Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 413 KB, 701x338, 99A481C5-3933-4418-8321-85E709B3DB20.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16183055 No.16183055 [Reply] [Original]

What are some universal truths we can take from all religions? How do we form a coherent belief system based on the common traits of extant religions?

>> No.16183063

>>16183055
Why would you wanna do that when Christianity is obviously the correct one?

>> No.16183068

>>16183063
How is that obvious?

>> No.16183076

>>16183055
you shouldn't eat pigs

>> No.16183077
File: 37 KB, 857x701, 6.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16183077

>>16183055
>daaahaha religion bad because there more than one haaaa

>> No.16183081
File: 168 KB, 1228x1842, rite of rebirth.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16183081

>what are converts and people raised in no religion but now have a faith

>> No.16183083

>>16183077
Never said that. I’m not an atheist.

>> No.16183089

>>16183063
>this dude thinks Christianity is the correct one

>> No.16183102

>>16183068
I guess it's possible that something like Gnosticism is correct, but either way, it all goes back to the resurrection of Christ.

>> No.16183112
File: 529 KB, 999x667, healthycustoms.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16183112

>>16183055
>What are some universal truths we can take from all religions? How do we form a coherent belief system based on the common traits of extant religions?
Men controlling women.

>> No.16183125

>>16183112
fucking based

>> No.16183156

>>16183055
We can't. All religions are based on an agricultural understanding of the world, and we are so far removed from the agricultural process and the mystery of life that old religions are no longer as meaningful.
The concept of death and rebirth are being lost to us, and while we have the idea of resurrection in the popular mind it lacks any meaning other than existential horror (zombies). A coherent belief system would be one that gives self-esteem by virtue of pro-social acts. But those pro-social acts would have to be universal, this inevitably clashes with other ideologies and makes for seemingly contradictory belief systems.
Honestly, the idea of a personal god and self improvement is the best way to go.

>> No.16183163

>>16183156
>Honestly, the idea of a personal god and self improvement is the best way to go
agreed, but i want to have the community aspect of larger religion as well

>> No.16183165

>>16183055
That religion is a necessary emergent property of reasoning creatures, required to make logical sense of their capacity to reason having emerged in the first place; basically the theory of forms is inevitable, and because the Christians ran most with Neoplatonic thought, they're probably in possession of the most correct one.

>> No.16183254

>>16183163
Then join one that suits your fancy. Most bible-churches are cucked and will be universalist. I attended one where they had an atheist get up and talk about the importance of god as a cultural entity.

>> No.16183271

>>16183055
asceticism is ethics is aesthetics

>> No.16183301

>>16183254
lol, how far christianity has fallen

>> No.16183444

>>16183089
how is it not?

>> No.16183448

>>16183444
Why do you think it is?

>> No.16183458

>>16183063
>literally a drone like in OP's image
sad

>> No.16183485

>>16183156
Coward. You do not need to cling to a personal god like a safety blanket. Face reality and shape it as far as you can for yourself and those you love

>> No.16183512

>>16183165
Except it does not make logical sense. All arguments for god are circular and exist for the sole purpose are to escape the fear of death through the belief in immortality. You will die, and your brain, the thing we know produces who you are, will rot away and be gone forever. Religion is pure cope for this unpleasant fact, and therefore on a fundamentally level can never be "correct" because it's function is to escape truth, not find it.

>> No.16183519

>>16183485
I never said I did. I don't, and neither do you. But that vast majority of people lack that amount of agency. I'm not going to deny someone belief in an existential fire extinguisher if it helps them to better function in society.

>> No.16183553

>>16183055
That is only accurate for jews and maybe hindus. Buddhism, Chrsitianity and Islam are all followed by converts to a much higher degree than in their "homeland".

>> No.16183554

>>16183512
sentimentalism, the post. now try thinking a little bit on the truths written for dozens of millenia. you have no idea what religion is and has no metaphysical intuition, as you said your brain is probably already rotten.

>> No.16183561

>>16183055
Judaism and Hinduism are ethnic religions and do not belief their truth is the truth for all mankind,.

>> No.16183578

>>16183554
>it was written a long time ago, it must be true!
Other way around there, friend, the people writing that long ago had no idea how the universe actually functions, and to be fair, we know very little today, but the concept of "metaphysics" is just a fantasy land for people to inject their wishes and hopes. It's genuinely embarrassing

>> No.16183599

>>16183519
I would not take away such a belief from someone, but I can acknowledge the utility it possesses for some people and still find them cowardly. Refusing to face reality in favor of a comforting illusion is perhaps the most pathetic form of existence of man

>> No.16183619

>>16183599
Unfortunately this is how societies normies will always operate. They need some sort of cope to keep going because if they look past the illusion they either cant or they break and lose their minds

>> No.16183634

>>16183578
If you have any ethical beliefs, it should follow that any metaphysical understanding of the world you have (which would extend to the sciences) is informed by what you believe to be your intrinsic ethos (since without metaphysics preceding ethics, that's the only reasonable ontology). Where does that ethos originate, anon?

