Stosh

From wikipedia Dogma is the official system of belief or doctrine held by a religion, or a particular group or organization.[1] It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology or belief system, and it can not be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. Although it generally refers to religious beliefs that are accepted regardless of evidence, they can refer to acceptable opinions of philosophers or philosophical schools, public decrees, or issued decisions of political authorities.[2] Viator , would you give an example of Taoist dogma as you see it, to be to solidify the subject? Stosh

Thanks guys , thats really very informative and beautifully stated stuff. Got it. Stosh

I do get your point Mh , but do you reconsider your doubt ( that it is possible to have atheist religion ) as expressed suchly... "I'm not sure about that sentence I bolded" Would not Buddhism be an atheist religion as some practice it? You would know better than I . Anyway theres another angle for me personally , and about Tao I just find it so ironic that the very things I cherish so well , the clarity and wisdom , the rejuvenating freedom of escaping the supernatural explanations about how the world all fits together ,is so unpopular in the very tradition where I find it so persuasive !!… That all the Taoists who dont believe in Gods dont think they have religion??? Not only that , but I find this out on a day when I finally put my early journal notes onto my ppj ! Now I get why Aaron said I was speaking Stoshism! That’s rich J Stosh

Ok , you dont consider your beliefs to constitute religion but you take them possibly as serious and diligent and fulfilling as many might take religion, or even more so right? So it has always seemed to me that the criteria of religiosity could basically be satisfied by belief systems that dont include monotheistic style gods. Some dudes might believe in spirits in the rocks and water and trees which 'animate' or inhabit those things , and that might still constitute "religion" Or persons could relate to their ancestors Others to the virtues of fire water wind metal and earth as they play out on the stage of Tao... and yet still not believe in any sort of superman dude directing things. And yet these other things might get called 'religion' I was under the impression that there were different approaches that folks had under the heading of Taoism , some of which included folks on higher levels like immortals , (but who dont actually "run the show") And other folks believed that thier spirits could float around out of " normal context" or that there were things which science hadnt discovered yet but which still would abide by rational principles or that there was really only one sentience which was sort of parcelled out. I personally dont see why belief in supernatural beings needs to be required to assign the designation of 'religion' since there is no real common denominator which excludes you. Sorry Im not saying it well. Fu Yue, do you consider your faith etc.... 'religion which does not include a god?' Viator , Im really just trying to find wording to fit the question I just asked Fu Yue , to see if I would have support for my claim that its possible to have 'atheist religion' ,, since I just shouldnt speak for anybody else on the matter. Et, the 'this' I was referring to was if all the Taoists here were theists. Since I had always thought the clear and refreshing message of it all was atheist (to me and to others ) I always felt like I was banging my head against a wall speaking to a non receptive audience now I suspect I see why. So I laugh at myself , the irony is rich Stosh

Wow if this is the case then the the Joke surely will be on me Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha :0 Stosh

I thought you considered yourself to be Taoist , you dont consider your beliefs to be religion then? You define religion by ,or require the belief in, god gods spirits etc ? Stosh

Alright , I might get corrected on that line about the possibility of atheists being able to have religion maybe its a definition thing. Its just so common for religious folks to have no respect for beliefs other than their own that I see it as almost inevitable that say, monotheists define the only true religions as monotheist etc But I dont see why supernatural humans are the only conclusion a people could come up with to answer the question of why it snows , where did the world come from , what is good to do. Its possible that a person can believe that gods exist and yet never try to beg from them, never try to kow tow to them etc Frankly I dont even know what 'believing in them' is accurately supposed to mean. As I have said before I consider myself philosophical Taoist (to satisfy a label ) and I dont consider myself religious since I follow no rituals attend no grouping etc.. but atheist is a label which connotes to many ,the belief in nothing of spiritual caliber , and thats not my position either. Actually yall have me wondering , am I the only one who posts here that doesnt believe in supernatural stuff at all? Stosh

Yeah well a person can lie about the sentiments they have they can be confused about the significances of their experience they can get high and see gods It is a point with no concievable point other than to disparage scientific investigations of reality Stosh

