Debate Mansion

   

Learning religions makes you less ignorant? (Page 5)

Post Reply New Post

Page 5 of 6

Page 1 Page 4
Page   of 6
Page 6 Page 6

debayon

IF-Sizzlerz

debayon

Joined: 01 October 2008

Posts: 20191

Posted: 22 May 2010 at 2:31pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by PhoeniXof_Hades

Even ignorant, idiotic, meaningless and senseless things can be read and and tried to be understood. Just because something is a complete bogus (to you) doesn't mean you can't read and learn about it - unless of course, you have ego problem(s).

Also, in order to know whether the thing really is bogus or not - you gotta read it and try to understand the gist of it - no matter how stupid it may appear. If even after that, it still feels bogus, then you have every right to criticize it, deem it illogical, call it senseless, etcetera. Otherwise you don't. You can't comment - either praise or criticize - on something you have no clue about.

Twilight is stupid, and one of the worst piece of literature (if it is worth being called a literature, that is) out there, but I forced myself to finish it so that I can make fun of the book and criticize it with my full knowledge. I did not start nitpicking on it until I knew I am done with it. It was a painful experience flicking through the pages, going through the purple proses, and the oh-so-beautiful-Edward and the Marie Sue Bella, but I did bring myself to finish it, no matter how hard it was for me.

If you can't bother reading about something, then don't bother commenting - especially with a passion - on it as well.

I am sure most of you will not like it if I start talking trash about your family just by going with what the society says. I should get a minimum, if not more, amount of knowledge about your families first before I make up my mind, right? Or should I just go on with my pre-set mind?

** You = A third person.

I think I told you before that I used to belive in God before, and I used to do pujas etc.. in my house. But one day, I just stopped doing so just to see the effect. Nothing much really happened, so I stopped believing. I thought it was a waste of time, and that time can be used in engaging in other benficial activities.

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "Learning religions makes you less ignorant? (Page 5)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

*Woh Ajnabee*

IF-Sizzlerz

*Woh Ajnabee*

Joined: 15 September 2007

Posts: 22665

Posted: 22 May 2010 at 2:32pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Emptiness

Originally posted by *Woh Ajnabee*

Originally posted by Emptiness

learning about religions could also put you on the path to atheism or make you an unbeliever, so beware Tongue


You say it like its a bad thing. No faith is better than blind faith, I think.

(of course now POH will start a debate on whether atheism itself is a faith or not with me, so I'm going to run before that happens LOL)


it is a bad thing if you're very religious and you love your religion.  The whole process of doubting your religious beliefs, and facing the possibility that everything you believed in might just be false, can be quite distressing initially, but an enlightening experience nonetheless.


Why is it a bad thing if you love your religion? Isn't it also possible that someone studied all the religions out there, picked one, and embraced it as their faith? What's so wrong about that?

I agree with the second part ... I think doubting your faith is extremely important, if you don't question it initially, how do you know if it actually makes sense. Doubting your faith can actually make it stronger, I think. If you don't question it - it becomes blind faith.

debayon

IF-Sizzlerz

debayon

Joined: 01 October 2008

Posts: 20191

Posted: 22 May 2010 at 2:33pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by jettythegod

Originally posted by debayon

Originally posted by jettythegod

Originally posted by debayon

Originally posted by Summer3

Originally posted by debayon

LOL, you sure it's not the other way around? When people learn about religions, their thought process might get influenced towards what best fits a particular religion(s). They tend to favor religion over the norms and customs of society, and get blinded by the religion probably.

<div></div>Well ego operates everywhere , in religion, politics and in everything thing. We may not need religion but we do need philosophy at least to understand several things that science is ignorant about.
Philosophy, yes. Religion, no. You see, philosophy is based on a fixed set of beliefs that can be proven by a set of observations. Religion is completely bogus, with no evidence to back it up, it is just how some ignorant people try to influence people to think like them through commercial means. I'm sorry, but for me, religion has now become more of a business than based on faith(no matter how incoherent the faith may be)


debu Hug missed ya !

totally agree with u.. i believe in god, but not in any allah, jesus, vishnu etc... poor evidence in my view.
The faith should make sense too, na? Idol worship is the worst thing I have seen in my life, I think some other members will bare witness to that, and what's up with all these guidelines you have to follow, with all the religions, but in particular Islam. Confused (Not bashing Muslims here).What people mean to say is that some spiritual being came and told them to do puja/read namaz/go to mass etc.Confused
 
Missed you too!Hug


i feel that good is the true religion of god LOL
Yeah, by being good, you are enhacing your personality as a person, and not just personality, your mentality etc.. That gets you the good will of others, and maybe that helps you be successful in life etc.. So, yeah, completely agree with you.
 
Ironically, all you have to do is add one o to god.LOL

CunningLinguist

IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 29 November 2009

Posts: 10923

Posted: 22 May 2010 at 2:45pm | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

mind-googling

Goldie

mind-googling

Joined: 07 October 2009

Posts: 1244

Posted: 22 May 2010 at 2:45pm | IP Logged
If there are things to be understood in the scope of the subject, then knowing it = understanding it. Otherwise, there are only facts that can only be known.


Edited by mind-googling - 22 May 2010 at 3:40pm

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20237

Posted: 22 May 2010 at 2:50pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by mind-googling

Originally posted by *Woh Ajnabee*


Well, understanding would the be ultimate "non-ignorance". But I think achieving a state of "non-ignorance" involves two steps. Just because you know something doesn't necessarily mean you understand it. Knowing is the first step, and to understand, you have to jump to the second step.

I can read something from a book and "know" it, but I might not necessarily understand it.

Editing to say your sig is stupid --- I AM right. Tongue

Second edit -- I totally screwed this response.

Can we really say we know something if we don't understand it?? Ermm I'm not sure!


We know what the Pythagoras Theorem states. But understanding how it was derived is different.
Or think of Chatur's speech in 3 Idiots. He knows his speech by heart, he knows what he wants to say - but in the end he really does not understand what he says.

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

Absolem

mind-googling

Goldie

mind-googling

Joined: 07 October 2009

Posts: 1244

Posted: 22 May 2010 at 3:05pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by return_to_hades


We know what the Pythagoras Theorem states. But understanding how it was derived is different.
Or think of Chatur's speech in 3 Idiots. He knows his speech by heart, he knows what he wants to say - but in the end he really does not understand what he says.

Casually speaking, it may be said that he knows his speech, but to be precise he has just memorized it. Because there are things to be understood.

mind-googling

Goldie

mind-googling

Joined: 07 October 2009

Posts: 1244

Posted: 22 May 2010 at 3:20pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by return_to_hades


We know what the Pythagoras Theorem states. But understanding how it was derived is different. Or think of Chatur's speech in 3 Idiots. He knows his speech by heart, he knows what he wants to say - but in the end he really does not understand what he says.

What the theorem states is a fact to be known only.
To know how it was derived, we have to understand it. Here, knowing = understanding.



Edited by mind-googling - 22 May 2010 at 3:27pm

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
Why do Indians makes such corny jokes?

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

debayon 59 3827 07 January 2010 at 2:53pm
By debayon
Should language learning be compulsory in schools? WillSmith456 1 440 09 July 2009 at 11:25pm
By WillSmith456
What is wrong not learning Hindi?

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 21 22

azman007 170 9930 06 June 2009 at 10:53pm
By rogna
Professional learning/degree in relations raj5000 7 399 11 October 2007 at 9:58pm
By mermaid_QT
Less (Women) 2 WL Riders in Delhi? SolidSnake 6 441 20 February 2007 at 5:34am
By ani11

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.