New posts

Reply to thread

Message

Hi,

Thanks for your insights.
I would elaborate on 'unreason' and 'reason'.
The Word 'reason' as I was trying to use really means 'logically sound' or 'without assertion'.

So... a 'reason' to do something should be based on sound logic and not superstition.

When people 'act' on superstitions, the consequence are potentially damaging and infinite...

To declare my position: I'm currently

- Adeist (rejection the assertion the metaphysical as a cognition) or reject the assertion of the existence of deity/ies

-Anti-theist I acknowledge there is a solid argument can be made that people 'believing' and 'acting' that a deity (metaphysical cognition) requires them (and others) to live a certain way, is the most damaging concept homo-sapiens have created.

You mention you have met a deity (via revelation?)...
How do you/anyone/everyone validate a revelation authenticity?

Also, please accept my appologies should my post reveal any cognitive dissonance. Please feel free to place me on 'ignore'.

<blockquote data-quote="AntN" data-source="post: 740034" data-attributes="member: 48647">Hi,Thanks for your insights. I would elaborate on &#039;unreason&#039; and &#039;reason&#039;.The Word &#039;reason&#039; as I was trying to use really means &#039;logically sound&#039; or &#039;without assertion&#039;.So... a &#039;reason&#039; to do something should be based on sound logic and not superstition.When people &#039;act&#039; on superstitions, the consequence are potentially damaging and infinite...To declare my position: I&#039;m currently- Adeist (rejection the assertion the metaphysical as a cognition) or reject the assertion of the existence of deity/ies-Anti-theist I acknowledge there is a solid argument can be made that people &#039;believing&#039; and &#039;acting&#039; that a deity (metaphysical cognition) requires them (and others) to live a certain way, is the most damaging concept homo-sapiens have created.You mention you have met a deity (via revelation?)...How do you/anyone/everyone validate a revelation authenticity? Also, please accept my appologies should my post reveal any cognitive dissonance. Please feel free to place me on &#039;ignore&#039;.<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="AntN, post: 740034, member: 48647"] Hi, Thanks for your insights. I would elaborate on [B]'unreason'[/B] and [B]'reason'[/B]. The Word 'reason' as I was trying to use really means 'logically sound' or 'without assertion'. So... a 'reason' to do something should be based on sound logic and not superstition. When people 'act' on superstitions, the consequence are potentially damaging and infinite... To declare my position: I'm currently - Adeist (rejection the assertion the metaphysical as a cognition) or reject the assertion of the existence of deity/ies -Anti-theist I acknowledge there is a solid argument can be made that people 'believing' and 'acting' that a deity (metaphysical cognition) requires them (and others) to live a certain way, is the most damaging concept homo-sapiens have created. You mention you have met a deity (via revelation?)... How do you/anyone/everyone validate a revelation authenticity? Also, please accept my appologies should my post reveal any cognitive dissonance. Please feel free to place me on 'ignore'.:) [/QUOTE]

Verification