fiksal wrote: ↑Tue, 16. Jun 20, 15:09
I could have brought it up once before, but that in relation to question of what's really agnosticism vs atheism.
Why Ketraar?
It's because of his "I don't care attitude". If I remember correctly that's how some people differentiate between agnosticism and atheism. Atheist don't believe, but neither they care what other believes as long as it doesn't encroach on their comfort zone. Agnostics while also don't believe, but are also conscious about what OTHER believes, and often eager to prove that those are wrong while their own belief is right.
If I can be a a bit presumptuous, someone like him would probably make a good Buddhist.
This reminds me of this popular idea - that there are no atheists in trenches.
Or that if you press hard enough, everyone believes in god, just doesn't know it, as not believing is impossible.
I interprete that saying differently. Because if you push hard enough, then atheism itself can become a belief like any others. I think that's the line that Atheist need to watch out for. Without moderation to keep it in check, giving enough zeal atheism may become a religion all but in name. And as I demonstrate, not all religion needs a god (and FYI, Buddhism is not the only one without a god).
fiksal wrote: ↑Tue, 16. Jun 20, 15:09
Yes there are good examples of people who believe both. It's a bit unclear to me how much in supernatural they believe, as curiously none can be applied to their profession.
And I tell you, it's not that big of a deal. It's similar to the question Kestraa asked ealier how can religions hold merit when it's so flexible. Ironically, I think the two groups that concern themselves and antagonize over that kind of question are the super devout/fanatic and some atheist. To us general practitioners, it's not hard to reconcile even in the face of contradiction. I have a feeling that you - as an atheist - are imagining it to be a much bigger deal that it actually is for us
I don't know what the astronaut think, but I would ask why would you think there gotta be a relationship about applying their faith to their profession? My guess would be ... may be they don't even think about it at all? You know, keep things separate and all that.
I'm actually a dual faith, in fact most Asian Buddhists are. Buddhism's adaptability is still a bit different from that of other religions, it's not much that it changes itself to appease the local, it just doesn't care if you hold several faiths at the same time. In Vietnam, that means most Buddhist also have a 2nd, our traditional folks religion. Just like if you look at Japan, most Buddhist there are also a followers of Shinto. And the things is, Buddhist and these local religions have a lot of contradictions in their belief system. And I don't mean just on small, irrelevant stuffs. Like for example, Vietnam Folk's religion belief on the afterlife is pretty much on a direct collision course of the Buddhist belief of the circle of life. And guess what ... I practice both belief, daily, no problem at all.
In another word, you don't have to think too hard about it. The astronaut example wasn't meant as a vindication for religion in the sense "hey even if these people can believe, that means it must be real!". The point is, out of the 7.8b people on this planet, few would stand above or can claim to be as close to science as cosmonauts. They are not simply pilots who take a craft into space, but remember they are also scientists who perform experiments in vacuum that no other scientists can do on Earth. Plus, they are the few who actually see the "Earth is round" - which some of them had described as a religious experience. (Reminder, while most of us know the Earth is round, it's still via theoretical proof and secondary images, we don't have the privilege of physically see the proof directly with our eyes). Yet, these people can still have faith. It's just to refute the notion you implied with your previous post. I can be scientific and religious at the same time, being atheist is not a pre-requiste to believe in science, neither becoming an atheist is a natural outcome/progression of being scientific.