atheist ??rational
atheists being rationals seems to be funny!!
how can a rational be an atheist ??
ok u r rational ?but do u have answers to all of ur questions??does anyone have ??
shuldnt they be agnostic!!hmm??
well am proud that ma religion allows space for even an agnostic and atheists in the form of "sankhyavaadis"!!
ie those who believe in numeralogy and science !those who believe that god is just an excuse wen we dont have answers to our questions!!
the sankhyavaadi believe god as "?"
all the scientific progress which the world has made is still unable to answer why??it only based on wat we observe !!take for example gravity they newton found out the secret did he really ??ok gravity is due to mass why??why things exists on the first first place ??
doesnt this question bug the atheists ??!!
how can be they so sure abt god non existence of god then ??
i am not a religionists
but i still believe that science no matter how far we go ?? since it is based on observations it can never answer or tell us why things really exists inthis world!!
all it can tell us is because of this it is like that !!because of that it is like this!!but can it tell why this and that exists on the first place??
i wud rather prefer maself to be as agnostic and i believe its more rational than atheists!!
hmmm i lot of things can be wriiten but i really dont have time for this
hehe!!
- maya_chan20's blog
- Login to post comments
We'd love it if you'd pop
We'd love it if you'd pop into the General Conversations, Introductions and Humour section, and tell us a little bit about yourself. Welcome to the RRS.
Well, I'm going to assume that English is not your first language, so I'll traverse my way through this garbled mess carefully.
You seem to be a little mixed up on definitions, and I recommend you read this article, Am I Agnostic or Atheist? found in the sidebar of this site. It may clear up your ideas about Agnosticism/Atheism.
Regarding your definition of rational, am I supposed to take it that we should just believe in a god regardless of the lack of evidence?
You point out that you in fact are not religious, and yet seem to chafe at the connotations of the word "atheism" preferring to be called "agnostic". I contend that you are an agnostic atheist, as are the majority of posters here, rendering your point somewhat moot.
Anyway, welcome, hope to see you on the threads.
Nobody has all the
Nobody has all the answers. You do not need all of the answers to be rational. You only need to make the most logical assessment with the answers you do have.
To have an answer requires evidence, something provable. Without that, it is nothing more than an excuse. Have you heard of the phrase "god of the gaps"? In those cases, god is simply used as an excuse. The problem here is that once evidence and hence an answer is found, many theists refuse to let go of their excuse over the more logical and provable answer. This is something that was clearly seen when it was discovered that the stars did not revolve around the earth, that the earth revolved around the sun, that the earth was not flat, that the earth and the universe is more than 6000 years old, that the flu and common cold is not demonic posession but in fact bugs and viruses, and we're seeing it now with evolution.
Science does not know all the answers, but nobody will ever claim it does. That's not what science is about. Science is not about knowing all the answers, it is about finding them so we can piss away these illogical and petty excuses and advance our society. Science not yet knowing something proves nothing, and keep in mind the key word here is "yet".
God in and of itself does not even have any evidence, only excuses. There is no evidence for the Christian god that cannot also be used for the Jewish god, Islamic god, Greek gods or Mesopotamian gods - and even then all "evidence" is very questionable in itself.
There are many things science cannot tell us, and there is much MUCH more that religion can not. To add to this, religion is often illogical, goes against all evidence and contradictory. How can it be used in greater stead?
Finally, English is a very beatiful language. I am sure it would be greatly appreciated by everybody if you were to use it the next time you post a message here.
Organised religion is the ultimate form of blasphemy.
Censored and blacked out for internet access in ANZ!
AU: http://nocleanfeed.com/ | NZ: http://nzblackout.org/
Thingy: If indeed
Thingy:
If indeed maya_chan20's first language is not English, it's blatant discrimination to be sarcastic to him about it. Attacking someone's religious beliefs is one thing (justified in my opinion) but making fun of someone because they didn't happen to be born in America, the UK or Australia to be able to learn the 'beautiful language' from birth makes you a jerk. How about ruling out he isn't foreign to you, or even that he doesn't have something like dyslexia, before making him feel unwelcome with immature discrimination? Yep, you have the right to do it. Just as I have the right to say you're a jerk for doing it.
hey ! if christians
hey !
