Do you believe in God and why

[trucking]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

When I was young I used to speak to old people.

Most were in agreement that modern life has advantages and disadvantages.

When I was living in Himalayan villages in the end of 70s, the locals had no technology except electricity, and not everywhere, yet they seem to be happier than anyone I've met in the West.

I agree. When I was young I lived deep in the Amazon for a year with a tribe that had only recently contacted the modern world. It was a moving experience.

Because there was nothing to compete about ( apart from women ) they were much more contented. Ignorant bliss. They knew nothing of temptation and competition and as a result were happier for it.

[mauGR1]

11 minutes ago, trucking said:

I agree. When I was young I lived deep in the Amazon for a year with a tribe that had only recently contacted the modern world. It was a moving experience.

Because there was nothing to compete about ( apart from women ) they were much more contented. Ignorant bliss. They knew nothing of temptation and competition and as a result were happier for it.

Well, as I said, there are pros and cons if we compare modern times to older times, and every experience, like yours, is unique.

Yet, I'm not convinced that technology has only, or mostly, positive aspects.

Happiness doesn't depend just on what we have, but it depends on many other factors, and a longer life is not necessarily a happier life.

[thaibeachlovers]

13 hours ago, Elad said:

They said the same thing over a hundred years ago when scientists discovered radio waves.

If the discovery of dark matter allows humanity to expand to the stars the Galactic Council of sane beings will, IMO, exterminate planet Earth as being a threat to the known universe.

[mauGR1]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If the discovery of dark matter allows humanity to expand to the stars the Galactic Council of sane beings will, IMO, exterminate planet Earth as being a threat to the known universe.

Very interesting scenario although a bit pessimistic.

Hopefully we won't get the technology to travel to other planets and fill them with trash, at least not before we have learned how to live in perfect harmony with the eco-system of our planet.

Not that anything of this is really significant or important, if we look at the big picture of the infinite universe.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, as I said, there are pros and cons if we compare modern times to older times, and every experience, like yours, is unique.

Yet, I'm not convinced that technology has only, or mostly, positive aspects.

Happiness doesn't depend just on what we have, but it depends on many other factors, and a longer life is not necessarily a happier life.

The below applies only to affluent western nations. Unfortunately for much of the human life on the planet life it sucked- it still does.

 

Far as I'm concerned, "good" technology ended in the early 80s. The age of the personal computer and its spawn from hell, the smart phone and social media, has done more to divide society than war and pestilence, IMO.

By then we had conquered all the known world, developed antibiotics, the slide rule, cars we could fix ourselves, safe housing, great movies and colour tv, popular music was still enjoyable, fast trains and safe planes. We'd been to the lowest depths, the peak of Everest, we lived in Antarctica and space.

 

Back then the world wasn't overpopulated, we were educated better than at any time in history, world war was a thing of the past, major diseases like polio were prevented by vaccines, and, it was safe to say, parents would leave their children better off than they. Back then pre school children were not confused about their gender, which was a good way to be. Pity we managed to stuff it up so badly.

 

Far as I'm concerned, we were pretty well off back then, but I wish I'd appreciated it more at the time.

 

[mauGR1]

23 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The below applies only to affluent western nations. Unfortunately for much of the human life on the planet life it sucked- it still does.

 

Far as I'm concerned, "good" technology ended in the early 80s. The age of the personal computer and its spawn from hell, the smart phone and social media, has done more to divide society than war and pestilence, IMO.

By then we had conquered all the known world, developed antibiotics, the slide rule, cars we could fix ourselves, safe housing, great movies and colour tv, popular music was still enjoyable, fast trains and safe planes. We'd been to the lowest depths, the peak of Everest, we lived in Antarctica and space.

 

Back then the world wasn't overpopulated, we were educated better than at any time in history, world war was a thing of the past, major diseases like polio were prevented by vaccines, and, it was safe to say, parents would leave their children better off than they. Back then pre school children were not confused about their gender, which was a good way to be. Pity we managed to stuff it up so badly.

 

Far as I'm concerned, we were pretty well off back then, but I wish I'd appreciated it more at the time.

 

Agree with all what you say, at least for our generation of folks who have been lucky enough to be born in stable countries, and enjoyed the full benefits of the economic boom.

It's a fact that the average Asian, or African, pollutes much less than the average American.

The problem becomes really hard to solve when all the "unwashed" of the planet claim a lifestyle similar to the one we have in Western countries.

Paradoxically, an asteroid could save humankind from destroying itself.

