Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Cerberus

Pages: [1] 2 ... 64
General Issues / Questions / Re: Evolution
« on: January 08, 2021, 05:42:36 AM »
Imagine there is a truth out there concerning the origin of mankind,
one party puts aside their feelings and wishes, their personal bias etc and seeks the truth armed only with reason and logic to the best of their ability spending a life time doing so...
isn't such party more likely to find the truth and is more deserving of it, as seekers of truth ?

Another party, religious or not, who has done absolutely nothing in the matter, a seeker of comfort and beliefs (although they don't perceive it!), who is filled with personal biases, somehow this person is more entitled to know the truth ?   :o

God has favored us over the other creatures, this, religious people will not cease chanting, but how so ? this they do not care about.

As far as I know, and as little as I know, humans have advanced to what they are now because of reason
From cave-dwellers, with primitive tools, the discovery of fire, the advancement of tools and the advancement of languages, we have evolved and evolved to who we are now, thoughtful people, with laws protecting us from each other and so on, IT IS A MIRACLE ! Again, one needs to realize what faculty, that God has given us and by which God has favored us from the rest of the animals, and by which we are taken from DARKNESS TO LIGHT. Everything is clear.

In regards to morality, in my opinion, one needs to apply that same faculty which allowed us to understand external subjects, to be applied internally, on our emotions and thoughts, on our intents and motives etc, so that we can improve ourselves in a way that befits us humans (rational beings!) and not animals (anger, impulsiveness, selfishness, territorialism, predatory behaviors, etc), such is the good vs evil struggle that we all endure.

Some quotes, from Charles Darwin:

"As man gradually advanced in intellectual power, and was enabled to trace the more remote consequences of his actions; as he acquired sufficient knowledge to reject baneful customs and superstitions; as he regarded more and more, not only the welfare, but the happiness of his fellow-men; as from habit, following on beneficial experience, instruction and example, his sympathies became more tender and widely diffused, extending to men of all races, to the imbecile, maimed,
and other useless members of society, and finally to the lower animals,—so would the standard of his morality rise higher and higher."

Here is the root of evil which Darwin clearly understood:

"Man with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other men but to the humblest living creature, with his god-like intellect which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the solar system—with all these exalted powers—Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin."

So I owe it to him to read his writings god willingly sometime in the future! If you can't read his writings, atleast check out his quotes.

Simple thought experiment to understand the subject you're talking about, from Emile Coué:

" Suppose that we place on the ground a plank 30 feet long by 1 foot wide. It is evident that everybody will be capable of going from one end to the other of this plank without stepping over the edge. But now change the conditions of the experiment, and imagine this plank placed at the height of the towers of a cathedral. Who then will be capable of advancing even a few feet along this narrow path? Could you hear me speak? Probably not. Before you had taken two steps you would begin to tremble, and in spite of every effort of your will you would be certain to fall to the ground.

Why is it then that you would not fall if the plank is on the ground, and why should you fall if it is raised to a height above the ground? Simply because in the first case you imagine that it is easy to go to the end of this plank, while in the second case you imagine that you cannot do so.

Notice that your will is powerless to make you advance; if you imagine that you cannot, it is absolutely impossible for you to do so. If tilers and carpenters are able to accomplish this feat, it is because they think they can do it."


Questions/Comments on the Quran / Re: The Seven Skies and the Fixed Ground
« on: September 29, 2020, 07:43:06 AM »
Consider the question: What is the shape of the earth ?

Assuming the person who asked the question is honestly looking for the truth, willing to invest all their resource into finding the truth (intellectual, material, time, and energy..)

-The scientific approach: (found in some high school course in khan academy, refered here for simplicity)
Make an observation.
Ask a question.
Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation.
Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.
Test the prediction.
Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions.

-The religionist approach: You have been given the truth by God himself (the unique source of truth) and now all you have to do is trust it/believe in it.

Have you ever asked why humanity never really benefited from religious texts in terms of technological advancement in engineering, biology, medicine, astronomy, mechanics etc ? Even if a group of people think a religious text is saying that the earth is flat or something like that, no one is really benefiting from it. On the contrary, it is simply ignored, and it is rather the people who have dedicated their time and energy in honestly seeking the truth in their subject on interest that end up creating benefit and making technological advancement that all people benefit from.

will you not reason????

General Issues / Questions / Re: Is what I am doing wrong/ haram
« on: September 15, 2020, 04:21:00 AM »
very wrong indeed.

General Issues / Questions / Re: Can God forget?
« on: September 15, 2020, 04:20:03 AM »

Well, why not fully detailed book given to moses, had no mention of desert-dwelling djinns? Let's tell Allah that He forgot to mention something in His previous scriptures (استعذ باللہ).

Reading this I think it's worthless to even try to go further into it.

General Issues / Questions / Re: Can God forget?
« on: September 14, 2020, 07:26:18 AM »
TellMeTheTruth, for the sake of your name, Allah is presented in the quran as the "true god", while other gods of the region are presented as false gods (allat, uza, manat). Another thing is the pre-islamic rituals done to the false gods (or any god for that matter) like animal sacrifice carried over to the god of the quran. But also pre-islamic local beliefs like the invisible desert dwellers (the Jinn) who were not mentioned in the previous abrahamic religions. So you make of that what you will. Also correct me if I'm wrong.

General Issues / Questions / Re: Will of the god or will of the man?
« on: September 14, 2020, 07:13:22 AM »
Ok let me try to simplify all that you're saying, because you're saying a lot and in doing that you're obfuscating your point.

You're making a moral relativist argument, that because there is no universal way of looking at things, therefore the more appropriate attitude is to be accepting and tolerant etc...It comes convenient with your idea that feelings is what matters. Everyone feels different, and everything is ok, and the cherry on top is that "all paths lead to the top" because of the infinite creator.

All of this aside, quickly look outside and watch people complaining about the lockdowns or even the mask-wearing, those people are all about their feelings, and your moral relativist argument doesn't help either. Feelings are selfish by nature and compulsive. Selfless acts are done thoughtuflly with understanding and intent (it could come with pain and discomfort, but it doesnt matter because feelings are blind and shouldnt dictate anything).

General Issues / Questions / Re: Will of the god or will of the man?
« on: September 11, 2020, 05:49:24 AM »
It's wiser not to be 'entrapped' in label or merely believing something just because somebody or some book said so.
The same things happened within an umbrella called / labelled "Religion" not all Religion actually a religion.
Which then beg the fundamental question what is religion?

Seek it yourselves, know the essence / characteristics of things and then you will know and not merely believe.

Because this universe seems to be based on contrast.
On everything there's an opposite contrast.
And it's created as such for a purpose.

Separation <-> Unity
Pride <-> Humility
Fear <-> Courage
Hate <-> Love
Rage <-> Calmness
Harming <-> Healing
Dominating <-> Accommodating
Gaining <-> Sharing
Egocentric <-> Empathy
Judging <-> Understanding
Bigotry <-> Tolerance

Some might be resonated more towards Separation, Pride, Domination, Judging and Bigotry and some might resonated towards the opposite. But that's just the way it is. And everything exist only because the one infinite creator created as such.
In the end all paths will lead to the top, to the one infinite creator.

That's why; seek out your own path, nobody shared the exact same path.
When you're realized that the path that you walked through now is not comfortable for you, then find another path.
Make sure the path that you walked is the path that you're truly resonating with.
At the very least be authentic with yourselves.

Remember that everyone actually have direct connection to the one infinite creator, just ask and you shall receive.
Don't let fear be in the way for you to realize and make use of such privileges.
Whatever path that you walked on, the one infinite creator is always there to guide you all the way.

"The enemy is fear, we think it's hate, but it's fear"
-- Gandhi

"Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, none but yourselves can free your own minds, have no fear for atomic energy, cause none of them can stopped the time".
-- Bob Marley: Redemption Song

I question the validity of all of this. It seems more of a wishful appealing thinking rather than logical and critical thinking. This is also typical to liberal religions such as the Unitarian Universalism church.

Why do all path lead to the top ? And why should they ?
And if so, does it include the path of X religion aswell ? then why complain about X religion ? why criticize at all, since all paths will eventually lead to the top ?

Why do you put "Judgement <> Understanding" as opposite to one another ? Did you know that as a result of understanding one discriminates and judges between what is right and what is wrong ? The question is actually whether that judgement is correct or not, it may very well be based on some kind of understanding. Reason above all allows to discriminate between what is rational and not rational...but in general, an individual uses their judgement to carve their own path. But remember you said all path lead to the top ?

What kind of advice is "seek your own path" ? Would it be wrong if someone, by following your advice, ends up in a path of hate, fear and pride, the things you don't speak so highly of ?

Why do you say and I paraphrase, " if a path is not comfortable for you, then find another path." Is comfort a critical index to the validity of a path ? The devil is in the details.

But in general, liberal beliefs are all about "comfort" and coziness, "nothing wrong with it as long as it doesn't hurt anyone", because the purpose is "happiness" and attainment of pleasure, hence why acceptance and "tolerance", and considering judgement as bad as it discriminates. There is no right or wrong (because they refuse to think critically about the matter, and risk finding themselves in discomfort) but instead, what is right is simply what "feels right", like love, tolerance, acceptance and all that cute stuff. and what is wrong is what brings discomfort, pain, etc. i.e what feels wrong. This is simply limited to the realm of feelings and wishful thinking.
Once you step into the realm of honest critical thinking then you risk putting yourself in discomfort, something you and the religion you criticize hate to do.

General Issues / Questions / Re: There is No Morality without Religion
« on: September 02, 2020, 03:39:41 AM »
if I have my morals and you have yours it doesn't mean there is no morality does it ? you have to be specific. What you mean is that there is no universal morality ? maybe. will see.

Also you are not making any distinction between morality on an individual level or a group level. If it's for an individual, then there is no need for a religion as an authority. The individual can think about what constitutes right or wrong or not think about it, and he could be right or he could be wrong, but it's his authority and his choice.

On a group level, religion works as the authority over the mass, and it serves as a mean to distribute a specific moral guide to a large group of people, and it mostly works; because large group of people are constituted by mostly people who do not think as individuals. The religion can hit right at their base desires and tell them that you will be getting a great REWARD if you do this and that, and you will be receiving a heavy PUNISHMENT for this and that. They don't care about the whys or the logic behind it. They just want to do what they're told to reap the benefit.

Why is reason only good in labs ? Because when you're not biased and you use your reason on an external subject you can reach the truth about that subject. That doesn't make it ineffective in matters outside labs does it ? Personal matters are filled with bias because of the individual's emotional selfish involvement. If in "import matters" such as medicine people have to be very logical and reasoning and without bias in order to be most correct, then why is it in "even more important matters" such as how to live one's life people choose not to be objective and not think rationally about it, and resort to acceptance, wishful thinking etc ? Because of their emotional and selfish involvement etc...what is called satan (personified as some demon whispering)

And by the way, logic is consistent.

At the end....there are philosophies out there (such as stoic philosophy) for individuals who take it upon themselves to think about matters in details, and there are religions out there for large groups to accept and believe in. Both can be a source of morals.

So what you mean to say, and I agree with is: There is no morality on a large scale without an authority such as religion to enforce it.

why not try to learn the logic behind what constitutes "haram" or "halal" and make use of it yourself instead of having to ask everytime is this haram or that halal?

Pages: [1] 2 ... 64