Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
Shooting stars are not stars, they are meteroids entering the earth's atmosphere. That's why I said the verse is incorrect becauase it says some of the stars (lamps) are made into missles. They aren't.
And one more thing, it is also our own assumption that we can see it. The verse never stated that either. Which why shooting star just came up as the parable. It may very well not be a shooting star at all but something similar to it.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
[QUOTE]
Does this affect me in life, barely, and even in the Quran there is very little devoted to this just for informational scope of things and some knowledge of the unseen world.
IMO these are trivial issues for you, we should discuss Aqidah or Creed if you would like.
[/QUOTE]
Even if a trivial mistake is there in the Quran, it shows that the Quran is not perfect , and consequently, Islam is false.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
Shooting stars are not stars, they are meteroids entering the earth's atmosphere. That's why I said the verse is incorrect becauase it says some of the stars (lamps) are made into missles. They aren't.
Enough said.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
And see you tomorrow 
Don’t accuse me of googling now. i have to sleep.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
It sure sounds ilke it is clumping all lamps together, as if the lamps they saw in the sky 1400 years ago are the same lamps used as missles:
*And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire. *
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
Even if a trivial mistake is there in the Quran, it shows that the Quran is not perfect , and consequently, Islam is false.
What I meant is that these are trivial issues to discuss when one does not even believe in God. Thats a more major issue. I don't mean triviality means inconsistency.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
Goodnight. Enjoy.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
And the verdict is.........Atheist wins round two as well..Wanted more Islamic scholars for round three to put up with the challenge !
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
Peace Umm
Please read below:
Well … you think you know logic. If you are not willing to accept then asking for proof is irrelevant. People who ask for proof if they a truthful will only ask for proof if they ARE willing to accept the claim provided a sound basis can be given. It seems you only ask for proof when you have already made your mind up not to accept.
I do not intend to guide you, because I do not believe that I can guide you. However, it is my responsibility to clarify the misconceptions that you may have, explain the things as I have understood them in a wise manner and prevent lies to be propagated by presenting the alternative views. In fact the Qur’an itself testifies and I cannot emphasise this more that people will be guided and misguided by the Qur’an. It does not admit defeat nor is it saying that it has faults, rather it clearly caters for the response type taken by me and you, it is all encompassing and though you may find things to ridicule and provide reason to yourself to denounce when analysed with honesty the same things are evidence for the contrary. You will find things that cannot be proven either way to support our reason to denounce the Qur’an. Let’s see if this is in fact true.
I am having trouble making sense of you verbosity here; however, I feel I agree with the idea that reasoning destroys myths. Therefore I am reasoning with you that humans are actually INCAPABLE of not believing in the unseen. They will believe somewhere some place a belief will set in and that belief will be founded on a limit beyond which only analogy, metaphor, reflection and the say so of others will suffice. Even the most staunchest of atheists will have a belief and that belief will be driven not necessarily by what is factual but a sort of reasoning will be employed that most likely skirts around a bias basis. People who are philosophic will reach beyond the capabilities of the mere rational because they will strive to reach truth rather than fact. Religion need not be about seeking truth, rather it is about seeking God, but if it is the true religion it needs to stand up to philosophical constructs rather than the factual ones. Fact is based on what is objective and most of belief is in a domain that should begin with objective evidence but sometimes even objectivity is not enough to convince some people of truth. Therefore it falls back on the absolute statement that there is nothing we can do to ‘guide’ people rather that guidance can only come from God. This statement is a philosophical truism.
I fear to burst your bubble on the extent of your reasoning. But you see putting things simply to me is asking for trouble. You should keep to the more difficult approach perhaps then you can better hide your fallacious arguments. Okay I’m going off on one, I apologise in advance.
You say firstly that you made an assumption. An assumption is fixing the argument so it suits your end result. There are other things that need to be entertained to do this subject justice.
Let’s assume your assumption is true. That humans try to survive. The questions to ask are why? Is it because it is innate in their natures? Is it because they ‘feel’ they should do, due to some external influence? But before we do this we should also entertain the question Do humans actually try to survive, or is the question more complicated than that?
Let’s see … from a young age children do very dangerous things that can harm them, though they have no idea of survival their parents do indeed protect them. So from this observation humans wish their young to survive. But so far the children themselves seem not to have a directly sensed purpose to survive. Then we have to look at all the people who kill themselves and all the people who wage wars. It seems the need to survive is laced with layers of complexity which on the level of reasoning is counter-intuitive. People will kill to keep other people alive.
