Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel

Full story: Newsday 70,988
Safety pins and screws are still lodged in 15-year-old Ami Ortiz's body three months after he opened a booby-trapped gift basket sent to his family. Full Story

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67193 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

Sure, science can tell us something about HOW the religious impulse functions.

But it has nothing to offer regarding the EXPRESSION of the religious impulse.
1) Science can tell us about hardware and functionality which is genetics, molecular organization and brain states.

1) Religion can not tell us anything about hardware and functionality which is genetics, molecular organization and brain states.

2) Science cannot tell us anything about subjectivity since each individual is unique in many ways and the human experience can only be understood by the experiencor (human subject).

2) Religion, too, is clueless about the subjective side of human experience but unlike science that does not lecture to us on how to live life and what to experience, religion arrogantly and ignorantly attempts to generalize human subjective states and makes everyone conform to one kind of reflexes, to uniform behavior and to a common code of values without understanding that subjective experiences and individuality cannot be generalized nor can people be made to conform to crude dictates of a general kind. At some point, humans will rebel and make every attempt to express their innate individuality that's free of dogmas, set rules and juvenile attempts at forcing everyone to conform and this is why every religion has numerous sects with each sect attempting to define its own set of generalizations and rules of human conformity. This breakup of religion into sects is yet another attempt at dogmatizing.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67194 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

Yes, I believe evolution can explain HOW the species has differentiated, but it offers nothing as to a purpose of why we are here in the first place other than (religious?) speculation and perhaps an internal reframing of the issue to meet its vocabulary.
What?

Purpose of life?

Why should there be any common purpose of life when motive and aim are purely subjective states with each human being having his own motives and aim(s) which may differ from that of others?

It goes without saying that happiness is the only common human aim and then too what makes one happy may not make another person happy. Here, too, happiness is quite a personal thing with no rigid definitions or no fixed rules.

Why are we here?

Why are we here is an illogical question - we're here because this is how nature works.

If you can prove that teleology is inherent in nature then only can you talk about the "why" at the universal and at the individual levels, otherwise it's an illogical question.

The why questions usually end up in a head-breaking infinite regress...
JOEL

Mumbai, India

#67195 Feb 9, 2014
FRIJOLES: Sure, science can tell us something about HOW the religious impulse functions. But it has nothing to offer regarding the EXPRESSION of the religious impulse.

JOEL: 1) Science can tell us about hardware and functionality which is genetics, molecular organization and brain states.

1) Religion can not tell us anything about hardware and functionality which is genetics, molecular organization and brain states.

2) Science cannot tell us anything about subjectivity since each individual is unique in many ways and the human experience can only be understood by the experiencor (human subject).

2) Religion, too, is clueless about the subjective side of human experience but unlike science that does not lecture to us on how to live life and what to experience, religion arrogantly and ignorantly attempts to generalize human subjective states and makes everyone conform to one kind of reflexes, to uniform behavior and to a common code of values without understanding that subjective experiences and individuality cannot be generalized nor can people be made to conform to crude dictates of a general kind. At some point, humans will rebel and make every attempt to express their innate individuality that's free of dogmas, set rules and juvenile attempts at forcing everyone to conform and this is why every religion has numerous sects with each sect attempting to define its own set of generalizations and rules of human conformity. This breakup of religion into sects is yet another attempt at dogmatizing.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67196 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

Swastikas are a symbol of hate.
What?

LMAO.

Swastika in Sanskrit means lucky or auspicious.

In Vedic literature, the clock-wise swastika symbolizes luck taken as a forward movement, or it refers to the cycle of time.

The Nazis gave the swastika a left-handed tilt, enshrined it in a circle and set an eagle atop it.

Is it logical to connect the Nazi swastika with hatred of the Jews?

By this yardstick, the Star of David, an ancient Babylonian symbol borrowed by the Hebrews, could be construed by the descendants of Baal worshippers to indicate racial hatred and genocide which millions of their ancestors were subjected to at the hands of the Biblical patriarchs.

