Logictisicul Agnosticism Philosophy Essay Research Paper

Logictisicul agnosticism philosophy

To compare and contrast belief is to debate an infinite amount of question that holds as much water as hypothetical questions with no answers. This is about the logical reasons why people believe in god, and do not believe in god. There are many different concepts that people believe in, making the following set of rationalizations run peoples ethics. Elders or righteous religious leaders teach and proclaim concepts they have learned from studying the lives of deities, saints, and books. Their religious writings fail to guarantee the validity of their concepts and beliefs, which have been derived from the studying of logical readers. Also, is the framework of religious concepts easy to comprehend and are as the basic concepts justified?

What is the validity of religious concepts and worldly explanations? In logical thought, all answers explain themselves because they come from other answers. The basis of our thought processes deals with a back and forth relationship of answer and explanation. Each answer is an addition to past questions and ideas discussed in the past. Previous explanations are used to answer newly formulated questions and past answers are used to comprehend recent explanations. In the cycle, no new concepts or revolutionary concepts are devised. Human thought is a reflection of past ideas and continuously uses archaic ideals to explain contemporary questions. Therefore, are religious concepts on which people mold their lives to are only a concoction of false answers and recycled excuses, masked as explanations. Religious answers are subject to a need for deeper analysis due to the way the answers were conceived due to the questionable validity of the sources. New answers to ancient questions should be formulated and examined. A newer, more contemporary thought process is vital to adapting concepts to an ever-changing societal point of view.

Another question is does your explanations make sense? Often in logical reasoning, the answers are stated in a complicated manner, which is often difficult for the average person to comprehend. Generally, answers in religious writings often make sense. One reason is that they usually have a priest or religious leader to explain every thing in greater detail, and the religious writing are designed (by humans) to make things perfectly easy to understand. This is one of the reasons that people find organized religion so inviting.

Does your explanation rely on assumptions that are not themselves justified? In normal logical thought, things are justified by scientific knowledge. On the other hand, religious concepts are justified by a reliance on the basic belief that God made the universe. This belief creates a chain reaction which people use to support a whole set of various religious beliefs. Can one really assume God’s existence is unquestionable due to the absence of an opposing deity or far greater power? Since there is no tangible proof of God, wouldn t one assume that humans would neglect the ancient scripts? The answer is no since the belief in God and his heaven are only a mental insurance policy for life after death but that is a good reason to believe in something if you do not have any information to back you up other wise.

If the world is a means to an end, why didn’t God skip the intervening stages and create the end? He created an animal that in its creation was already decide of its outcome with a eternity of pain or a eternity of pleasure. Why he would ever even make a game of the human if he already knew the out come, which would have such an eternal consequents on owner existence is nothing short of a child playing with his toys knowing that the G.I Joe s will win every time. Also just the though of him making use flawed by his own direction, individually stamping on owner forehead pass or fail just disgusts me, and it is known that the normal Catholic or Christian like religions can NOT dispute the rightness of there god in his aspect of all knowingness. So you cannot debate whether or not he knew he created a life that was doomed to eternal damnation. The only explanation for his behavior is that he cares nothing for us, which is very contrary to what we believe.

The answers to your questions can be answered if you take a side of either viewpoint. The answers to these questions are complex and which viewpoint to choose is a difficult task. Overall, it is essential for a person to understand that if they want to be immersed in real enlightenment of thought, and not strung around by a wild goose chase of falsehoods and spoken misconceptions; they must think objectively. Do not believe in something just because it gives you a mental insurants policy. You must live to be happy and make other people happy, because your happiness is not more important then other people happiness, which means do not be self-centered. One of our evolutionary gifts is rational thought, which should be used at all times. It is about the only thing setting us apart from the other animals, and if you don t use you are no better then a parrot. Not being self-centered is a produce of rational though. Procreation and eating and such should be used in moderation because the primal needs are necessary for existents, but are not a path of true enlightenment. Even though ignorant is bliss do not underestimate the happiness of the ignorant. So do not over look their happiness. You may chose to not know, to not understand, to not know a set clear bases of though where you don t have to ask questions of other people to answers redundant and obvious questions of conduct from rewritten indoctrinated papers of control. One must question imposed religious concepts, as well as shy away from the indoctrinated brainwashing of organized religious thought.

34f