Everything you have ever been taught can simply be chalked up to being a theory. Mathematics is one big theory, it can't be proven. Will adding an even number to an even number always give you an even number? Prove it. Science isn't about creating undeniable proof, it's about giving the explanation that properly fits all aspects of a given situation. Something religion can't do. I think religion, as you said, is more simple to understand. Big man in sky make small man on ground. But that doesn't make it correct. The "theory" if evolution is much more complicated, but it fits all (or at least much more) of the aspects of the given situation. Science can tell us why reality exists, we just aren't smart enough to grasp the concept yet. Though quantum physics is an interesting and evolving theory which more and more fits the description. Science does solve it.
Arthur C. Clarke — 'Magic's just science that we don't understand yet.'
Yeah. I honestly don't bother with science at times. Science can't tell us why reality even exists. Science only has theories on how humans … moreexist. While it's a good theory, there's no way to prove it. I believe that a lot happens because of the supernatural, or something similar, but in this day and age where any image can be manipulated, it's hard to prove any point other than "science solves it all"
Math isn't science. Math is a set of rules. Math is provable.
Say you have two numbers, m and n, both of which are even. That means both have two as a factor. You want to prove that m + n is even, which is to say 2 is a factor. So let's say m is 2 times j and n is 2 times k. That means m + n is 2j + 2k. By the distributive property of multiplication over addition, m + n is 2 * (j + k). That means m + n is even. Q.E.D.
Science isn't provable. There is only observation. Occasionally, something is observed that conflicts with theory. Either the observation is wrong, or the theory is wrong. When it's clear the observation isn't wrong, the theory changes, and science has to change with it.
Religion isn't provable. There are only stories told by previous generations. Occasionally, something is observed that conflicts with these stories. When that happens, it's God testing your faith, and the observer should be cast out.
Everything you have ever been taught can simply be chalked up to being a theory. Mathematics is one big theory, it can't be proven. Will add… moreing an even number to an even number always give you an even number? Prove it. Science isn't about creating undeniable proof, it's about giving the explanation that properly fits all aspects of a given situation. Something religion can't do. I think religion, as you said, is more simple to understand. Big man in sky make small man on ground. But that doesn't make it correct. The "theory" if evolution is much more complicated, but it fits all (or at least much more) of the aspects of the given situation. Science can tell us why reality exists, we just aren't smart enough to grasp the concept yet. Though quantum physics is an interesting and evolving theory which more and more fits the description. Science does solve it.
Arthur C. Clarke — 'Magic's just science that we don't understand yet.'
Most likely we will just die. No memories, thoughts, senses, nothing. On the other hand some people who have had near death experiences have said they had "out of body experiences". Some say they saw their family waiting for them.
Some kids even remember and describe their "past lives" which raises even more questions.
Death just like the universe and life itself. Is just another big mystery, one which we will never come to understand.
Eternal oblivion, when the brain dies that is it for a person. Similar to how you felt before you were born.
Consciousness is a physical thing created by the brain. This is what TJ TheAmazingAtheist described in his video.
Also, near death experiences are just created when the brain goes into shock, especially when hooked up on any opium products. Doing an hour of research on NDE teaches you a lot.
My teacher told me that when her husband died for a second he saw himself being died but when my grandmother died for five minutes she saw nothing but darkness. I believe in god and hope for a heaven.
Mathematics is most definitely a science. And it is most definitely a theory.
Theory-- The thing about you saying "Math is provable," is that it is simply not true. Your example uses to precise numbers, my reasoning for mathematics being a theory is more encompassing; that the rule X (even) + Y (even) = Z (even) cannot be proven, ever. Because in order to prove that you would need to add every even number in existence from 0 to infinity. Take another equation to reiterate the fact: f(x) = x2 + x +41. This equation will always give you a prime number. Or will it? From 0 - 39 the equation works as intended, but at 40 the equation fails (this example serves dual purpose, you will see this again later in my "mathematics is a science" rebuttal). Ergo, unless you test every possible input and come to the correct outcome you cannot say an equation is fact, only a very trustworthy theory. This is a semantical argument made to prove the point that just because a theory is a theory doesn't make it any less reliable. The existence of anything but our brain is a theory, it cannot be proven because everything from sight, sound, and touch to thought, is all contained in the brain. You literally cannot prove anything exists, but the "theory" of the universe existing is much more likely than us being brains floating in a jar.