if christians believed that world is only 6000 years old than its the problem wid christians !
here we people believe in "kalpadi samvat"
and it is abt millions of years you can search it in the net
the kind of feeling which u are having against "illogical excuses" i think is a result of unflexibility
in religion of ur place!!
and ma english is not superb like u people !!i agree i do comitt a lot of typing mistakes and am sorry for that if you had problem wid debugging wat i said ..
hehe
as far as god is concerned !
we are the only beings who have the conciousness of this level
the level at which we can question our existence
are you happy and not crazy of not knowing this answer???
the term god is just there to help us
so that we do not go crazy !
so we say....
lets leave this question to god!
god knows!!
wat do you say on the existence of nature ??or how are you goin to define god ??
but unfortunately "monotheist" god is always associated wid religions !
people believe bible and kuran are infallible words of god!
yeah that is wrong !
as far as violence is concerned problem starts only wid those monotheists religions who believe that their god is the true god and their prophet was the last prophet !polytheists are rational enough to believe in the multiplicity of a single god !!so u can find even christs foto in some hindu houses !!
hey!!
am not gonna write these posts in a literal way nor upto "english people's standard "
so pardon me for that ..
hehe!
take care!
glamour kat
well ma english is not so good!!
and wat i wrote above,i did that in hurry
hehe
so pardon me if you had problem in debugging wat i said !!
the article abt agnostic atheist was gud but it has confused me further!!
also i want to know at which extent you can go to put forward your views!
and how u luk upon those who believe in god??even those who dont believe that their god is the only true god!
and is this atheism a result of religiously motivated violence like that of sep 11 ??
hmm..
well thanks for welcomin me here ...
serotonin_wraith
thanks ,as you can digest my bad english !!
hehe
Welcome!
Welcome maya_chan20.
We are glad you are here.
We look forward to having you participate and post your views.
The only thing I will suggest is that you be prepared to back up your assertions.
Again, welcome!
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Quote: Thingy: If indeed
There's a difference between bad english due to it not being a first language or the person not being very good with the language, and bad english due to laziness and disregard for education. Using terms like wud, wid and ma are not due to lack of eductaion or poor english, they are educated slang. Poor english would be something along the line of "wuld" (at worst), wif and my. The only excuse would be if this person already knows how to speak the language and this is how they were later taught to write, in which case the person who did the teaching did maya more of a disservice than a service in the first place.
Much of what he says can be taken to be shortcuts due to poor english or typing, but there's just too much disregard for english and educated slang for me to be able to accept that that's all it is.
As for my reply to maya_chan20's posts - You say you're more of an agnostic so I understand how you can still hold on to god for questions to existence that science cannot yet answer. Personally I prefer not to dillude myself, I can be happy not knowing but this is a personal thing and it's one of the few areas I am happy with people still holding on to some form of deity. It's more a case of your own comfort and ability to cope than anything else - that's perfectly fine. I know there's some on here who will disagree though.
As for the existence of nature, I accept the scientific explanation for it. I don't define god as I don't believe in any form of god.
Atheism isn't a result of anything. Atheism is simply not being a theist. Atheists do not believe in anything per se, but rather we do not believe in the dogma of religions or their gods. That is what atheism is.
Organised religion is the ultimate form of blasphemy.
Censored and blacked out for internet access in ANZ!
AU: http://nocleanfeed.com/ | NZ: http://nzblackout.org/
I would suggest that
I would suggest that maya_chan20 use spellcheck. It will point out grammar and spelling errors.
To me it looks like he used a translation program (like google translator or something) since they are know for their grammar errors. Either that, or he has an english alphabet keyboard.
What brought you to an english speaking forum anyway?
maya_chan20 wrote: as far
How do you know other animals are incapable of questioning their own existence? Seems a very egotistical stance that a lot of religions feed on. Many people seem to be afraid that they are insignificant relative to the universe and imagine an all-powerful being interested in them to feel better.
-Triften
thingy wrote: Much of what
It looks to me like someone who posts using "IM" abbreviations.
maya_chan20, we don't use IM "speak" here on the forums. We write out the full words.
We can certainly overlook actual mistakes, but please don't use Instant Message abbreviations.
