Black Spirituality Religion : How Do Atheists Feel About Non-Abrahamic "Religions"?

Thus, I'm not the only one here, that sees that you have written off African thought....
that is the gist of it. some of us believe that white is right. can't be mad at them, that is how they have been socialized.
that is why i wouldn't even speak to such about an ATR. if the mind is closed there is nothing to be said.
you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make them think.
 
....Says the person that has made such conclusions about Spirituality as a whole. You don't see the irony of this?



And the hits just keep coming. You couldn't tell me a single thing about ATR's, despite A) being given info about them, and you attempting to downplay, and B) Being asked directly for what--if anything--you know about them.

You quote my statements, but you don't actually respond to them.Instead, you attempted to hide your own ignorance by diverting the convo to science (and focusing on the minutia therein), a point that was never in contention in the first place.

You asked about the personal views of an Atheism and mine include science. If you can't see or accept the connection between scientific knowledge and my personal disbelief then that's on you. Fortunately the value of such things don't rest simply on your own personal incredulity.


They have a name for this disingenuous tactic of debating:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

To this very moment, you can't tell me 5 solid things about any ATR (let alone Kemetic), especially that which you haven't learned from White folks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well

Every time you make special qualifying statements like this with your assertions that tells me you aren't actually interested in what someone else thinks or knows unless it fits neatly into what you believe is valuable knowledge.


And no, I continue to posit that you DON'T know much about the Dharmic systems, least of which you can readily demonstrate here. You asked about the Samsara, I countered with the Chakras, and you ignored it. You asked about the Kemetic, and I offered Shu and Tefnut, and you ignored it. I presented to you Black scholars past and present, like Diop and RUNA (whom you obviously have no knowledge of), and you counter offer with Hawking, Einstein, Spinoza and the like... White men who would just as soon toss all of our Black ***** in a Black Hole, than teach us about one.

Hawking must've built a new chair if he's capable of throwing someone into a black hole. I gave you a Black physicist too in that original grouping, but I've noticed you always leave him out because that makes your argument look a little less brittle about this point you're trying to make. The fact remains that if you don't like Hawking or Einstein are going to say about the Universe you're not going to like Gates, Giles, Alcorn, or Young have to say either.

The only thing you can demonstrate about Dharmic systems or ATRs is your own personal interpretation of them. I showed you two examples of Buddhists (Japanese and Tibetan) who don't purely look at their beliefs as something purely allegorical but take a literal interpretation. One group self-mummified themselves because of their dedication to it. If that doesn't get you to acknowledge anything about the religion that sprang up around Buddha, nothing will.

You had/have every opportunity to take the conversation down a path of learning about systems with which you are obviously unfamiliar, but you have refused at every turn. Instead, you opted to answer Q's with Q's, and call foul when I didn't play your game.

As I said, this not my first rodeo.

You can't have a conversation with someone who thinks that the ability to ask questions or to answer them should only be a one way street. Again you've failed repeatedly to demonstrate any reason why these spiritual systems meet a standard of proof to be taken any more seriously than the claims of Abrahamic ones.

This is not a verbal discussion, where you could easily say "I never said or did any of that".... But it's all written out here, for everyone to see. And as folks have said, they see the exact same thing that I do.

See, I've learned a long time ago, that the beauty of message board forums, is that you always have an audience. Convo's that you think are just between you and one other person, are being read by different people. And for however many people you think are reading them, there are that many more people that are actually reading them.

Thus, I'm not the only one here, that sees that you have written off African thought, and the great Black Minds, past and present, that posited such a mindset, in favor of Whites and Jews and others.

But, feel free to continue to tell me that I(we) don't now what I'm talking about, despite the 16 pages here, where you've proven this to be accurate.

Feel free to keep taking comfort in finding someone that agrees with you as a sign of validation. The Westboro Baptist Church does when they find they have a meeting or demonstration where more than one person has showed up. If that were the only requirement for truth or validity their arguments would be air tight.

Everything about your position relies on making science a White thing. Ironically, the Egyptians you supposedly respect for their religious beliefs get a little bit of spit in their face every time you try to maintain this position. Every non-White person who contributes to understanding our world in a better way, past or present, gets a little bit of spit in their face because their accomplishments are trivialized in favor of myth alone. So go ahead and keep telling yourself that you somehow value Black thought. Maybe someone out there will actually believe that you mean it. Maybe they'll even believe that you actually care about what the truth might be.
 
You asked about the personal views of an Atheism and mine include science. If you can't see or accept the connection between scientific knowledge and my personal disbelief then that's on you. Fortunately the value of such things don't rest simply on your own personal incredulity.

I don't have any qualms with the inclusion of science in one's personal world view. That's not the issue here. The issue is making assumptions under the guise of science, about topics you clearly cannot demonstrate any knowledge about.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well

Every time you make special qualifying statements like this with your assertions that tells me you aren't actually interested in what someone else thinks or knows unless it fits neatly into what you believe is valuable knowledge.

Says the guy that has no knowledge about ATR.

If you think for a moment that you are going to be let off the hook on this one regard, you at sorely mistaken.

Hawking must've built a new chair if he's capable of throwing someone into a black hole.

