Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
is love based on reason? no
it is a power validated purely on the presence of a feeling.
those who deny God have not experienced the love of the Creator.
it's like someone who has never been in love, saying that love does not exist.
how do you explain to someone what it feels like to be in love, and to feel love. really.
can you do it?
and the different kinds of love. you love a good meal. a new car. different in degree than how you love your wife or boyfriend or nephew. and the feeling of being loved. that is certainly not reasonable. listen to people try and describe how their pet loves them. and perhaps the power of love for a child. brings a parent to tears just thinking about the love for their child, no matter what age. is that reasonable? try explaining that.
now take that most immense love, the love for a child, which many say is the strongest love they feel in their life. and try to picture that a thousand fold. and you feeling the power of that. that's a feeble faint limited by words attempt to describe how it feels to be loved by the Creator. which lives within every one of us. and is available to every human.
when someone feels that, nothing is the same.
now try explaining how it feels to be in love to someone who has never been in love, and has never felt loved, and says to you "prove you are really in love" and "i don't believe you" and "anybody can say anything why should i believe you if i can not experience it myself" and "you are making it up" or "it's something else but not love" or "it's chemicals in the brain not love" or "you are just saying that because you don't understand science" or "if you are in love then why are children dying of cancer and starving somewhere" "if you are really in love then why have i never been in love". respond to those comments, and see how "reasonable" you sound.
Welcome! I was wondering when or if you would make an appearance. Glad you are here. Really!
Again I can't speak for everyone or anyone else, but I once "knew God." Might say I even loved Him, with all my heart. Not to be snarky, because I'm explaining this ONLY to further explain that I also loved Santa Claus in the same way. Not sure when I lost that love or sense they were there, real, but all to say I've known the love of which you speak.
How to explain much about the rest you ask about? I'm reminded of this thread I also started some time ago as part explanation anyway. If you are interested in what more or else to consider...
FOUR: The second reality, all that exists in the universe, known or unknown, is disclosed to Man most accurately and peacefully by way of well documented history (rather than religious books) and empirical science (rather than theology). Universal truth is all we can accept as reality, the truth, with the most certainty and least conflict. What we can all most reasonably accept as true for all concerned.
[...]
Number Four leaves out the important groundwork that allows any progress at all in the search for Truth.
This is philosophy/logic/the laws of thought.
Such as the Law of Non-contradiction, the Law of Cause and Effect, etc.
This will not be found in history books, and will not be found in empirical science.
Without these axiomatic rules, rational discourse does not exist.
I don't agree with your original (now bolded) premise. The individuals I have loved...I can tell you exactly what characteristics they had that led me to love them. I can give you specific examples of things they did that made me love them. What you seem to be talking about is infatuation.
then according to the logic used in the opening post if there is not a "truth" to love
then it is "fiction" and "false" and "nonsense"
that is the logic of the opening post. written by an atheist.
What logic 8s there in believing that if you don't agree with what someone says then you must disagree with them. Sometimes you just don't accept what they said being so.
I said love was not truth but an emotiin. I don't understand how you can include that it must be a fiction if it is not a truth. Is football a truth or a fiction? My question makes no sense. There are things that are neither a truth or a fiction. Live, art, sports, happiness, sleeping.
Do you think sleep is a truth?
I don't care if the OP is an atheist or a fundamentalist religious zealot. I don't need to agree with all atheists, in fact a few are on my ignore list. And some Christians and Jews are in my friends list hence your pointing out the OP is an atheist is totally meaningless.
what is the truth of love?
and where is that on this list?
There is much not on this list that is part of our human condition. For many, these ten truths and all they reference is plenty enough for one thread. IOWs, careful what you ask for...
The truth of love? That we all recognize love as yet another very common human experience? How many people would argue it isn't? We even all now better understand love from a physiological standpoint too, again with the help of science. Hate is also not on the list. Maybe the list is a way to promote more love and less hate without specifically using those words or examples. More peace anyway, rather than unnecessary friction. That's what I like to think these Ten Truths are essentially about...
and other people could do the very same things and have the very same characteristics and you would not fall in love with them.
so parents are "infatuated" with their children?
and to say that someone has to "do" certain things or "have certain characteristics" to be loved or earn love is not what love is at all. love has nothing to do with what a person does or how they act. it is not conditional. it does not change. it is always there a constant.