No ET Science is not the atheists religion Read my mouth, atheism just means one doesnt believe in a deity -god or gods ! Science it a method regarding objectively verifiable truth. And its perfectly possible to have atheist religion Sometimes Taoists have gods sometimes they dont. Stosh

That religion doesnt use facts , it both true and false IMHO it just doesnt use the facts that science does and the person who tries to prove the validity of faith with objective facts is a confused fool ,, the same goes scientists that try to prove the validity of objective fact with spiritual insight As Religious Taoists have shown me , on begins by inspecting ones own subjective sphere to gather subjective data and arrive at conclusions ,,these are what 'facts' are like in the subjective realm ,, they are the testimony of personal experience. No someone cant verify- create scientific fact without proof . Before proof there is hypothesis and data. An individual can talk about things they dont know thoroughly , but thats true about anything Science doesnt claim to be able to explain eveything completely , I will say this one more time for the thick headed who may drift by,,, IT IS A FRIG__ PROCESS! Have a nice mornin folks Stosh

Ouch Stosh

Whoa ! I really like it , nifty! Stosh

Youre right of course , but (I think ) I am a fire snake and apathy doesnt come easy. Have a nice evening , Im going to watch the debate tonight. Stosh

Both are methods to arrive at what is true science is about the objectively true faith is about believing the subjectively true religion and applied science are about making it stick (roughly speaking) and although they tread on each others toes at times there is no real innate conflict they need define. Stosh

Interesting people saying interesting things and none of them for Stosh Ill go away.

I think folks only seem to change ( very much) based on which of many aspects of themselves are exposed at any given moment Im still largely the child I was at six or eight and he was very much the adult I am now If other folks change significantly I cant say since there is really only the subjective witness to testify to the question. Stosh

Yep , thats what I mean too. Seeing the situation , understanding the motives and manners of the enemy Working within the scope of circumstances at hand to achieve your goal Without creating fresh conflict. Nicely done Mh. Stosh

.

No I dont think it an empty saying , I think Lao was supplying an alternative paradigm to that which was ,and is ,standard operating proceedure. When one has more than a single option they have more freedom in their actions. Those that have only the one gut reaction they have already developed , they are predictable , and they have forfeited flexibility for the sentiment of certainty or for the maintenence of thier self image. More colorfully I would say that a deer generally runs or is wary in order to impose his will on the wolf, since it is the will of the deer merely to continue living. The wolf has to engage and overcome in order to impose his will on the deer. The yeiding aspect is that one must accept that which it is that is their situation , and accept the truth of what they are , and act accordingly to those circumstances,, rather than pretend that one is what one is not , or rather than pretend that if they just give up ,,,their enemy will go away or come to them as dinner. The enemy has his reasons , just as you do in some situations there is an inherent conflict in other situations there is not. I dont believe in Karma other than as an abstract idea about consequences The wolf must eat The deer must avoid being eaten Each upheld ,undone ,by each others way Stosh

Ha ha ha Theres christian tolerance for ya. Stosh

Its my experience that when someone tries to impose their will on me that the effective response is to try to impose my will on them. Then they back off. Stosh

What happened to this thread ? I was looking forward to seeing marble gardens ponds. Stosh

Because as various wise folks over centuries have pointed out, it is generally ourselves which cause us the most grief. The paradigms we operate by , learned as children etc do not always fit the everchanging frame that we occupy. We learn good things well and bad things just as well And when its the things external to us we have but limited control over them. So getting off ones own back , and not driving for stuff that we cant readily get has benefits. Stosh Oops , sorry MH Im redundant to your post since you got under the wire first.

Mashing traditions together all by onesself is a long and difficult road Then again the traditions at hand , in large part ,,are THEMSELVES, mashed together syncretions by predecessors out of even earlier traditions. Whatever you find for yourself which brings you happiness or spirituality or meaning or harmony with society ... has earned its own validity. Hasnt it? Stosh

Yep , thats a big distinction to my mind in terms of Xtian goodness and Tao virtue. and the kind of thing which underlines what I find works so reliably about Tao. Stosh Stosh