1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Religious beliefs of Iron Maiden fans

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Sea of Madness, Jun 16, 2017.

  1. Zare

    Zare Dream of broken citadels

    Yes there is, wisdom in ancient texts, and stuff. Where you see 'dignitaries' I see ordinary people. In robes. With a theology degree. I approach them as normal people, some are plain old idiots, some are enlightened and educated beyond my levels. But that robe 'means' that he's 'closer to God' than you. Which is entirely false.

    Men in robes are men in robes. Enlightened people are enlightened people. They can go hand in hand
    jazz from hell likes this.
  2. The Flash

    The Flash Dennis Wilcock did 9/11

    There's nothing inherently wrong with something being an ideology. Scientific method is the viable path to knowledge. Science recognizes it can be wrong, it always tests itself out and always refreshes itself. It does not claim to "know everything" as you asserted it does and it never has. On the contrary, science has always been about admitting that we don't know everything, that's what seperated it from dogmatic religious and metaphysical thought.
    Zare likes this.
  3. jazz from hell

    jazz from hell Ancient Mariner

    That's not what I was trying to say; sorry if I was unclear, but I've already clarified it. And, also @Perun, I'm by no means anti-science, and I'm not attacking you or any scientist for doing your job at all; I've already made that very clear here: http://forum.maidenfans.com/threads/progressive-rock-metal.18952/page-17#post-631744. But there's a place for philosophy and religion as well, and it's not okay if scientists completely deny that.
    I'm saying that Meditation might be a path to a different kind of knowledge that you can't obtain through science. I'll never be able to prove it to you though, because -- well, as Wittgenstein said: 'Explanations come to an end somewhere.'
    Zare likes this.
  4. Perun

    Perun King of Kings Staff Member

    I didn't say you were, and I also don't have the impression that you are.

    The neurological stimuli obtained through the process of meditation could be acquired otherwise; but I know that's not your point. I don't want to deny you the belief that you acquire knowledge through meditation that is something deeper and special, but personally, I don't share it. There is a lot of value in calming down, stepping back, musing and meditating, but there's nothing metaphysical to it.
  5. jazz from hell

    jazz from hell Ancient Mariner

    I completely agree. But I don't understand your conclusion here:
    Steve Reich, an avantgarde composer, one of the greats of our time (Pulitzer price etc., but he also studied philosophy at Cornell), once said something in an interview, which intrigued me for years: "If I say something scientifically, like ‘This book weighs one pound’ we can put the book on the scale and find out if that is true or false. If I say, ‘Natural laws are the expression of G-d’s will’ there is nothing conceivable that will ever prove or disprove this. I’m not looking for evidence. I’m expressing an attitude that implies life is sacred."
  6. Perun

    Perun King of Kings Staff Member

    There is no logical value to this statement. If he makes a statement like that and uses it as an argument, the burden of proof is on him, whether he likes it or not. He can't just shrug it off like that.
    The Flash likes this.
  7. LooseCannon

    LooseCannon Yorktown-class aircraft carrier Staff Member

    By definition, the existence of a divine being cannot be today proven. Zare, I agree with you, quite personally, that the amount of unknowns will decrease as we learn more about stuff, as we gain more information and better technology. But if it's impossible to prove something, that's fine too. For me, personally, things without evidence do not meaningfully exist. That is to say something has to be quantifiable or measured for me to believe in it. I'm perfectly willing to believe there's stuff out there I don't know about. It could be something very, very big, or very very small. We're constantly getting better at detecting both, and science is great for that.

    I don't see this is as a quarrel with religious people unless they choose to make it a quarrel. If someone wants to worship whichsoever god they want (with the caveat that their religion not inspire violence, and that it stays out of government and schools), I support that right. In fact, I would defend that right unto the death, if needed, despite being an atheist myself.

    There's been a discussion about what knowing means. Lots of religious people know that their god is real, etc. I'm not criticisizing this, other than to say it's a belief. And there's a critical difference between the layman definition of knowledge and the scientific definition of knowledge. I think that's the crux of the disagreement here.

    Keep in mind that everyone is entitled to their religious beliefs, or lack thereof, guys and girls, so please do keep the discussion civil.
    Zare likes this.
  8. Zare

    Zare Dream of broken citadels

    Jazz, that quote implies that God has a will. Will is something inherent to a subset of carbon-based life, on planet Earth, as far as the proof goes. People made God in their own image. This is the biggest problem I have with major religions, their egocentrism, homocentrism, call it what you will, and geocentrism. Humans on Earth, everything is about them. Well, it simply isn't. Religions native to Americas are like life and death to Abrahamic ones, as far as I can tell, and all "our" holy scripts do not mention that people, and their believes, and what God did to include them in his kingdom. They don't know about them because their knowledge was severely limited, talking about Eurasian peoples 1000-2000 yrs ago, and they see themselves as the Oracle. There was an ancient civilization in Turkey that had implemented in and outs of urban settlements, yet holy scriptures attribute that probably to Mesopotamia. Tons of old and gone ancient 'developed' civilizations, especially around the banks of river Ind.

    Human knowledge will never be completed. Everyone who presents his thinking as the ultimate knowledge is wrong by definition. Saying again, I think core Christianity's has great synergy with scientific approach, it's abstract enough. I'm also quite pleased with this discussion and everyone has good points.

    LC, we both know that things start "existing" once we start to perceive them. You could be blind from birth and never know something's not OK if you had no interactions in life. You'd walk around like a dog without ever realizing that's not the way it's "supposed to be". That's human mind and that's quantum mechanics :)
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2017
  9. jazz from hell

    jazz from hell Ancient Mariner

    Obviously there isn't, and if you read the whole quote, it makes it quite clear itself. But that's besides the point.

