Submitted by philosophybreak t3_y9ndt3 in philosophy
Just don't tell people what a comprehensive philosophical teaching about life and death is called. Reddit does not like that word.
That's because there's no validity to such obnoxious claims, because they are used as vehicles for social control, and because they tend to be used as cause to attack non-adherents.
In reality, nobody knows what happens when we die, and all evidence suggests "nothing, nothing at all". Anyone claiming to the contrary - that is claiming to have a truly comprehensive philosophy as to life and death - is a liar, a charlatan. Nothing is that simple, and nobody actually knows anything about the areas they claim knowledge of. It's so obvious that this is true, and yet people continue to fall for the con.
Any wonder that many of us are frustrated by this tired and well-abused concept? The 8-letter word you're referring to has little useful place in philosophy. There are a few good ideas (which also exist elsewhere in more reasonable forms), but by and large it should be used as a cautionary tale: a warning of the dangers and limitations of "faith", and a reminder of the value of skepticism.
religious beliefs will never go away. they are ingrained into humanity.
I hope that's not true. Lies, especially lies that hurt people, should be allowed to die.
I'm not talking about any specific religious belief, unless you believe that everything unprovable is a lie.
No, I believe the feigned certainty that tends to attract followers is a lie. It's clear that no one really knows. We've looked at it every which way. If there's any kind of "after", it doesn't interact with the "here and now".
Sorry I don't follow what obnoxious claims are invalid?
>a comprehensive philosophical teaching about life and death is called
...?
Are you being willfully obtuse, or do you not grasp the point that "faith" in an afterlife is driven by lies told for the sake of controlling and profiting by others?
For dialogue to happen both sides need to be willing to listen. Your use of derogatory words for no reason says you're not ready to and overall seems to believe you've figured life already.
no, both sides do not need to be willing to listen.
one side makes claims that have no evidence or proof, the other supposedly bases beliefs off of evidence. as such there is no 'both sides' as the premise of each sides beliefs are contradictory.
there are no rational, tangible reasons to be religious other than wanting to be (its a story, do you put equal weight to the greek pantheon and Zeus as you do an afterlife or major religion?)
"Are you being willfully obtuse?" was a serious question, and phrased quite innocuously. On the list of potentially "derogatory" words, "obtuse" ranks right up there with "meany head". I can gather why someone might be offended by the underlying suggestion, but "derogatory language"? Give me a break.
Though I believe I can surmise the answer: Yes, you are being willfully obtuse. That is, you knew exactly what I meant, and you asked only because you were seeking a foundation for some straw-man or feckless equivocation, to aid in defense of religion or the existence of the supernatural.
I could be wrong, but judging from your initial comment deriding redditors for anti-theism, in concert with this? Seems unlikely...
>overall seems to believe you've figured life already
No, what I've "figured out" is simply what I said. Religious folks, particularly religious leaders - who "seem to believe they've figured [out] life already" - are either intentional liars or deluded fools. Nobody has those answers, and they are lying whenever they say they do.
Lol now you downvote me before replying. I won't even bother reading your crap. Bye.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments