What Religion Do You Practice/Not Practice and Why?

[Noon]

I've been there in thought, and I moved on.

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't want to understand feelings that don't serve me well.

I have no fears of someone permanently robbing me of my joy because I've always found the exit door and escaped. What can man do to me?

In order for me to thrive in an environment, there must be respect. I can dislike the way people treat me and treat themselves even and still survive, but if people abuse me or themselves to a point where I can no longer filter out the abuse, then I prefer to remove myself from them.

Thanks for all your input

I know the importance of a clear mind - that high-stress thinking tends to sink into self-preservation mode, and when I'm there, I can't think beyond bare essentials. Kind of like bandwidth poverty with a different cause. Even in the case of a non faith-based religion I think the carrying principle has to be trust; trust in a deity, or trust in a grand design, or trust in the good in the world and your basic safety within it. I'm trying to salvage my trust in the form of the latter here - the shaken trust in this case is events-based, but I'm considering it might also be merging with that bare essentials self-preservation mode - and while doing so also reassure myself I don't need to sacrifice my ideals either to "survive" or to feel better about it should I momentarily not.

 

[Mane]

I don't understand how people can be intentionally cruel, or go out of their way to be so, or how good intentions can be used against you

From their perspective, they usually aren't. People justify themselves & view their choices and actions as extensions of the reasons that motivated them in the first place. When these cause harm from the perspective of others, it's usually not because the intention was the harm itself, but because they were not willing to think of their actions from the perspective of another, either not seeking it, blocking it or disregarding it. Even with the most extreme cases, when harm is part of what they are getting from it, it still gets overlapped in judgement. The most sadistic of behaviors is usually framed in terms of "Just having fun" or "They've disrespected me" or "They deserve it".

To be a decent person to others can only gain it's meaning from the perspective of others, and that is not an attribute but an action - to actively engage in empathy & sympathy, to willingly invite & seek out the perspectives of others, a thoughtful understanding of what your actions and behaviors mean not not only to you but to everyone they impact, and to disarming yourself from all the internal forces that might stand in the way - anger, ego & self righteousness. You can't inherently "be it", because it is not something you are, it is something you do.

 

[Nicodemus]

These are not mutually exclusive, and to some degree may even overlap. Just different perspectives on the same thing.

Hope and optimism, from a factual point of view, often being healthy but false impressions of what is to be expected.

 

[Chrysanthea]

I had always been raised a Christian since birth... but even when I considered myself one I never felt in any way connected to its teachings. It may have been somewhere around the age of eight where I had asked myself "Why?", and I couldn't answer it. From then on I had nothing but doubt for my religion, yet was afraid to move away from it for some reason... maybe it was the possibility of Hell, or backlash from my parents... but even though deep inside I felt I wasn't a Christian I felt it necessary to hold onto it. It was around Middle School where I finally accepted my beliefs and pronounced myself as an Agnostic, where I really stand today. I however believe that some Religions/Philosophies have some truth to them... most notably Buddhism. It's philosophy on life about how one should accept that living means suffering as well, and that to "release" oneself from such suffering one should follow the "Middle Way" just clicks with my way of thinking. I truly believe this is the best path for me because I was most happiest during my Freshman year of highschool... the only time in my life where I actively practiced the ideals of Buddhism.

 

[Betty Blue]

I'm an atheist. Because although I am agnostic to the existence of God (Agnosticism is not a word that means "unknowing to the existence of God", it just means lack of knowledge, I'm an Agnostic Atheist, as most Atheists are), I do not see any evidence or rationale that bolsters the veracity of such a claim to anything more than a myth.

I'm pretty much agnostic, i find the gnostics & the mystics schools of thought quite romantic in some senses... i believe in something but i'm not sure it can be explained in any organised religion. What i believe in is probably more closely aligned to string theory ...possibly more abstract.

 

[Coriolis]

I'm pretty much agnostic, i find the gnostics & the mystics schools of thought quite romantic in some senses... i believe in something but i'm not sure it can be explained in any organised religion. What i believe in is probably more closely aligned to string theory ...possibly more abstract.

I was at this point at one time. The only way through it for me was to ignore all established religion, and look in my own thoughts to figure out what it was I actually did believe. Once I started to work this out, more and more pieces of the puzzle fell into place, helping me form the spirituality I have today (which still doesn't fall under an organized religion).

 

[Obsidius]

I'm pretty much agnostic, i find the gnostics & the mystics schools of thought quite romantic in some senses... i believe in something but i'm not sure it can be explained in any organised religion. What i believe in is probably more closely aligned to string theory ...possibly more abstract.

Ah yes, I've heard this kind of belief before, a belief in some underlying link between all things, something beyond our explanatory faculties. I think it holds much more water than a the idea of a God does, but it's indeed very interesting.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

From their perspective, they usually aren't. People justify themselves & view their choices and actions as extensions of the reasons that motivated them in the first place. When these cause harm from the perspective of others, it's usually not because the intention was the harm itself, but because they were not willing to think of their actions from the perspective of another, either not seeking it, blocking it or disregarding it. Even with the most extreme cases, when harm is part of what they are getting from it, it still gets overlapped in judgement. The most sadistic of behaviors is usually framed in terms of "Just having fun" or "They've disrespected me" or "They deserve it".

To be a decent person to others can only gain it's meaning from the perspective of others, and that is not an attribute but an action - to actively engage in empathy & sympathy, to willingly invite & seek out the perspectives of others, a thoughtful understanding of what your actions and behaviors mean not not only to you but to everyone they impact, and to disarming yourself from all the internal forces that might stand in the way - anger, ego & self righteousness. You can't inherently "be it", because it is not something you are, it is something you do.

This is a wise approach to morality without religion. I'd be willing to bet that it comes from being stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Notice, also, in the poll above how there is little correlation between religious belief and political attitudes. Some of our most conservative members are unbelievers.

 

[Olm the Water King]

Well, if we look at the definitions the way they're generally used, I guess I could call myself an agnostic.

I could also call myself a 6 on the Dawkins scale.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Well, if we look at the definitions the way they're generally used, I guess I could call myself an agnostic.

I could also call myself a 6 on the Dawkins scale.

I am a 6, also. I live as though God doesn't exist.

 

[Luke O]

Well, if we look at the definitions the way they're generally used, I guess I could call myself an agnostic.

I could also call myself a 6 on the Dawkins scale.

I'm a definite atheist, where am I on the scale?

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I'm a definite atheist, where am I on the scale?

• 1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
• 2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
• 3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
• 4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
• 5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
• 6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
• 7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."
  

 

[Luke O]

• 1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
• 2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
• 3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
• 4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
• 5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
• 6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
• 7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."
  

That's sorted then

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

That's sorted then

Which one are you, though?

 

[Luke O]

Which one are you, though?

Eight.

 

[Chrysanthea]

I would be impartial but according to those descriptions I believe there is a 50% chance of either, but I just abstain from believing either.

 

[á´…eparted]

I'd be 6 who wants to be 7. I blame this partly on my education which has the statement of "no peak is no information", referring to spectra interpretation.

 

[Coriolis]

I'd be 6 who wants to be 7. I blame this partly on my education which has the statement of "no peak is no information", referring to spectra interpretation.

But too many peaks is just noise.

 

[sprinkles]

just noise.

Remember telephone modems?

 

[Coriolis]

Remember telephone modems?

Vaguely. I don't remember having much trouble with the one I used briefly.