Science-- Science has 3 essentials that must be met in order to be properly called and received as science. Those 3 being: evidence gathered in experiments and observations, theories about the evidence, and the requirement that if contradicting evidence arises then the theory is rendered incorrect. If I give you the statement that the equation f(x) = x2 + x +41 (there it is!), using natural numbers, will always give you a prime number then you would need to experiment and observe by imputing numbers to see if this is true. You would come to the theory I had, that the equation gives you prime numbers (if you start from 0). You would then (at 40) find new evidence which proves the theory false. And the theory would need to be changed or disregarded completely.
But in the end none of this truly matters. I was just putting forth the idea that science gives answers, far more than silly religion.
Math isn't science. Math is a set of rules. Math is provable.
Say you have two numbers, m and n, both of which are even. That means bo… moreth have two as a factor. You want to prove that m + n is even, which is to say 2 is a factor. So let's say m is 2 times j and n is 2 times k. That means m + n is 2j + 2k. By the distributive property of multiplication over addition, m + n is 2 * (j + k). That means m + n is even. Q.E.D.
Science isn't provable. There is only observation. Occasionally, something is observed that conflicts with theory. Either the observation is wrong, or the theory is wrong. When it's clear the observation isn't wrong, the theory changes, and science has to change with it.
Religion isn't provable. There are only stories told by previous generations. Occasionally, something is observed that conflicts with these stories. When that happens, it's God testing your faith, and the observer should be cast out.
For the very few who have accepted the flying spaghetti monster into their hearts, we will ascend to the holy strainer and only the rightious will be able to pass, we will then be in the realm that runs with butter and meat sauce, forever with our lord and savior.
For the very few who have accepted the flying spaghetti monster into their hearts, we will ascend to the holy strainer and only the rightiou… mores will be able to pass, we will then be in the realm that runs with butter and meat sauce, forever with our lord and savior.
The equation source is a tl;dr, but the gist I got from scanning it is that it's possible to have theories about numbers and equations. Of course it is. Until they're proven, though, well, they're not proven. The proof I gave above actually works all the way up to infinity (or more precisely, with no upper bound), because it works for any arbitrary integers. The rules of math exist even in the absence of all life.
I won't belabor the point, though. Especially not on page 1 of a multipage thread about religion.
Mathematics is most definitely a science. And it is most definitely a theory.
Theory-- The thing about you saying "Math is provable," is … morethat it is simply not true. Your example uses to precise numbers, my reasoning for mathematics being a theory is more encompassing; that the rule X (even) + Y (even) = Z (even) cannot be proven, ever. Because in order to prove that you would need to add every even number in existence from 0 to infinity. Take another equation to reiterate the fact: f(x) = x2 + x +41. This equation will always give you a prime number. Or will it? From 0 - 39 the equation works as intended, but at 40 the equation fails (this example serves dual purpose, you will see this again later in my "mathematics is a science" rebuttal). Ergo, unless you test every possible input and come to the correct outcome you cannot say an equation is fact, only a very trustworthy theory. This is a semantical argument made to prove the point that … [view original content]
For the very few who have accepted the flying spaghetti monster into their hearts, we will ascend to the holy strainer and only the rightiou… mores will be able to pass, we will then be in the realm that runs with butter and meat sauce, forever with our lord and savior.
The proof you gave does work for any random input numbers, but you cannot test every set of numbers. Ergo it will always be a theory. Ergo v… moreia ergo it is a science. The rules of math exist without a being to interpret it, so does scientific theory. Science sets out specifically to identify the norms and phenomena that exist without the scientist present. (Obviously Schrödinger's cat comes into play, but the same could (technically) be applied to mathematics, but that's an extremely abstract and fairly moot point.)
The proof you gave does work for any random input numbers, but you cannot test every set of numbers. Ergo it will always be a theory. Ergo via ergo it is a science. The rules of math exist without a being to interpret it, so does scientific theory. Science sets out specifically to identify the norms and phenomena that exist without the scientist present. (Obviously Schrödinger's cat comes into play, but the same could (technically) be applied to mathematics, but that's an extremely abstract and fairly moot point.)
The equation source is a tl;dr, but the gist I got from scanning it is that it's possible to have theories about numbers and equations. Of … morecourse it is. Until they're proven, though, well, they're not proven. The proof I gave above actually works all the way up to infinity (or more precisely, with no upper bound), because it works for any arbitrary integers. The rules of math exist even in the absence of all life.
I won't belabor the point, though. Especially not on page 1 of a multipage thread about religion.