In ordinary terms, the Magen David is simply a geometrical symbol representing a hexagram which could or which could not have an occult meaning.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67197 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

Religion offers a vocabulary to describe perceptions that by definition are difficult to describe scientifically, and to address questions such as purpose, which are too squishy to be operationalized by science.
Really?

What're these unique perceptions that religion offers that atheism does not offer when it's obvious that knowledge and morality and ethics are related to different states of consciousness with each emergent state of consciousness having its own blend of knowledge, morals and ethics?

This ordinary observation is corroborated by the progress (in terms of knowledge, morals and ethics) that human society has made down the millennia and will make in future....

While knowledge can be factual where objective phenomena are concerned but wisdom, morals and ethics are subjective and so each individual can have his own set of these with broad areas of overlap with others.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67198 Feb 9, 2014
More, later.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#67199 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Cancer, Aids, I can understand
But typhoid? Who brags about curing typhoid?
What kind of diseases do you expect from India.

Changing the issue, one of the ten commandments is 'remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Christians understand it as a mandatory to go to church and pray god. Though many of them prefer to sleep, rather than going to church What's the Jewish perspective about it? I know you shouldn't work, but is it a mandatory to go to the sinagogue on Sabbath?

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#67200 Feb 9, 2014
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you like Moet and Chandon?
It's one of my favourite along with Cristal Roederer, Krug, Pommery Curveč Luise, Gosset Celebris, Perrier Jouet belle Epoque, Bollinger RD, Armand de Brignac, etc..
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
<quoted text>Which wine glasses should champagne be served in?
I bet even one like you knows it...

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67201 Feb 9, 2014
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>

It's one of my favourite along with Cristal Roederer, Krug, Pommery Curveč Luise, Gosset Celebris, Perrier Jouet belle Epoque, Bollinger RD, Armand de Brignac, etc..
Nice.

I am a teetotaler.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67202 Feb 9, 2014
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>

I bet even one like you knows it...
Yes, I know about the wine glasses.

But, do you know which 4 wine glasses are primarily used to serve champagne?

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67203 Feb 9, 2014
What is the correct way of holding a wine glass?

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67204 Feb 9, 2014
winebibber

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67205 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

A lot of Hasidic Jewish thought is very similar to Zen, except for different terminology -

instead of emptyness and nothingness, they use "God" but the actual concept is very similar if not the same.
The two concepts are neither similar nor the same.

You're seriously mistaken.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#67206 Feb 9, 2014
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice.
I am a teetotaler.
Why?

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67207 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>

The mitzvot, prayer, and study are technologies to enable me recognize the divine in the moment.

Practice makes perfect.
So, using these technologies, have you realized the divine or the self if there're anything like these entities in reality?

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#67208 Feb 9, 2014
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I know about the wine glasses.
But, do you know which 4 wine glasses are primarily used to serve champagne?
Yes.

Why do you make stupid questions, pretending even an answer? I've read you also asked how to hold a wine glass. I guess the next one would be where to lay glasses on the table, right?

I thought all this was already taught to you.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67210 Feb 9, 2014
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>

Why?
Hyper-sensitive nervous system - even the smell of alcohol, at times, makes my nerves shiver and my head ache, if I happen to be in an extra-sensitive state of consciousness on that particular occasion.

Since: Jan 14

Location hidden

#67211 Feb 9, 2014
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>

Yes.

Why do you make stupid questions, pretending even an answer? I've read you also asked how to hold a wine glass. I guess the next one would be where to lay glasses on the table, right?

I thought all this was already taught to you.
So, you don't know which are the 4 main wine glasses in which champagne is usually served.