On the other hand however, death is part of life. What I mean is no one has escaped death or those who live long it is fairly certain that they will soon die. Now the assertion by you is that people have developed ‘religion’ to combat a fear of death. On the other side of the equation the people who have developed science are trying to combat death itself. Based on reasoning alone what is the better option? To try to combat death or try to combat the fear of it? The reasoning in the latter is of a higher rational calibre because past experience tells us that no one can cheat death. Not that we have yet substantiated that the reason for religions development is about death, we are merely entertaining the notion raised by you at this stage.
Now let’s argue the position of the said claim which is humans have developed religion to combat the fear of death. Is this true? The reasoning provided is based on a possible truth that we do ‘fear’ death. This is like saying bananas exist because they are edible. There may be a connection between the fact that religion does indeed provide hope and peace and a better way to handle the unknown of death. But it does not mean that religion was devised for that reason, just because we can see that our fear of death is reduced by religion. Rather we need to come up with direct evidence to support that view. If it can be found that in the past the fear of death led to a demise of humanity so by creating religion somehow the people survived or prospered over those people who had no religion then your argument can fit in with your claims. In fact I can just easily say that religion increases our fear of death so we can be better people because it emphasises that we have only one chance to make a good life. So your argument is half-baked and that is that. In fact it is not only half-baked it actually requires a lot more belief in my part to accept your version than mine, which is that the One who created us, has indeed created our religion for us too.
As I said I require ‘proof’ evidence that suggests the connections you are creating. The size of a car increasing does not always mean what you have asserted. You must first rule out that the car is not growing. How about if you are moving towards the car? How about if you are shrinking in size? What if you have not ruled out the fact that you might be deceived? Logical proof has to be rigorous. Of course cars do not grow, but in the case of religion we can just as easily entertain the idea that religion has been sent to us. In fact because we have documented statements in our scripture to this effect that “Islam has been chosen for us” then we have greater evidence for our belief than you do for yours, which is that on a fanciful thought you create the notion that people developed their own religion from nothing just to combat a fear of death. Your assertion cannot be proven. In fact if it were true would you not get animals beginning to develop religions too out of fear of death? And even if you can answer saying animals this or animals that you cannot support your statement with evidence like we can.
The one making the claim is the one who should be asked the question. I did not make any claim. The claim comes from the Qur’an. Test the Qur’an and see if it holds it’s ground. The Source of the Qur’an is the One Who needs to defend it, not me. I have found there is enough evidence in Islam that satisfies me enough to believe it with conviction. Without giving the Qur’an a fair trial it cannot be dismissed as false. That is what you and all people are doing. Those people who have treated the Qur’an with respect have also seen the accuracy and truth it proclaims every time. And you do have to offer something. Even if what you have to offer is confusion and lies it is being offered by you whether you realise it or not. By regurgitating the material off dubious websites you are doing such things. Enlightened or people of religion are also less likely to afflict pain and punishment. It is those people who under the guise of religion who are in fact worldly power mongering and killing others. Let alone dividing the world. When a people are saved or not when there are some who are good and those who are not none of this information comes to me, so I have not place in Islam to call people as such. However, Islam does tell what will happen to such people who find their way into such classifications. I hope that appeases your concerns.
There are explanations or reconciliations beyond your one that suffices the apparent difference that you are presenting.
The first reconciliation is one based on overlap, which in my view is the weaker of the two. Here is how it goes:
2 + 2 + 2 where 2 from the first 2 and 2 from the second two makes up the 4 in the verses regarding the mountains.
The second reconciliation is one based on the concept of seven firmaments and the concept of completion of them.
According to my understanding verses in Chapter 7:54 are high level verses referring to 6 periods of time of generally equal significance. These will be cosmological eras. The chapter 41 verse 9 – 12 however, is talking on a different level. Nebulae and system development. Chapter 41 verse 9 splits this development in two periods of time. The first of the two periods is subdivided into four equal periods for the development of the mountains, etc and the second of the two periods is subdivided into the development of the atmosphere in two sub periods.
A yawm in Arabic does not have the same period length in every verse in the Qur’an, rather it can only be taken to be a period of equal time length based on the objects being talked about in that very verse. You will notice that the term in chapter 41 verse 12 states “So He completed them”, which implies that the beginning of the creation was already in place and the two periods of time were used to only complete the heavens not make them entirely. A period of time can be defined either as stage where changes are happening until an equilibrium of sorts is reached or against an arbitrary means of measurement. I think you will find Islam and the Qur’an is consistent in the way it perceives the word ‘yawm’ which is as period of activity or time rather than ‘day’.