I did test every set of numbers. If you don't think so, name a set of numbers I did not test.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9And every single possible combination of those numbers. You did not, and could not, test every single number in existence. Every time you have tested a number add another number, and then another one, until the day you die. You would still have only scratched the surface of the possible number combinations.
The equation source is a tl;dr, but the gist I got from scanning it is that it's possible to have theories about numbers and equations. Of … morecourse it is. Until they're proven, though, well, they're not proven. The proof I gave above actually works all the way up to infinity (or more precisely, with no upper bound), because it works for any arbitrary integers. The rules of math exist even in the absence of all life.
I won't belabor the point, though. Especially not on page 1 of a multipage thread about religion.
Here are God's words to Adam, after Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit.
Genesis 3:19 states: "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."- ( King James version.)
And St Paul wrote at Romans 5:12, which states: "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for they all have sinned."- ( King James version.)
Do I believe this is true?
Absolutely.
I believe in God, and the Bible.
For those interested in some scientific facts about what many have reported happens to you after you die, I would recommend reading through this Wikipedia article:
There are also many interesting books on the subject, such as Embraced by the Light by Betty Eadie
These people have been the closest to death, and there are many experiences reported, such as life review, feelings of bliss and happiness, a feeling of ascension, etc. Cultural and religious factors often influence the experience. From a strictly physiological perspective these may be hallucinations induced by abnormal temporal lobe activity, possibly due to DMT release from the pineal gland. It's the closest thing we have to knowing what occurs during death.
Ah, Yes, Afterlife and family reunion. Grow up. Science is starting to understand the secrets of aging and why we age, There're multiple studies that are suggesting that stopping the aging process may be possible within 10 years. Anyways, What happens when you die is that you lose consciousness, And eventually your body decays and turn into stardust. Fun, Isn't it?
Seriously, you don't want to go there. If you want to personally choose to totally ignore the possibilities of anything beyond death, then so be it... but that doesn't mean anyone thinking otherwise needs to grow up simply because they won't conform to your way of thinking.
Ah, Yes, Afterlife and family reunion. Grow up. Science is starting to understand the secrets of aging and why we age, There're multiple stu… moredies that are suggesting that stopping the aging process may be possible within 10 years. Anyways, What happens when you die is that you lose consciousness, And eventually your body decays and turn into stardust. Fun, Isn't it?
Ah, Yes, Afterlife and family reunion. Grow up
What an ironic statement..
Seriously, you don't want to go there. If you want to p… moreersonally choose to totally ignore the possibilities of anything beyond death, then so be it... but that doesn't mean anyone thinking otherwise needs to grow up simply because they won't conform to your way of thinking.
I mean.. unless you unintentionally worded your statement incorrectly, there really isn't any way to interpret the statement as anything other than you telling people who believe in an afterlife to "grow up".
"But 'that world' is well concealed from humans, thtat dehumanizing inhumane world, which is a heavenly nothing; and the belly of being does not speak to man except as man... Yes, this 'I,' with its contradiction and perplexity, speaks most honestly of its being - this creating, willing, valuing 'I,' which is the measure and value of all things." - Friedrich Nietzsche
My first statement was about the religious people who believe in religion because they want to be reunited with their families at the end. Or that living without a greater force than themselves is something bleak. These views really piss me off because they're very stupid. That's why i said "Grow up". The rest of the comment will have a long explanation that I don't have the energy right now to explain thoroughly
I mean.. unless you unintentionally worded your statement incorrectly, there really isn't any way to interpret the statement as anything other than you telling people who believe in an afterlife to "grow up".
My first statement was about the religious people who believe in religion because they want to be reunited with their families at the end.
I think few people are religious simply for that sake, but even for those who are, who are you to tell them that this belief is childish? If they want to take solace in the possibility of seeing lost loved ones again, then let them do so. You have nothing to argue to the contrary, so its really just a huge waste of your time.
Or that living without a greater force than themselves is something bleak.
Not sure what that has to do with the topic on hand.
These views really piss me off because they're very stupid.
They aren't stupid at all. Again, if people want to take solace in the possibility of seeing their lost loved ones once again, then let them do so. Let people hope. Some of us have very good reasons for feeling the way that we do.