[VincentRJ]

11 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

When I was young I used to speak to old people.

Most were in agreement that modern life has advantages and disadvantages.

When I was living in Himalayan villages in the end of 70s, the locals had no technology except electricity, and not everywhere, yet they seem to be happier than anyone I've met in the West.

You're providing a very small snapshot of the behaviour of a small group of people who lived in a primitive culture and who, by their own standards, were doing very well, and who even had electricity, which must have been a great joy for them. ????

 

The reality is, people tend to adjust to the conditions in which they are brought up and consider those conditions as normal. An outsider from an advanced civilization who considers such conditions as absolutely awful, compared with their own 'normal' environment, will tend to be surprised that anyone could be happy in such conditions.

 

This contrast between the expected misery, as a result of the awful environmental conditions, and the normal happiness of people who were born into such conditions and who know nothing else, can result in a distorted impression in the mind of the outsider. Call it delusion if you like. ????

 

An analogy that springs to mind, is our perception of color, light and shade. Our perception of any particular color will change in accordance with the characteristics of any adjoining colors. If you look at a light shade of grey adjoining a totally black shade, the light shade of grey will appear completely white. However, if you look at that same shade of 'light grey' positioned next to a truly white surface, the light shade of grey will appear a dark grey, if not black.

 

Hope I've managed to dispel your delusion. ????

[Sunmaster]

Ok, I get it....it's Monday morning and you're all feeling a bit down and gloomy. ????

I like to be a bit more positive, both in respect to technology as to the future of humanity.

Science and technology have done wonderful things for us. Never in the history of mankind have so many enjoyed a comfortable life like today. Generally speaking, we don't have to worry where our next meal is coming from, we are sheltered from the weather, we have free time to enjoy our hobbies or do nothing. These are luxuries that were unthinkable just a 100 years ago.

Science and the technology that it produces, are just tools. If someone shoots another person, you wouldn't blame the gun, would you? You would blame the shooter. 
In the same way, we shouldn't point at technology and make it the source for all evils in the world. People who use that technology are responsible for their actions. More specifically, it's their state of consciousness that is the problem, which again is related to the level of happiness you guys mentioned earlier.
 

A consciousness that sees itself as separated from nature and the mystery of life, as is the case with the reductionist, materialistic worldview, can -by its own definition- only find 'happiness' in transitory events (a new car, a stunning girlfriend, a promotion), but excludes other sources of permanent happiness due to its restricted belief system. Such consciousness is a slave to external occurrences, making it fly high during pleasant ones, fall into despair during unpleasant ones and linger in apathy and boredom during the 'in-between' times.

Opposed to that state of consciousness, is one that believes in the interconnectedness of all there is. The source of happiness then changes from impermanent circumstances to more lasting ones. What they are and how to realize them, have been discussed here at length.

Now, technology being a tool, has advantages and disadvantages, depending on the way we use it. It can help us raise our level of consciousness by giving us more free time to ponder about life. It can also hinder this development when we abuse it, ie spending all our free time glued to our smart phone.
The type of technology and the way we use it as a species, will necessarily evolve in accordance with the level of consciousness of humanity as a whole. We can already see that more and more is being done to find new energy sources, clean up the oceans and reduce waste. These are the first signs that there is a shift in consciousness and our relationship to nature is changing. There is hope! ???? 

Personally, I'm very grateful to what science has done and the technology it produced. It allowed me to build up my own business and be free from the yoke of employment.

Edited October 12, 2020 by Sunmaster

[mauGR1]

14 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Hope I've managed to dispel your delusion. ????

The tone of this phrase makes me pretty much aware of the fact that you completely miss my point.

Try to ask : "how is life ?" To an average son of a middle class family in the seventies, ask the same question to a Vietnam war refugee, or a peasant in Mexico, a tribesman in Africa,or a clerk in a communist country... The variety of different answers you'd get could help you to widen your perspective, or maybe not.

Glad to help ????

[mauGR1]

25 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Personally, I'm very grateful to what science has done and the technology it produced. It allowed me to build up my own business and be free from the yoke of employment.

Edited 11 minutes ago by Sunmaster

I'm glad that you say "personally" but we are talking in general, about humankind as a whole.

It's no doubt that technology benefits, or affects, different people, different countries in different eras in different ways.

Just to make it clear, technology can be good or bad, or so-so, it depends how we use it, but I guess I'm stating the obvious.

