Print

[Jun-Watarase]

Would the world be a better place without organized religion?

Well, while I don't have any religious beliefs, and are in most cases against the idea of organized religion... I don't think it's a bad thing that some spirituality exists. In many religions, people's behavior and morals are regulated by the idea of constantly being watched by their god, punishment, and fear of it. A lot of ideas of being moral and just comes from religious influences from youth. Another thing other than good morals and whatnot is hope. People need hope. It is in many cases, hypocritical and completely illogical, but many people in modern society that consider themselves religious acknowledge the possibility (fact) that it's all actually imaginary and created to explain things that humans weren't able to explain. Religion is a human invention, thus flawed, and it'd exist in some form or another.

I both agree and disagree.  yes, religion is, in both ways, whether you are a believer or not, a human invention. the belief in higher power, however, is not; it has been around as long as upright man has looked up at the night sky and realized how truly small a human is.

in terms of social evolution, one could argue organized religion is an evolution from a period of relative amorality in the ancient era, a bridge between a time of despots and enlightened electorates.  it will not be long before people classify themselves more so as 'spiritual' rather then a 'believer.'  The structure of organized religion will soon dissipate, like an unnecessary organ, as humans begin to take their relationship with higher powers in the universe, ethics and philosophy into their own hands.

yes, human inventions are flawed, but will always be evolving. apes began with using a twig as an instrument to gather insects; ancient man forged tools from stone into better, more precise tools; religion or faith is a tool of universal understanding, and along with the evolution of humanity, will continue to change to better accomplish its aim.

Hmm... honestly, I don't see exactly where you're pointing out you're disagreeing me with. You're more or less just adding to what I had initially said. But yes, of course there's a 'higher power', but it's not necessarily conscious and all knowing the the way people portray a God. Humans obviously aren't on top of the world and the universe around them, so me denying the possibility of a 'higher power' is just an arrogant claim that human kind doesn't deserve. As for religion in terms of evolution, it's more or less just people advancing in knowledge and understanding-- even if people do shed the religions that exist today, something similar and slightly more efficient would most likely take its place. A lot of people need something to believe in, whether it be something to explain the phenomenons around them that they can't seem to understand, or just some hope that someone is in control of their lives to reward them and reassure their sense of integrity. I won't get too far into this, though. It's REALLY hot and I'm extremely exhausted. Man.

How much food are human beings really able to hold in their stomachs? Like a fully grown adult male for example?

If a small cut or a puncture wound bleeds like a stream of water, is there something wrong?

That varies between the sizes of their stomachs, but uh... I'd suggest to stop eating once you get bloated. From then, I'm pretty sure you're able to judge just how much one is able to eat. I don't think there's an actual clear estimation as to how much the amount an average human is able to take to refer to, honestly. I'm too lazy to really look into it, and I can't speak from experience as I don't exactly have a regular diet.

And yes. If you bleed like a steam of water, with no resistance whatsoever, I'd say something is wrong. That's some extreme hemophilia there.

If you are living your life in a loop and you somehow remember some of the stuff you're learning from a previous rotation of said loop [and yet are somehow making the same choices as before] or if you somehow know the future in advance (and the knowledge along with it), would you slowly lose enthusiasm for the subjects because you already know them even though you shouldn't?
Would you stop studying as seriously as you would normally?

If you achieve knowledge from the future but change things so you don't study what would give you said knowledge, would you still retain it? Or would it somehow disappear?

Well, that's dependent on one's personality and patience. If you're referring to cases of... reincarnation, well, you for one cannot conclude that such memories are even real of relative to your past life. If one is able to look into the future, it gets somewhat complicated. Uh... in reference to ideas in 'studies' and in fiction, it can go one way or the other. Either you're able to change your future and the instance you become aware of what your future is alters what actually happens, OR your future is set in stone and you'll come to that eventual point in the same fashion BECAUSE you were predestined to become aware of it, or uh... it'd just happen regardless of what you do. As for retaining knowledge and it changing your behavior, it depends on what exactly you're foreseeing. Dependant on what emotions or thoughts you have from gaining that knowledge, you react to it a different way. You can become paranoid, jaded, lazy, blah blah blah... it's all circumstantial.

Man, I'm really lazy right now. It's so hot, it ain't even funny.

[JTchinoy]

only hit mid-high 80's today in san jose.

[Barnes]

EDIT: Nevermind

[satanic_mechanic]

Would the world be a better place without organized religion?

Well, while I don't have any religious beliefs, and are in most cases against the idea of organized religion... I don't think it's a bad thing that some spirituality exists. In many religions, people's behavior and morals are regulated by the idea of constantly being watched by their god, punishment, and fear of it. A lot of ideas of being moral and just comes from religious influences from youth. Another thing other than good morals and whatnot is hope. People need hope. It is in many cases, hypocritical and completely illogical, but many people in modern society that consider themselves religious acknowledge the possibility (fact) that it's all actually imaginary and created to explain things that humans weren't able to explain. Religion is a human invention, thus flawed, and it'd exist in some form or another.

