I'm fucking done with nihilism and secularism. I want to

the brothers karamazov

>>7508685
The Bhagavad Gita

Ecclesiastes, then all of the New Testament.

File: In The Buddha's Words.jpg (83KB, 640x968px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 640x968px

Come to The Island my friend, where it is cool and refreshing

http://www.pacificbuddha.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/In-the-Buddhas-Words.pdf


We ourselves must walk the path, Buddhas merely show the way" -- Dp 165

I'll post my Catholic reading list in say 10 hours when I wake up and go to mass.
Keep the thread alive or post it again if it dies. It's a list of around 50 titles.

File: nietz.jpg (126KB, 600x696px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 600x696px

>>7508685
>being tricked by religion that secularism necessarily leads to nihilism

>>7508685
The Master and Margarita, Brothers Karamzov, any number of the popular fantasy items, I.e. lotr, toafk

File: 1448562539740.jpg (155KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 480x640px

>>7508685
>Let muh feels dictate reality
Y tho?

ford the river, know thyself

File: Saint_Augustine_and_Saint_Monica.jpg (156KB, 1242x1600px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1242x1600px

The Confessions of St. Augustine. One of the most moving accounts of conversion and personal belief ever written, and as a bonus at the end you get some sweet philosophy of time and theological commentary.

>>7508685
Read the works of Thomas Merton and Dorothy Day, namely, their conversion. Following that, mere christianity by C.S. Lewis. Following that, or proceeding; pray. The easiest way to 'believe' is to pray, for it is in prayer that one can find God.

>>7508712
I've heard that this book doesn't accurately portray Buddhist thought. Should I read it if im interested in Buddhism? I'm not OP.

>>7508706
>fix'd
>ecclesiastes
>gospels
>rev
>genesis, kings and chronicles, wisdom books, and major prophets

>milton
>dante
>virgil
>homer

>joyce loop back into eccles

>>7508685
The Tao Te Ching

>>7508685

I'm sorry, OP

but there is probably no return to a religious state of mind once you have lived as an atheist

if you dindn't embrece the soul in your childhood
you are to late now

>>7508720
It does, Nietzsche isn't a secular.
>>7509256
I only converted at 15, and was baptised at 18.

Now I'm a published theologian (who sells nothing)

Fear and trembling

File: None of this matters.jpg (18KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x360px

>>7508685
you'll be back op
they always come back
you can't escape the nihils

>>7508929
>narnia
haha noice

File: 1448689496104.png (461KB, 640x1000px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 640x1000px

Here you go OP.

>not converting to the fastest growing , most logically consistent religion

OP you don't need religion to find God. Just go look at the beauty of nature then ask yourself how it all got there.

Science doesn't even pretend to understand how life "evolved from nothing".
God is like a comfortable blanket, snuggly wuggly, come on it Anon, there's room for you under here :3

>>7508699
Idolatry desu

>>7508968
>idealist dialectic
>not dialectical materialism as interpreted by Koba, the Honorable Chairman Mao, and the Eternal President

>>7509494
>>7508685

OR YOU COULD WORSHIP ODIN! WHEN YOU DIE I SHALL CARRY YOU SHINY AND CHROME TO VALHALLA!

File: heh.jpg (239KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1280x960px

>>7509494
>come on it

>>7509494
That's funny because The Bible explains all of that.

>>7508685

How has no one brought up Siddhartha?

>>7509521
because it's gay

>>7509533

You're fucking gay!

Any Dostoyevsky book

>>7509541
And it takes one to know one and I am telling you Siddhartha is gay

File: jung.jpg (41KB, 297x404px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 297x404px

Jung, my friend.

>>7509256
Atheist turned devout Catholic here, you're full of shit. Shit I'd say the majority of the people at my Newman Center were atheists/agnostics before they discovered the Church.

File: 1446714475494-1.png (929KB, 1404x2133px) Image search: [Google]

929KB, 1404x2133px

>>7508685
It is hard for me to believe in religion because of how literal and how controlling it is and limiting of the mind. As a logical person who wants to believe in stuff but can't I STRONGLY suggest delving into occultic stuff. I strongly suggest you going toward more "mystical" "magick" way of life for the "illogical" thinkingthat humans need.

I strongly suggest checking out 8ch fringe section. Theres a HUGE library of literature that I suggest getting into.