>> No.16183647

What can I read to know more about the 'God-sized holes' in atheist's? I keep hearing more and more about humans naturally creating 'religions' when there aren't any present or they rejected old ones (examples like the current blm stuff and millennial's obsession with 'science') .

>> No.16183654

>>16183112
Ya I’m thinking based

>> No.16183657
File: 580 KB, 500x500, 58091151-A77B-4F75-B065-49E97777DB33.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16183657

>>16183063
>cryptojewish personal “God”
>the right one

>> No.16183663

>>16183112
>incoming call

>> No.16183702

>>16183578
didn't mean that because something was written a long time ago it was true, you're too dumb to even understand a simple statement that old people also had a profound consciousness of the state of existence here and that there has been a lot of works produced which you have never opened a single one of them, obviously.

> the people writing that long ago had no idea how the universe actually functions
yeah they managed to mantain civilizations for millenia because they were totally clueless about anything, they formed everything modernity is destroying because of chance and who knows what else. yeah of course a retard like you would believe in intellectual progress.

>concept of "metaphysics" is just a fantasy
there is simply no way to make sense of anything without metaphysical inquiry, the very logic (and this is what is most intriguing, someone like you making sense of basic logic - even though truly by instinct like an animal) you employ to construct statements based on linguistic categories, the conditionings of existence - condition itself - time, space, state of pre- and post- death you yourself speaks. you are all the time making metaphysical assumptions without even knowing. that is how much of a dumbfuck you are.

>> No.16183729
File: 40 KB, 433x433, 1597779266434.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16183729

>>16183599
>I would not take away such a belief from someone, but I can acknowledge the utility it possesses for some people and still find them cowardly. Refusing to face reality in favor of a comforting illusion is perhaps the most pathetic form of existence of man

>> No.16183739

>>16183634
I would not count personal, subjective experience as "metaphysics", but through personal experience you gain the awareness that there are desirable things and undesirable things and that this exists intrinsically in how your body structure is made up. It follows de facto that you should pursue a maximization of desirable experiences and a minimization of undesirable experiences using logical foresight in service of this aim. Another aspect of reality is the idea of synergy, or the whole being greater than the sum of it's parts, therefore social dynamics come into play and you get rules of thumb like individual rights within a framework of a functioning society. I don't see metaphysics entering into it at all

>> No.16183776

>>16183702
>yeah they managed to mantain civilizations for millenia because they were totally clueless about anything
Ah yes, the Mayan human sacrifice ritual to make sure the sun kept coming up existed because they weren't clueless. The burning of young women for witchcraft was because those people weren't clueless.

Look through history and you find most societies WERE absolutely clueless.

Concepts which aid in the application of logic and constructing models of reality are not the same thing as "metaphysics".

>> No.16183803

>>16183776
>The burning of young women for witchcraft was because those people weren't clueless.
They were not, they were based

>> No.16183811

>>16183739
Kek, it doesn't matter if you would "count it" as metaphysics, what you just described is metaphysics, and you're already starting to arrive at the theory of forms yourself. How can two people agree on what is the maximization of pleasure, an abstract concept? If candy pleases me, and music pleases you, we can both speak of pleasure while only having experienced candy and music respectively, no? This even lines up with biological reality, if you're insistent on scientific validation, that we partake in the same chemical, namely dopamine, when we have partaken in these things. But you literally require metaphysics to observe these things, calling it something besides metaphysics means you in turn require whatever you decide to call it, but we would both be speaking of metaphysics as a "form." The only difference would be that we no longer understand one another unless we go through, as we just have, hundreds of words of explanation because you were too lazy to pick up Plato before speaking of philosophy. Do you see the futility of this? Read Alcibiades!

>> No.16183821

>>16183776
Stop embarrassing yourself cuh

>> No.16183857

>>16183821
Ok refute it then, you can't? That's because you're a sad little virgin

>> No.16183870

>>16183063
Read Alfred Reynold's "Jesus vs Christianity".

