| Poem: Submit | Random | Best | Worst | Recent | Comments |
|
stab in the dark (Free verse) by not_a_philosopher in my mind
which is just as faulty as any other I know of
I think that I could care less what
anyone else believed in
as long as they believed in something
because
in my life
which is just as incomplete as any other I know of
I think I have been hard pressed
to find
a happy aetheist
Up the ladder:
Afraid
Down the ladder:
Pet Hatreds
Votes: (green: user, blue: anonymous)
Arithmetic Mean: 4.285714
Posted: March 20, 2005 1:48 PM PST; Last modified: March 20, 2005 1:48 PM PSTWeighted score: 4.807899 Overall Rank: 11045 Comments:
[8]
Dovina @ 12.72.4.183
|
21-Mar-05/6:56 AM
|
Reply
Can we have some of you happy athiests speak out in rebuttal?
Yahhh, Vee believes in nuhsink, Lebowski.
You sink vee are kidding und making mit da funny schtuff?
Do you mean that you could care less, or that you couldn't care less? If it is the former, why not say, "I could care more?"
Have you really been looking?
Do you think it is possible for one to be an atheist, and believe in something? Please think about what the word "atheist" means prior to answering. Thank you.
What is an aethiest? Does it have anything to do with aether? Do you think you have been hard pressed, or have you actually been hard pressed? How could you not be sure?
It's a pity that you could care less, as that proves (as does the poeme, really) that you do care at least a little.
What is it with all these idiots who use that stupidly bastardised form of a perfectly sensible phrase to accidentally express precisely the opposite of what they actually mean? Especially putative poets, who ought to have at least a little sensitivity to language?
Probably because you spend too much time hanging out with those Baptist Student Union band-chicks.
actually im a jewish literature/philosophy/history nerd who likes the beatles and couldnt read music if my life depended on it
but nice try
What does that have to do with anything?
Didn't you read the disclaimer? not_a_philospoher
I have at times considered myself atheist, at times catholic, at times a strongly NON catholic christian, and now I call myself agnostic out of submission to reason and logic...now onto your poem and some minor psychoanalysis:
you're a narcissistic, self centered, drug addict; let me explain...the most frequently used word in your poem is (no surprise) "I" you used the word "I" six times in eleven lines which means that over fifty percent of your propositions were from YOUR perspective...not that we can ever truly get out of our own perspective...but, you make it glaringly apparent that the focus of this communication is YOU. you also use the word "my" twice bringing your total references to SELF up to eight out of a total of 60 words meaning that at least 12% of the symbols that leave your lips mean "you." that should cover the narcissistic self centered part of my analysis. now, you're a drug addict...religion truly is the opiate for the masses...it allows us, in our mind, to take our self out of the center of our universe and replace that center, usually, with a god who is now the one responsible for EVERYTHING from creation on...god loves us when all the world hates us...god explains when we can't...god gives us an image of perfection to strive for and forgives us when we don't hit the mark...blah blah blah...god gives us happiness... B.S. you are responsible for your choices you are responsible for the effect your behavior and words have upon others (for example, some atheist getting slightly upset because some christian claims that happiness cannot be found outside of god) happiness, i have found, is more about tolerance, acceptance, and forgiveness of others and their flaws....more about accepting the fact that bad things happen....about accepting the fact that YOU WILL DIE and making the most out of every moment you have with every emotion you create from your delusional little worldview (btw...all of our worldviews, especially mine, are delusional). But, in the end, whatever makes you happy; if you need to damn people like me to some symbollic hell in the back of your psyche, go nutz if that makes you happy, just don't ever try to take your self-righteous judgment public; i'd hate to see the people lieing bloody on the pavement just because some psycho christian believed they could tell the difference between true good and true evil. Peace, Sean
How does a submission to logic and reason make you an agnostic? [50]
because any religion (perhaps the universalists are the exception) requires a submission to faith which requires acceptance of illogical and unreasonable "truths." Even atheism requires that one submit oneself to accepting that which "might" be...the only logical and reasonable conclusion when questioning the existence of God, or gods, or whatever, is that we will probably never know whether or not there is a god. Any other conclusion requires us to fool ourselves into using our language incorrectly so as to justify our reality.
After reading your first reply and desiring more for meaning, I read some of your previous posts. I am left wondering, after what seems like a long history of constructive criticism, why you choose to be overly vague and aggressive in your posts today? peace, sean
Do you believe everyone who submits themselves to reason and logic will become, like you, an agnostic?
Not at all... I'm not sure, because I don't know everyone, but, I would tend to believe that most people while following the rules of logic, reason, and language would inevitably and mistakenly deny some linguistic truth that contradicts their previous framework of reality. What I am saying, literally, is that, at this point of our progression in knowledge, the only logical and reasonable answer to the question, "does God exist," is the answer, "We do not know." To give a definite, "yes," or a definite, "no," to this question is to use language in order to contradict true knowledge, or lack of knowledge; and, also means that any subsequent associated conclusions which can in any way be connected to the question of God (all questions and answers begin with our question of the beginning of existence/reality) will also be inherently false in a philisophical context.
