Someone here

@Bazooka Jesus is a chair a something or a nothing?

You can verify it in 5 minutes of self-inquiry. @Yahya great ?.

God told me @Carl-Richard lol.

@Yahya I didn't want to discuss the content of any specific religion or whether it is true or valid. But the structure of religion in general and the epistemic value of "faith" and "belief". But since you insist on that.. I find the concept of "soul" in Islam very interesting if you wanna discuss Islamic flaws. Islam believes that each "person" has a unique soul that is going to be restructured after death of the body in the day of judgment to be "judged" and based on the good deeds vs bad deeds... It's either gonna go to heaven or hell. The proplem with this is (if you are familiar with Buddhist teaching) that there is no individual self for each human organism. There is no self inside of you which is in control of your life and can be 'judged' objectively for its deeds. The modern scientific understanding of the "self" is that its temporary and subject to time and change and death as the body is.. And the 'mind' or 'personality' is not an abstract spiritual essence that is separate from the body.. But it's a byproduct of the brain.. There is no 'self' separate from the body or inside the body.. But rather its an emergent phenomenon of the body.. The body and mind grow together and decay together.. And we can actually change your personality by playing with the chemicals in your brain... A little injection of chloroform can erase your thinking process completely and can turn 'you' into a psycho completely lost control.... That shows you that your self is a byproduct of chemicals in the brain.. And the personality dissolves once you get older enough.. As a result of the dissolve of the neural network in the brain.. You see? That' personality ' completely dissolves in elderly people because it was never a substantial thing onto itself. And there is another issue.. The personality is not just one.. But rather it's a stream of different personalities.. My personality when I was 10 yo is different from when I was 20 yo is different from 30 yo etc.. And each moment there is something that gets added into my "self" and something that gets removed.. So which one of these different selves will get rebirthed at the day of judgement???? The 10 yo me or the 30 yo me or the 60 yo which is a completely different person???? And sometimes people have split personality disorder.. Which is a common mental illnesses.. A person can have two different personalities because of a certain damage in his brain.. Which might make him in some cases behave like a murderer and sometimes not.. So which personality of that person will get judged on the day of judgement??? You see how this doesn't make sense because it assumes this kinda static 'soul' or 'self' that lives inside the organism statically and permanently. There just is no such thing.

@Bazooka Jesus why is there something rather than nothing?

@Cireeric no he said he means it literally. You are imagining your birth (and your entire past) In the present. Memory doesn't prove a past. It's impossible to prove a past. It's impossible to prove anything other than the present moment. Hence "your birth is imaginary".

Life is nothing. Unfortunately (or fortunately?) people only discover this in their last years.

@Yahya why would I do that? That was never the goal of this thread to debunk religion but to search it's positive sides. If you find peace and Happiness with Islam then does it really matter if it's "true"?

Why are you using two accounts? ?

It's completely relative. no objective fools and objective wise.

I wonder the same too.. Because I have no idea what you are even talking about. ? Surprise surprise

Agreed. Yet thread wasn't to compare science with religion.. But what gives religion worldwide upvotes regardless of it's nonsensical aspect. It turns out we agree on that aspect.. Which is it makes people's lives easier.. Provides a sense of purpose.. Morality.. Meaning.. Etc. It's not that it 'actually "delivered that. Morality and the meaning of life etc are of course relative and subjective if we look closely at what" morality " really is. But even a sweet illusion that gives a sense of direction in life simply feels better than the nihilism of atheism. It is filled with errors. But regardless I'm not trying to debate a specific religion here. Contemplate this.. 'religion' is at the ultimate analysis a thought in your mind. A set of beliefs without a believer. Such That the moment you stop holding the belief.. You are no longer a 'believer'.

Yeah yeah

That's a naive generalization that I don't agree with. It's one thing to outline possible limitations of science and to say entire science is BS is going a bit too far. After all you are using a scientific product rn to type that science is BS lol. Then stop using all the technology produced by science. I get what you're saying. And that's actually what I said above in my first reply to you. That even empirical investigating must be supplied by a leap of faith. Even faith in the scientific method. However.. Testability +leap of faith in that testability (because it's based on direct experience and direct information) is far better then just mere faith based on nothing but a fucking holy book. Don't you think so?

@Yahya cool. 'few' questions for ya.. 1. Why do you believe Islam is true? After all its all based on a story in the past.. Have you actually personally verified any of the Islamic beliefs (heaven and hell..day of judgement etc). 2. how do you know that Quran is true? After all its a random old book that no one knows who's the author of it. And it's filled with scientific errors and myths. How is it that you can trust blindly whatever is written In Quran to be true? 3.if you are aware of that.. But you just chose to emotionally lean towards believing.. Is it just the simple fact that faith feels good and gives you a sense of security and peace.. Meaning and purpose etc?

@Leo Gura dude.. Brilliant work. Just finished the episode Sometimes I doubt if you are even human (well you are God I guess)

@Gesundheit let's simplify this whole thing.. The differences between the scientific method (testability.. Evidence based.. Falsifiability etc) and religious dogma are well clear. The similarities are what's not so obvious. The main concern is what's the epistemological value of 'belief'.. How can you trust something as true or valid knowledge about the world when all you have is just a belief in it because it's written in some book (scripture)??? Do you think billions of Christians and Muslims and Hindus etc are fools that they don't understand that this doesn't count as a strong evidence? Yet they seem to disregard that and emotionally lean towards being dogmatic about their beliefs that they know well it's not justified enough.