Intro to fringe is a good intro book that i just finished reading.
It is also awesome because you can pick your own path.

Just a suggestion as an enthusiast to this stuff.

>>7508929
>The shack
Kill yourself

>the divine comedy
That's like a big "fuck you" to the church

>The space trilogy
totaly unrelated

>The screwtape letters
literally "atheism iz dum"

>>7508737
>>7509482
>The meaning of the limitless universe, with all the galaxies and the planets and the black holes and the pulsars and other unknown things, can be adequately expressed through grunts, whose meaning is dictated by social contract and varies from region to region, of a group of animals and it's "everything is meaningless."

Atheist and nihilistic logic. 10/10

>>7508690
shit nigguh
I was expecting this as the first reply after seeing this in catalogue

ggwp

>>7509712
>The space trilogy
>unrelated
you've never read it, or you'd know it was

>>7508731
Master and Margarita is an ode to secularism desu

>>7509493
This is you

https://youtu.be/9ViOAUNuq58

>I want to believe.

Then you're an idiot

>>7509642

>Atheist turned devout Catholic here
>devout Catholic
>devout

I wouldn't assume this if I were you

>>7509720

>>7508685
>Thinking the universe needs meaning when you life creates its own meaning for yourself
If you think life, the universe, whatever, needs some deeper meaning than what you make of it, you're basically some sort of pessimistic.

You can be secular/atheist/agnostic and not be nihilist. Life doesn't have INHERENT spiritual meaning, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have meaning.

Life is what you make of it. It's like playing a crazy, limiting MMO. Figure out what you want to do, work towards it, surpass your obstacles, take on side-quests that sound interesting (love, family, etc), whateverprobably a shitty analogy but it's easy enough I guess.

Do what fills you with meaning, purpose, drive, or just fun in general. Honestly, heading into a religion that you think is probably not quite true in the first place is nothing more than a distraction rather than a fulfilling endeavor. At best you'll come out the same way you went in (but with more knowledge about religions), medium case you'll become some part of a mainstream religion without being a pushy ass about it. Worst case you'll turn into some weird pagan who everyone looks down on and/or doesn't understand.

>>7509890
Holy fuck I screwed up my greentext. Here's what meant
>Thinking the universe/life needs meaning when you can create or find it for yourself.

>>7509720
>"My animal grunts, on the other hand, represent divine truth!"

>>7509642
How's being retarded?

>>7509885
Um okay?

>>7508685
You're retarded, you just change your world views because you're what, bored of them? So what does that say about how you view things in the first place? If apparently your perception of truth can be changed just like that. You're no better than those tumblr douchebags who call themselves muslim because it's trendy to be the 'oppressed' person. Just because you want to believe doesn't mean you do or will after reading some books. The majority of modern philosophers, people much smarter than you or I, reject theism and rightly so; it's unsubstantiated and absurd. Unless you truly experience some kind of religious event (even though I personally don't believe they exist, and that they're merely odd sensations we experience for whatever purely natural reason that it may be, that we perceive as a religious experience) I can't see anyone as much of a critical, rational thinker. Those who experience something religious I can give some leeway to as most people don't understand that strange experiences can arise idiopathically and so they obviously attribute it to a god or spirit or whatever, but if you just read something and decide "hmmm, yes, that makes complete sense I am now a christian/muslim/jew" etc. then you're a fucking moron.

>>7508685
kierkegaard

face your existential dread

File: alfred-korzybski-quotes-17149.png (7KB, 502x998px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 502x998px

>>7509890
You missed the point of this
>>7509720
Whatever statement you make - meaningful or meaningless - is still bound to incredibly limited, first of all, because you will express it through the incredibly flawed medium of language, which is nothing but noises given meaning by other humans. To an animal we will sound as alien as birds or dogs sound to us.
And second, every statement and theory about the universe - positive or negative - is related to your perception. You may say that the universe is mechanistic and that people are robots, trying to be "objective", but in the end it's just your perception, and such judgment probably says more about you than the thing observed.
To say anything about the universe is to lie, unless you find a way to pass behind your perception and language. However, if you'd found it, you would never have said such bullshit as this

>Life doesn't have INHERENT spiritual meaning, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have meaning.

But keep believing that you know what life and existence is or isn't, whether it's meaningful or not. I wish I was sure as you.