The rest of the comment will have a long explanation that I don't have the energy right now to explain thoroughly
My first statement was about the religious people who believe in religion because they want to be reunited with their families at the end. O… morer that living without a greater force than themselves is something bleak. These views really piss me off because they're very stupid. That's why i said "Grow up". The rest of the comment will have a long explanation that I don't have the energy right now to explain thoroughly
I've never really wished to start an argument, Or to condemn someone to do something, I just despise that weakness because it's an illusion. A false hope to control you. You're making a fuss over it. I was just stating my opinion.
My first statement was about the religious people who believe in religion because they want to be reunited with their families at the end.
… more
I think few people are religious simply for that sake, but even for those who are, who are you to tell them that this belief is childish? If they want to take solace in the possibility of seeing lost loved ones again, then let them do so. You have nothing to argue to the contrary, so its really just a huge waste of your time.
Or that living without a greater force than themselves is something bleak.
Not sure what that has to do with the topic on hand.
These views really piss me off because they're very stupid.
They aren't stupid at all. Again, if people want to take solace in the possibility of seeing their lost loved ones once again, then let them do so. Let people hope. Some of us have very good reasons for feeling the way that we do.
The rest of the comment will… [view original content]
I just despise that weakness because it's an illusion. A false hope to control you.
Its not a weakness. There is no harm done in having hope. As I said before, people have their reasons for believing what they do. I believe in some sort of spiritual afterlife simply because of what I have personally experienced (I'm hesitant to go into detail on this.. as I have only talked about it with one person ever). You have no argument that these views are an illusion. Don't insult people when you have literally nothing to back it up.
You're making a fuss over it. I was just stating my opinion.
The fact that you're trying to push your opinion as concrete is just silly (we wouldn't be having this discussion if you had done otherwise). You can say you were "just stating your opinion", but you were doing so in a blatantly rude and narrow minded fashion. To imply that people of faith (in regards to afterlife) are in need of growing up is frankly, a very stupid thing to say... for reasons I have already explained.
I'm not really making a fuss about anything. I'm simply taking you up on your opinion, and explaining to you why it is a faulty/narrow-minded stance to take. If you had simply said something along the lines of: "I personally don't think there is anything after death", I wouldn't have taken you up on what you said.
I've never really wished to start an argument, Or to condemn someone to do something, I just despise that weakness because it's an illusion. A false hope to control you. You're making a fuss over it. I was just stating my opinion.
I just despise that weakness because it's an illusion
Sorry for butting in but after this I just have to. How is it a weakness? In no way does it make me or anyone else weaker for believing in an afterlife. What is it going to change how I become a decaying corpse after I die like you believe? No it wouldn't change a damn thing, so your logic makes no sense. Also you don't even know if it exists or not, how is it an illusion?
I've never really wished to start an argument, Or to condemn someone to do something, I just despise that weakness because it's an illusion. A false hope to control you. You're making a fuss over it. I was just stating my opinion.
Comments
i hope for on afterlife, but i think that we are just gonna lie in the dirt, and at some point get eaten by worms....
Wait, Italian soldier? The one that liked to collect guns?! Dude, I was your sister!
Everything you have ever been taught can simply be chalked up to being a theory. Mathematics is one big theory, it can't be proven. Will adding an even number to an even number always give you an even number? Prove it. Science isn't about creating undeniable proof, it's about giving the explanation that properly fits all aspects of a given situation. Something religion can't do. I think religion, as you said, is more simple to understand. Big man in sky make small man on ground. But that doesn't make it correct. The "theory" if evolution is much more complicated, but it fits all (or at least much more) of the aspects of the given situation. Science can tell us why reality exists, we just aren't smart enough to grasp the concept yet. Though quantum physics is an interesting and evolving theory which more and more fits the description. Science does solve it.
Arthur C. Clarke — 'Magic's just science that we don't understand yet.'
Just based on my own personal experiences I have had so far in my life, I believe in an afterlife.
If there isn't an afterlife after all, I am simply gracious for being given the opportunity to experience life.
Hey what happened to your son?
Last I heard he was drafted into the war, did you ever see him again?
Math isn't science. Math is a set of rules. Math is provable.
Say you have two numbers, m and n, both of which are even. That means both have two as a factor. You want to prove that m + n is even, which is to say 2 is a factor. So let's say m is 2 times j and n is 2 times k. That means m + n is 2j + 2k. By the distributive property of multiplication over addition, m + n is 2 * (j + k). That means m + n is even. Q.E.D.
Science isn't provable. There is only observation. Occasionally, something is observed that conflicts with theory. Either the observation is wrong, or the theory is wrong. When it's clear the observation isn't wrong, the theory changes, and science has to change with it.
