To what extent should a rational person question his or her beliefs? Should they go so far as to question the belief that questioning belief is rational?
Before we get to the dangers of Statist thinking, wouldn't we first want to know if we CAN actually question our beliefs. Scientific evidence from neuroscience tells us that conservatives will rationalize rather than examine beliefs critically while at the same time maintaining a complete denial of that fact, if the examination leads into areas they find emotionally distasteful. It could even be that the whole notion that Statist thinking is dangerous could be a CBD creation, I don't know.
The curtain covering the religious cult called Statism is removed as Larken Rose breaks it down. For those with enough courage to question their beliefs the following is for you.
Statism: The Most Dangerous Religion
No they weren't. The rebels were fighting to topple the imperial meritocracy and revive the hereditary aristocracy defended by a loony warrior-priest cult.So I'll start us off with:
Star Wars.
The Rebels are fighting to enact another democratically-elected Senate. Those fascists.
To what extent should a rational person question his or her beliefs? Should they go so far as to question the belief that questioning belief is rational?
Yes. Humanity, particularly Western culture is dominated by rational left hemisphere logical linguistic linear thinking. In some cultures in the East another form of thinking still has some representation, a holistic, non-language, instant pattern recognition, holistic and instant grasp form of perception. This is the kind of thinking that produces flashes of insight when, after intense struggle with a problem, a solution surfaces at some calm moment, even in dreams, that makes connections between things that were missed by logical reasoning. A person who has wisdom is somebody who can operate using both these mods of thinking.
This is why in Zen for example, the Koan is used to block rational thinking.
The breakthrough to holistic understanding, seeing without language, is also the root of religious experience. It is transformative. All language about its existence are like fingers pointing at the moon. They are only fingers and not the actual moon.
If you reason diligently, you will come to the end of reason. You will find that it is a trap, the type on a page, and not the infinite blankness on which the thoughts appear. Thought is time and time is fear. But the ego cannot end thought because thought and the ego are one. The intuitive leap, the insight, and its manifestation is mysterious to me. I just call it Grace.
All I can tell you is that the price I paid for the destruction of all my treasured beliefs produced a pearl of infinite worth.
I watched about half the video before posting this.
Government, to me, exists to enforce some kind of morality. Laws against murder are underpinned by the moral claim that murder is wrong; that human lives are precious and must not be frivolously taken. This is why I reject claims that we shouldn't be enforcing morality. That's exactly what every law does, whether it says so or not. Consider the debates over gay marriage, abortion, and drug use. One side says an act is wrong and should be restricted. The other says that the act is not wrong, or even though it's wrong, more harm is done by restricting it than allowing it. These are debates over morality, and which morality should be imposed upon us.
Granted, such an institution is ripe for abuse. But what's the alternative? There is no system of society which bakes in the feature of managing all of humanity's worst tendencies. In anarchy, might really does make right. With a government, might still makes right, but we have a tiny chance to influence that might and bring it into accordance with some semblance of a right and just order.
To what extent should a rational person question his or her beliefs? Should they go so far as to question the belief that questioning belief is rational?
What price did you pay? And what treasured beliefs were destroyed?
An old guy who gets a small % of the vote is more dangerous than statist govts that killed hundreds of millions. Sounds legit.
His ideas, not him all by his lonesome. Come on Genx87. Ron Paul by himself has accomplished nothing more than Internet Presidency.
I believed that all the suffering and misery this world creates for innocent people would be returned to those who caused it in an afterlife, and that all those who suffered and returned love for violence would be rewarded with immortality. The idea that the universe was cold and indifferent cause me to suffer profoundly so I set out to prove there is a God.
My need for logical proof lead to the destruction of all that. I knew then the real truth, that life is misery and that those who see it for what it is, like me, will suffer all their lives knowing this terrible fact. My effort to find God, destroyed my faith and my hope. There is no God who loves and cares for me of for anybody else. That is the price and the treasure I paid.
So lets hear about how his ideas are more dangerous than statist ideologies of the last 100 years that have killed hundreds of millions.
Then (honest question) what's the point of living?
Enjoy the ride. Why does it need to be more complicated than that?
Then (honest question) what's the point of living?
How enjoyable most things are is mainly a product of your state of mind.Because the ride is not always enjoyable.
If I am not mistaken, you are a person of faith. Real faith is, I believe, a wonderful thing. It allows you to step over the problem of reason. There is no logical proof that God exists and you don't need it. I did . My need for logic and proof killed me. I lost that battle. I had to surrender to black hopelessness and misery. One night, I started to ask myself why I suffered, what was the cause, why did I feel so sad that life is meaningless. Why did I need there to be meaning? My whole focus went into that question deeper and deeper when a blast of wind hit the house and I awakened to the silent awareness of just being the wind. In a moment of time I changed from one state of consciousness into another and the result was that I suddenly knew everything. The need for meaning, the need for rational proof of goodness, the need for a proof of God is as meaningless as everything else. All the love that I had ever hoped to get was all there inside of me. The meaning of life is not to be loved but to love. All the love we hope to find is just our love blocked in its expression. We were all born with an infinite capacity to love as children and that love was killed. Our fear of love is out fear of death.
When faith is 100% love is real. The lover knows that God is real because God. No rational proof is needed. You know God by being real.
There are three traditional paths to this state. Through the body, the way of the fakir, thought the heart, the way of the monk, and through the mind, the yogi, 7 ways if you count combinations.
How enjoyable most things are is mainly a product of your state of mind.
How would you convince a 19th century slave of this?
That's why I said most and not all, but I'm sure even slaves found little ways to make even that life a tiny bit less miserable.How would you convince a 19th century slave of this?
That's why I said most and not all, but I'm sure even slaves found little ways to make even that life a tiny bit less miserable.
Why should they what?The question is why should they, if it's all for nothing.
Why should they what?
Maybe they think life as a slave is better than nothing? I dunno, but I think you're missing the point.Make life slightly less miserable when they can end their pain by killing themselves.