Furthermore, science also deals with eras and functional natures between those eras. Just take a look at the development of the universe theories.
For 18:47 what are trying to get at?
For 20:53 The Earth is like a bed – it is sanctuary like a bed, it is comfortable like a bed.
For 43:10 The same
For 43:38 Two easts can also imply north east and south east, or it can also be geographical east, geopolitical east or magnetic east based on the magnetic north. Most likely it is the former.
For 78:6 Explained
For 79:30 Spread the Earth – yes I agree
It is true what Muslims scientists did or did not realise is not important, but what you don’t realise obviously is. None of these verses require explanation further than what is in them.
But at the same time there is nothing to suggest that it is a consecutive process, that is logical to you, but it may not be the intended. If there is a possibility that you are wrong it means that there is impossibility that it can be conclusively called erroneous.
I have also explained the concept of yawm in Arabic. This concept is consistent, you will everywhere in the Qur’an where it talks about ‘yawm’ in many different contexts, which vary the time length.
Some lights in the sky are bodies like the sun and moon other lights in the sky are shooting stars, which serve a different purpose to the sun and moon. The rest is part of the belief system and we can at the moment use science to prove or disprove this.
[quote=“ummm”]
read the previous post. The Sun does not set in a prticular place.
The Qur’an never says that the sun sets in a given place. Rather it says that a human being saw or perceived the sun to be setting in a given place. If the Qur’an mentions what a human sees and thinks, if that thought is wrong it does not make the text wrong. It merely means that the thought of the human whose thoughts are being quoted was limited and that Allah (SWT) knows the thoughts of his people.
I think you will find the terms are reflexively implied as though on an egg-shaped surface. It is based on the etymology of the Arabic text.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
It sure sounds ilke it is clumping all lamps together, as if the lamps they saw in the sky 1400 years ago are the same lamps used as missles:
*And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire. *
Thats what I pointed out, the verse is not indicative if they see those lamps or stars. This is how we a trying to comprehend it. What is apparent here is that these lamps or stars do shoot out much similar to a missile (which is why I guess the translator used the word missile, I doubt he was implying literally missile, its more like an adverb to further qualify the action of striking the Jinn in this verse). As you rightly pointed out, its definitely not meteorites entering the atmosphere because that would mean the lower heaven is right above us (which can also be true, the unseen is another dimensions which we cannot experience unless by the permission of Allah SWT). So what I believe from this verse is that Jinn are targeted but the part where we are analogizing is between what those strikes look like based on what is known to us. Shooting star was the closest parable, which could be totally wrong or even right. However this still does not prove an inconsistency in the Quran. Why I say that is because we are unable comprehend what the heaven looks like and where it is. However given that this universe exists it is not unreasonable to believe that heaven does exist. There is enough in this universe to establish that belief than to negate it.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
^^^ Let's start with a little thinking...
Suppose, you, using advanced 3rd millenium technology succeed in creating your own big bang and give birth to a new Universe. Also suppose that you are immortal. In course of time, the Universe develops, a planet is formed and intelligent animals like human beings evolve in that planet. Wouldn't you be just proud of your hard work, your creation? Would you really want all the intelligent animals bow down before you 5 times a day, every day, failing which you would brutally cast them into hell? Would you really give your precious creations such brutal punishment for silly reasons like that? Would you care about who among them believe in you, instead of being more concerned about their cultural development? Would you brutally punish them just because they didn't believe in you?Would you want a war b/w those who beleive inyou and those who don't/
This is my first accusation against the Quranic allah- tyranny.
Nice one !!!
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
And the verdict is.........Atheist wins round two as well..Wanted more Islamic scholars for round three to put up with the challenge !
Peace Rocking vibes
Actually your response is highly predictable. Allah (SWT) says in the Qur'an:
008.073 The Unbelievers are protectors, one of another: Unless ye do this, (protect each other), there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief.
You can't be objective even when the Qur'an speaks about you and the actions you undertake! So you see it is no surprise that you say this, but seeing that the topic is about the Qur'an ... It is irony that the Qur'an runs to its own defense.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
And the verdict is.........Atheist wins round two as well..Wanted more Islamic scholars for round three to put up with the challenge !
No athiests in sight for round three. Must have stepped out for dressing.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
Psyah, That verse is more predicitable than what it claims to predict. Every argument about the validity of the Quran is circular. It is God's word becauae it says it is God's word.
It says those who don't believe it will band together and that they are evil, what is so glorious or ingenious about that?
