Samson
Póg Mo Thóin
I think it would be best to let the author respond.
Answering for the author is my coping mechanism.
The rest of us call it arrogant.
Happily, the opinion of you and your imaginary peanut gallary is irrelevant.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think it would be best to let the author respond.
Answering for the author is my coping mechanism.
The rest of us call it arrogant.
Oh wow. Another attempt to explain why people of faith are idiots. What a shocking surprise.
Oh wow. Another attempt to explain why people of faith are idiots. What a shocking surprise.
Did you get that from the article?
I didn't.
I thought it justified religion as a normal, natural, and very effective reaction to stress.
Like masturbation is for Curvelight.
Oh wow. Another attempt to explain why people of faith are idiots. What a shocking surprise.
Did you get that from the article?
I didn't.
I thought it justified religion as a normal, natural, and very effective reaction to stress.
Like masturbation is for Curvelight.
Openly fantasizing about guys is probably why you cannot debate politics.
Did you get that from the article?
I didn't.
I thought it justified religion as a normal, natural, and very effective reaction to stress.
Like masturbation is for Curvelight.
Openly fantasizing about guys is probably why you cannot debate politics.
No, its fear of rapier-wits like you and Truthmatters.
Moronophobia.
Openly fantasizing about guys is probably why you cannot debate politics.
No, its fear of rapier-wits like you and Truthmatters.
Moronophobia.
If you are intellectually paralyzed out of fear by a dummass like me then you really are beyond help. Stick to your fantasies...at least there you can control everyone...
I found it interesting as I have always thought that religion was nothing but a mental construct designed as a psychological coping mechanism
qft
The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.
The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.
One does not need to assume, one just needs to observe.
The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.
One does not need to assume, one just needs to observe.
The premise assumes there is something wrong with people who have faith. You're making the same claim but try to hide it by claiming observation. It's like saying anyone who watches a space shuttle launch must work for NASA.
The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.
One does not need to assume, one just needs to observe.
The premise assumes there is something wrong with people who have faith. You're making the same claim but try to hide it by claiming observation. It's like saying anyone who watches a space shuttle launch must work for NASA.
"Nor is it possible to undo the spiritual value of the mystic state by by specifying the organic conditions which appear to determine it"
And
"The truth is that the organic causation of our mental states..."
The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.
Why?
The "problem" is not coping.
I think it would be best to let the author respond.
"Nor is it possible to undo the spiritual value of the mystic state by by specifying the organic conditions which appear to determine it"
And
"The truth is that the organic causation of our mental states..."
Why, in your opinion, do these statements necessarily point toward belief in mind-body dualism? The point of Iqbal's statements is that connecting spiritual experiences to certain chemical processes in the brain does nothing to undermine the legitimacy of those experiences.
Why?
The "problem" is not coping.
I think it would be best to let the author respond.
Religion and the belief in deities resulted from fear.
Fear of the unknown. To cope with that fear people had to find a way to define then control what was making them fearful.
Gods were then invented as a mental construct and appeasing gods became the basis for all religions.
It is how we coped with our fear.
One does not need to assume, one just needs to observe.
The premise assumes there is something wrong with people who have faith. You're making the same claim but try to hide it by claiming observation. It's like saying anyone who watches a space shuttle launch must work for NASA.
Where does it say in the premise that there is "something wrong with people who have faith?"
Religion: It's All In Your Head
I think it would be best to let the author respond.
Religion and the belief in deities resulted from fear.
Fear of the unknown. To cope with that fear people had to find a way to define then control what was making them fearful.
Gods were then invented as a mental construct and appeasing gods became the basis for all religions.
It is how we coped with our fear.
Going back to the babylonian myth of origins your point is quite clear but a bit out of context for the op. Your position still assumes there is something wrong with everyone who has faith.
Religion and the belief in deities resulted from fear.
Fear of the unknown. To cope with that fear people had to find a way to define then control what was making them fearful.
Gods were then invented as a mental construct and appeasing gods became the basis for all religions.
It is how we coped with our fear.
Going back to the babylonian myth of origins your point is quite clear but a bit out of context for the op. Your position still assumes there is something wrong with everyone who has faith.
No it doesn't.
I never said there was anything wrong with the coping mechanism of religion did I?
And do you deny that people lived in fear of the unknown in our history.
Anthropologically people of all cultures all over the world developed religions and belief in gods to explain what they could not understand and to assuage their fears. We are wired for such thinking.
The premise assumes there is something wrong with people who have faith. You're making the same claim but try to hide it by claiming observation. It's like saying anyone who watches a space shuttle launch must work for NASA.
Where does it say in the premise that there is "something wrong with people who have faith?"
If a "coping mechanism" is needed, especially out of fear........