>> No.16183883

>>16183857
>>16183811
learn to read cuh

>> No.16183903

>>16183857
It's so obviously wrong that no rational person would require refutation for it, but here I will proceed to reason with you anyways that you do not seem to be in possession of much of a clue yourself, seeing as you deny the role of metaphysics while simultaneously forming an argument whose foundation is that very thing. Therefore, it would seem obvious to me that because you must have gotten these ideas (perhaps their wording or some other thing), somewhere (by experience or otherwise), our societies haven't much more a clue than they did in the distant past. Or would you argue that your opinion on these things that you've stated are not held by a large swathe of our society? And if indeed we may call it ignorance, which I suspect we may, that a large portion of our society is not ignorant? Clueless, as you put it?

>> No.16183913

>>16183883
Have sex
I doubt that anyone who fails to build any type of meaningful human connection is really concerned about religions and the belief each human being follows, since he can't go out of his basement

>> No.16183914

>>16183776
>civilizations that lasted for millenia
>MAYAN
you are really retarded lmao

>> No.16183977

>>16183903
>>16183913
you've been refuted by this nigga so many times its not even funny. When you make assertions about first principles of the word you presuppose categorical schemes. There I dumbed it down for you. Even Hume's Fork is a metaphysical statement, Reddit Materialism is metaphysical. Claiming society "progresses" presupposes a categorical/causal/qualitative scheme that does not reduce to impact mechanics alone. Just because you lack higher cognitive function does not make metaphysics illegitimate.

>> No.16184094

>>16183903
So you still don't understand metaphysics huh? Since you won't read Plato I'd suggest Aleister Crowley.

>> No.16184110

>>16183977
The person insulting you is not the same as the person who took issue with metaphysics. I still disagree with equating the building of models which produce reliable outcomes with metaphysics. Metaphysics by their very name imply they are outside of physical reality. You absolutely do not need to appeal to that to build functioning internal models of realty which exist solely within the confines of physical reality. Also, Platonic "forms" are retarded, every person's concept of a chair is based on chairs they've seen before combined with the imagination of what might make for a more serviceable chair. It doesn't mean that the "form" of an optimal chair exists outside of human conception

>> No.16184154
File: 124 KB, 1356x257, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16184154

>>16183914
The Mayan civilization broadly existed for 3 millennia

>> No.16184169

Heaven is sky.

>> No.16184266

>>16183063
Bait

>> No.16184292

>>16183055
Yeah, but unironically

>> No.16184346

>>16183055
a.) value your community
and
b.) don't be a dick to anyone within it

>> No.16184404

Anthropocentrism, the importance of morality, hereditary traditions, the sky, the sun, and of course the existence of ghosts and dragons.

>> No.16184420

>>16184094
Huh? Do you really hold me in such low esteem that you think I'd make a semantic argument about metaphysics without at least having read one of the very first philosophers? Rude. Anyways, do the esoterics really have much to offer in the platonic tradition of metaphysical inquiry that isn't made irrelevant by later thinkers like Descartes and Kant?

>> No.16184434

>>16183554
>now try thinking a little bit on the truths written for dozens of millenia
are magic, astrology, and geocentrism true now?

>> No.16184454

>>16184154
>dissolved
yes, not continuous, what i meant by civilizations are the ones like egyptian, chinese, indian that lasted millenia (more than 3 thousand years btw) continually

>> No.16184503

>>16184434
>magic
yes, magic is real and has been present since the emergence of human beings, you just have never read anything on the subject.

>astrology
considered to be the a single subject with astronomy

>geocentrism
cosmologically, yes.

>> No.16184529

>>16184503
>>>/x/

>> No.16184592

>>16183055
Wow people disagree, great observation, guess we should become gaythiests and worship Microsoft

>> No.16184609

>>16184592
fuck off retard

>> No.16184614

Wow some people agree, great observation, guess we better become christards and worship dragons

>> No.16184618

>>16184529
you are on a literature board, read a book before talking about things you have no knowledge

>> No.16184665

>>16184618
I don't have to read a kid's fanfiction in order to know that it's fake.
>you are on a literature board
/lit/ is also the defacto philosophy board. If your epistemology boils down to "people believed this for a long time so it must be true!" then you shouldn't come back until you have read at least one book with any philosophical merit.

>> No.16184667

>>16183055
Afaik Hindus and Buddhists don't believe they hold a monopoly on truth like the Abrahamic autists do.

>> No.16184703

>>16184110
>You absolutely do not need to appeal to that to build functioning internal models of realty which exist solely within the confines of physical reality
The thing is that you have no idea what metaphysics is for metaphysics is not ''functioning internal models built'' of reality but the very conditions of reality. Metaphysical inquiry is not a construction of reality but groping its ''structure''. As you also said, ''confines of physical'' implies conditioning, totailty, wholeness, etc. which are predicated on physical reality.
And do you say that metaphysics does not exist inasmuch as you know it, or inasmuch as you don’t know?