Religion isn't provable. There are only stories told by previous generations. Occasionally, something is observed that conflicts with these stories. When that happens, it's God testing your faith, and the observer should be cast out.
Most likely we will just die. No memories, thoughts, senses, nothing. On the other hand some people who have had near death experiences have said they had "out of body experiences". Some say they saw their family waiting for them.
Some kids even remember and describe their "past lives" which raises even more questions.
Death just like the universe and life itself. Is just another big mystery, one which we will never come to understand.
Eternal oblivion, when the brain dies that is it for a person. Similar to how you felt before you were born.
Consciousness is a physical thing created by the brain. This is what TJ TheAmazingAtheist described in his video.
Also, near death experiences are just created when the brain goes into shock, especially when hooked up on any opium products. Doing an hour of research on NDE teaches you a lot.
My teacher told me that when her husband died for a second he saw himself being died but when my grandmother died for five minutes she saw nothing but darkness. I believe in god and hope for a heaven.
Mathematics is most definitely a science. And it is most definitely a theory.
Theory-- The thing about you saying "Math is provable," is that it is simply not true. Your example uses to precise numbers, my reasoning for mathematics being a theory is more encompassing; that the rule X (even) + Y (even) = Z (even) cannot be proven, ever. Because in order to prove that you would need to add every even number in existence from 0 to infinity. Take another equation to reiterate the fact: f(x) = x2 + x +41. This equation will always give you a prime number. Or will it? From 0 - 39 the equation works as intended, but at 40 the equation fails (this example serves dual purpose, you will see this again later in my "mathematics is a science" rebuttal). Ergo, unless you test every possible input and come to the correct outcome you cannot say an equation is fact, only a very trustworthy theory. This is a semantical argument made to prove the point that just because a theory is a theory doesn't make it any less reliable. The existence of anything but our brain is a theory, it cannot be proven because everything from sight, sound, and touch to thought, is all contained in the brain. You literally cannot prove anything exists, but the "theory" of the universe existing is much more likely than us being brains floating in a jar.
Science-- Science has 3 essentials that must be met in order to be properly called and received as science. Those 3 being: evidence gathered in experiments and observations, theories about the evidence, and the requirement that if contradicting evidence arises then the theory is rendered incorrect. If I give you the statement that the equation f(x) = x2 + x +41 (there it is!), using natural numbers, will always give you a prime number then you would need to experiment and observe by imputing numbers to see if this is true. You would come to the theory I had, that the equation gives you prime numbers (if you start from 0). You would then (at 40) find new evidence which proves the theory false. And the theory would need to be changed or disregarded completely.
But in the end none of this truly matters. I was just putting forth the idea that science gives answers, far more than silly religion.
EDIT: Equation source: http://arachnoid.com/is_math_a_science/
For the very few who have accepted the flying spaghetti monster into their hearts, we will ascend to the holy strainer and only the rightious will be able to pass, we will then be in the realm that runs with butter and meat sauce, forever with our lord and savior.
All hail the mighty FSM! May all bask in his holy sauce made from tomato and be touched by his immaculate and glorious wet noodle.
Ramen
The equation source is a tl;dr, but the gist I got from scanning it is that it's possible to have theories about numbers and equations. Of course it is. Until they're proven, though, well, they're not proven. The proof I gave above actually works all the way up to infinity (or more precisely, with no upper bound), because it works for any arbitrary integers. The rules of math exist even in the absence of all life.
I won't belabor the point, though. Especially not on page 1 of a multipage thread about religion.
R'amen brother.
I did test every set of numbers. If you don't think so, name a set of numbers I did not test.
The proof you gave does work for any random input numbers, but you cannot test every set of numbers. Ergo it will always be a theory. Ergo via ergo it is a science. The rules of math exist without a being to interpret it, so does scientific theory. Science sets out specifically to identify the norms and phenomena that exist without the scientist present. (Obviously Schrödinger's cat comes into play, but the same could (technically) be applied to mathematics, but that's an extremely abstract and fairly moot point.)
Your post did not register.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9And every single possible combination of those numbers. You did not, and could not, test every single number in existence. Every time you have tested a number add another number, and then another one, until the day you die. You would still have only scratched the surface of the possible number combinations.
I don't know about you guys, but I'm going to Florida.
To join the Star Clan (You will only understand this reference if you read the Warriors series)
Here are God's words to Adam, after Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit.
Genesis 3:19 states: "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."- ( King James version.)