Thanks.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
to all (about my english hehe)!!
hey i dont use any translators!!
yes i am lazy when it comes to writing!!
may be that is why i commit so many mistakes !!
as far as me being in english forum is concerned , am here because i like to see whats is happening around the world and i am open to new ideas ...
next time ill try to use proper english !dont worry
!!
rationalism is not about
rationalism is not about knowing everything. rationalism is a lens. looking at the world through a telescope doesn't mean you see everything. it's the same thing.
I think it takes a nerve to
I think it takes a nerve to criticize someone’s english like that especially if you’re American, seeing how if you are the chances of you speaking another language are extremely slim. So basically if you want to converse with someone who speaks another language you have to wait for them to learn yours. Then when they make an effort to cross that language barrier that you had no interest in even approaching you criticize how they do it. Not a terribly nice thing to do in my opinion.
There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft
hello chan, it seems you
hello chan,
it seems you are from India.same here.First you wrote that you are agnostic, then you said that like many Indians you have no problem in believing multiple gods and gave an example that many Indians have jesus's picture as well along with other gods in their home.
There is a saying about that in India "jitne kankar utne shankar"(they make as many gods as there are stones).
you also talked about some indian sages and some sankhyavaad, I was told on this forum by some people that I have misconceptions about Hinduism, but I didn't reply as that would have resulted in nothing but an egoistic duel. I hope in your case you are not depending upon internet, your friends or hearsay.
So I would really appreciate if you could quote the scripture,(name, author,page. no etc.) from where you have got this information.
You can quote even in original language as well, I know both hindi and Sanskrit.
That way All of us can learn from your wisdom and knowledge.
for u and other indians
am not a religionists !as i even do not believe that hindu is a religion ,it never started wid a single person !!
hindu was the name which the invaders gave to the people here who lived near and beyond the river sindhu
the europeans mal pronounced it further and referred it as indos
hence the name india
so this hindu name was given to all dharmas here !!
whether it maybe jains , sanatan dharma,vedic dharma,samana ,sankhyavaadis,tribals or even buddhist
time to time each of the dharma dominated not by force but by shastrath (debate of religious leaders)
there was time wen the whole country went buddhist,a time wen whole country was vedic and a time now wen sanatan people are more in number!!
now due to some political reasons jain people sometimes identify themselves as separate !!and buddhist all together moving towards separation !!buddhist people are also finding favour in america and among the celebrities there !maybe its a fashion for them!!
the problem is wid christianity and islam is they are not flexiblle enugh to acccomodate even the agnostics !christian texts although can be viewed flexible as rubber but if they try to do so it becomes self contradictory!!
in islam the book even stops them from doubting wat is written ..
in these kind of religions doubting is equivalent to heresy or hell ...
as against this the scriptures such as upanishads
the mandook upanishad
say:: no one can gain knowledge of brahaman
by just reading a book or following some rites or rituals or religion
its a personal experience and is gained only through relisation of self !
upanishad is not the end !!
this is wat mandook upanishad say
the christian religion can be viewed basically as a sanatan religion or even a small part of sanatan religion!for them theirs god is the only true god so they fite for there true single god!
they condemn hindus of heresy as its a polytheist religion
but even a stupid hindu here is rational enugh to visualise multipicity in one !!thats why hindus are always shrinkin !they never did crusades!!
well
am not defending hinduism here wat i want to tell u there is a scope for agnostics and atheists watever
those who deny existence of god and believe in science mathmetics can become a saankhyavaadi
those who believe everythin is illusion can become samanas *wat kant preached
those wprakati lover too find a place in hinduism ho deny god but not prakati (nature)
it means in hinduism (i dont like to use term ism for hinduism) *ism is for fixed belief here no one has correct definition of hindu!!
yeah the one who is not a christian ,muslim,buddhist and know even sikhs ,jains parsis in india is a hindu in india
there is research goin on
and its interestin to know that our krishna of india
not even share the same name but have many points in common wid christ!!
i dont want to say anythin here its so tiresome to write you yourself search it !!
well i recommend you "thinking allowed dean brown" on you tube it has some interesting facts for u !!
please dont discuss hindu religion here !its an english and atheist forum !being a nationalist and atheist is a different thing !i dont want to discuss want it here please u can give me ur email!!i can send u there!!
