Thus, fixing the attention on the judgments to substantiate the validity of the provisions put forward sufficient grounds the law helps to separate the true from the false and come to a correct conclusion. Logic: Textbook for law schools
Even though I would agree that most religions are incorrect, that's not a very helpful stance to take. In reality, we have to deal with different beliefs, and the interaction thereof. With some notable exceptions, the actual beliefs are of secondary importance next to getting people to get along. Telling people that their religion is a lie usually doesn't accomplish anything. However, it is likely to hurt the relations and agreements between the people involved.
The law, in many parts of the country, prohibits anyone from selling a haunted house without full disclosure to perspective buyers. Meaning the law acknowledges the existence of the paranormal.
People should have to explain the atheistic point of view, so that they understand the need for the development of science. That was not as in Russia, discrimination against atheists. We need to develop genetic engineering.
Logic law of enough base helps to separate true judgment from false there is no sufficient reason for religion
You say you want logic while we're being given magic. Abiogenesis - living organisms can arise spontaneously from inanimate matter; spontaneous generation. ... the theory that the earliest life forms on earth developed from nonliving matter. Does that sound logical or magical to you? All the planets are aligned, got some unknown chemicals-fairy dust no doubt, before fairy dust was outlawed, and poof - life. Sounds magical and very fanciful to me. And yet it must be true because a scientist said so and they've never been wrong before.............oh wait, that's not any where near to the truth. Flat earth, coming Ice Age, no more polar ice caps etc. Those theories where based on what? Logic? And then with abiogenesis, they took their logic and turned it into a fanciful magical fairy tale, but it's OK because it's science.
Abiogenesis is possibility in theory and Experimentation/Observation verify said possibility. Creation of life by an unseen entity has nothing to be experimented with and cannot be so much as contemplated in a scientific way.
Consider the planets and the dirt beneath your feet. Where did they come from? Do you think they existed before the Sun? And where did the Sun come from? It was formed when celestial hydrogen atoms clumped together and went nuclear. There isn't another Sun being formed in this area because all of the necessary celestial hydrogen has been consumed in the previous formation of the stars in the area. The conditions that allowed abiogenesis no longer exist on Earth. Life is constantly evolving. Stars are being formed in other areas of space and over time the process of abiogenesis will start there on some newly formed planets and life will evolve.
In what way would explaining the atheistic point of view lead to understanding a need for development of science? I'm all for advancement of science, genetic as good as any, but I don't see it as necessary in any particular way.
I do not believe in magic. I believe in the laws of physics. Magic is a pseudoscience. The belief in it is a mental disorder.
Jesus is not a "religion", he was solid flesh and blood and is a great role model as an anti-establishment rebel.. Jesus said:- "The world wants you to dance to its tune.." (Matt 11:16/17) And people quickly cottoned on- "Jesus saved you from the empty way of life handed you by your forefathers" (1 Peter 1:18 ) "Don't conform to the pattern of this world" (Romans 12:2) "As a soldier of Christ, please only God and not the world" (2 Tim 2:3/4) "Don't love the world or the things in it,otherwise the love of God is not in you" (1 John 2:15-17) "Set your mind on things above,not on things on the earth" (Col 3:2) "You were bought at a price,don't serve men" (1 Cor 7:23) "A friend of the world is the enemy of God" (James 4:4) "You were dead when you followed the ways of the world" (Eph 2:1/2) "You died with Christ from this world, so don't keep submitting to its rules" (Col 2:20) "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil.." (Eph 6:12) Jesus said-
Please define 'mental disorder' and be specific as to which mental disorder you are referring to. I expect it to be consistent with the clinical parameters of a diagnosis in modern psychology and psychiatry. Prove that a belief in magic by itself is a mental disorder as clinically defined.
Religions stem from a period when knowledge was limited to what someone managed to learn in their lifetime and pass down by word of mouth to others. Myths and fables were interwoven with events that were part of the natural world and the universe. When an earthquake or lightning or a torrential flood occurred shortly after seeing a comet in the sky they were linked by the observers without any sound basis. But because that link had been made others made the same associations in the future. With the advent of written communications and the scientific method it has been possible to separate the wheat from the chaff. From science we have factual data that can be proven to be accurate regardless as to who does it. Religion is wedded to the mythical and unproven while science just deals with the facts. Everyone has a choice as to which they want as the basis for their own life. Science is fascinating because it continues to teach us new things while religion demands fealty to that which has been exposed as meaningless. Religion is not "a lie" to those who choose to believe in it. Religion is only "a lie" when those who believe in it attempt to impose their beliefs on others. If a religion is based upon sound principles and practices then adults would adopt those religions because of their appeal. Instead the majority of those who adhere to a religion do so because they were raised and indoctrinated into that religion from birth. Very few adults adopt a religion purely on it's merits. Those that do have made a choice to ignore the contradictions and that is their constitutional right. Freedom of religion can only exist because there is freedom from religion. With that core principle those who believe in religion are free to do so and allow those of other religions and none at all to exercise their own freedom of choice.
link please, I notice that you are referring to a pluralized noun. Please tell us which 'adaptation disorder' a belief an magic diagnoses.
