- #71
NeoDevin
- 332
- 2
There are many Psychopaths that got degrees in Mathematics, Physics, Biology, Chemistry, etc...
I don't see your point at all.
Let's not forget how many psychopaths follow the various religions around the world.
There are many Psychopaths that got degrees in Mathematics, Physics, Biology, Chemistry, etc...
I don't see your point at all.
I don't know what one has to go through to get a degree in psychology, but my common sense is willing to tell me that a psycopath can't just as easily get a degree as a good person. Whoever a 'good' person is, I don't know.
Your last paragraph is also telling. So, you know for a fact that no man will understand the chemical reactions of the brain? I guess we should stop all neuroscience then? Say in 50 years we do learn about such chemical reactions, where will you conviently place the existence of god then? Some other area of science you have a lack of understanding at that point in time? Current lack of knowledge does not imply the existence of god. This is a very weak argument.
Newton et al used this same logic to rationalize god. He could not solve more than the two body problem of orbital motion, so he said it was god. Then someone came along and mathematically solved it, and it was no longer thanks to God. You are playing the same game here. Esentially, you are pulling the wool over your own eyes.
Perhaps, I haven't study the history of religions, so couldn't say for sure. Do you have any evidence to back this up?If you find the roots of most religions, you will find that most are based on a person who was practicing philosophy and wisdom.
I would disagree here, I would put forth that religions more often tend to prey on the ignorance, attempting to fill in gaps in knowledge about the afterlife. That combined with fear, both of the professed consequences for disobedience and fear of the unknown are why they have so many followers.The very reason for them having so many followers was their ability to use reason and teach wisdom.
``Some are...'', ``Some can...'' Are you going to tell me that there are no psychologists/psychiatrists who are dedicated to helping people, no teachers who are dedicated to teaching and learning? The fact that `most do not' should be a big red flag to anyone going to look for wisdom from a priest.My belief is that no matter what religion, the job of the priest should be to learn and teach wisdom. Not that that is what most do, but I think that some are dedicated out of love to accomplish that purpose, and some can teach you things that do not rely on faith.
Perhaps, I haven't study the history of religions, so couldn't say for sure. Do you have any evidence to back this up?
I would disagree here, I would put forth that religions more often tend to prey on the ignorance, attempting to fill in gaps in knowledge about the afterlife. That combined with fear, both of the professed consequences for disobedience and fear of the unknown are why they have so many followers.
``Some are...'', ``Some can...'' Are you going to tell me that there are no psychologists/psychiatrists who are dedicated to helping people, no teachers who are dedicated to teaching and learning? The fact that `most do not' should be a big red flag to anyone going to look for wisdom from a priest.
You wouldn't live long enough to put the complete understanding of even one second of time into words. Neuroscience tells us very little in the grand scheme of things. Of coarse we should be always striving for a more complete understanding. But as an individual, or a group, your knowledge will always be limited. There is more knowledge in one second of time for one brain cell than you could ever store into you brain.
In what way would it be harder for a psychopath to get a degree?
Not knowing what precisely they study, I can't comment on the validity. I do know that in some denominations, the only requirement to pass the training is a pulse. Perhaps others are different, I don't know, and my intention is not to condemn all pastors and priests as incompetent.
I was referring to BobG in particular with my comment about it being arbitrary. He mentioned that he would talk to a priest because he would be confident that they wouldn't tell the whole town. Thus, that he chooses a priest is completely arbitrary as anyone else he trusts would fill the role just as well.
It doesn't bother me that people choose to confide in their pastor, just seems sensible to suggest that people evaluate the reasons for doing so. ``Because they were raised that way'' seems a pretty weak excise to me. Just so we're clear, I'm not suggesting people not talk to their pastors about their personal problems, I am suggesting that people evaluate the reasons for doing so, and recognize that just because someone is a pastor, does not mean they are qualified to give advice on every aspect of one's life.
If you speak to your pastor about things because it makes you feel more comfortable, then that's excellent. By all means continue. But don't think just because he's a pastor, or because you feel comfortable around him that he's suddenly qualified to give advice about how to feel/think/behave in order to have a more fulfilling/balanced life.
And, hey, sometimes the batty old lady down the street might be just as helpful. The odds just aren't quite as good.