And St Paul wrote at Romans 5:12, which states: "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for they all have sinned."- ( King James version.)
Do I believe this is true?
Absolutely.
I believe in God, and the Bible.
Voltaire
This song has some interesting lyrics.
"Did I take my own life only to find myself in another bed, Dreaming another life?"
We'll turn into walkers.
For those interested in some scientific facts about what many have reported happens to you after you die, I would recommend reading through this Wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-death_experience
There are also many interesting books on the subject, such as Embraced by the Light by Betty Eadie
These people have been the closest to death, and there are many experiences reported, such as life review, feelings of bliss and happiness, a feeling of ascension, etc. Cultural and religious factors often influence the experience. From a strictly physiological perspective these may be hallucinations induced by abnormal temporal lobe activity, possibly due to DMT release from the pineal gland. It's the closest thing we have to knowing what occurs during death.
you get to create your own world
We will turn into Walkers
I wish.
Ah, Yes, Afterlife and family reunion. Grow up. Science is starting to understand the secrets of aging and why we age, There're multiple studies that are suggesting that stopping the aging process may be possible within 10 years. Anyways, What happens when you die is that you lose consciousness, And eventually your body decays and turn into stardust. Fun, Isn't it?
So eternity only exists within non-existence? Interesting.
What an ironic statement..
Seriously, you don't want to go there. If you want to personally choose to totally ignore the possibilities of anything beyond death, then so be it... but that doesn't mean anyone thinking otherwise needs to grow up simply because they won't conform to your way of thinking.
humans are made from atoms and molecules, so we just become molecules, and soil for the earth, and creatures that walk the earth.
Belan, You should really stop talking to me because you're clueless of what i mean. Thank you.
"Ah, Yes, Afterlife and family reunion. Grow up"
What else could that possibly mean?
I'll tell you, But when i get back. I have to go now, busy day.
I mean.. unless you unintentionally worded your statement incorrectly, there really isn't any way to interpret the statement as anything other than you telling people who believe in an afterlife to "grow up".
"But 'that world' is well concealed from humans, thtat dehumanizing inhumane world, which is a heavenly nothing; and the belly of being does not speak to man except as man... Yes, this 'I,' with its contradiction and perplexity, speaks most honestly of its being - this creating, willing, valuing 'I,' which is the measure and value of all things." - Friedrich Nietzsche
My first statement was about the religious people who believe in religion because they want to be reunited with their families at the end. Or that living without a greater force than themselves is something bleak. These views really piss me off because they're very stupid. That's why i said "Grow up". The rest of the comment will have a long explanation that I don't have the energy right now to explain thoroughly
I think few people are religious simply for that sake, but even for those who are, who are you to tell them that this belief is childish? If they want to take solace in the possibility of seeing lost loved ones again, then let them do so. You have nothing to argue to the contrary, so its really just a huge waste of your time.
Not sure what that has to do with the topic on hand.
They aren't stupid at all. Again, if people want to take solace in the possibility of seeing their lost loved ones once again, then let them do so. Let people hope. Some of us have very good reasons for feeling the way that we do.
No explanation needed.
I've never really wished to start an argument, Or to condemn someone to do something, I just despise that weakness because it's an illusion. A false hope to control you. You're making a fuss over it. I was just stating my opinion.
Its not a weakness. There is no harm done in having hope. As I said before, people have their reasons for believing what they do. I believe in some sort of spiritual afterlife simply because of what I have personally experienced (I'm hesitant to go into detail on this.. as I have only talked about it with one person ever). You have no argument that these views are an illusion. Don't insult people when you have literally nothing to back it up.
The fact that you're trying to push your opinion as concrete is just silly (we wouldn't be having this discussion if you had done otherwise). You can say you were "just stating your opinion", but you were doing so in a blatantly rude and narrow minded fashion. To imply that people of faith (in regards to afterlife) are in need of growing up is frankly, a very stupid thing to say... for reasons I have already explained.
I'm not really making a fuss about anything. I'm simply taking you up on your opinion, and explaining to you why it is a faulty/narrow-minded stance to take. If you had simply said something along the lines of: "I personally don't think there is anything after death", I wouldn't have taken you up on what you said.
Sorry for butting in but after this I just have to. How is it a weakness? In no way does it make me or anyone else weaker for believing in an afterlife. What is it going to change how I become a decaying corpse after I die like you believe? No it wouldn't change a damn thing, so your logic makes no sense. Also you don't even know if it exists or not, how is it an illusion?