There are a lot of reasons to want to believe in something for which there is no proof; and all of these motivations, when they regard a higher power, are manifestations of an old instinct sustained by various illnesses.

The most prevalent among these instincts is groupthink. I welcome, even encourage you to post fedoras in response to me. You should see why I am writing this post as I do.

I have heard compared the belief in God to the belief in China. I have never been to China, but I have seen evidence on maps, on tags that say 'made in China', and in people's words. This is no greater evidence for China than God by the bible, dozens of sophist apologists, and a community of believers - the most typical bullies - in churches or on imageboards. But, there is a way to go to China. I can buy plane tickets, and one day come return home. The lie could be uncovered - much unlike god. I would have to die to confirm god. Doesn't that already smell of deception to you? How are you not already skeptical?
There was not always a way to go to China in which I could return home before I die. But there is today.

But nihilism: that drives people to the most extreme leaps of faith. With nihlism, one takes a leap (or is more often pushed), one implodes, or one explores dark areas with few guides where one could not easily see the dangers. Nihilism does not trouble most, but poisons a specific type - the sensitive, the overthinking, the unsuccessful. It paralyzes most of these types. But those who overcome emerge the strongest: overcoming nihilism alone is the deadlift of the soul.

>>7508934
It does. It uses primary sources. Just take the commentary with a grain of salt; remember the title isn't 100% accurate, but they are still Buddhist texts.

File: fa0.jpg (79KB, 479x720px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 479x720px

>>7510248
I agree, sire. It absolutely reeks of deception.

>>7510088
>every statement and theory about the universe - positive or negative - is related to your perception
Including that one. And the one I just said. Ad infinitum. Also man muss schweigen? But we came to this conclusion by talking. What?
Thinking is a war that ends when all its warriors die. This is why meditation is peace to so many - it is so close to death. Thinking can be either a beautiful war, one that is fought with strength and bravery, or an nasty one, where the main tactic is deception.

>>7510256
My genius is in my nostrils.

>>7510248
Fact: Every human being has a belief in the supernatural, invisible, faith in chance, the unknown, luck.

Fact: Some people have that part of their brain shut off and unresponsive to this aspect of the human experience, the spiritual.

Fact: If you cannot have spiritual experiences, your brain is deficient or damaged in some way.

Opinion: Take your autism right the fuck out of here, nobody wants to hear any of your idiotic analogies or thought experiments. If God as a notion could have been dismissed, it would have been done so over the past thousands of years of human cultural and intellectual growth and you are certainly in no position to contribute to that refutation in any way.

Spoiler-nospoiler: You have brain damage, that's why it's so hard for you to believe in something spiritual. You are also a psychopath if you can't empathise with someone who is deeply religious and believes in a higher power.

Obvious: Do you understand that organised religion can be corrupt because all human interaction can lead to corruption? Scientists can forge their experimental results, Doctor's can perform malfeasance or be negligent, Businessmen can break laws or make unfair deals. There's only one interaction between two parties A, B that cannot be undermined, and that is the ultimate exertion of power by one onto the other causing death, yeah that's a final and absolute because it always reduces to a singleton.


So you think the Bible and Christianity might not have it right. Christians will disagree with you, but they disagree with the Catholics and other subsects inside their own religion. So you say the Quran and Islam might not have it right, The Shia and the Sunnis certainly don't get along, but they would definitely get along less with someone outside their faith entirely.

Could it be, that just like in business, or medicine, or arts, or sciences that people don't always deal fairly or in some objective absolute truth when it comes to religions?

See the biggest problem with atheism is that it is an unscientific and unfounded position to take. First of all you should be properly labelled adeist or aspiritualist, since not only do you reject all theisms you reject the possibility of any deity or supernatural or mystical or spiritual experience. See that's just your opinion. Science takes an agnostic stance on positions of unknowns. A scientist does not make claims of knowledge pro or con something they do not know. a-gnostic, without knowledge.

You are a materialist and a reductionist by proximity of ideology. And people like you only want to eliminate competition so they can rule with a supposed absolute and perfect system (which they control, what a surprise). You know who else tried to do that? The original fedora tippers of the 19th ant 20th centuries, the fucking Communists.

>>7510280
>Fact: Every human being has a belief in the supernatural, invisible, faith in chance, the unknown, luck.
what the fuck are you on about, I certainly don't

stopped reading there desu, invalidates the rest of your post

>>7510280
>See the biggest problem with atheism is that it is an unscientific and unfounded position to take.