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
Psyah, That verse is more predicitable than what it claims to predict. Every argument about the validity of the Quran is circular. It is God's word becauae it says it is God's word.
It says those who don't believe it will band together and that they are evil, what is so glorious or ingenious about that?
Peace Seminole
It is not God's Word because it says so. It is God's Word because we can't show it is not God's Word and in addition it makes the claim and in addition it tells us its falsification test and in addition it reassures us that it will pass every time. Nothing can fault the Qur'an. And if the verse is so predictable then at least it is true. And if it is not true how is it so predictable? And if it really is so predictable show me in which book this has been written other than the Qur'an?
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
Peace yet again ummm
The Qur’an is obviously comprehensive enough to be understood by all people, which is the reason why all people, in their many variations are Muslims, professing to the Qur’an as the word of God.
What is not fair is to assert the contrary, that it is suitable only to desert people. This is an emotional and totally unsubstantiated argument. The fact that many non-desert people are accepting Islam today proves that it is not only applicable and relevant today but also to the non-desert Arabs.
As for parables, it states within the Qur’an exactly what you are doing. That is right it talks about you. Let me show you:
Surah 3 verse 7 He (Allah (SWT)) it is Who has sent down to you the Book; in it are verses fundamental; they are the foundation of the book: others are Mutashabihat. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the Mutashabihat seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows their true reality except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: ‘We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:’ and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.
This verse is guiding us to concentrate on those things that are tangible. If we see a topic related to something that we cannot possibly ascertain in this life, then we should not debate over it, rather we should ponder over those aspects around that topic that are within our grasp. The Qur’an cannot be disproved in it’s verses that are of parable nature however, in those areas where the context is not such a parable, then bring it to the fore and we can discuss.
More can be taken up on this topic later.
In order to debate facts we need to know where you got the facts from whether your facts agree with ours and whether your analysis of those facts is valid based on the full set of facts that surround the facts in question. It is far more credible that you can quote authentic Muslim sites to combat the Islamic/Qur’anic concepts rather than take what open deceivers are propagating in the name of disclosure.
I have answered this. The sun sets in a place is the concept in the minds eye of the person whom the narrative is talking about, not Allah (SWT).
In Islam God is incomparable, but not unknowable. We know about God only what He has revealed about Himself. However, to even begin bringing humanistic argumentation in to play to determine God is wilful deception because we must be prepared to argue about God based on the understanding there is about God from authentic scriptural references.
Suppose – hypothetical
Own big bang – we don’t even know how to get all the energy in one place to create the big bang.
Suppose immortality … we cannot entertain that thought for many reasons, but I’ll play along.
Your argument is misplaced. I’ll explain that in a minute. But I have a better analogy. Let’s say you are a parent and you clothe your child, take him to bed and feed him every day. You always take care of him, but your child not only denies that you are his parent, but also ignores you and denies that you exist. Will you carry on feeding, clothing, and caring for this child in the same way?
This is a better analogy because we are not God so we cannot begin to entertain thoughts like that, however, we can be parents and we do realise that there is an injustice if we do not worship God. That injustice is not to God but to our own selves, because it is our sense of fairness that we will harm.
Now here is why your argument is misplaced. God does not create a universe and sits back proud of his achievement. He is at all time Sustaining us in our existence. Without Him we would cease to exist. Without His permission we would fail to raise a finger or even an eyebrow in protest to how tyrannical we think He is (SWT). No .. Rather He is The Most Patient and The Most Merciful and The Majestic in how He nourishes us all the time and gives us time to choose and live in this world at ease an in comfort. Then how many of the bounties of God shall we deny? We love our parents dearly as they love us, but God gave us them also. All comforts in this world whether you believe in Him or not come from Him. This is the belief of the Muslim and now using this belief recreate the scenario you have given and re-ask the question.
Mountains are demonstrated scientifically to prevent shocks from earthquakes penetrating large distances, by absorbing the shocks themselves. Whether this is evolutionary chance or not is debatable, such an amazing fluke hey? But God tells us before we knew that they did this, in His Book 1400 years ago. We are still not the wiser regarding the splitting of the moon. But as a Muslim I believe in all of the Qur’an.
It does use scientifically correct language in my opinion. The failure is that we cannot understand much of it yet and when we do we realise very quickly that it not only solves the riddles but does more emphatically than we tried to do it ourselves. Embryology is one such area.
As I said only Allah (SWT) knows. It is part of the Qur’an and we accept it, but the people who will grasp the Qur’an are the people of understanding.
