Seriously? There is a ton of evidence that consciousness resides in the brain. For instance, you can drive a railroad spike through a brain, and alter or eliminate the consciousness in it. You can shoot a congressperson at close range through the brain and massively alter her ability to think, reason and communicate. You can take drugs that effect the brain and alter consciousness.
If you think that consciousness doesn’t reside in the brain, it is up to you to provide evidence of it existing beyond the bony confines of the skull.
If consciousness is created by the brain, then when the brain rots, as it does when we die, the consciousness obviously ceases. Again, it is up to you to provide evidence to the contrary. And I and the rest of humanity eagerly wait.
Is Zen Buddhist a fancy way of saying not willing to think about shit?
No, you got it wrong. Easter is the celebration of Jesus rolling the stone out of the way, going out of the cave and seeing his shadow. They had six more weeks of winter.
It’s not up to me to prove shit to your whiny ass. I haven’t asserted any belief or lack thereof–and in point of fact, Zen Buddhism is one of many religious traditions that’s completely compatible with atheism.
More like, it’s a fancy way to say “religiously and morally obligated to think about shit”. For instance, right now, I’m thinking you’re causing yourself a hell of a blood pressure spike because of two words on a banner that are doing jack and shit to harm your day. For your own sake, save your time and energy on people who are ACTUALLY causing harm in the name of religion, instead of just doing their thing.
You demanded that I substantiate my claim. And my claim is supported by science. The people who believe in shit like afterlives and personal Gods have the burden to provide evidence for them.
Who me? I got so upset I created a pit thread. I don’t think that requires much in the way of blood-pressure increases.
Conservatives? I’m a conservative. Show me where what you wrote, here, has any relationship to my political opinions, whatsoever, shitstain.
Nowhere does conservatism as a political philosophy require belief in “the devil”, nor does it require belief that “gays are very bad people”. In fact, nothing you wrote in that paragraph has anything at all to do with “conservative”. It is entirely and exclusively a religious view of a subset of Christians.
If you want to slam Christians for those beliefs, feel free. I don’t share them. But don’t attribute their stupidity to me, fuckwit.
For comparison with the chip on my shoulder about evangelicals, let’s see, I was hospitalized with a head wound after a case of aggravated assault and battery at the hands of evangelicals (an action they’ve vehemently defended, making them less reasonable than even Rand Rover, see here), after spending years being harassed by them and basically made a pariah for not joining them, being fired from a good job for not joining their church, enduring a slew of false accusations and generally seeing my career path (science field, go figure) disrupted through their interference.
But Easter in general? You don’t believe in it, fine, but what did it do to you?
You can accept or not accept whatever your little heart desires. It doesn’t change the fact that you are insulting to Christians and other religionists. And even when it is pointed out to you—with your own quotes (as you requested)—you think you are the one to decide if it was insulting to others or not. (There’s that lack of empathy thing, again, raising it’s sad head.) Now, either your critical thinking skills are just not where you think they are, or you are so entrenched and invested in looking down on those who are religious that you reflexively give yourself a pass for being a cock. You seem to adhere to the notion that, “Well, if I believed something so stupid, I wouldn’t be offended if someone called it stupid.” Well, you just keep on rockin’ on with your bad self. In the meantime, I’ll take solace in the fact that try as you may, there will be other people in your daughter’s life that will get her to see religion in a light that is brighter and less ignorant.
That’s just stupid–you think that being an atheist makes you unable to have stupid, unsupportable ideas? Just look at Bill Maher (or Lobohan, for that matter).
Nope and I didn’t say that either. But it’s also obvious that those who chose to take things on faith as opposed to facts are relinquishing their critical thinking skills when it comes to that topic. AKA, casting the first stone if you will.
magellan01
I can’t help the fact that some people will take* any* implied criticism of a belief, or any expression of alternate opinions to be an insult. Even when that criticism can be proved to be demonstrably true, Merely expressing it is taken as an insult even when none is intended. That puts religious criticism in a no-go area of its own creation. Treatment not demanded by other world views.
As for the quotes you used. You were happy to strip them of context weren’t you? It was to be expected.
You seem desperate to paint me as lacking empathy, even when I’ve explained several times that I moderate what I say about religion, precisely because people take offence. I do not want to hurt anyone’s feelings unnecessarily.
That said. If someone wants to ask me a direct question such as “do I think religious people are deluded” I would answer “yes” That is honest and not intended as an insult. What would you expect me to say?
Honest opinion expressed in web forum does not translate into behaviour in the street. You are desperate to apply a caricature that doesn’t fit.
And how illuminating is the phrase
Do you mean that you want only the positive aspects of religion to be discussed? Or are people allowed to talk about the negatives as well…or will any mention of the demonstrably sexist and homophobic tendencies of, say, the catholic church mark me down as one who sets out to insult and offend. I do hope you are not suggesting special treatment and protection for religious views
If you are expecting me to mention both sides, positive and negative then have no fear, I do, and will continue to do so. Why would you assume I wouldn’t?
In essence you did. I had specific criticisms of what Bobble posted. You came in and thought that made for a “special day”, because I was religious (which I’m not, by the way, so you’re wrong there, too). You were using a mile-wide broad brush as opposed to pointing to where the flaw in my logic was. Oh, but of course every theist can ever measure up to an atheist when it comes to critical thinking, right. Hmmm. It appears another atheist’s critical thinking skills ain’t all he thinks them to be. Thanks for the demonstration.
Look back at my post. See where I was quoting someone else who used the term conservative and specified the type of conservative who gets freaked out having to explain teh gay to their kids? Yeah, it was a parody of that type of conservative. Being born prior to yesterday, I’m aware that there’s more than one type of conservative. :dubious:
You probably didn’t get the parody of the egghead atheist either. Gee, I hope an atheist doesn’t fly in and browbeat me for implying that all atheists are a bunch of verbose, pompous science nerds.
My ideas were supportable. In fact, I explained very politely how you were wrong. Consciousness is a property of the brain, if you think different, present evidence.
And to put it plainly: Atheists are not necessarily any smarter or reasonable than theists. Although, all theists, every single one, has accepted a belief system with no evidence to back it up.
I understand that as someone who believes Zen is worth a shit, you probably feel kinship with religious people who believe something without evidence, but c’mon shitbird, at least have the integrity to remove the mote in your own eye.
I haven’t asserted any belief or lack thereof–and in point of fact, Zen Buddhism is one of many religious traditions that’s completely compatible with atheism.