hey and there will many mistakes as usual its 3 o clock in the morning and am feelin sleepy!so please correct it urself!!hehe
thanks for information
thanks for information without refering to any sacred scripture except mundaka-upanishad.
mundaka-upanishad says that in order to know brahm or God you have to give up household life and become a recluse, thats why in India there are naked sadhus/sages still roaming in mountains and take drugs to overcome their sexual drive.
hindu word, you are right was given by muslim invaders and it means thief.None of the sacred scriptures has word hindu in them.
you are right we should not discuss this thing here as none of these people will be interested. But I asked you, because your posts suggests that Hindus are better then christians/muslims/etc.
You said Hindus never did any crusades, they killed their own people under the name of caste system. Please read Manu Smriti said to be written by son of Brahma which contains rules how to treat low caste people and women.
Thats okay, i dont want information from internet, i have studied hindu texts(ramayan,mahabharat,Gita,Manu Smriti) in my school curriculum.
Gauche wrote: I think it
I couldn't agree more.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
hehe am not saying wat u
hehe am not saying wat u studied was wrong ! wat am saying that hindus dont have a single book to refer to !! they can choose any one of them they like!! so there is flexibilty!!!
manu smriti:: there are lot manu smiritis available its upto u which u studied !! there are puranas who even declare that low cast shuld not be allowed to read this and that !!but funny thing is no one refers to them ! do u refer to them ?? hehe or how cud in the same nation khrishna cud become a god even wen he belonged to weaker section of that society the yaduvanshis !!
people say even verses of manu smiriti have been changed !the time wen britishers started translating it and their missioneries became active in india !
there was no way missioneries cud civilise us !!!!!
there only weak point in hindu society was caste system which can be used as a catalyst in conversion !!who are christian converts in india are they brahmins .shatriya or vaishyas ??/
they found only manu smiriti and few puranas worthy enugh to be used as a proof of attrocities against low castes unfortunately no one follow those puranas yeah manu smiriti is stil being followed but how many of them do u see following it ??
the problem have a solution because there are people in hinduism who will deny or even stop treating manusmiriti as great scripture
the islamist and christians will never deny wat has written
the chrisitians still have the same book to refer
muslims still proudly excepts wat is written in quran
in sam harris words only "find a muslim who say some part of quran is applicable some part not " u have find a moderate !!
wat am saying is: its easier to find a moderate in hinduism!!!
sumara
silly !!hindu doesnt meant thief?? the sa of sanskri becomes ha .....like the semisphere also becomes hemisphere !
where did u read that ??that hindu meant theif ??hehe
the word sindu was spoken as hindu !!
upanishad: i am talkin about
upanishad: i am talkin about "mandukya" upanishad
not "mundak" dont worry!!
give me ur email ill talk u
give me ur email ill talk u there from nowonwards !!
k???about your "hindu religion" hehe
Oh please don't take your
Oh please don't take your discussion off-line!
A lot of us may not be responding, but we're reading it!
This will be a wonderful opportunity for all of us to learn first-hand about something we know little about.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
agnostic = atheist lite;
agnostic = atheist lite; ie: someone who is currently not brave enough to call themselves "atheist". I'm no longer afraid, that is why I don't call myself an "agnostic".
You obviously aren't ready to take that step yet. That's fine, take your time, but don't tell us we're not rational because we've taken the step which you aren't ready to take yet.
goescrunch
hey ok,but can u tell me what u are not afraid of??
and wat i am afraid of ??
whom you were afraid of earlier??hehe
maya_chan20 wrote: hey
I was afraid of what my friends, family, and society in general would think of me. After all, for the longest, I had always heard that atheists were these evil people without morals. People that would lie, cheat, steal, and harm people without remorse. LoL, now I know better. ^_^
goescrunch
i congratulate u that u are now intellectual enough to decide wat is right and wrong without the need of god!!
but not everyone is intellectual enough like
u yaar!
like we need laws and punishments so that the crimes are less
the same way people do need god !
most of the crimes are under control just because of the fear of punishments
but at the same time there are crimes under the name of true god .that should be changed !
the same way ur sages and saints tried to make the society disciplined !
this level of conciousness at which u can question ur own existence is not present in everyone !
am not saying i fear god !k!