I thought that the unknown wasn't a problem. Now it suddenly is?

I honesty don't think you have the slightest idea what you're talking about. Your post sounds like a incoherent rant from someone who just had a stroke

>>7510280

My spiritual experience is that I have a dragon spirit companion. It's hard to make that mesh with other people's spiritual experiences, or common sense, or mainstream belief systems, even of a spiritual nature. So...what? Does spirituality operate by consensus model?

>>7508685
Just pick whatever branch of Christianity you want and identify with it. We both know you're just converting out of fear of being called a fedora or as a reaction against liberalism anyway.

>>7510287
This is no different from saying you lack the intuitive understanding that 1 + 1 = 2 that even infants and animals possess. You have a malfunctioning sensus divinitatis.

>>7510287

nice one breh

>>7510340

Except of course that 1 + 1 = 2 is actually a proposition that can be tested in real life

>>7510342
No, because 1 + 1 = 2 isn't an empirical proposition or inductive.

>>7510348
It's a priori. If you want to split hairs over whether it's synthetic or analytic, there's plenty of philosophical literature on the topic already.

>>7510300
What point are you trying to make?

>>7510377

My experiences can be classified as spiritual, unless they're rejected as lunacy. But if they can be rejected as lunacy, the categorical closeness to mainstream religious beliefs implies mainstream religious beliefs can also be rejected as lunacy.

File: 1451220744419.png (531KB, 973x1053px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 973x1053px

Don't just automatically assume that a middle eastern Abrahamic religion is the only way.

The vast spectrum of neo-paganism welcomes you! We're not just Wicca. Embrace freedom

>>7510383
this so much, it's difficult to explain to religious people how there's no real distinction between what they believe and someone who believes that crab-monsters from planet uglathoo are beaming NSA intelligence into their head

>>7510383
The thing is that no one knows what God is, or what he looks like. It's lunacy, however, to try to attach him to a material concept like a "dragon."

>>7510088
oh someone else read Prometheus Rising

>>7510386

Well, that delusion seems to lack a spiritual quality, which is why I used my own as an example. Shamanism and familiar spirits and such are well established in spiritualism, but also easily dismissed in the modern world as psychotic delusions. So if this has already been done with the spirituality of the ancient world, what makes modern spirituality immune?

>>7510397
>I'm not a robot
goddamnit captcha

>>7510287
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotheology

>>7510293
Atheism is a position based on a reduction of an entire pantheon of recorded human knowledge and experience which coincidentally allowed it to emerge. It is circularly defining and self-eliminating, making it self-refuting. It only exists as a surface thin ideology. Where it fails to provide any evidence is on the claims that it is a base human position, somehow unnaturally and forcefully abolished by religious institutions. But again, you don't have to deal with claims of evidence to begin with, since you position is wholly a negation, which cannot be proven by definition. Well, isn't that convenient.

>>7510300
Spirituality operates the same way imagination does. It can be influenced by others or totally your own or some combination. Or would you say imagination also doesn't exist? Well let's pack it up friends, these 15,000 years of creative thought have just been an illusion, where are robots.

>>7510394

Why? Perhaps God is in everything, and dragon is merely an aspect of God. Perhaps dragon isn't a material concept at all; there are no material dragons anywhere, but the concept of dragon has importance in many spiritual systems, whether it's St. George's Dragon (or St. Martha's or St. Margaret's), or in Chinese dragon worship.

>>7510402

What's the substance of spirituality if it's literally made up though?

>>7510280
>tfw God gives you brain damage so you can't see the truth
sucks desu

>>7510402
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotheology
...so?

I don't believe in anything supernatural or spiritual, how can you claim that everyone does?

>>7510403
Nice mental gymnastics. I can smell the hemp lotion and incense sticks through my computer screen.

>>7510404
What's the substance of pain or love or fear or desire or hope or certainty or ....

Oh that's right, we actually don't fucking know.

>>7510409

I'm a STEM student actually :^)

>>7510280
>Fact: Every human being has a belief in the supernatural, invisible, faith in chance, the unknown, luck.
I don't.

>Fact: Some people have that part of their brain shut off and unresponsive to this aspect of the human experience, the spiritual.
People don't have any part of the brain shut off. If that happened the part would rot and disappear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_percent_of_the_brain_myth#Analysis

>Fact: If you cannot have spiritual experiences, your brain is deficient or damaged in some way.
Most elevated of keks this is what neurotypicals actually believe.