Isn't the scientific method more credible and reliable than blind religious faith and dogmas? The strange loop of course is that you should have faith in empirical evidence for it to be credited by you.. Otherwise we could ask "how do you know that empiricism itself is a vaild way of arriving at truth"? So it turns out there is interesting intersections and similarities between the religious method and the scientific method. Faith is almost inescapable. Of course.. According to the common view scientific belief (belief in scientific hypotheses or theories) has nothing to do with religious belief (belief in the creed of some religion). Though this common view is very widespread..it is usually not reflected upon or analyzed in some detail. One of the reasons that on a closer look and deeper analysis it will turn out that there are a number of interesting similarities between the two. And also the differences show interesting and important characteristics. But to show that there are similarities and that there are differences is only one important task. It will become clearer on a more detailed analysis that both “similarity” and “difference” should not be taken too literally. Since in many cases a particular similarity will show some new differences in special details and a particular difference will show some new similarities on a deeper level.

It's interesting because when I contemplate the epistemic foundations of science vs religion... It turns out that faith is essential even in science. A lot of atheists simply don't believe in God because they (naively put) don't see him. Or simply have no experience of God. While they might 'believe' evolution is true when they never themselves verified any of it. They just take the words of scientists on blind faith. So what different are they than a religious person who takes the word of his scholars on blind faith? I'm not saying that's a valid epistemic position.. It's flat out wrong.. But I'm interested in how could they (religious people) not see that it's wrong? Or perhaps they don't care about objective facts but only how they feel (faith feels good and comfy) ...and they don't bother with epistemological questions from a religious perspective.. or attempts to understand the epistemological issues that come from religious belief. The questions which epistemologists may ask about any particular belief also apply to religious beliefs and propositions: whether they seem rational..justified.. warranted.. reasonable.. based on evidence and so on. They basically don't give value to that.. And they value feeling better and feeling protected by God.. Even if God turns out to be a myth in their head.

In that case scenario.. If eating that pizza did in fact elevate your mood . nourish you... and you enjoyed the taste.. .. Then it did make you happy.. Temporarily at least. You can't deny that. The state of "being present with whatever is present" and not longing to change our present circumstances is what you defined happiness as.. But that state is not induced for free.. And it doesn't last. Unless you can get there through meditation and are able to extend it for a long time. Then props to you. But I wasn't able to do it or figure out how this would work.

Alright.. Beyond just working.. Eating.. Shiting.. And fucking.. Getting old.. And getting sick.. And dying......... What is it really all about? What takes you beyond the mundane? What gives you real serenity and peace of mind? I don't know if you have noticed yet.. But the "classical" approach to happiness =pleasure just doesn't work. If you just get all the money and all the sex and all the yachts and houses etc..... Sure that is a relatively better condition than begging for food as a homeless person... So there is definitely a direction towards happiness.. But you don't actually believe that's what life is All about don't you? Also ... There is what's known as hedonic treadmill... as a person makes more money.. expectations and desires rise in tandem.. which results in no permanent gain in happiness. Because now what used to make you super happy barely dabbles with your senses anymore. So you have to chase something bigger and bigger.... And it never ends. Also we live in a world of duality. There is no night without day. No cold without hot. No high without a low. You can't just capture your happy moments and play them in repeat forever.. Life flows.. Everything passes. Impermanence is another thing. No matter what you do and where you go.. You are always back to baseline. Think of all your happy moments in the past.. All gone as if never even happened. Now you have to chase them again. And so on. You are literally haunting a mirage and you know it.. But you keep doing it anyways. Because you can't help it. The programmed "needs". You "need" stuff constantly. You need air.. Water.. Food.. Safety.. Comfort.. Pleasure.. Approval.. Meaning.. Purpose.. Value.. Etc etc. The last three ones are not found out there somewhere. So you have to make them up. And you deep down know you are making them up.. So you never actually find them. Just few thoughts. Share some insights about the nature of happiness.. Desire.. Attachments.. The human condition.. Etc.

@Gesundheit it's not just me.. Everyone are searching for what's right in front of them.

I found this random video while searching for the ultimate truth lol

Exactly. I never bought the notion that Truth =love and goodness (exclusively). It just doesn't match with straight up "reality". So when a Guru is preaching that "happiness is your true nature".. Don't they know that life includes cruelty and (sometimes) unimaginable amount of suffering and misery? You wouldn't expect such wise people to be blind to that. I guess it has to do with "you create your own reality" type of thing. So Truth can be whatever you insist on imagining It is.

So about the difference between the waking reality and dreams... First of all... It's not possible to distinguish the two.. Unless you go lucid on a dream. But for now.. You can't tell which is which. That is.. You don't know if you are dreaming or awake right now. You might have just woke up from one dream to enter another dream. And this might go on endlessly. Which is interesting because it kinda show that there is absolutely no difference between dream and "reality" in terms of phenomenonal experience. The same thing.. Sights sounds and different kinds of perception are identical. Except maybe in the dream state its kinda unstable and dark.. And there is a huge lack of consistency. All of which are the opposite in the waking state. It's pretty solid and consistent. But dreams only seem inconsistent after you wake up and compare them to the waking world. So it's not highly unlikely that this world too might be highly inconsistent relative to a higher order of reality that you might wake up to. Interesting. The dream argument (similar to simulation theory argument) is that the act of dreaming provides preliminary evidence that the senses we trust to distinguish reality from illusion should not be fully trusted.. and therefore.. any state that is dependent on our senses should at the very least be carefully examined and rigorously tested to determine whether it is in fact reality. But my answer to that is that dreams are all there is. Who said that dreams aren't real? They are 100 %real since we experience them. They are just different kinds of reality. As in they come about (generated) differently than the waking world (as assumed) but they are phenomenally identical as I said. Which means there is no such thing as illusion vs reality. It's all just different kinds of reality