Agnostic.com

8 6

Beautiful!

How many of these can you identify in yourself and others?

TheMiddleWay 8 June 21
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

8 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

It is true that humans are stupid.

1

All have committed the sin of some fallacy and fall short of the glory of a perfectly logical life.

Word Level 8 June 22, 2020

@Word what exactly is the perfectly logical life?

@AravindAjith one with out committing any sin of fallacy.

1

All hail our eminent robot overlords! 😀

3

I love the artwork. That inspires me. Arguing is pointless. I bring people the news that they need to see, but people are going to believe what they want to believe.

That is 100% true.

2

Too many and I made an A in my college logic class. I have often wondered whether computer programmers think more logically in other areas since their programming requires an understanding of logic.

0

I recognize a few...

3

I don't use all these I need to memorize the rest.

0

make sure to study epistemology while you're at it. you guys have a serious blind spot in your understanding of evidence.

Humans or robots? ☺

@TheMiddleWay you guys is a bunch of atheists and agnostics and do I count myself among them - no. I am very familiar with epistemology and don't suffer from the same blind spot.

@TheMiddleWay well of course I can't say I don't have one at all. I just don't suffer from the particular issue so many of them seem to have about static vs dynamic testing and the limits.

@TheMiddleWay and to which "middle way" do you refer - the hsin hsin ming?

@TheMiddleWay so you're a buddhist?

@TheMiddleWay so you're partially vedic.

@TheMiddleWay and what do you think Siddartha Gautama learned from? What teachings do you think spurred his asceticism for the 7 years before he sat under the bodhi tree? Cultural appropriation requires some actual study of the history and context - wouldnt you agree? you sure throw that word "hindu" around without understanding the astika/nastika reasoning and distinctions.

@TheMiddleWay really? so in which of the 4 vedas were there claims of infallibility?a samhita? brahmanas? it certainly wasn't within the upanishads and that would be completely counter to the forest texts for sannyasin. where are these claims? because after a decade as a Buddhist and having lived at the Kopan monastery for a spell I use the "be an island" mantra more than anyone around. But your analysis deals with the brahma sutras and not the vedas themselves. The secondary and tertiary sources vice the actual canon itself. The upanishads are canon. The rest is a history lesson in Indus Valley religious progression.

You also seem to have a very skewed understanding of the word "hindu". Hindu is NOT a religion. It is a amalgam of all the religious belief sets of the "Hindustan" region. Those include various astika and nastika beliefs including Buddhism and Jainism and Sanatan dharma (Shivaists, Vedantists etc...). Buddhism is most certainly "hindu" and the ascetic order Siddartha joined prior to enlightenment under the Bodhi tree was hindu. His studies as a prince were of aryan nature and, thus, were also hindu. Understanding the synthesis is also a key to understanding the limitations of the Buddha's teaching. If you cannot account for the ashrama then you cannot apply such to life without living as a monk.

jagat mithya
viveka
satyambhaja kalpitamkuru adharmamtyaja
atmaneva atmana tustah
ayam Brahmasmi

Om shanti shanti shanti

@TheMiddleWay also ... your views on rituals and blind faith show you don't have a clear understanding of the amalgam. The "gamut of hinduism" ranges from strict, bhakti-led followers who perform rituals (IAW the samhitas of the rig, sam and yajurvedas) all the way to secular academic advaita non-dualists like myself.

  1. "Its tenets" - you're missing the point entirely. there is no "it". Hindu is an amalgam of ALL the belief sets in that region. Thus if the thing you are following is a tenet from that region then you are following "hindu".

  2. I was gonna argue with your judaism point, but it has a lot in common so I might agree there. It's still a far cry from the diversity supported by vedic beliefs both astika and nastika and the way the word "hindu" is grossly misused. But I digress.

  3. I don't think you have a clear understanding of the Baghavad Gita and its' relation as canon to various vedic beliefs. It's just like the koans. That is just one expression of the belief itself told as a fable. Thats like listening to the scorpion and frog story and taking from it that scorpions are to be avoided at all costs. you're completely neglecting ishta devata. the particular passages you cite point to bhakti measures that aren't even observed by many if not most of those reading the Gita. But not all observe moksha thru bhakti. If you want to speak canon then you cite the upanishads. All you've done here is denigrate one particular view of many and in doing so you have actually damaged the Gita's strength. Those who follow the dharma do so with a very fluid concept of the fables included within. We KNOW it's fable. It's just the representation WE pick. Thats ishta devata. The caste system is a societal and historical thing that you need to study more before completely dismissing out of principal. I can show you entire sanghas of Buddhists who have strict ritual practices and won't deviate one iota from what the sutras told them 3,000 years ago. I can also show you a billion sen buddhists who do nothing of the sort.

@TheMiddleWay it's very relevant when you dismiss something without any clue as to what it is based on. you have to go back to the root before just dismissing something. empty your cup then learn.

@TheMiddleWay well, no matter. you follow your path as you make it. I can only point at the moon. you're missing everything Shakyamuni Buddha drew from though and as such you lack the catbird's seat for objectivity. Missing the forest for the trees. namaste

@TheMiddleWay I would suggest that you reexamine your understanding of vedic primary and secondary sources. the smrti and shruti and itihasas. the history is actually pretty interesting and it will help gain a better understanding of just what is canon and how far that reverence goes before it is overlooked. Being an island and looking beyond the text of the sutras requires an understanding of the upanishads and the structure of the vedas. Blind faith is rarely an issue in vedic beliefs. That is strictly an observance on a bhakti path which is like equating pentecostals to unitarians. HUGE differences.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:508229
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.