I both agree and disagree.  yes, religion is, in both ways, whether you are a believer or not, a human invention. the belief in higher power, however, is not; it has been around as long as upright man has looked up at the night sky and realized how truly small a human is.

in terms of social evolution, one could argue organized religion is an evolution from a period of relative amorality in the ancient era, a bridge between a time of despots and enlightened electorates.  it will not be long before people classify themselves more so as 'spiritual' rather then a 'believer.'  The structure of organized religion will soon dissipate, like an unnecessary organ, as humans begin to take their relationship with higher powers in the universe, ethics and philosophy into their own hands.

yes, human inventions are flawed, but will always be evolving. apes began with using a twig as an instrument to gather insects; ancient man forged tools from stone into better, more precise tools; religion or faith is a tool of universal understanding, and along with the evolution of humanity, will continue to change to better accomplish its aim.

Hmm... honestly, I don't see exactly where you're pointing out you're disagreeing me with. You're more or less just adding to what I had initially said. But yes, of course there's a 'higher power', but it's not necessarily conscious and all knowing the the way people portray a God. Humans obviously aren't on top of the world and the universe around them, so me denying the possibility of a 'higher power' is just an arrogant claim that human kind doesn't deserve. As for religion in terms of evolution, it's more or less just people advancing in knowledge and understanding-- even if people do shed the religions that exist today, something similar and slightly more efficient would most likely take its place. A lot of people need something to believe in, whether it be something to explain the phenomenons around them that they can't seem to understand, or just some hope that someone is in control of their lives to reward them and reassure their sense of integrity. I won't get too far into this, though. It's REALLY hot and I'm extremely exhausted. Man.

the part where you say it is flawed - my assertion is that since religion as it was and in most cases still is is not flawed, but obsolescent, overdue to be upgraded to a new form of universal spiritualism that harbors none of the divisive sectarianism that old organized religion has.  Since it is a tool or an organ, it cannot be flawed, but rather old, since at the time of its invention or evolution it was very much necessary.  the ape's twig was not flawed - it served the exact purpose the ape intended.  granted, over the course of evolution humans would invent tools that are far more useful, but that does not make the first use of a tool by any primate 'flawed.' that was the nature of my disagreement.

[Jun-Watarase]

the part where you say it is flawed - my assertion is that since religion as it was and in most cases still is is not flawed, but obsolescent, overdue to be upgraded to a new form of universal spiritualism that harbors none of the divisive sectarianism that old organized religion has.  Since it is a tool or an organ, it cannot be flawed, but rather old, since at the time of its invention or evolution it was very much necessary.  the ape's twig was not flawed - it served the exact purpose the ape intended.  granted, over the course of evolution humans would invent tools that are far more useful, but that does not make the first use of a tool by any primate 'flawed.' that was the nature of my disagreement.

Ah, I see. Normally I don't like getting into religious debates, but this is fine. Religion and philosophy is pretty flexible, so you may be right. I may be, too. It's only in my opinion that under most circumstances, religion is flawed. Religion is a man-made idea, created to explain the universe and celestial entities in a understandable fashion. Religion was created to do just that-- explain the universe, but not only that but instill morals, hope, and reassurance that people have a good understanding of the environment around them. Using religion as an explanation makes it undoubtedly flawed, because many of its explanations have been scientifically proven to be incorrect, and would probably continue to be. However, it's not as if everything in religion and spirituality is fictional-- it is in my opinion that many things that were recorded to happen have a complex scientific explanation. Over the course of history has man altered original religious text to bend to his will, to have people believe what they believe in their power, which is why monarchs had their people's trust, being known to be the 'closest to god', how sexist societies favor men in almost every way, how people claimed to be divine and were catered to for only that reason, etc etc etc. Did I explain that well enough?

It's flawed, to me, because it's biased, because it's a primitive form of explanation created by man. I don't believe that none of it is real, however. A lot of religious and spiritual text refers to phenomenons that could actually happen, only that they would be explained in a spiritual fashion as opposed to scientific. Just because they fulfilled what they were created to do, doesn't make it not flawed. It's not as if I feel that religion shouldn't have existed-- it did what it was there to do, for hope, for reassurance, for understanding, but anyone can make up stories to explain how things seem to be why they seem to be. Making it a belief for the masses, makes it a religion, whether or not it's true or not. It's in religions like Christianity, Catholicism, and the like that have been tainted over and over for the sake of power.

[Kaura117]

Objection. An ape's twig CAN be flawed in that the ape chose a stubby, ineffective one in lieu of a more immediately useful equivalent. Religions, too, can be flawed- in that, while they fulfill what spiritual "needs" its followers desire, it does so at detriment to its believer's cognitive welfare. A stubby, ineffective faith when a far more useful one can derived from mere observation.

Then again, this comes from an atheist and a Discordian. Trust not what you read, and five tons of flax. 

