Why Paganism ?

[anunitu]

Re: Why Paganism ?

Explain I must get 'clear' . TY

Ask L.Ron,he could most like 'spline it to you

or ask Tom Cruise

- - - Updated - - -

Starting to wonder if your real name is Sheldon Cooper...."Is that sarcasm?"

[iris]

Re: Why Paganism ?

Have a biscuit anu. Have two.

[Medusa]

Re: Why Paganism ?

Have a biscuit anu. Have two.

mine mine mine!


*runs away with cookies

[Willow]

Re: Why Paganism ?

Cookies!!!

[nbdy]

Re: Why Paganism ?

For the record, I call myself neither pagan nor paganist.

hmm. Objective, unbiased truth according to whom? Which neutral means of discovery? How do we decide "true?" What is the nature of "reality?" What would constitute "evidence" of "existence?" Isn't everything just something to occupy one's time? Maybe read about naive realism and understand that it not the only theory of perception out there. I am totally cool with that being your idea of reality, but others need not agree.

[Seeking a Religion]

Re: Why Paganism ?

For the record, I call myself neither pagan nor paganist.

hmm. Objective, unbiased truth according to whom? Which neutral means of discovery? How do we decide "true?" What is the nature of "reality?" What would constitute "evidence" of "existence?" Isn't everything just something to occupy one's time? Maybe read about naive realism and understand that it not the only theory of perception out there. I am totally cool with that being your idea of reality, but others need not agree.

Objective unbiased truth would be (according to Websters Dictionary) : Fidelity (or lack thereof) to the Original. The Original is the standard of objective real truth . Modern Science is an instrument by which discovery of truth is used and it often confirms or verifies the reality we all enjoy as mankind. In other words...it is possible to know the absolute truth about many many things which make up our reality whether it be our cosmos or biology or physics.

What would constitute evidence of existence, is : If it can be tested, repeated, or observed whether in its very essence and/or by the after-effects . IE: We can know that our Cosmos requires a personal intelligent Cause because although we haven't seen with our own eyes this Cause, we can see the many after-effects that reflect the personal and intelligent ; we never see such things coming from anything but a personal intelligent source . Using the same logic, if we are going to believe in a Pagan Diety , then maybe we should be asking : What is the evidence for this Diety that ive embraced as far as its existence / what are the effects from this Diety / can it be measured, observed, or shown to exist by using rational deduction instead of formulating a rather blind faith that it must be real because I want it to be or because it makes me feel good. (no offense intended by this) .

Yes, we all get to choose what we want to believe in, or about, or of.....but because we have Minds that exhibit reason, rationalizing, and logic.... shouldn't we be putting our Faith in something/someone to the test a little bit more before we jump fully into the water ? I think so . We make choices all day long based on logic, reason, and reality and we base a lot on faith ...but its not blind faith so much as it is wise faith , for, we would never get in a commercial airplane if the pilot told us that the chances of the plane reaching its destination in one piece is going to be 60% . It would be silly getting on a plane and being asked to have that kind of faith that we'd all make it alive ..........yet it seems so many people are willing to put 100% faith and trust in a Religion that hasn't been scrutinized for being realistic . I find that interesting.

- - - Updated - - -

Scientology requires a lifelong commitment and a hell of a lot of money to become a member and gain its secrets.

Im not afraid of life long commitments , I have some money saved up, but I doubt theres any real amazing secrets buried deep within Scientology that man has come up with , for, there is nothing new under the sun. And if did join and jumped thru all the hoops, id be pretty darn mad if all I was told in the end was : ' Just close your eyes and feel the force as it baskets you in warmth ' .

[iris]

Re: Why Paganism ?

Well. My religion doesn't define me, or my life. I am actually a person in my own respect, I would like to think that most people are. But sometimes all you can do is believe.
If you are looking for something which science can measure, you will have to stick with science. You can't measure a god. I can think of no religion, pagan or otherwise, which has been scritinuzed for being realistic. Not one. Unless science counts. And most scientists will happily (maybe not happily) admit that we still have lots to learn about the world. We don't know anything.

[anunitu]

Re: Why Paganism ?

Honestly one can if they wish drive themselves crazy trying to pin down the wisp of the spirit..I myself would just sprinkle a little pixie dust and off I would go..because I have no time to waste on debating if there is a reality I seem to have missed. If you must spend all your time questioning what life is,you have no time to actually live it.

[iris]

Re: Why Paganism ?

Honestly one can if they wish drive themselves crazy trying to pin down the wisp of the spirit..I myself would just sprinkle a little pixie dust and off I would go..because I have no time to waste on debating if there is a reality I seem to have missed. If you must spend all your time questioning what life is,you have no time to actually live it.

I'll second this

[Rae'ya]

Re: Why Paganism ?

Hello. Im trying to write this in all respect . I have asked a few Paganists if their particular Belief system is centered in any scientific credibility since Science seems to be our neutral means of discovering what is true to reality . All have replied 'No' . So I guess what bewilders me is why someone might choose to believe in something that may have been around awhile and may have a following, but lacks any scientific truth in support of it ? Why believe in something / someone if there is no evidence for that existing ? Why make something true for oneself if there is no objective unbiased truth to it ? Is it just simply something to occupy ones time with and because it gives a measure of pleasure somehow ?