However here is the way I have understood the verses about the stars.
Firstly, you need to understand that the verse is part of the Chapter, which is titled Dominion, which is a man given name to the chapter. The theme of the chapter is about the Dominion of God and how He is Powerful over all things. This verse is a gem really and there is plenty of meaning behind it.
I need to stress that the nearest heaven according to my understanding is the limit of the sky to space. It is the boundary of our atmosphere – The mesosphere to be precise. This is the place where meteoroids will be burnt up and when the ceramic tiles come in to use on the shuttle during re-entry. The truly amazing thing regarding this verse is the TRUTH in the idea that shooting stars are part of the lowest part of the heavens. In addition to this, another TRUTH is that these lights have been referred to as ‘adornments’, which is a fact. Every Disney film with a night scene or a romantic evening is made into a magical moment when a shooting star passes by. When we see them in real life we gaze in amazement and interest. They are by far the most beautiful heavenly bodies for the naked eye sought for by many. So why tell us about these TRUTHS? It is obvious … to reflect the Power of God and Bounties of God and Knowledge of God all in one verse. All of these types of lights, which are part of the lowest heaven, are used to drive away devils, which has another point of insight. This insight is a reminder that we do not know everything from observation alone. And we are told this specific information possibly because God Knows that we will learn about and understand shooting stars, dismissing them as random events. You will therefore notice that they are not random events. They occur in batches and stop and then reoccur. There is nothing in the phenomenon of meteoroid activity that can negate the elemental of warding away devils. If you concentrate on the devil part of this verse you may miss the more important parts which inform about the scientific aspects. And such is the nature of this verse.
Consequently, in Surah 85 there is mention “By the heaven holding the big stars” this heaven is the one that is responsible for what we see as the big stars in the sky, i.e. sun, planets and the non-deep sky stars making up the nodes on constellations. This heaven layer is our local galactic region. The path of the sun travels through them through the various ages.
This is the type of lie that needs to be stopped. The Qur’an does promote thinking. It time and again raises the status of those people who reflect, those people of understanding. People cannot be reflectors or understanding without being thinkers. So what you say is a lie and what you give needs to be proven otherwise retracted.
Obviously I feel I am a thinker I profess to that the Qur’an is the Word of God and I also believe you have not done enough of thinking yourself.
There is no mistake in the Qur’an no matter how trivial a matter. But I agree take up a matter of faith for it is more important than things about shooting stars. Some people ask that such few words in the Qur’an but what was the need to put this shooting star verse in. Well to those people I would like to lure them to this verse, with a related meaning and connotation:
Surah 2 verse 26
Verily, Allah is not ashamed to set forth a parable even of a mosquito or so much more (insignificant or significant) than it. And as for those who believe, they know that it is the Truth from their Lord, but as for those disbelieve, they say: “What did Allah intend by this parable?” By it He misleads many and many He guides thereby. And He misleads thereby only those who are rebellious.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
ufff...
why do you guys write such humongous replies? I'll try to reply to as many posts as i can.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
What I meant is that these are trivial issues to discuss when one does not even believe in God. Thats a more major issue. I don't mean triviality means inconsistency.
I understood what you meant. But don't you feel that even a single mistake makes the Quran imperfect and Islam false? Doesn't that also prove that God(atleast Allah) doesn't exist, or there is no proof that he exists. "God" is the central topic in this thread but few seem to be interested in discussing it.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
[QUOTE]
Well … you think you know logic. If you are not willing to accept then asking for proof is irrelevant. People who ask for proof if they a truthful will only ask for proof if they ARE willing to accept the claim provided a sound basis can be given. *It seems you only ask for proof when you have already made your mind up not to accept.
*
[/QUOTE]
Firstly, I am a freethinker, and always keep an open mind when discussing.
Secondly, even if I AM close minded, it still doesn't hurt you to give me the proofs would it?
Thirdly, if i tell you that I split the Sun in two, will you accept it? How can any person believe in Quran's extravagant claims without proofs? I do no know what is holding you back from giving proofs.
Re: Islam promoting thought and false accusations: Att. Ummm
to psyah:
I had written a complete massive reply to you but all of it just got deleted(power failure, UPS battery down). So don't mistake me if my answers are not as lengthy as was required.