Edit: Also, in regards to the very first question in this thread- it would, in fact, be considered incest. In fact, it would be twincest, which is still incest, but with genetic data much closer to alike than between two ordinary human beings. Masturbation only applies to single-body sexual activity, see. =D

[questionette]

QUESTION!!~

Okay so I was wondering what are those things that you can see when you squint your eyes...they move around really fast like little moving dots with trails behind them (best way I can describe them)

They're not eye floaters...because those are a little bigger and more easily seen...am I crazy?

[Jun-Watarase]

QUESTION!!~

Okay so I was wondering what are those things that you can see when you squint your eyes...they move around really fast like little moving dots with trails behind them (best way I can describe them)

They're not eye floaters...because those are a little bigger and more easily seen...am I crazy?

I think know what you're talking about, but I actually don't know what those are. They seem to happen mostly due to light or your eyes focusing on something, then to a clear space, kind of like how you stare at shapes, then look at an empty space and they still appear, only with this it's less uniform. I used to play around with that when I was a little kid, following them with my eyes when I'm bored and have nothing in particular to do while sitting or something...

Question for you guys. What do you feel is the difference in gender and sex?

[questionette]

Do you mean what is the difference between the terms "gender" and "sex"?
Because from my anthropology class I've learned that "sex" is that it is biologically founded, whereas "gender" is socially/culturally adapted.

If you mean like...whats I think the differences between males and females are...when asked this I think about

• Hormones vs. Testosterone
  
• Having innie genitals vs. outtie
  
  • XX vs. XY chromosomes
    
  • Differences in fat vs. muscle percentages
    
    • the amount of fat tissue stored in the breast glands
      
    • as well as the difference in hip-bone sizes
      
      • ...and the fact that we give birth
    
    
    oh man and I just keep thinking up more stuff...
    
    cultural differences is a whole other tangent...
    
    

[Jun-Watarase]

Do you mean what is the difference between the terms "gender" and "sex"?
Because from my anthropology class I've learned that "sex" is that it is biologically founded, whereas "gender" is socially/culturally adapted.

I feel that 'sex' is what one biologically/physically is, whereas 'gender' refers to what they feel they are, mentally. It takes a lot of patience, an open-mind, and the ability to be completely comfortable with oneself to be considered genderless. It's an interesting topic, though. How one can deviate, mentally, from what they biologically are.

A lot of people are brought up thinking that sex and gender are the same, but that also says a lot about how people initially felt about the topic. Traditional views on it are that gender matches corresponding one's biological sex, but in modern-culture, we realize how that isn't always the case. (eg, homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals.) It's interesting when a person is born one sex, but regards themselves as the opposite gender, using it as a lifestyle and identity. It sounds tough, and many people who harbor feelings like this suffer being given a body they might consider themselves inadequate, with or without an SRS. I have friends who have undergone SRSs and psychological distress from not being the gender they wished they were born with.

And from that, another topic. It isn't completely relevant, but you'll see the relation. In Plato's Symposium, it was said that in ancient times that there were three types of people. Male/female, male/male, and female/female. Then God came along and split those people in half, and those people spent their lifetimes looking for their other half. The whole "the one" idea. Realistically, we know ideas like this aren't true... but it's romantic, isn't it?

With humans, we're able to accept our sexuality and have it apply to our everyday lives. Humans live under the circumstances where we are able to do, whereas had we been another animal instead, natural selection would've wiped most homosexuals out due to their inability to procreate.

[JTchinoy]

how can i get to the end of the world?

they got there in pirates of the caribbean, which was a very interesting documentary on the life of pirates.  i wanted to travel there someday.

[questionette]

how can i get to the end of the world?

they got there in pirates of the caribbean, which was a very interesting documentary on the life of pirates.  i wanted to travel there someday.

Maybe if you flush yourself down a toilet you'll get the same results...

[JTchinoy]

Does it have to be a southern hemisphere toilet or a northern hemisphere?

[questionette]

EQUATOR TOILET

[JTchinoy]

EQUATOR TOILET

does that even flush using a swirling motion? or will it just flush straight down?

[questionette]

EQUATOR TOILET

does that even flush using a swirling motion? or will it just flush straight down?

Duh.  You go to the end of the world, so no one's lived to tell if it flushes swirly or straight down. 

[Mister_E]

I wanna know who started calling sex "whoopie"?

The question came from a conversation I walked in on at the wrong time sometime ago.

[Kaura117]

I wanna know who started calling sex "whoopie"?

The question came from a conversation I walked in on at the wrong time sometime ago.

No clue, but it sounds somewhat 1930s-esque. Check with your grandparents? >_>

[Mister_E]

I wanna know who started calling sex "whoopie"?

The question came from a conversation I walked in on at the wrong time sometime ago.

No clue, but it sounds somewhat 1930s-esque. Check with your grandparents? >_>

My only living grandparent is not the type of guy I should be asking.

[JTchinoy]

EQUATOR TOILET

does that even flush using a swirling motion? or will it just flush straight down?

Duh.  You go to the end of the world, so no one's lived to tell if it flushes swirly or straight down. 

Can you check for me?  I'd like to know for sure before I try.