[luckyluke]

12 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

When I was living in Himalayan villages in the end of 70s, the locals had no technology except electricity, and not everywhere, yet they seem to be happier than anyone I've met in the West.

A perception.

 

When I was in Nepal something like 35 ago, I did a trekking.

My Sherpa told me, that he was happier now than leaving in his village, where there was not even electricity.

Of course the opinion of this guy didn't reflect necessary the opinion of all.

During my trekking we encountered some villages like his, I slept on a wooden bank in a sleeping bag, only light a candle.

Beautiful nature, quiet, serene, but people didn't look particularly happy.

A perception of course.

[BritManToo]

Just now, luckyluke said:

A perception.

 

When I was in Nepal something like 35 ago, I did a trekking.

My Sherpa told me, that he was happier now than leaving in his village, where there was not even electricity.

Of course the opinion of this guy didn't reflect necessary the opinion of all.

During my trekking we encountered some villages like his, I slept on a wooden bank in a sleeping bag, only light a candle.

Beautiful nature, quiet, serene, but people didn't look particularly happy.

A perception of course.

My misses lived in a shed in the Thai jungle near Nan before she was 15.

2Km to the nearest running water, no electricity, no paved road, and it took all day to walk to the nearest shop and back.

They lived on what they foraged in the jungle.

 

She says it was hell.

[Tagged]

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Very interesting scenario although a bit pessimistic.

Hopefully we won't get the technology to travel to other planets and fill them with trash, at least not before we have learned how to live in perfect harmony with the eco-system of our planet.

Not that anything of this is really significant or important, if we look at the big picture of the infinite universe.

Interesting to read about importance to the nature, when we only ruin our existence with our presence, and not the nature. Nature is way more toxic and sustainable, and will survive us. 
 

Nature = God

[mauGR1]

8 minutes ago, Tagged said:

Interesting to read about importance to the nature, when we only ruin our existence with our presence, and not the nature. Nature is way more toxic and sustainable, and will survive us. 
 

Nature = God

...we ruin our existence with our presence..."

Wow, that's a paradox !

I would have said it perhaps differently, but that's exactly where I was going.

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

The tone of this phrase makes me pretty much aware of the fact that you completely miss my point.

Try to ask : "how is life ?" To an average son of a middle class family in the seventies, ask the same question to a Vietnam war refugee, or a peasant in Mexico, a tribesman in Africa,or a clerk in a communist country... The variety of different answers you'd get could help you to widen your perspective, or maybe not.

Glad to help ????

Much too difficult to determine who is an 'average son of a middle class family', or an average 'Vietnam war refugee' and so on. The answers will be different within each small group you question, assuming you question more than one person within each group.

 

We're all biased to some extent with significantly different views, opinions, experiences and goals. One of the goals of science, as it tries to understand our environment and the functioning of the human body, is to transcend that tendency towards biasness which is part of our nature.

 

History tends to focus on the glorious achievements of past generations rather than the awful plight of ordinary, working class people. 

[Surelynot]

2 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

We're all biased to some extent with significantly different views, opinions, experiences and goals.

...and religion is pretty unique when one considers the extent and depth and effort made to indoctrinate young, gullible minds.

 

Any institute that attempts to indoctrinate children into a religion is doing the work of the devil

[mauGR1]

16 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Much too difficult to determine who is an 'average son of a middle class family', or an average 'Vietnam war refugee' and so on. The answers will be different within each small group you question, assuming you question more than one person within each group.

 

We're all biased to some extent with significantly different views, opinions, experiences and goals. One of the goals of science, as it tries to understand our environment and the functioning of the human body, is to transcend that tendency towards biasness which is part of our nature.

 

History tends to focus on the glorious achievements of past generations rather than the awful plight of ordinary, working class people. 

I quite agree with these various statements, and I admit that I was playing devil's advocate, (someone has to do it) where denying the benefits of technology.

Apparently, the pros surpass the cons, and the best evidence is the rapid growth of population in the last centuries. 

The paradox is in the fact that, while good general conditions tend to favour the growth of the population, the over population is likely to worsen the general conditions.

Just saying ????

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

You're providing a very small snapshot of the behaviour of a small group of people who lived in a primitive culture and who, by their own standards, were doing very well, and who even had electricity, which must have been a great joy for them. ????

 

The reality is, people tend to adjust to the conditions in which they are brought up and consider those conditions as normal. An outsider from an advanced civilization who considers such conditions as absolutely awful, compared with their own 'normal' environment, will tend to be surprised that anyone could be happy in such conditions.

