Religion One of the all-time great bakes

[Sloth]

Matt Dillahunty totally dismantles a Christian caller with reason and logic, leaving him speechless. Impresive stuff. Scroll to about two thirds in, caller Mark.

http://www.atheist-experience.com/archive/AtheistExp-2011-02-13.mp3

Love Jeff Dee's input too

 

[Hawkamania!]

That is nothing compared to this great bake.

 

[Partridge]

Matt Dillahunty totally dismantles a Christian caller with reason and logic, leaving him speechless. Impresive stuff. Scroll to about two thirds in, caller Mark.

http://www.atheist-experience.com/archive/AtheistExp-2011-02-13.mp3

Love Jeff Dee's input too

Religious people often get stuck when confronted with reason and logic. If humanity had only developed those concepts a little earlier there wouldn't be religion.

 

[Jess Moondragon]

It is fine to venerate reason and logic if you wish to remain a mental pygmy, however if one wishes to cultivate a serious ontology a more effective method is obviously required.

The idea that logic is the highest form of mental aptitude is perhaps the most alarming symptom of our laughable condition as a species.

 

[rayven]

What would that method be? would it include reason and logic or would it ignore them?

 

[Hawkamania!]

What would that method be? would it include reason and logic or would it ignore them?

Add imagination, common sense, learning from history, learning from your mistakes and not having stubborn opinions that can hold you back. Otherwise, one's knowledge may end up being half-baked.

 

[crackers_58]

There is nothing more arrogant than an atheiest.

 

[Checkers_Nixon]

There is nothing more arrogant than an atheiest.

Yes, militant atheism has detroyed the United Kingdom, and if left unchecked will be the downfall of Australia.

Atheist = Valueless

 

[Jess Moondragon]

What would that method be? would it include reason and logic or would it ignore them?

I will gladly answer your question to the best of my ability. The method I am speaking of has nothing to do with reason or logic. It involves an integration of the subconscious mind with the conscious mind. Reason does not utilise the subconscious, and the subconscious is our greatest resource in terms of knowledge. In our subconscious we find the key to religion and existence.

Shamanic traditions of the Americas use things like peyote as a means of uniting their conscious and subconscious minds.

Yogic traditions of the east use meditation for the same purpose.

The knowledge obtained by such means is called intuitive knowledge. Once again I would like to state that reason is not a suitable means of obtaining religious or existential knowledge, this is simply a fact not a criticism.

 

[Chief]

"Religious knowledge"? What would an example of this be?

 

[Chief]

Matt Dillahunty totally dismantles a Christian caller with reason and logic, leaving him speechless. Impresive stuff. Scroll to about two thirds in, caller Mark.

http://www.atheist-experience.com/archive/AtheistExp-2011-02-13.mp3

Love Jeff Dee's input too

To be fair, he didn't have much of an opposition

 

[Jess Moondragon]

"Religious knowledge"? What would an example of this be?

The Tibetans have a wonderful knowledge of the process that occurs after the discarnation of the physical vehicle.

 

[Pie eyed]

It is fine to venerate reason and logic if you wish to remain a mental pygmy, however if one wishes to cultivate a serious ontology a more effective method is obviously required.

The idea that logic is the highest form of mental aptitude is perhaps the most alarming symptom of our laughable condition as a species.

The logical response in the absence of any other possible answer.
Nonsense.

 

[Fire]

The Tibetans have a wonderful knowledge of the process that occurs after the discarnation of the physical vehicle.

Your experiences all stem from the physical vehicle.

You need a brain to have a mind to explore your spirituality.

Or would you argue this point?

I think you are being unnecessarily condescending in expressing your views.

 

[rayven]

I will gladly answer your question to the best of my ability. The method I am speaking of has nothing to do with reason or logic. It involves an integration of the subconscious mind with the conscious mind. Reason does not utilise the subconscious, and the subconscious is our greatest resource in terms of knowledge. In our subconscious we find the key to religion and existence.

Shamanic traditions of the Americas use things like peyote as a means of uniting their conscious and subconscious minds.

Yogic traditions of the east use meditation for the same purpose.

The knowledge obtained by such means is called intuitive knowledge. Once again I would like to state that reason is not a suitable means of obtaining religious or existential knowledge, this is simply a fact not a criticism.

simply put would be remove emotion and culture from the tools you posses to seek knowlage?

 

[Jess Moondragon]

Your experiences all stem from the physical vehicle.

You need a brain to have a mind to explore your spirituality.

Or would you argue this point?

I think you are being unnecessarily condescending in expressing your views.

Yes I would argue that the mind is something quite separate from the human brain.

 

[volcboy]

In my experience, fundamentalists are invariably boring, unimaginative and have rigid thought patterns that do not allow new information to modify previous collections of ideas and thought patterns. And that includes atheists.

 

[Fire]

Yes I would argue that the mind is something quite separate from the human brain.

So would I.

That doesnt address a single thing that I was asking. Do you need a brain for a mind to exist?

 

[Sloth]

There is nothing more arrogant than an atheiest.

I'd rather be arrogant than wrong.

 

[Sloth]

Atheist = Valueless

Theist = Clueless

 

[Jess Moondragon]

So would I.

That doesnt address a single thing that I was asking. Do you need a brain for a mind to exist?

The mind needs a brain to act as its vehicle in the physical world. Beyond that, in regards to what I was saying about the Tibetans, the mind does not need a physical vehicle in non-physical (or tri-dimensional) surrounds. This is basic esotericism, you are free to disagree, obviously.

 

[J_Moore]

Yes I would argue that the mind is something quite separate from the human brain.

I wouldn't. We're shit and dirt.

 

[Pie eyed]

I wouldn't. We're shit and dirt.

Atoms actually but shit and dirt will do.

 

[Pie eyed]

In my experience, fundamentalists are invariably boring, unimaginative and have rigid thought patterns that do not allow new information to modify previous collections of ideas and thought patterns. And that includes atheists.

Really that includes anyone with a rigid belief system, an inability to critically analyse new information and penchant for the status quo over confronting reality. It could apply to anyone.

The mind needs a brain to act as its vehicle in the physical world. Beyond that, in regards to what I was saying about the Tibetans, the mind does not need a physical vehicle in non-physical (or tri-dimensional) surrounds. This is basic esotericism, you are free to disagree, obviously.

The mind is certainly a product of the brain possibly even able to survive it. This does not mean it is anything but a purely evolutionary phenomena.
You and I both inhabit a very physical, tri-dimensional universe in fact we know no other so I find it hard to get overly excited about Tibetan religious claims as they are obviously being misrepresented here or are simply wrong. Let's take the mind out of the known 3 dimensional universe and discuss the possibilities then perhaps.

 

[J_Moore]

Atoms actually but shit and dirt will do.

can it science boy.

the body is made up of 4 humours.