Cute.

I gave you a Black physicist too in that original grouping, but I've noticed you always leave him out because that makes your argument look a little less brittle about this point you're trying to make.

Says the guy that likes to ignore statements and questions posed to him.

Anyways, what black physicist was that?

The fact remains that if you don't like Hawking or Einstein are going to say about the Universe you're not going to like Gates, Giles, Alcorn, or Young have to say either.

I'd dare say you are right, except I don't know who these people are. Apparently you have me at a disadvantage with these scientists, as I seem to have you with ATR and non-Abrahamic religions.

The difference is, I can admit as much. Can you?

Don't worry; I don't expect an answer to this Q, so feel free to treat it as rhetorical (we both know you're going to anyway).

The only thing you can demonstrate about Dharmic systems or ATRs is your own personal interpretation of them. I showed you two examples of Buddhists (Japanese and Tibetan) who don't purely look at their beliefs as something purely allegorical but take a literal interpretation. One group self-mummified themselves because of their dedication to it. If that doesn't get you to acknowledge anything about the religion that sprang up around Buddha, nothing will.

I like how you mention ATR's here, as if "we've" covered them in this discussion.

I'd already covered our two examples of Buddhism. I conceded to one example, and contested the other.
In the meantime, you totally ignored the numerous examples I'd given about the Chakras.

Do you even know what the Chakra is? The different between the Root and the Heart Chakras?

Feel free to treat those Q's as rhetorical as well. We both know your next response will consist of you talking around these points, as you've been doing since I first mentioned them.


You can't have a conversation with someone who thinks that the ability to ask questions or to answer them should only be a one way street.

This is hilarious.

Again you've failed repeatedly to demonstrate any reason why these spiritual systems meet a standard of proof to be taken any more seriously than the claims of Abrahamic ones.

Again, the goal posts are moved. We're not even playing in the same game field anymore (not that we ever were).

Who's "standard of proof"? White folks? The "Scientists" that you so deeply revere?

African thought bears it's own evidence.

Farrakhan once said "that which does not justify its own existence, thus justifies its own removal from existence".

Africa gave birth to the world as we know it; your so-called "science", music, math, culture, agriculture, EVERYTHING that you clearly view as a standard of civilization. And they did it with and thru the spiritual systems that they created, and not in spite of them.

That's the conundrum that you, and the white men you idolize had/have yet to reconcile in your myopic scientific view.

Just a quick question though: Are you Black?

Feel free to keep taking comfort in finding someone that agrees with you as a sign of validation.

Yep, sure do. Just as you do, lest you wouldn't keep citing Jews and Crackas as prove of your views. Are you really this self-oblivious and obtuse?

The Westboro Baptist Church does when they find they have a meeting or demonstration where more than one person has showed up. If that were the only requirement for truth or validity their arguments would be air tight.

Yeah, have fun with that.

Everything about your position relies on making science a White thing.

Actually, it doesn't. I would have been content to not discuss "science" at all, as it doesn't bear as much relevance as it clearly does or you.

My position relies on African/non-White thought vs White thought. Your so-called "science" is merely one example of how that White thought comes to bear.

Ironically, the Egyptians you supposedly respect for their religious beliefs get a little bit of spit in their face every time you try to maintain this position. Every non-White person who contributes to understanding our world in a better way, past or present, gets a little bit of spit in their face because their accomplishments are trivialized in favor of myth alone.

I'd ask you to explain this point, but we both know that you're not going to.

So go ahead and keep telling yourself that you somehow value Black thought. Maybe someone out there will actually believe that you mean it. Maybe they'll even believe that you actually care about what the truth might be.

At least I claim to value Black Thought (the Roots are awesome, aren't they??). What do you claim to value?
 
Anyways, what black physicist was that?

Right there:
To approach an understanding of this requires that one discards their already formed conclusions and looks at the evidence. I can point you to plenty of people who talk about this as well: Hawking, NDT, Krauss, and others are a good start. I wouldn't take what they say because of their skin color though. I'd actually look at the content of the position and the evidence for it and draw your own conclusions. If you still maintain that your belief is one of an intelligent first cause, fine but saying that science supports that position will be accurate. At the very least, you will come away with an understanding about how the face value of observations and scientific knowledge don't point to a creator.

Your original response:

Did you really just give me the names of 3 white men, when I am discussing Non-theistic religions, none of which White men had anything to do with?

Taken from here with more gems like "white man science": http://www.destee.com/index.php?thr...ic-religions.79783/page-9#post-863888[/QUOTE]
 

Donate

Support destee.com, the oldest, most respectful, online black community in the world - PayPal or CashApp

Latest profile posts

HODEE wrote on $$RICH$$'s profile.
$$RUCH. SO COOL.VBRO. WHAT MY bornday. Again. Destee. June. U didn't call. Phone me. I'm loosingbit. In my dopamine euphoria. None stop. I send my new pic. Noylt. Me. That guy. Wears 1x. I wear.b3x. Ok love Destee Fam. Errors I don't care ok. Love
Destee wrote on MANASIAC's profile.
I saw you ... :yaay: ... Welcome Home! ... :flowers:
Back
Top