>If God as a notion could have been dismissed, it would have been done so over the past thousands of years of human cultural and intellectual growth and you are certainly in no position to contribute to that refutation in any way.
People are dumb.

>Spoiler-nospoiler: You have brain damage, that's why it's so hard for you to believe in something spiritual. You are also a psychopath if you can't empathise with someone who is deeply religious and believes in a higher power.
Is there any source on this spiritual part of the brain? I distinguish "physical" from "emotional" feelings by their causes, not by sensations.

>Obvious: Do you understand that organised religion can be corrupt because all human interaction can lead to corruption? Scientists can forge their experimental results, Doctor's can perform malfeasance or be negligent, Businessmen can break laws or make unfair deals. There's only one interaction between two parties A, B that cannot be undermined, and that is the ultimate exertion of power by one onto the other causing death, yeah that's a final and absolute because it always reduces to a singleton.
This must be a red herring because it doesn't related to anything here.

>See the biggest problem with atheism is that it is an unscientific and unfounded position to take. First of all you should be properly labelled adeist or aspiritualist, since not only do you reject all theisms you reject the possibility of any deity or supernatural or mystical or spiritual experience. See that's just your opinion. Science takes an agnostic stance on positions of unknowns. A scientist does not make claims of knowledge pro or con something they do not know. a-gnostic, without knowledge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy

>You are a materialist and a reductionist by proximity of ideology. And people like you only want to eliminate competition so they can rule with a supposed absolute and perfect system (which they control, what a surprise). You know who else tried to do that? The original fedora tippers of the 19th ant 20th centuries, the fucking Communists.
Stalin was destroying scientific progress.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Science

Calm your tits and retry.

containment threads are a godsend
just imagine all these guys running rampant on the rest of /lit/ right now

>>7510402
>Atheism is a position based on a reduction of an entire pantheon of recorded human knowledge and experience which coincidentally allowed it to emerge.

Sorry, what is this based on? Just your opinion?

>It is circularly defining and self-eliminating, making it self-refuting.

As is all knowledge, to a degree

> It only exists as a surface thin ideology.

No more than any other position on anything

>Where it fails to provide any evidence is on the claims that it is a base human position, somehow unnaturally and forcefully abolished by religious institutions.

Where does it claim that? Atheism is simply the rejection of deities, you added this to it

>But again, you don't have to deal with claims of evidence to begin with, since you position is wholly a negation, which cannot be proven by definition.

So do I have to provide evidence or not? You said I did, now I don't? What the fuck are you even talking about?

>Well, isn't that convenient.

Your post certainly isn't. It is a rambling mess of incoherent nonsense

>>7510407
A very well defined portion of your brain deals with belief.

The fact you say "I don't believe in anything supernatural or spiritual" implies you have the capacity to do so, but it is not being exercised, the same way you have the capacity to love someone but you aren't always in love with every stranger.

That is completely different than saying

"Because I don't believe in anything supernatural or spiritual there is obviously nothing supernatural or spiritual."

That statement makes no fucking sense, it's either pathologically and narcissistically wrong, or tautologically incoherent.

You do realise that right?

I claim everyone has the CAPACITY to believe in it.

If there is a God then why am I an atheist? Checkmate, Christians. :^)))

>>7508766
also the confession of leo tolstoy

File: 1443906383373.png (322KB, 1861x401px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1861x401px

>>7510385
>Paganism
Not even once

>>7510432
>The fact you say "I don't believe in anything supernatural or spiritual" implies you have the capacity to do so
u wot meight

>the same way you have the capacity to love someone but you aren't always in love with every stranger.
Not everyone is like that, you black-and-white-thinking mother fucker.

>Because I don't believe in anything supernatural or spiritual there is obviously nothing supernatural or spiritual.
>That statement makes no fucking sense, it's either pathologically and narcissistically wrong, or tautologically incoherent.
L'epique estraumane.

>>7510432

>belief = supernatural or spiritual

And this is based on...?

>>7510432
1. I never claimed that "Because I don't believe in anything supernatural or spiritual there is obviously nothing supernatural or spiritual."
I simply claimed that I don't believe in anything supernatural.