It's a question of happiness, not adaptation. Bhutan is rated the happiest country in Asia and it's not due to having the latest i phone or some other idiocy.

 

I've always noticed that less affluent people are happier than wealthy ones. Fijians in the early 70s were happier IMO than in the late 70s.

Thais in the 90s were definitely happier than now.

Prosperity IMO does not increase happiness, rather the reverse.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

I quite agree with these various statements, and I admit that I was playing devil's advocate, (someone has to do it) where denying the benefits of technology.

Apparently, the pros surpass the cons, and the best evidence is the rapid growth of population in the last centuries. 

The paradox is in the fact that, while good general conditions tend to favour the growth of the population, the over population is likely to worsen the general conditions.

Just saying ????

Our civilization is the most advanced technologically in human history, but it's possibly the first time people's children will be worse off than them.

What did technology give us? Social media bullying, suicide of children and children that don't know what gender they are. Give me the early 60s, thanks. In NZ that was a golden era, yet we had dial phones, no computers, no tv, no holiday air travel, expensive cars, no obesity, little criminality, and a bright future if we worked for it. We had less, but IMO we were the better for it.

 

PS, everyone ( more or less ) went to Church on Sundays.

Edited October 12, 2020 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, Surelynot said:

...and religion is pretty unique when one considers the extent and depth and effort made to indoctrinate young, gullible minds.

 

Any institute that attempts to indoctrinate children into a religion is doing the work of the devil

Are you sure about that? I went to Sunday school but no one tried to "indoctrinate" me. After I left school I was free to make my own mind up about it.

 

Perhaps you were indoctrinated, but that was not everyone's experience.

[mauGR1]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Our civilization is the most advanced technologically in human history, but it's possibly the first time people's children will be worse off than them.

What did technology give us? Social media bullying, suicide of children and children that don't know what gender they are. Give me the early 60s, thanks. In NZ that was a golden era, yet we had dial phones, no computers, no tv, no holiday air travel, expensive cars, no obesity, little criminality, and a bright future if we worked for it. We had less, but IMO we were the better for it.

 

PS, everyone ( more or less ) went to Church on Sundays.

Yes, I have a similar experience of the 60', a good time to be in Italy and arguably most countries in the world, although you were born, i think, a few years earlier than me. 

Yet if you ask some people, Vietnam war, Cambodia civil war, and some famine in Africa come to mind, the 60' were not the best of time.

I also agree that internet, despite being a great achievement, has coincided with a certain decline of quality of living, but personally i tend to blame more overpopulation to be responsible for the increasing loss of civil liberties.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, mauGR1 said:

Yes, I have a similar experience of the 60', a good time to be in Italy and arguably most countries in the world, although you were born, i think, a few years earlier than me. 

Yet if you ask some people, Vietnam war, Cambodia civil war, and some famine in Africa come to mind, the 60' were not the best of time.

I also agree that internet, despite being a great achievement, has coincided with a certain decline of quality of living, but personally i tend to blame more overpopulation to be responsible for the increasing loss of civil liberties.

 

Indeed, that's why I qualified my post with "in NZ". I think Australia was blessed as well at that time.

From the movies, the UK was not a nice place back then. I'm happy I didn't live there then.

[mauGR1]

12 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Indeed, that's why I qualified my post with "in NZ". I think Australia was blessed as well at that time.

From the movies, the UK was not a nice place back then. I'm happy I didn't live there then.

Well, in the UK they were playing great music in the 60s, and  ,like all Western countries, they were living an economic boom, after the tragedies of the war...perhaps you are referring to the problems with North Ireland ?

[thaibeachlovers]

16 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, in the UK they were playing great music in the 60s, and  ,like all Western countries, they were living an economic boom, after the tragedies of the war...perhaps you are referring to the problems with North Ireland ?

Yes great music, but they were giving away the empire and faced being a has been once great nation.

Of course the running sore of Northern Ireland.

Carnaby Street was supposed to be an amazing place but when I went it was a dump living on memories with a con artist in residence.

[mauGR1]

7 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Yes great music, but they were giving away the empire and faced being a has been once great nation.

Of course the running sore of Northern Ireland.

Carnaby Street was supposed to be an amazing place but when I went it was a dump living on memories with a con artist in residence.

Ok, back on topic, as you mention the "fall" of the British empire, it didn't fall, it just gradually become the nowadays' empire imho.

What it was religion, supposedly the word of God, was used to unify the tribes inti kindoms and finally empires once, but then the creation of a currency was the next "unifying tool".