Yes, where table etiquette is concerned, you must know the correct way of holding a wine glass and know where on the table cover a wine glass is placed.
former res

Cheshire, CT

#67212 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Thats been my position.
<quoted text>
I call it (a) practice. Practice (of) connecting.
Ideally, I try integrate a variety of cognitive modes. You might be correct that all cognitive modes are thought, but I differentiate between thinking, visualizing (seeing), emoting (which includes experiencing awe), movement, etc --- all modes of cognition
Wow! If you had just said so earlier.

So you would sign the following statement:

I, Frijoles, do not believe in god. I believe the existence of which is unknown and unknowable. For this reason, I take no position as to whether or not god exists.

(I believe this is what you've agreed to above.)

Your practice does sound like a whole lot thinking/cognition. But I do "think" that I understand the different types - right brain vs left etc.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#67214 Feb 9, 2014
Frijoles wrote:
To be an atheist implies to ACTIVELY disbelieve.
No more than any other position.

While arriving at the atheist position (particularly when one is coming from the polar opposite position), does require some thinking and introspection, once that position has been achieved, there really isn't much "active" disbelieving going on. Like Former said, I spend no more time actively disbelieving in a god than I do in actively disbelieving in the Easter Bunny.
Frijoles wrote:
What proportion of time does one have to spend disbelieving to be worthy of the label? You have to spend a lot of time focused on this issue, disbelieving.
No time, unless you're so inclined to reexamine your position periodically - which is not necessarily required.

There are no time constraints on labels. You either believe or you don't (or you haven't made up your mind yet). The time one spends thinking about their position it is a personal matter. Perhaps one could argue that if you are spending an extreme amount of time thinking about it, then perhaps you haven't selected a position yet, which is perfectly fine as well.
Frijoles wrote:
To me, that takes a certain type of person, a "militant" thinker. The flip of a "militant" believer I guess.
Pet peeve alert. The word "militant" is often thrown about in a derogatory fashion by people uncomfortable with those attempting to change the status quo - militant atheists, militant feminists, militant gays. Every group has a subset of vocal participants whom I prefer to refer to as activists. I can assure you, for every activist atheist, there are hundreds of atheists that belong to the silent majority. Outside of this forum, my atheism comes up extremely rarely, and when it does, it's not initiated by me.
Frijoles wrote:
To me its different side of the same coin. Both the believers and the atheists seem to be possessed with the issue of God
I'm no more obsessed with God than I am with the Easter Bunny. What I do concern myself with is the effects that a belief in a god does have - particularly when it affects others.
Frijoles wrote:
while I, as a behaviorist, tend to skirt the issue of belief - seeing it as irrelevant at best, and an obstruction to my religious practice at worst.
I have atheist thoughts from time to time,(anyone, religious or otherwise who doesn't, probably isnt being honest with themselves) but I would hate to be captured as a position within a label.
No one is forcing the atheist label on you (at least I don't think so). Only you know what your thinking or what you believe, and how strong those beliefs are. In the same respect, don't assume everyone who does prefer to use a label such as atheist is necessarily of the activist variety.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min forks_make_us_fat 1,153,143
Deat Abby 12-16 17 min Mister Tonka 54
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 40 min Jacques Ottawa 181,714
women are so shallow these days (Nov '11) 1 hr Go Blue Forever 82
CHICAGO BEARS ARE SHYT. Boycott them 1 hr Go Blue Forever 20
Obama pardons 2 Illinoisans, including former M... 2 hr Le Duped 2
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 3 hr Yumpin Yimminy 68,876
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 5:55 pm PST

Bleacher Report 5:55PM
Indianapolis Colts vs. Dallas Cowboys Betting Odds, Analysis, NFL Pick
NBC Sports 6:29 PM
Reports: Bears benching Cutler - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report 7:26 PM
Trestman May Never Get 2nd Shot After Bears Meltdown
Bleacher Report 7:27 PM
What Are Experts Saying About Detroit?
Bleacher Report12:43 AM
What the News of Clausen Starting Means for the Bears