2. You didn't "claim everyone has the CAPACITY to believe in it" in your original post I replied to, you said "Fact: Every human being has a belief in the supernatural, invisible, faith in chance, the unknown, luck." which just isn't true.

I don't know if there's a supernatural or spiritual. If I had to guess I'd say there probably isn't, but ultimately nobody knows, and anyone claiming to have the truth is either ignorant or lying.

>>7510435
free will innit

>>7510450
the capacity for a belief implies statements knowledge.

If you accept you have the capacity for a belief in a spirituality, but you chose to not exercise that capacity. You have simply replaced your belief in spirituality with your belief that you don't belief in spirituality. That is a spiritual belief, because your "belief you don't believe" is just as ungrounded and illogical as a theists "belief in a particular belief".

You either believe in something, which is the position atheists and theists take respectively, or you withhold knowledge of belief, which is what agnostics do.

This doesn't change the fact all three have the capacity for the belief, the theist uses it one way, the atheist uses it another way, and the agnostic lets it occur naturally without accepting or rejecting claims about anything.

I started reading the bible a while ago. I read the Torah and Joshua, it was pretty violent. I really liked the book of Jonah. I read some of the gospels and that was when I climaxed, Jesus was just walking around talking in riddles and healing anyone that believed. Amazing.

>>7510421
You cannot empirically reject an un-empirical definition.

>I am God, to prove I am God I have made it impossible for you to empirically prove my divinity. There is no way for you to measure or test or observe my godhood, I will die just like any other man.

>That's okay, because I don't believe in God.

>Aren't you going to run any tests or anything?

>Why bother, like you said it would be impossible for me to prove you are God by your circular definition. And you cannot prove a negative.

>So you reject me on what grounds?


The one question no atheist can answer.

>>7510469
So, in conclusion:
1. A theist is, by definition, someone who believes that it is true that truly supernatural spiritual phenomena exist.
2. An atheist is, by definition, someone who believes the inverse.
3. An agnostic, by definition, someone who takes neither stance.
4. A spiritual belief is materially equivalent to an illogical and ungrounded belief.
5. A person must have one of the just established stances.
Is this correct?

Start with Plato and Aristotle. Proceed with Christianity when you understand them

>>7510498
depends.

I argue that spiritual belief S and S' (its inverse) are ontologically equivalent, since they are members of a large belief set BS.

Making any knowledge statements about BS is uninteresting to me, because they are by necessary definition unprovable.

You cannot make scientific progress in this arena, since the rigours of the scientific method fail to apply.

But that is to be expected, since science is just a small part of the human experience, primarily focused with how observable things work.

Your phrasing in 2 is not explicitly saying this.

Statement 4 is difficult to unpack, illogical and ungrounded from a propositional logic perspective. That perspective however has little to do with the real world, since people act illogically all the time and it is within human nature to do so. Human beings are not wholly rational computing machines.

A belief it might rain could be an ungrounded belief if you have not obtained sufficient data to make that belief substantive, but it might take you until the first drop hits you to collect enough information. Words like illogical and ungrounded don't make a lot of sense in common day language, they are inflammatory and don't add anything to the discussion.

The level of abstraction required to codify any actual belief makes any statements about its logic or grounding completely irrelevant. Logic was not invented to deal with complex concepts of belief. It is a mathematical approach to find solutions to very specific types of questions, inside a well defined domain. The word gets used to imply clarity or goodness or positive action. I am not using it like that, I am using it purely as a mathematically descriptive term.

>>7508685
Become Muslim, today's world is like the Roman empire on the eve of its Christian conversion and Islam is the new religion to end all religions.

Think about this analogy and you'll see it is water tight.

>I argue that spiritual belief S and S' (its inverse) are ontologically equivalent, since they are members of a large belief set BS.
This whole thing implied that.
>A theist believes something without justification.
>An atheist disbelives the same thing without justification.

>Statement 4 is difficult to unpack, illogical and ungrounded from a propositional logic perspective. That perspective however has little to do with the real world, since people act illogically all the time and it is within human nature to do so.
TFW it may be true that every belief be unsound.

>A belief it might rain could be an ungrounded belief if you have not obtained sufficient data to make that belief substantive, but it might take you until the first drop hits you to collect enough information.
A clouded sky evidences it, though. Also, meteorology fails miserably because of how chaos works.