Some time ago we were told "love is never having to say you're sorry."
Trying to place truth in love is cheapens it. Love, hate, fun, beauty are not anything I would judge to have a truth. How can you even judge if my love for my wife is true or not. Or a dog's love for its people? How is the rugged beauty of the badlands the truth?
Love is truth or truth is love is what religious people say to try to convince the non religious that they are wrong or missing out on the truth which of course the truth has to be the it particular religion or favour of that religion. .
What logic 8s there in believing that if you don't agree with what someone says then you must disagree with them. Sometimes you just don't accept what they said being so.
I said love was not truth but an emotiin. I don't understand how you can include that it must be a fiction if it is not a truth. Is football a truth or a fiction? My question makes no sense. There are things that are neither a truth or a fiction. Live, art, sports, happiness, sleeping.
Do you think sleep is a truth?
I don't care if the OP is an atheist or a fundamentalist religious zealot. I don't need to agree with all atheists, in fact a few are on my ignore list. And some Christians and Jews are in my friends list hence your pointing out the OP is an atheist is totally meaningless.
"I don't understand how you can include that it must be a fiction if it is not a truth. Is football a truth or a fiction? My question makes no sense. There are things that are neither a truth or a fiction. Live, art, sports, happiness, sleeping."
that is exactly the point i am making. i am agreeing with you.
which is why the logic in the opening post is flawed.
in the opening post emotion is discarded since is not "facts, reason, logic" it is "spawned" it is "speculation"
"FIVE: Faith is spawned from the human inclination to speculate or suppose beyond universal truth as determined and defined by science. Such notions, religions, often involve spirituality or a belief in an energy, power or force. A belief in a deity, god or gods, the supernatural. These notions that go beyond common human awareness are typically based or recognized more by emotions and feelings rather than facts, reason and logic. They typically call for faith rather than proof, all stemming from personal experience rather than common observation or scientific verification."
the poster LM consistently maintains that if something is not "truth" that it is "fiction" "false" "nonsense"
i disagree and many have pointed out the flawed logic in that premise which he continues to steadfastly maintain, in his parlance like cement.
All I've asked for more than once are some examples, or even one, of a universal truth that has to do with religion or spirituality.
So far...…...none.
Have you got one perhaps? Is one required?
Science, religion and spirituality are all different approaches to establishing or determining what our universal truth actually is. See Truth Eight again, where it is noted they cannot be reconciled. Are you arguing they can?
If religion or spirituality involves a deity or the supernatural and science and these truths make the case that no deity or supernatural has been proven as a universal truth, how would you imagine a universal truth that "has to do with religion or spirituality?"
These truths are ABOUT considering the approach toward understanding and/or accepting our universal truth in the context of competing versions stemming from religion and spirituality. See the connection? Something like someone tried to explain earlier; there really is no way to discuss theism without discussing atheism. Same sort of obvious relationship.
If you consider your God or deity a "universal truth," then perhaps that's the connection you are trying to suggest, but needless to say the connection requires a definition of universal truth very different from mine. Your God or deity falls into the category described in Truth One.
EIGHT: Science fosters the peace of a universal patience and acceptance of our common condition and experience as humans. Faith forbids followers to question thus retarding Man's progress. Science encourages inquiry thus expanding Man's awareness and enlightenment. Faith typically deems any question about God's existence as evil in nature, not to be tolerated. Science has no such restrictions or judgement. Accordingly, there is no manner in which to reconcile these two competing approaches toward revealing Man's universal truth.
While I agree that for many the path of Faith and the path of Reason seem to be competing or contradictory approaches to Truth, anyone who puts the effort in to explore the adult thinking of their faith will usually find a more nuanced line of thought.
For myself as a Catholic this can be seen in the thought of Aquinas (and many others), who recognize that the Truth of Reason cannot be ignored.
‘...Thomas had the great merit of giving pride of place to the harmony which exists between faith and reason. Both the light of reason and the light of faith come from God, he argued; hence there can be no contradiction between them[...] Faith therefore has no fear of reason, but seeks it out and has trust in it...” - Faith and Reason - Pope John Paul II
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