>> No.16184713

>>16183063
you would think /lit/ wouldnt fall for such cheap bait

>> No.16184758

>>16184665
>"people believed this for a long time so it must be true!"
you are half illiterate, you can't even interpret correctly what a statement conveys. there have been countless writings on magic and how it functions. you are ignorant, you know you are ignorant and you refuse to correct your ignorance. discussion with someone like this is not possible.

>> No.16184765

>>16184758
>discussion with someone like this is not possible
and yet you pursue it anyways, because you believe in magic, kek

>> No.16184874

>>16184758
My waifu is real and magic is not. Until you have read my treatise on this theory you are ignorant and may not judge my claim to be false.

>> No.16185384

>>16183055
2nd one is right (:

>> No.16185402
File: 2.20 MB, 600x600, 1589036709884.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16185402

>>16184503

>> No.16185474

>>16183448
Not anon but: cuz it says it is.

And like that, I win the argument. *sunglasses*

>> No.16185568

>>16183102
>Dude, jesus totaly was resurrected, but like only for 40 days and no one except his followers ever saw him
Literaly the most brainlet religion of them all, easily worse than even Islam

>> No.16185682

>>16183112
laughed

>> No.16185704

>>16183647
Read Moldbug and the Cathedral, not all of it is directly relevant but he search for the things he writes on a-religion/a-god religion where you have religion without God.

>> No.16185709

>>16183063
Based

>> No.16185914

>>16183063
this but unironically

>> No.16185954

>>16183076
There isn't a convincing argument not to eat food of porcine origin. Most mammalian meat is very good in terms of lipid profile, fat ratio and protein.

Poultry is the least sanitary, indeed the least nutritious, and yet no religion singles out the foul fowl.

>> No.16185977

>>16183063
Based

>> No.16185978

>>16183647
Unironically, read The Selfish Gene, by Dawkins. It's where he comes up with Memes. In short, humans need certain things to have a coherent worldview, and when lacking them they'll make them up. These things, totaled together, are a religion.

Most of the time however this is just cope by Christfags who think Liberals are atheists (they aren't, they still reify creationism and the existence of a Creator).

>> No.16185996

>>16183055
you cannot have the benefits of a cohesive moral and ontological framework without also accepting the rigor and responsibility that comes with adhering to it

repent and believe in the gospel of our Lord, Jesus Christ

>> No.16186030

>>16183301
The depths of her debasement are unfathomable. The plague of modernity spares nothing.

>> No.16186053

>>16183165
the capacity to reason is not emergent, it is a divine gift

>> No.16186085

>>16186053
Can you explain the contradiction? Because I don't disagree.

>> No.16186092

>>16185978
you don't belong to this board and much less to this thread, friend. you're talking about religion when you know nothing about it besides what an atheist who also doesnt know what religion is wrote? is this where your knowledge on religion come from?

>> No.16186101

>>16185568
Well, yeah. Once the resurrected Christ appeared to someone, they became a follower of Jesus. That's exactly what happened to Paul.

>> No.16186114
File: 135 KB, 450x337, 1911223-bigthumbnail.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16186114

>>16183055
Drugs are degenerate. The solution to weak men and women is to force them to face their problems and grow stronger, not give them a physical addiction to use as a crutch. Decriminalizing actions that are criminal is not a sign of progress. It is a sign of a society that is too weak to defend it's principles. Sale of liquor and intoxicating drinks, tobacco and drugs must be prohibited completely.

>> No.16186127

>>16186114
There's nothing wrong with smoking tobacco. It is the same as having a cup of coffee.

>> No.16186147
File: 62 KB, 980x552, 152552333.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
16186147

>>16186127
Yeah, sure.

>> No.16186149

>>16186053
why can't those both be the same thing?

>> No.16186155

>>16183055
God is unconditionally loving and accepting
Everything in this world is God, including you
Because of this your soul, your real self, is eternal and your true nature is that of God's essence.
Because of this your natural state is to be unconditionally loving, accepting, and at peace (the Kingdom of Heaven is wiithin)

>> No.16186181

>>16183165
Christians perverted Neoplatonic thought.

>> No.16186386

>>16186085
>>16186149
Would you call the muscles of the arm emergent?
No, they are a component of the man.

You may call the things born of reason emergent, things that tend toward the divine ideal of order such as social hierarchy or architecture, because they are brought about in combination with the exercise of will.
Reason absent of will is internal.

>> No.16186447

>>16186181
like platonists perverted egyptian theology?

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action