Why so touchy about religion? | Page 3 | INFJ Forum

Why so touchy about religion?

Science shouldn't be the end-all be-all. It is useful and important, however when it comes down to it science is simply a process to understand things to the best of our ability. It also often makes assumptions on fact - for example it was fact that the sound barrier could not be broken until it was. So science is ever changing theory, based on our limited perceptions. To assume that that's all there is is probably being arrogant...after all I'm sure there are some things out there that just can't be understood by the human brain at our current level of intelligence - or ever at all. We have extremely limited perceptions if you think about it.

I think it's stupid that people get so worked up about it. This stuff is better left alone. Whenever I get into it I eventually feel attacked just because I know there is a good basis for what I have come to believe but hell if I can explain it right. There's always someone out there to make me feel stupid. And it's annoying when you feel you have made a good point but no one acknowledges that (or just doesn't agree) and simply plows right into trying to prove just how wrong you are.

I imagine that most do it to re-affirm their own beliefs. I doubt that most discussions of that nature ever started for the benefit for the other person but for themselves. Which is why they usually end up being something where everyone is talking AT one another but not with one another. Not productive at all.

I'm not too fond of conflict, I suppose. I tend to avoid it like the plague but I have a big mouth I'm afraid. :m145:
 
Shai Gar said:
You can't prove anything with faith. Faith asks for things not to be proven. I've got a naturally questioning mind, I'll never take something important on faith.
Click to expand...


It takes faith to believe that there is no god.
 
Let's bury this discussion once and for all

I have here proof that God exist:

Let's take a look at the word GOD
G is the 7th letter of the alphabet, O is the 15th, D is the 4th.
7+15+4=26
There's 26 letters in the alphabet. So God equals 26, the Alphabet equals 26.God is everywhere, the English language is the most world spread language to date, it is everywhere.
If two things are equal and one of them exists (the alphabet), then the other one must also exist (God)
 
The first rule of science is that there are no scientific facts, you work on the basis of disproving your own hypothesis, rather than proving it. Its the way it should be and the way it is.

I admit I am quite touchy about relgion,and I don't believe in God. I try not to be judgemental and I respect others opinions if they are not pushed in my face or I do not have to see the consequences which having faith brings when watching the news.

If it helps people thats great but when it kills people its not. It angers me that non believers have to pander to peoples 'feelings' under these circumstances.

I believe in humanity, self control and living life well because it is better for my own mental health.
 
Loula said:
The first rule of science is that there are no scientific facts, you work on the basis of disproving your own hypothesis, rather than proving it. Its the way it should be and the way it is.

I admit I am quite touchy about relgion,and I don't believe in God. I try not to be judgemental and I respect others opinions if they are not pushed in my face or I do not have to see the consequences which having faith brings when watching the news.

If it helps people thats great but when it kills people its not. It angers me that non believers have to pander to peoples 'feelings' under these circumstances.

I believe in humanity, self control and living life well because it is better for my own mental health.
Click to expand...

Did you not read the above proof?
 
Religious debates are so stupid. All they do is offend people. They don't achieve anything.
If you have a specific issue that makes a difference than that's different but just arguing over beliefs is silly because your not going to convince anyone first of all and also religion itself is pretty harmless. Why are you so determined to rip something from someone that gives their life so much meaning?
I really have a problem with people manipulating a person's faith in love and God, giving them false associations to make them feel just as deeply about an irrelevent issue. But if you were actually trying to convince someone of something and not just trying to attack them as a person (which is exactly what you do when you critisize their beliefs) then you have to come at it from their perspective and explain things in a way they can understand. Citing portions of the bible when you explain yourself helps. You have to be gentle about it because shouting and critisism accomplishes nothing; it just deeply upsets people and then hardens their defenses.
Also, some times there is this thing called willful ignorance which is best not to be messed with.
 
Last edited:
You know, I sort of compare science vs. religion discussions to trying to rationalize emotions. Just as one can speculate that there's a number of biological and psychological explanations circulating around the phenomenon of love, the majority of people feel comfortable seeing it from a more romantic, humanist perspective. Love, faith, hope, creativity, and all the other "idealistic" experiences is exactly what renders us human.
 
Derren Brown'S alwAys plaCing sUblimiNal picTures in his television shows.

Work phoned telling me I'm fired because I've not turned up for nearly a week.
Derren Brown is a cunt.

If Derren Brown is so amazing, why doesn't he hypnotise us all so we don't think he is a cunt.

Fuck Derren Brown, I win the Nigerian Lottery all the time

“That Derren Brown trick that caused people to be stuck to their chairs is the best I have ever seen. I was truly stuck and could not move”.
Stephen Hawking
England
Click to expand...

I now know where Loula is from XD.
 
I imagine that if someone is convinced his or her religion is the "True Religion" and that everyone else is going to Hell, then it would be pretty scary to even consider the possibility of being wrong. Thus, many believers are "touchy" about religious discussion. Maybe they think there is nothing to discuss.
 
You can't scientifically prove a lot of things.

I cannot scientifically prove what Shai is thinking at this exact moment. I can come close, but no, I cannot "prove it". I cannot scientifically prove any memory that Shai has.

I cannot scientifically prove love.

No one here can scientifically prove my opinions of others, but they indeed, are there in my head, no?
 
midnightmelody said:
I cannot scientifically prove love.
Click to expand...
Actually, they probably are able to scienfically prove/ explain love which is really scary to think about. There are some things with sceince that I don't think they should even go there.
 
Last edited:
I cannot scientifically prove love :p


And yes, that's creepy.
 
I think this thread needs to be renamed to "Why is religion a frustrating topic?"
 
foureyes said:
Actually, they probably are able to scienfically prove/ explain love which is really scary to think about. There are some things with sceince that I don't think they should even go there.
Click to expand...

What does it mean to scientifically prove/explain love, though? Does it mean scientists can show which part of your brain "lights up" when you fall in love? Does it mean they can show how your hormones are affected? (I'm making this up, I don't know if your hormones are actually affected or not.) What if they could tell exactly where every molecule in your brain would go when you're in love? None of that has anything to do with what it's like to be in love. If I was an alien coming from another universe and someone gave me a scientific report describing someone's hormones or brain molecules when the person was in love, that wouldn't really tell me anything meaningful about what love is. I think the idea of understanding love scientifically or logically doesn't really make sense.

So I guess that I agree with foureyes, overall, that science shouldn't go there... or I guess I'd say I can't quite even imagine what it would mean for science to try to go there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back