Is the secret to life really found in a fortune cookie?

Why? said:
If Asians don't like to convert, then how come there are so many freak'in Asians who are under the influence of Eastern philosophy?
Click to expand...

Why? said:
You mean atheism is a front for not knowing? That's true. Atheist tend to deny that they don't know.
Click to expand...

I doubt many asians truly follow the Buddha's teachings, however many have already been converted to Christianity, thanks to missionaries. More to the point, I didn't say Asians don't like to convert, just that Buddhism, Taoism and the like are more like martial arts, you can take it or leave it. In other words, if you don't follow Buddhism, it's your loss, why should I care? The most they do in converting is to present themselves as an example to others.

By the way, Buddhism has no conceptions of Gods, so Buddhists are atheists.
 
Why? said:
They don't say "I doubt there is a god!" They mostly say, "I know there is no god!"
Click to expand...
Mostly?
Source?

Are you saying that to convert another to a religion means to go against that person's free will?
Click to expand...
Again you're assuming.
(Or just letting the hamster in your head that passes for brains loose from its wheel).
"To convert" is not necessarily the same as "to be converted".

Why? said:
The older you get, the more you should know. The more you should know how little you know.
Click to expand...
But you still know more than you did at any previous age...
And it's "how little compared to what there is to be known" - relative, not absolute.
 
My source is countless hours on this site listening to atheist proudly proclaim that there is no god. So, are you going to answer the question or not, "Are you saying that to convert another to a religion means to go against that person's free will?" Actually, assuming there is an infinite amount to know in an infinite universe, what little you know is comparatively zero at any age. Recognizing this occurs more often in the old, as there brains are more developed.
 
Also, the less enlightened posters who tend to think I am a troll have yet to figure out that meaningful discussions can be raised from even seemingly meaningless topics.
 
As I pointed out, fortune cookies were originally full of biblical sayings. Additionally, they bear only a passing resemblence to actual eastern philosophies.

I can say there is no God the same way I can say "Why?" has no photo of me on his wall. It's certainly possible, but so unlikely that it would not be reasonable to believe.
 
Why? said:
So, are you going to answer the question or not, "Are you saying that to convert another to a religion means to go against that person's free will?"
Click to expand...
Again you introduce specious reasoning.
Nope, in the vast majority of cases people who have been converted have probably not been coerced at all.
But the difference is that in the West religions (of most denominations) go out proselytising - which Buddhism doesn't tend to do.

Actually, assuming there is an infinite amount to know in an infinite universe
Click to expand...
Wow, two assumptions in one sentence:
why do you think the universe is infinite?

what little you know is comparatively zero at any age. Recognizing this occurs more often in the old, as there brains are more developed.
Click to expand...
And?
The point being...?
 
spidergoat said:
By the way, Buddhism has no conceptions of Gods, so Buddhists are atheists.
Click to expand...

I don't know about most Buddhists these days, but historically they did believe in gods.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Buddhist_deities,_bodhisattvas,_and_demons

One of them is pertinent to this discussion on conversion. In China they had "pure land" Buddhism where there was Amitabha, Lord of Western Paradise. You go to the Paradise for being enlightened. I also think it was taught that if you said Amitabha's name as you died you would go there.
 
Spndergoat. Well, that's a very reasonable statement. Almost a first among the atheists on this site.
 
Why? said:
Also, the less enlightened posters who tend to think I am a troll have yet to figure out that meaningful discussions can be raised from even seemingly meaningless topics.
Click to expand...

I love that...
those who recognise you for the specious troll that you are are "less enlightened".
Welcome to SciForums :runaway:

Spndergoat. Well, that's a very reasonable statement. Almost a first among the atheists on this site.
Click to expand...
Which just proves how many of the threads you've actually read before making your ridiculous statements.
Spidergoat's comments are hardly unusual for SF.
 
Point being, the older are generally wiser than the young in understanding what little they know.
 
Why? said:
Point being, the older are generally wiser than the young in understanding what little they know.
Click to expand...

Point being that the older you are you know more than you did, learn enough and you're smart.
Sit there saying "Oh I know so little" and you're a loser.
Do something about it.
 
Indeed, they are less enlightened. Every question, however simple, can lead to a further set of questions which lead to the complex. Obviously, a question about fortune cookies is a stupid question - until you start discussing it and get to the point we are at now. This is simply a different tact in stimulating conversation. The ridiculousness of the question gets big egos like yourself to respond, which is good for the entire conversation. A troll has no interest in your response. I am not a troll.
 
But being smart is knowing how little you know. The loser is the one who doesn't realize this.
 
Why? said:
Indeed, they are less enlightened. Every question, however simple, can lead to a further set of questions which lead to the complex.
Click to expand...
But you were making statements and then arguing, not asking questions.

Obviously, a question about fortune cookies is a stupid question - until you start discussing it and get to the point we are at now. This is simply a different tact in stimulating conversation.
Click to expand...
The word is "tack" or "tactic".

The ridiculousness of the question gets big egos like yourself to respond, which is good for the entire conversation.
Click to expand...
Again, two errors in one sentence:
I didn't respond to the question at all.
And you are making assumptions about my ego - beam in your eye maybe?

A troll has no interest in your response. I am not a troll.
Click to expand...
A troll fails to see the point even after it's been made three or times - hiya troll.
 
Why? said:
But being smart is knowing how little you know. The loser is the one who doesn't realize this.
Click to expand...

Nope: being smart is learning more instead of sitting there saying "I don't know".
Smart is finding out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top