4 ms·

That’s kind of dismissive. Just because something is “religion” doesn’t mean that it has nothing to say on the subject. In my experience, a lot of Indian “relig

That’s kind of dismissive. Just because something is “religion” doesn’t mean that it has nothing to say on the subject. In my experience, a lot of Indian “religious” texts have some pretty interesting philosophy above and beyond the dogma one might expect from religion. Eg, the Vedas talk a lot about perception and how it influences our experience in the world.

lynx23 3y ago
Thanks ChatGPT for correcting my speech. But, I kind of wonder, what is wrong about this suggestion? Do you consider suggesting to ask the experts in a particular field as dismissive? Do you think asking the general public about a very specific culturally loaded topic is better then refering to the experts?
- jdenning 3y ago
  Ugh, I just realized that accusing people who disagree with you of being ChatGPT is going to be a thing now. The dismissive part was the "pleasantly sounding" bit. If you want to continue the discussion in good faith, I'm game, but nothing you have written so far indicates to me that you are operating in good faith.
  - lynx23 3y ago
    To me, religious explanations always have an air of cozyness, because "reality" of human experience is usually much more harsh then people are prepared to accept. Case in point: "an act of god" vs "the universe doesn't care about you in particular". In any case, I realize I was a bit too cynical for a fruitful exchange, my bad.
    - jdenning 3y ago
      That's fair - but I think that the cozyness you're referring to is more a product of someone building their entire world view off of a core "truth" that cannot be undermined. That kind of thing is pretty common among religious people (Edit: I think that a lot of modern materialists have the same problem); however, if you're willing to engage with non-empirical philosophy in general, there's a lot of interesting stuff in texts that you might otherwise dismiss as religious dogma. Not the stuff that is promoted by organized churches/gurus/etc for consumption by their followers, but writings from people who seem to have been genuinely trying to figure out WTF this whole existence thing is about. In my experience, a lot of Vedic/Hindu and Buddhist writings are in this genre (at least they are no worse than modern, western philosophy in this regard). A lot of very deep thinkers from the ancient world have been relegated to the pile of "religion", but if you give them a shot, you might find something interesting. If you engage with practically any text written more than a thousand years ago, you'll find things that seem silly from a modern perspective, but if you grant them some leeway re: how their cultural context influenced their thought, there are some real gems. (Edit: as a relevant example from Buddhism, check out the Diamond Sutra)
    - jdenning 3y ago
      Separate reply, because I've already made two edits :) -- also don't confuse Judeo-Christian-Islamic philosophy with religions in general. The majority of Buddhist philosophy doesn't say anything about "acts of god"; rather they really emphasize that the problems you have in life are about *you*, not the universe, or any external forces/deities.
- psnehanshu 3y ago
  Even if you tried 100 times to defend your comment, I would still think you were being dismissive. So don't waste your time defending.
- wahahah 3y ago
  > Do you think asking the general public about a very specific culturally loaded topic is better then refering to the experts? What's the harm? "Experts" can share their perspectives as well.

lynx23 3y ago

Thanks ChatGPT for correcting my speech. But, I kind of wonder, what is wrong about this suggestion? Do you consider suggesting to ask the experts in a particular field as dismissive? Do you think asking the general public about a very specific culturally loaded topic is better then refering to the experts?

jdenning 3y ago
Ugh, I just realized that accusing people who disagree with you of being ChatGPT is going to be a thing now. The dismissive part was the "pleasantly sounding" bit. If you want to continue the discussion in good faith, I'm game, but nothing you have written so far indicates to me that you are operating in good faith.
- lynx23 3y ago
  To me, religious explanations always have an air of cozyness, because "reality" of human experience is usually much more harsh then people are prepared to accept. Case in point: "an act of god" vs "the universe doesn't care about you in particular". In any case, I realize I was a bit too cynical for a fruitful exchange, my bad.
  - jdenning 3y ago
    That's fair - but I think that the cozyness you're referring to is more a product of someone building their entire world view off of a core "truth" that cannot be undermined. That kind of thing is pretty common among religious people (Edit: I think that a lot of modern materialists have the same problem); however, if you're willing to engage with non-empirical philosophy in general, there's a lot of interesting stuff in texts that you might otherwise dismiss as religious dogma. Not the stuff that is promoted by organized churches/gurus/etc for consumption by their followers, but writings from people who seem to have been genuinely trying to figure out WTF this whole existence thing is about. In my experience, a lot of Vedic/Hindu and Buddhist writings are in this genre (at least they are no worse than modern, western philosophy in this regard). A lot of very deep thinkers from the ancient world have been relegated to the pile of "religion", but if you give them a shot, you might find something interesting. If you engage with practically any text written more than a thousand years ago, you'll find things that seem silly from a modern perspective, but if you grant them some leeway re: how their cultural context influenced their thought, there are some real gems. (Edit: as a relevant example from Buddhism, check out the Diamond Sutra)
  - jdenning 3y ago
    Separate reply, because I've already made two edits :) -- also don't confuse Judeo-Christian-Islamic philosophy with religions in general. The majority of Buddhist philosophy doesn't say anything about "acts of god"; rather they really emphasize that the problems you have in life are about *you*, not the universe, or any external forces/deities.
psnehanshu 3y ago
Even if you tried 100 times to defend your comment, I would still think you were being dismissive. So don't waste your time defending.
wahahah 3y ago
> Do you think asking the general public about a very specific culturally loaded topic is better then refering to the experts? What's the harm? "Experts" can share their perspectives as well.