Now the religion, which is hardly the word of God, has transformed itself into a worshipping of the dollar.

You can go to every corner of the planet, everyone will know what is a dollar, and very few, if nobody will refuse it, the empire is already controlling the whole planet, and the official religion is capitalism.

Personally, I think it's just a stage of history, and this wave of materialism is going to reach the highest, and then slowly recede, to give space to a renaissance of human spiritual values.

This, or else .

[Tagged]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Yes great music, but they were giving away the empire and faced being a has been once great nation.

Of course the running sore of Northern Ireland.

Carnaby Street was supposed to be an amazing place but when I went it was a dump living on memories with a con artist in residence.

Giving up empire was part of the though negotiations with the americans to get help during the 2. WW

 

 

[mauGR1]

9 minutes ago, Tagged said:

Giving up empire was part of the though negotiations with the americans to get help during the 2. WW

Cf

 

Or perhaps with the economic empires based in USA ????

[VincentRJ]

22 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It's a question of happiness, not adaptation.

Happiness depends on one's ability to adapt to the circumstances and conditions, whatever they are. Consider the situation of someone who has been jailed for a few years. He'll probably feel very unhappy. However, if such a person is familiar with Buddhism, he might take that opportunity of 'free food and lodging, and no requirement to earn a living', to practice meditation and mindfulness for a few hours every day, and eventually feel happier than he had ever felt before imprisonment. ????

 

Bhutan is rated the happiest country in Asia and it's not due to having the latest i phone or some other idiocy.

 

Bhutan uses a 'Gross National Happiness Index' to rate happiness. To accurately compare the happiness of the Bhutanese people with other nationalities, the other nations would also have to use the same GNH index, which they don't, and the methodology of the survey would also have to be demonstrated as unbiased.

 

I've always noticed that less affluent people are happier than wealthy ones. Fijians in the early 70s were happier IMO than in the late 70s.

Thais in the 90s were definitely happier than now.
Prosperity IMO does not increase happiness, rather the reverse.

 

I think it would be very challenging and difficult to determine that without bias. Appearances can be very deceptive. There is also the concept of 'confirmation bias' to consider. One can always find examples of wealthy people who have made a mess of their life. Extreme wealth can be a problem for some, but Bill Gates seems to have found a solution and claims to be very happy. ????

 

Examples of extreme poverty are far more common than examples of extreme wealth. For every wealthy person who is miserable, there are probably a million destitute, poverty-stricken people who are even more miserable.

 

To get back to the Bhutan situation, here's another perspective. I guess the Bhutanese government will not be at all happy with this perspective. ????

 

On closer inspection, Gross National Happiness is neither gross nor national. It’s an idea born on the backs of oppressed minorities who have been whitewashed out of the central narrative. It’s a happiness for the ruling class at the expense of those whose land and livelihoods were stolen from them.
The GNH survey is taken in person with a government worker who comes to your house. It takes several hours to get through all the questions. It’s not anonymous. The questions are extremely manipulative. What sort of results are they getting?

 

The Gross National Happiness idea is perhaps Bhutan’s most important and powerful export. But ultimately, it’s more a marketing campaign for tourism and international reputation than an enlightened way of governing the people. Until there’s GNH for everyone in the country and not a select few, Bhutan is just another example on the long list of disabused fairy tales.

https://thebolditalic.com/gross-national-happiness-is-a-lie-oaklands-bhutanese-refugees-speak-out-7861353fc9c3

[Tagged]

The strange is, I would never ever been born in any other time or country. I had every possible uppertunity to make my life as good as possible, and become what i wanted, and every possible tool to solve my problems. Physical challenges as mental problems. Im so greateful for the chances and challenges life have given me. Hands down

 

nb: not to forget spiritual knownledge, where I could pick and choose from the top shelf!

Edited October 13, 2020 by Tagged

[FarFlungFalang]

On 10/12/2020 at 10:22 AM, Tagged said:

Interesting to read about importance to the nature, when we only ruin our existence with our presence, and not the nature. Nature is way more toxic and sustainable, and will survive us. 
 

Nature = God

Everything is natural and we are part of the evolutionary process we are not seperate from it.Everything we do is natural and everything that happens is natural.Then again there are different definitions of Natural so it depends on which definition of the word applies, just like the different definitions of God.Some define God as a make believe figment of imagination me I define it like this.

Everything = God = Universe = Nature.If one takes this definition then it's pretty hard not to believe in God.