>Words like illogical and ungrounded don't make a lot of sense in common day language, they are inflammatory and don't add anything to the discussion.
You used them though.
You were the one who did, right?

>The level of abstraction required to codify any actual belief makes any statements about its logic or grounding completely irrelevant.
What is codifying beliefs?

>Logic was not invented to deal with complex concepts of belief. It is a mathematical approach to find solutions to very specific types of questions, inside a well defined domain. The word gets used to imply clarity or goodness or positive action. I am not using it like that, I am using it purely as a mathematically descriptive term.
Wherein have you done what with what word?

Are you even the person to whom I replied in >>7510498?

>>7510591
>0. Matters of spirituality cannot be reduced to axioms or logic, spirituality exists a priori and is a part of self-consciousness
>1. All Humans have spirituality.
>2. Some Humans have very low spirituality.
>3. Some Humans have very high spirituality.
>4. A subset of (2) are atheists.
>5. A subset of (3) are theists.

I simply argue (4) and (5) are just examples of extreme positions adopted due to (2) and (3) respectively.

Example:
>0. Matters of intelligence cannot be reduced to axioms or logic, intelligence exists a priori and is a part of self-consciousness
>1. All Humans have intelligence.
>2. Some Humans have very low intelligence.
>3. Some Humans have very high intelligence.
>4. A subset of (2) are idiots.
>5. A subset of (3) are geniuses.

I simply argue (4) and (5) are just examples of extreme positions adopted due to (2) and (3) respectively.


That is my position.

Atheists could be right in rejecting deities, but more likely they are rejecting deities because they have low spirituality.
Theists could be right in accepting deities, but more likely they are accepting deities because they have high spirituality.

Spirituality as a sub-set of the collective cognitive experiences of man can change over time and be affected by external factors, it can grow or shrink.

So what is spirituality? That's a good question, I think that's the interesting question. Not what is God, or what is the right religion, or is there a God, or any of that left-right paradigm shit people get trapped in.

>>7510446

> a single ad-hominem image macro

yep! your logic is airtight bro. go Christfag. enjoy your lifetime of guilt

File: atheistsbtfo.png (265KB, 496x750px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 496x750px

>>7508685
all you need senpai

>>7510767
You know if you do Christianity right you actually feel really good, right? The guilty feeling is exaggerated.

File: 1449276751169.jpg (209KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1280x1280px

>>7508706
>>7508946

i feel like these posts are severely underatted
especially the order. >>7508946
i thinks thats probably the best way to read the Bible for a non beleiver

>>7509597
theres mediocre shitposting,
and then,
there are the true masters, who lurk in the shadows waiting for their chance to strike

File: 1448645258095.jpg (138KB, 1075x603px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1075x603px

>>7509720
You should write a book.

>>7508685
>I'm fucking done with nihilism and secularism.
>I want to believe.

Literally still a nihilist.

>I'm fucking done with bad consciousness and democracy.
>I want subjugation or nihilism.
FTFY

>>7509266
>implying you know Nietzsche

>>7508934

There are more sects of Buddhism than you would believe anon. Just look at the clusterfuck of the Christian sects and you've got the right idea. I read pic related and while I'm sure some of the Buddhist sects will disagree with it they can't even agree with themselves most of the time. I'd give it 8/10, definitely recommended.

read some religious texts but also read arguments for and against whatever you were struggling with before.

you need to fill the void of not knowing god with the faith that there at least is one

beyond that, it aint so easy.

>>7510280
Advanced post
Will not be understood

File: Bilbo.jpg (42KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 640x360px

I'm an atheist, but I struggle with the question:

Is it really so one-sided that there is no God, and that theists are so sure of themselves, or there actual doubts that linger, and the existence of God isn't something that can be dismissed so easily?

>>7512508

meant atheists, not theists

>>7508685

The bible bro. I've been atheist since forever but some stuff in the bible really moves me to tears man... I'm almost sad I can't believe it. Theres no way I could profess devotion to Jesus, real or not, I'm just too proud to bend my knee to come individual or group.

This must be the kind of feeling nietzsche talked about.

>>7512525
>I'm just too proud to bend my knee to come individual or group.

What a retarded reason to be an Atheist, especially considering you already do since you are this thing called a citizen who obeys the laws of society.