[QUOTE]
I do not intend to guide you, because I do not believe that I can guide you. However, it is my responsibility to clarify the misconceptions that you may have, explain the things as I have understood them in a wise manner and prevent lies to be propagated by presenting the alternative views. In fact the Qur’an itself testifies and I cannot emphasise this more that people will be guided and misguided by the Qur’an. It does not admit defeat nor is it saying that it has faults, rather it clearly caters for the response type taken by me and you, it is all encompassing and though you may find things to ridicule and provide reason to yourself to denounce when analysed with honesty the same things are evidence for the contrary. You will find things that cannot be proven either way to support our reason to denounce the Qur’an. Let’s see if this is in fact true.
[/QUOTE]
Basically you are saying that quran guides some people and miguides some according to the wishes of allah. Any person whose mind isn't blurred by religious beliefs can see the absurdity of this statement( I am sorry I am being harsh but this is completely ridiculous)
Secondly, let me tell you that I never asked for your "guidance". i challenged Quran's extravagant claims, and in opening this thread I thought you had taken up the challenge to defend the Quran. This has got nothing to do with clarifying misconceptions. this is not a student-teacher dialogue, where a student absolutely believes the teacher but merely raises his "doubts"- that is, implying that he hasn't clearly understood and the master knows best. Rather, this is a clash of conflicting opinions. I justify one and you justify the other.
[QUOTE]
I am having trouble making sense of you verbosity here; however, I feel I agree with the idea that reasoning destroys myths.
[/QUOTE]
I am glad you agree.
[QUOTE]
Therefore I am reasoning with you that humans are actually INCAPABLE of not believing in the unseen. They will believe somewhere some place a belief will set in and that belief will be founded on a limit beyond which only analogy, metaphor, reflection and the say so of others will suffice. Even the most staunchest of atheists will have a belief and that belief will be driven not necessarily by what is factual but a sort of reasoning will be employed that most likely skirts around a bias basis. People who are philosophic will reach beyond the capabilities of the mere rational because they will strive to reach truth rather than fact.
[/QUOTE]
All truths are facts.
all facts are truths.
Humans are perfectly capable of not believing in the unseen without proofs, thank you very much. Some people, have their opinions about things- some may believe in Quantum Mechanics and some in Relativity. This belief however is VERY DIFFERENT from religious belief. These are just opinions. Some people may feel that caffeine causes headache9just an example). If a scientific research shows otherwise, then they change thier opinion. I am at loss to find a similarity with this and religious beliefs.
Religion need not be about seeking truth, rather it is about seeking God, but if it is the true religion it needs to stand up to philosophical constructs rather than the factual ones. Fact is based on what is objective and most of belief is in a domain that should begin with objective evidence but sometimes even objectivity is not enough to convince some people of truth. Therefore it falls back on the absolute statement that there is nothing we can do to ‘guide’ people rather that guidance can only come from God. This statement is a philosophical truism.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
You say firstly that you made an assumption. An assumption is fixing the argument so it suits your end result. There are other things that need to be entertained to do this subject justice
[/QUOTE]
Reasoning is always in the form "Given a is true, B is true." An assumption is always necessary to get to a conclusion.
[QUOTE]
Let’s assume your assumption is true. That humans try to survive. The questions to ask are why? Is it because it is innate in their natures? Is it because they ‘feel’ they should do, due to some external influence?
[/QUOTE]
let us assume that a baby is born in complete isolation. if a muderer comes and tries to kill it, will the baby not cry? This proves that will to survive is innate and not caused by external influences.
[QUOTE]
Let’s see … from a young age children do very dangerous things that can harm them, though they have no idea of survival their parents do indeed protect them. So from this observation humans wish their young to survive. But so far the children themselves seem not to have a directly sensed purpose to survive.
[/QUOTE]
I am sorry psyah, but I expected much more from you. A child does a lot of dangerous things, because it is not aware of the dangers,. Commonsense, no? You telling me that children have no will to survive? They love injections?
[QUOTE]
Then we have to look at all the people who kill themselves and all the people who wage wars. It seems the need to survive is laced with layers of complexity which on the level of reasoning is counter-intuitive. People will kill to keep other people alive.
[/QUOTE]
People commit suicide when they have lost hope completely and are extremely depressed. Here extreme depression counters the human will to survive. if it overpowers, then the person commits suicide. Given a choice between a "pleasant" life and death, don't you think they would choose life? this is obviously because there is no depression then nothing to counter the will to survive. this proves that the will to survive always exists.
As for wars, animals wage wars for food and fmales. food is necessary for survival and a bachelor's life must be difficult. Humans wage wars to protect themselves. i both these cases, the living being risks its own life to make its(and its loved ones) life more eaningful. Again, this shows the human will to survive.