Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

In reply to the discussion: Food for Thought [View all]

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
28. IMHO, they are highly personal and individualized.
Sat Jan 14, 2012, 05:17 PM
Jan 2012

For every person who has developed a philosophy or holds religious beliefs, you are likely to get a very different answer.

Unless, of course, that person is a fundamentalist who only incorporates what they are told and has been instructed not to question.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Food for Thought [View all] UnrepentantLiberal Jan 2012 OP
If all the achievements of science were wiped out rrneck Jan 2012 #1
And the greatest chance we have to overcome those threats, and many more not attributable darkstar3 Jan 2012 #27
Is it? Or do we need more humanity, social justice, compassion and empathy? cbayer Jan 2012 #29
I don't think your items and mine are mutually exclusive. darkstar3 Jan 2012 #36
I don't think they are mutually exclusive either. cbayer Jan 2012 #42
I don't think more of what got us into this mess rrneck Jan 2012 #31
That's because you misattribute the responsibility for "this mess". darkstar3 Jan 2012 #34
Who is responsible? nt rrneck Jan 2012 #46
And we will still have had mass murder, smallpox outbreaks, most children dying before the age of 3. Humanist_Activist Jan 2012 #40
We have all those benefits rrneck Jan 2012 #45
Its what you do with those resources that count... Humanist_Activist Jan 2012 #51
I find your optimism appealing rrneck Jan 2012 #59
Correction, current technology(most of it) runs on fossil fuels... Humanist_Activist Jan 2012 #61
It's still the same problem. rrneck Jan 2012 #62
There is a reason he is a cosmologist and not a philospher. cbayer Jan 2012 #2
He was a good prophet though. nt rrneck Jan 2012 #3
I thought he was still alive. cbayer Jan 2012 #4
Nope. Died 12.20.96. An interesting fellah. nt rrneck Jan 2012 #5
You're thinking Sagan. SwissTony Jan 2012 #7
Ha! So i am! More coffee for me. nt rrneck Jan 2012 #8
He is. Carl Sagan and my brain are not. :) nt rrneck Jan 2012 #11
Dawkins is a cosmologist??? nt. SwissTony Jan 2012 #6
Like rrneck, I was also confused. Thought this was a Stephen Hawking quote. More coffee!! cbayer Jan 2012 #9
Um, he is FAR FROM a cosmolgist: MarkCharles Jan 2012 #12
Yes, I know. I had him confused (see above) cbayer Jan 2012 #13
And how would a philosopher regard the history of religion's contribution MarkCharles Jan 2012 #14
Guess that would depend on the philosopher. cbayer Jan 2012 #15
You condemned Dawkins for NOT being a "philosopher".. interesting... MarkCharles Jan 2012 #17
As I mentioned, I had confused him with someone else (see above.... again) cbayer Jan 2012 #18
So what, precisely does "philosophy" offer that "science"... MarkCharles Jan 2012 #19
Philosophy and religion answer some questions that science can not or has not cbayer Jan 2012 #20
Ah yes, how can one question Christmas? MarkCharles Jan 2012 #21
Why do you care what people do in the privacy of their own homes or organizations. cbayer Jan 2012 #22
"Why not join forces to fight common foes?" So who decides which are.. MarkCharles Jan 2012 #23
Well here on DU, it's pretty clear who the common foes are. cbayer Jan 2012 #24
I could ask the same question of religious believers. What... MarkCharles Jan 2012 #30
Mr. Charles, you have called me uneducated, immature, delusional, illogical and many other things. cbayer Jan 2012 #32
I have never called ANY PERSON on ANY forum those words... MarkCharles Jan 2012 #43
Oh, I forgot to add paranoid. We are done here. cbayer Jan 2012 #49
Not one of those accused YOU, but typical religious thought processes MarkCharles Jan 2012 #50
Now as to your rights to accuse Mr Dawkins of stating "baloney"... MarkCharles Jan 2012 #44
Is that really your purpose? Sal316 Jan 2012 #33
Your defensiveness is noted, as is your disdain for anyone MarkCharles Jan 2012 #35
And being a theologian makes you an "expert" in what? darkstar3 Jan 2012 #38
Uhhh...theology. Sal316 Jan 2012 #47
They weren't "scare quotes". They were "laugh quotes". darkstar3 Jan 2012 #48
Post removed Post removed Jan 2012 #58
Just like learning Klingon makes you and expert in... uhhh.... Klingon AlbertCat Jan 2012 #55
And what answers are those? darkstar3 Jan 2012 #25
IMHO, they are highly personal and individualized. cbayer Jan 2012 #28
So how are they "answers"? darkstar3 Jan 2012 #37
I'm not sure I understand the distinction. cbayer Jan 2012 #39
Yes. darkstar3 Jan 2012 #41
they are highly personal and individualized. AlbertCat Jan 2012 #56
Agree on all points. But they are not mutually exclusive. cbayer Jan 2012 #57
Philosophy and religion answer some questions ... for many people. AlbertCat Jan 2012 #53
There is a reason he is a cosmologist and not a philospher. AlbertCat Jan 2012 #52
The concept of a scientist probably did not exist until LARED Jan 2012 #10
You are quite right about the world "scientist" MarkCharles Jan 2012 #16
And? darkstar3 Jan 2012 #26
The ancient Greeks were well on the way.... AlbertCat Jan 2012 #54
So, we would be like China? (nt) The Straight Story Jan 2012 #60
His problem is he is casting science and scientists almost as a species separate from humanity. rug Jan 2012 #63
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Food for Thought»Reply #28