>>7508685
Bro the most underrated work you could read but also one of those which could be the most influential to you would be "The kingdom of god lives within you" by The count, Lev Tolstoy

>>7512530
As if being atheist is not the current cultural zeitgeist anyway. It's truly amazing how out of touch atheists are, that they think they're crashing people's worlds when a lot of people went through an atheistic stage in their mid teens

Always thought that dwkins is a 5th grader picking on 1st graders, but now I see that's the case for the whole of atheism as a movement. Adults are on the side keeping quiet hoping that they'll grow out of it

>>7510280
Blown the fuck out. Simpletons will deny the logic in this post.

This guy speaks the plain truth. The divine is but another facet of nature, just as humanity is a part of nature. The supranatural is real and in no way opposes the doctrines of rationality, empiricism and the like. There is nothing "woo woo" about this fact. The intelligent man finds this truth by reconciling what the average man calls "science" with what the average man calls "spirituality." There is absolutely no reason why these things so integral to the human condition cannot coexist.

Atheists and other zealots unbalanced in their thinking are merely the latest in a long line of simpletons who lack the presence of mind for honest, clear-minded contemplation. It's ok to admit you don't know, as this is the first step to approaching the mystery of the universe - seen and unseen - in earnest. So we cling to preset beliefs that give us meaning, instead of having the courage to develop our worldview to accomodate the depth of everything. To deny one side of the arguement is to deny the arguement entirely.

A balanced mind uses both hemispheres to percieve the world.

I became a little religious after I saw an angel at church. Looks like an angel, at any rate. I didn't even know such perfect human beings could exist.

>>7512589
Story time plz

>>7510280
Based. Lmao'ing at the fedora replies to this post.

>people are dumb lulz
>using this as an argument for literally anything past your 16th birthday

This board is a meme

/lit/ why do you spend so much time arguing? Is it to validate your own beliefs or do you actually believe somebody will be won over by condescending rants on a [nationality] [hobby] [form of communication]?

>>7512663
There isn't much of a story, it's just someone I see every week at mass who has the most beautiful face I've ever seen. Maybe God was trying to get my attention, but he chose a weird way to do it.

>>7509597
literally the intellectual equivalent of a cartoon animal chasing his own tail around a tree

>>7510070
good post. ideas as fashion statements is bad

supernal beauty exists on earth

it restores whoever discovers it, wherever it is found

>>7512705
"Evil is the starry sky of the good."

>>7512705
wed, bed & vivify the wan world

You saw it and you turned a way and now you're looking for a way to ignore it, preferably with a structured system with lots of historical cred to back you up where you yourself can't. These are perfectly normal feelings but ultimately what you are chasing can be found elsewhere.

You must confront the dark, arbitrary, chaotic nature of life and the inevitably of death and live to your fullest. That dank compassion of the genuine loving soul is not just for Christians, they aren't bad people for trying to brand it because it's a very valuable thing but you can find it within yourself without any kind of authority. If you're empty and hollow without the authority you may as well be a parasite leeching off of the healthy. You can do it all on your own and see those kinds of things Christians attribute to holiness, piety, and the love of Jesus, and likely being an individual with your own perspective you may be able to express it in different ways or with different words. But expressing it is the point, not how you express, that's the mistake Muhammad made and it turned organized religion into an arbitrary shitshow where might made right. Whatever holy word of god is fundamentally an aspect of human expression, not the other way around.

Religion is bullshit. Grow the fuck up and accept your place in this pointless universe.

Atheist is a theist.

it's in the name, get it?

>>7512508
>or there actual doubts that linger, and the existence of God isn't something that can be dismissed so easily?
here, take a look

>“In speaking of the fear of religion, I don’t mean to refer to the entirely reasonable hostility toward certain established religions and religious institutions, in virtue of their objectionable moral doctrines, social policies, and political influence. Nor am I referring to the association of many religious beliefs with superstition and the acceptance of evident empirical falsehoods. I am talking about something much deeper–namely, the fear of religion itself. I speak from experience, being strongly subject to this fear myself: I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers.

>I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that.”(”The Last Word” by Thomas Nagel, Oxford University Press: 1997)”

>>7508685
"The Catholic Church and Conversion" by G.K. Chesterton. It's online for free, too.

http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~mward/gkc/books/conversion.txt

>>7508685
Look into Buddhism. It's really good at giving real spiritual teachings, but it's a lot more compatible with a general secular mindset, so it would be a lot easier to transition into I think.

>>7512867
What does it mean?