    Look at it this way: Did it ever happen to you that you felt a woman was truly in love with you? Did you then try to scientifically prove this 'knowledge', find out that there's no logical value in it, that the neurological stimuli that provoke it might as well come from elsewhere and conclude that love doesn't exist?

    By the way, would you describe yourself as an agnostic?
  10. jazz from hell

    jazz from hell Ancient Mariner

    That's why I sometimes feel closer to Judaism, because it's more abstract than Christianity, which 'humanizes' the divine even more, in its praying to Jesus. But I've come to the conclusion that it ultimately doesn't make much of a difference, whether you prefer to think about God (or however you call it) as more of a person, or more of an abstract 'force' -- as long as you're aware that, in any case, you're only using analogies and metaphors to describe it. Still: someone once told me a version of Reich's quote that I actually prefer, which is that 'natural laws are divine.'

    About the other thing:
    I understand that you don't want to get too personal, so let's say an imaginary person has had a 'mystical' experience, however small it might be, by whatever way. Let's say, because that's relatively common, it was a feeling of unity, or one-ness, that presented itself as a small glimpse of, say, an ultimate reason, what's it all about. If that person now wants to deepen his or her understanding, science will try to explain it through brain molecules etc. That explanation will not be satisfactory.
  11. Onhell

    Onhell Mexican Revolutionary

    Why qualify it? Many to this day think that about plain old psychology. Sure it tries to play with the big boys buy going into brain chemistry, but that's nothing biology, chemistry ad neuroscience hasn't already looked into.

    So I'd like to know how parapsychology is a pseudo-science where plain psychology isn't.
  12. Zare

    Zare Dream of broken citadels

    Plain psychology uses scientific method? I don't know, ask a a psychologist.
  13. Onhell

    Onhell Mexican Revolutionary

    I thought it did, but it still gets criticized for trying to quantify intangibles like feelings and "personality." That's why modern psychology has moved away from Freud, Jung, Ericson and the like and ventured into brain chemistry and chemical imbalances thinking if they can "fix" that they can fix the individuals problems.

    I'm currently seeing a psychiatrist and I have mixed feelings about it. I told him I have suffered from depression all my life and that I was currently depressed due to recent life events and that I have been told I have anger issues. He immediately gave me an antidepressant without even asking me what's been going on and ordered an EEG when I told him about my brain trauma. I didn't even turn in the prescription for the antidepressant, because this is a demon I know well and I knew that in this case it was situational and I just needed to adjust and let time take care of it. I was intrigued to find out what the EEG would show since my last one was when I was 12. As it turns out there is an abnormal brain wave pattern which the neurologist described as "dispersed, non focal.

    He got upset that I didn't take the antidepressants and flat out asked me, "why are you here then?" and I said, "to find out what's wrong with me, not to be pumped full of pills." He sat back, thought about it, looked at the EEG results and said, "If you're ok with it I would like to give you something for the abnormal brain waves." Amazing how quickly people change their tune when you defend yourself. I told him in this case yes, it is a tangible problem with a possible tangible solution. I've been on the med since June 23rd and I can say it's working. My temper is not what it used to be and I'm still myself, so I'm happy about that.

    So I'm happy that after all these years I finally have a possible answer to my mood swings and short temper, but I am kind of disappointed that I may not get the "talk therapy," I wanted regarding my other issues. I guess that's what friends are for though lol.
    Wästed The Great likes this.
  14. Brigantium

    Brigantium Jumping on the bandwagon Staff Member

    I guess talking treatment is more expensive. Tbh it's flawed in itself and works best if they can pinpoint an issue very quickly (eg phobia resulting from an accident). Very often patients can't work out where it's come from and therapists too often only look for the obvious stuff.
  15. Perun

    Perun King of Kings Staff Member

    That's a bit different, isn't it? If a woman is truly in love with me, she shows me, she lets me know, and it is of consequence for me. Why do I need to spend my time being concerned with a divine being or force that I don't know exists, that has never done anything to prove to me that it exists, and whose existence or non-existence is ultimately of no consequence for me?

    I would, under certain premises.
  16. LooseCannon

    LooseCannon Yorktown-class aircraft carrier Staff Member

    I work with a lot of doctors these days, and a lot of psychiatrists think people only see them for a quick solution - here's some pills, go away - and a lot of them absolutely hate it. It's not what they got into the discipline to do. So if the guy brushed you off originally, it's probably because he hears a lot of the same stuff that ends with, "Can't you just put me on something?" rather than "How can we fix this without reliance on medication?" Of course, in many cases, medication is required in some form, but blanket meds are never a great solution.

    Glad to hear you're feeling better, old friend.
    Onhell likes this.
  17. jazz from hell

    jazz from hell Ancient Mariner

    You don't need to. You just have to acknowledge the fact that there's knowledge that's not scientific.
  18. jazz from hell

    jazz from hell Ancient Mariner

    Recently I listened to a guy on Youtube, who's got a, as he describes it, 'no bullshit'-channel about Magick (can't rememember its name right now). He's well educated, well spoken and seems pretty normal, and calls himself a black magician. 'Black', not because he tries to do any harm to other people (he says he doesn't), but because he casts spells (or whatever) for himself in order to achieve his desires. He says that that's the difference to 'white' magick, which only tries to absorb and experience the secrets of life etc., without trying to influence anything. Not what I thought was generally thought of as the difference... So what's the difference, according to the forum?
  19. Magnus

    Magnus Ancient Mariner

    With all due respect, Jazz, this is an oxymoron AND bullshit in my opinion.
    Perun likes this.
  20. Cornfed Hick

    Cornfed Hick Electric Eye

    I believe in dark matter and dark energy, even though no one -- including Hawking -- knows what those things actually are.

    And I was raised Methodist and married a Southern Baptist.

Share This Page