Current abiogenesis hypotheses posit that self replicating molecules, capable of subsequent mutation and adaption through natural selection (and other evolutionary processes), possibly arose from other, non-replicating, organic molecules and common atomic elements. Your source is hyperbolic and inaccurate. This is more correct, except there are no abiogenesis scientific theories, only scientific hypotheses. Try to get it right next time. Your incessant misunderstanding of what you hate is boring.
There most definitely are a emotional and intellectual reasons for the existence of religions in human civilization. And logic has little to do with any of them. "True judgement" in dealing with human nature and our interactions is almost completely subject to interpretation unlike science or case law.
If a patient presents with firm delusions that an invisible being follows them around, watching them. And an entire backstory and personality for this being is described by the patient, they WILL be diagnosed with a mental illness. Guaranteed. Religious ideation has merely been cut slack on account of numbers. We can't treat them all.
Ahem... "Psychiatrists often treat patients with psychotic disorders who are religious or spiritual in some way. Most scientifically trained psychiatrists and other mental health professionals believe in a scientific, secular world-view. Sigmund Freud thought that religion caused neurotic and possibly even psychotic symptoms. In Future of an Illusion, Freud (1927) wrote: "Religion would thus be the universal obsessional neurosis of humanity... If this view is right, it is to be supposed that a turning-away from religion is bound to occur with the fatal inevitability of a process of growth If, on the one hand, religion brings with it obsessional restrictions, exactly as an individual obsessional neurosis does, on the other hand, it comprises a system of wishful illusions together with a disavowal of reality, such as we find in an isolated form nowhere else but amentia, in a state of blissful hallucinatory confusion " Thus, Freud thought that religious beliefs were rooted in fantasy and illusion and could be responsible for the development of psychosis (although Freud never directly attributed psychosis to religion, only neurosis). This negative view of religion in the mental health field has continued into modern times with the writings of persons like Albert Ellis (198 and Wendell Watters (1992), who have emphasized the irrational nature of religious beliefs and their potential harm. The personal religious beliefs of psychiatrists and psychologists (especially when compared to those of the general population) likewise reflect the secular and generally negative views toward religion that are prevalent within the profession (Neeleman & King, 1993; Curlin et al, 2005). For years, religious persons were portrayed as examples of psychiatric illness in diagnostic manuals (prior to DSM-IV) (Larson et al., 1993). This negative perspective regarding religion, however, was not based on systematic research or careful objective observation. Rather, it was based on the personal opinions and clinical experience of powerful and influential persons within the psychiatric academia, who had little experience with healthy religion." http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0101-60832007000700013&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en ....Just Sayin'....
Non responsive to the question. I asked for the clinical diagnosis so that I could check the diagnosis and its criteria. Instead you gave me an amateur hour pop psychology reference to 'delusions'.
From the above citation: BACKGROUND: Religion is often included in the beliefs and experiences of psychotic patients, and therefore becomes the target of psychiatric interventions. OBJECTIVES: This article examines religious beliefs and activities among non-psychotic persons in the United States, Brazil and other areas of the world; discusses historical factors contributing to the wall of separation between religion and psychiatry today; reviews studies on the prevalence of religious delusions in patients with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and other severe mental disorders;. discusses how clinicians can distinguish pathological from non-pathological religious involvement; explores how persons with severe mental illness use non-pathological religious beliefs to cope with their disorder; examines the effects of religious involvement on disease course, psychotic exacerbations, and hospitalization; and describes religious or spiritual interventions that may assist in treatment METHODS: Literature review. FINDINGS: While about one-third of psychoses have religious delusions, not all religious experiences are psychotic. In fact, they may even have positive effects on the course of severe mental illness, forcing clinicians to make a decision on whether to treat religious beliefs and discourage religious experiences, or to support them. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should understand the negative and positive roles that religion plays in those with psychotic disorders. Thank you for your support. In fact religious beliefs are not in and of themselves symptomatic of mental illness.
No they are not, in and of themselves. Yet, belief in unseen and unknowable magical beings does indeed indicate certain issues with reality.
I agree, I would no more tell people in their pledge or on their money there is not a God then there is a God... both would be wrong best to let people decide for themselves without government forcing it on them .
