Monday, April 15, 2013
Week 9 - BUDDHISM .
I actually do believe that it is possible to live according to the teachings of buddhism in the contemporary United States. Although it is a major conflict between what Buddhism teaches and how we are encouraged to think and act within our society. I believe that if a person truly wants to live their life a certain way they can, with hard work and determination. according to buddhism the main source of our suffering is our preoccupation with our desires. Suffering is caused by selfish cravings and desires. which is completely true. Our society creates this image of the perfect life that has a lot to do with materialistic things which in the end don't necessarily amount to happiness. and we cause ourselves to suffer because we are selfish and don't care about anyone but ourselves for the most part and the desire to be better than everyone else and have power and live lavish lifestyles that are unrealistic. The contemporary United States paints this image, and Buddhism in a sense paints the picture of being happier with the simpler things and when we detach from our narrow concerns with ourselves and truly become enlightened and live our lives to their fullest potential. I think it's possible to live this way although it's not easy i think it would make things much better and the world would be a completely different place if everyone were to follow the teachings of buddhist. It would be a simpler United States, with selfless people who were actually concerned about the world around them not just themselves in the world.
Sunday, April 7, 2013
Cosmological and Design Argument.
The cosmological argument argues that the existence of the universe requires and explanation and active creation of the universe by a being outside of the universe. Generally assumed to be God.
The design argument uses and argument by analogy. Paley suggests an analogy between a watch and the universe. like a watch the universe exhibits such a complex design that it could have only been the creation of an intelligent will.
I think both of the arguments do have valid points that may cause a person to question their religious beliefs but i don't think that the arguments are strong enough to change someone's religious convictions because of how much different religions vary and believe different things about God, but i do think either argument can generally be related to someones religious beliefs because things had to start some where and in a sense might make their beliefs stronger and give them more reason to believe in their religion because they feel like it gives them a clearer sense of understanding why things they way they are and how they became this way. But both argument fall short once they start to get in details and start explaining further. The questions how? or why? constantly came to mind while reading about both arguments or in fact when learning about any religion. Not saying that there isn't A God but it comes to a certain point when learning about religion where things cannot be explained by facts but by belief and faith in that religion. Faith plays a major role in religion when things cannot be explained and faith has no role in philosophical argument.
The design argument uses and argument by analogy. Paley suggests an analogy between a watch and the universe. like a watch the universe exhibits such a complex design that it could have only been the creation of an intelligent will.
I think both of the arguments do have valid points that may cause a person to question their religious beliefs but i don't think that the arguments are strong enough to change someone's religious convictions because of how much different religions vary and believe different things about God, but i do think either argument can generally be related to someones religious beliefs because things had to start some where and in a sense might make their beliefs stronger and give them more reason to believe in their religion because they feel like it gives them a clearer sense of understanding why things they way they are and how they became this way. But both argument fall short once they start to get in details and start explaining further. The questions how? or why? constantly came to mind while reading about both arguments or in fact when learning about any religion. Not saying that there isn't A God but it comes to a certain point when learning about religion where things cannot be explained by facts but by belief and faith in that religion. Faith plays a major role in religion when things cannot be explained and faith has no role in philosophical argument.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)