This is why people ask, "Do you BELIEVE in God?" Because, the reality is that God is a BELIEF, not a fact. Fact is necessary for truth; at least, as defined by the language you are using, which, as zodiac pointed out in another post, is reality. The language you use defines reality for you, whether that language be used to communicate hard truth, or your "fuzzy" truth which is really nothing more than belief in superstition. In conclusion, no, I don't think most who submit to reason and logic will be "like me," agnostic; rather, I'm more cynical than that, I believe they would submit to religion, admit that they are helpless and ask some entity that might exist to save them; then, they will begin a long line of passing responsibility for actions and events onto some entity that might exist, therefore giving up control of their life to some thing that probably is not in control anyway. peace, sean p.s. in the end, what i've found in my experience, is that, in practice, i end up following christian morals more often and more accurately than most christians i meet; in fact, i can count the number of christians who are not hypocrites on one hand and one hand alone - those few, are far greater than i, for sure, they are the most forgiving, kind, tolerant, accepting, and loving souls i've met - to take my point one step further - the absolutely most kind, forgiving, generous, caring, loving, tolerant, the most free soul i've ever met is a full-blooded, born and raised, pagan.
1) Would you say that if people stopped believing in God, He'd stop existing?
2) Would you say that if everybody started believing in a new kind of supreme being (one called "Zchtfv", maybe), He would start to exist? 3) I didn't say anything of the kind. I know this isn't a question. 4) Are you familiar with the reasoning that goes: If I believe in God and God exists, then I go to heaven; If I don't believe in God and God exists, I'm pretty much fucked; If I believe in God and God doesn't exist, I'm no worse off; If I don't believe in God and God doesn't exist, I'm no worse off; So, logically, it's safer (ie, better) to believe in God than to not believe. ?
You assume belief is something you can turn on or off at will - nonsense!
Of course belief can't be turned on or off at will. Unfortunately (for you), Pascal's Wager only says that it's more reasonable to believe in God than to not believe in God; it doesn't do anything to make people who don't believe into believers or vice versa.
So if the question is, "If everyone were logical and reasonable, would they be agnostic?" then the answer is no, they'd believe in God. If the question is, "If everyone became logical and reasonable, would they become agnostic?" the answer's probably also no, they probably wouldn't change, since reason doesn't seem to have much to do with it. If the question is, "If everyone were as logical and reasonable as durr_T_hippie, would they be agnostic?" the answer's again probably no, they'd just spout off a bunch of unreasonable nonsense they'd heard somewhere, like he does.
You assume that anyone who says something halfway reasonable has heard it somewhere.
We believe waht we are driven to believe, and seldom change for logical persuasion.
you talk a lot of bollocks.
1) You heard that somewhere.
2) You don't think Durr_T_hip_E is reasonable either. And I happen to know he heard all that somewhere. 3) Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying now. No, that's not what I said before. For that, I'm truly, pants-fillingly ashamed.
Would you consider yourself an agnostic with regard to the proposition that there exists an undetectable nob protruding from your forehead?
i may well be a narcisist and self centered, wouldnt doubt it for a second (i am, afterall, american)
i have never touched a non-prescription drug in my life, and have never abused "legal" products for the effect of the legal and i am not addicted to spirituality/religion or anything of the sort i am a jew waivering on agnostic and am as far fromt he right wing fundamentalist christian you are imagining me to be i agree with you on all that stuff you said about god and BS how could man (women) i often comment on the bs-ness of religions that dont let you think - i prefer philosophy to close minded jesus crap i agree with you about what makes people happy, and we are all delusional, usually about our granduer im not damning anyone it anything id rather believe in spinoza's god than that of john matthew luke or mark i believe in c. s. lewis's ideas of heaven and hell (you might want to read the great divorce) and trust me, i have no idea what the difference between good and evil is, but if you know please enlighten me
***GRAND ROUND OF APPLAUSE***
perfect reply... apple-G's for my over-reaction... and thanks for the recommendation "great divorce." peace, sean
(raises eyebrow): "apple-G's"?
(everyone over re-acts here,) (I suspect most people just use this sight to let out their inner debater/ass-hole)
You dope.
Newsflash: Philosophy is your religion. The Great Divorce is crap. So is Spinoza. You are a right-wing fundamentalist.
not that their is anything wrong with right-wing fundamentalism but I most certainly am not,
I happen to be quite liberal
I'm a neoconservative.
good for you
I am an elephant, with claustrophobia of the blowhole
I believe there is a lot wrong with right-wing fundamentalism. For instance, I believe it made you say "their" instead of "there", and consistently punctuate like an epilept.
good job, you figured me out
and I have never actually read the great divorce, i only know about it because my father discussed in passing once you probably know nothing about Spinoza, so how would you know what his G od is like, and you probably missed the reference to einstein, didn't you
I repeat: Spinoza is a goob. Everybody knows about Spinoza.
228 view(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