Id appreciate it if someone could give me some elaboration on these questions so I can better understand . Thanks much. David.

Honestly, I'm having a bit of difficulty taking these questions seriously given the apparent contradictory nature of your own beliefs. In the Atheism vs Anti-theism thread you were expressing some very clear theist viewpoints in relation to their being a Divine Source for the universe et al... yet in several other places you have expressed what seems to be a disdain for belief that is not supported by science.

So before I answer your questions I'd like to ask you the following...

Why not paganism?

What makes our belief in our non-scientifically-proven gods any different to anyone else's (including yours) non-scientifically-proven god/s?

If, as expressed in an earlier thread, you believe that your god is scientifically proven, can you please provide me with your proof? By which I mean that I would like a list of sources and studies which have lead you to that quantifiable, measurable and repeatable conclusion.

[Vel]

Re: Why Paganism ?

Hello. Im trying to write this in all respect . I have asked a few Paganists if their particular Belief system is centered in any scientific credibility since Science seems to be our neutral means of discovering what is true to reality . All have replied 'No' . So I guess what bewilders me is why someone might choose to believe in something that may have been around awhile and may have a following, but lacks any scientific truth in support of it ? Why believe in something / someone if there is no evidence for that existing ? Why make something true for oneself if there is no objective unbiased truth to it ? Is it just simply something to occupy ones time with and because it gives a measure of pleasure somehow ?


Id appreciate it if someone could give me some elaboration on these questions so I can better understand . Thanks much. David.

I am of the opinion that science is not the neutral means of understanding what is true to reality. From my perspective it is a strictly human way to understand and explain natural phenomena in the context of whatever the established or accepted paradigm happens to be. It is also known to be helpful in making life easier. Now if I wanted to know what the ultimate nature of reality is, it would be reasonable for me to look to a Tradition that teaches me the ultimate nature of reality if that Tradition gives me the impression of being of a transcendent origin.

It is true that Jupiter is the Father of the Deities and King of Humankind. There is an objective and unbiased source of this truth – a higher, supernal world that makes itself known to us. That's not to say this is a literal-factual truth though. In the end Jupiter is the image or representation of something that is ultimately transcendent. Rejecting the transcendent world as an objective source of truth would be anthropocentric and modernistic of me.

My Tradition, Religio Romana, gives a measure of inner pleasure. It is an inner pleasure of knowing that the Deities are real, that there is Fate, and that I have the opportunity to become a god in the Olympian world just as Aeneas, Romulus, and Julius Caesar did. These things reveal to me the meaning of life.

[thalassa]

Re: Why Paganism ?

why someone might choose to believe in something that may have been around awhile and may have a following, but lacks any scientific truth in support of it ?

Because not everything in the Universe is quantifiable, concrete, or objective.

Metaphor, when applied correctly, is stronger than materialism.

Also, there is no such thing as scientific truth. And "truth" anyhow, is a purely human mental construct.

Why believe in something / someone if there is no evidence for that existing?

Because something that has evidence doesn't need belief to exist.

Ideas are real too...until we stop believing in them. Ideas are what make us human. Sure, some of them suck...but the arc of history bends towards justice when you aren't looking at the past through blinders and rose colored glasses.

Why make something true for oneself if there is no objective unbiased truth to it?

Well if objective unbiased materialism was all there was to life, I might as well jump off a cliff. After all, the objective unbiased fact is that we are all born to die. Might as well skip the middle bits and simplify things...

Based on what you've written elsewhere, you are quite good at making many concepts true for yourself, ideas that are poorly supported by any real scientific data or historical analysis...so you should be able to answer this one for yourself.

Is it just simply something to occupy ones time with and because it gives a measure of pleasure somehow ?

Religion, from the Latin of either "to go through again" (per Cicero) or "to bind fast" (per Servius and Augustine) is about relationships--variably those connections can be within ourselves, within our families and our communities, within our ecosystem, within our various societies, and within the Universe itself. Certainly, part of the role of those relationships, is that they give us pleasure, or solace, etc. But really, the reason they exist is because they selected for, biologically and culturally.

Agnosticism is the only intellectually honest position on deity. Functionally though, any theological position is equally beneficial or not--entirely dependent on the character and personality of the person holding the opinion. And, in the face of experience, none of that matters. I'm Pagan because when I meet god, it is in the face of Nature...when I talk to god, Nature talks back. I'm Pagan, not from belief, but from experiences. And whether those experiences are from within or without doesn't matter--what matters is the experience itself and the change that is manifested as a result of it. I don't expect you to understand that.

Is this the consensus of what im reading ? Do any of you know of a World Religion or Philosophy whereby there is more objectivity to it ....and which can be supported (at least minimally) by scientific proofs ?

Agnosticism...and maybe Buddhism without the religious bits.

Or , do you believe there is a great divide between Science and Religion and the two are incompatible and cannot be meshed ?

I don't support Steven Jay Gould's idea of Non-Overlapping Magesteria (NOM) completely, but I think there is some truth to it. Science and religion are different ways to look at the world--one as objectively and concretely as possibly by quantification, and the other subjectively and abstractedly through feeling. But, with that being said, there are places where they *do* overlap, though lightly. Some things we just lack the technology to explore, other things we lack the capacity to ever explore.

Science will never be able to demonstrate the non-existence of deity. Religion will never be able to demonstrate the existence of deity.