At its core, its the least arbitrary of your supposed arbitrary constructs. Being that the center of all religions is the passing down of history, and the sharing of a documented event.
You thinking the witness or the media as being invalid does not change that its simply the sharing of (usually) old information. the truth? do you know anything about what the truth is? There is no truth. the truth is only a concept that is available in relation to something else. One universal truth can only be a Dogma, and that is what religion is based upon. somebody's in philosophy 101! Yeah, they're pretty bad examples. I'll definitely agree on that. On July 02 2013 08:15 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 08:06 ElvisWayCool wrote:On July 02 2013 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:57 politik wrote:On July 02 2013 07:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On July 02 2013 07:34 kwantumszuperpozishn wrote:
The good thing about being human is that we are intelligent and that our knowledge keeps increasing that we are outdating and rejecting previous ideas and beliefs that seemed to adequately explain natural and social phenomena when human knowledge was not yet fully developed.
Chief among this is religion. It is getting the most heat because among other human institutions, it has been the most influential and even abusive and continues to control and influence some human relations. If, then, we are willing to go down this path and be consistent about it, why not go the full extent and interrogate all other abstract and arbitrary human constructs?
Chief among this is love. Outside religion, love seems the one concept which people would cling to and defend their lives. If we declare love just as one of the arbitrary human concepts, then we would eliminate many of the old fashioned and nonsense things that we tie ourselves into as humans - dating, marriage, long term relationship, etc. Think about it, if we start to reject the idea of love, and treat it as nothing more than socially reinforced concept that we evolved, and instead just have a transactional relationship in the sense that is built around trust, companionship, friendship, communication, etc, then we can free ourselves from the tyranny of love.
What do you think? Why do we still value these other arbitrary constructs? All religions starts on the basis of a witness testifying a hallucination and writing it down in record for people throughout history to know this truth. Do you have proof that it's a hallucination? Remember, the argument is that religion is an arbitrary construct--if people believe it because they believed the ramblings of some guy, whether its true or not has not bearing on the fact that it stops being arbitrary if people believe what he is saying anyway. An arbitrary construct suggests that people conceive of an abstract idea and follow it. Religion is hearing someone say something is supposedly true, and believing them. That's the opposite of arbitrary. That's literally taking evidence and structuring your viewpoint on that evidence. You not finding the evidence valid does not mean the believer finds the evidence invalid. It's taking an argument and structuring your viewpoint on it. There's no evidence... EDIT: That's like me saying a lollypop is my god, which is arbitrary, and then someone believing me and it all of a sudden not being arbitrary. People can feel love, they can't feel religion. So I say love isn't arbitrary, it's an actual phenomenon. Do you really think that people believing your lie makes their belief on said lie arbitrary? If they believe your lie they treat it as truth--heck, you even point to them who god is (the lollipop) so not only do they have a witness telling them who god is, they actually "saw" god himself with their own two eyes. They then live their lives *knowing* that God is a lollipop. That's not arbitrary. i recommend "edit" I will bear my tiping skarz like a champp no phear!
i didn't even mean typo's... just the triple post
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
