Printable View
Well thought out answer by Sam Harris (this guy is really intelligent and very compassionate - that may be my fantasy, but I always find compassion in his eyes and the way he talks as opposed to some other new atheists). This generally refutes the Abrahamic position (and its mimicry within hinduism) ... correct mysticism neither tries to hide from death nor from the bliss of every living moment in this life.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7bcMmnZo9o
I see that towards the end he set up and demolished the strawman - if one is religious, believing in an afterlife, it offers no incentive to do any good in this life. That is his interpretation of the theistic belief system. It would be interesting to see if actual theists look at life this way.
He was explaining why he finds the question strange. If the theist really proposes eternal heaven or hell or moksha as the basis for the meaning of human life - what Sam says is perfectly true. Moksha propounders of this country were at least honest and denied life at outset and created sannyas.Quote:
Originally Posted by wundermonk
Yes, many theist would not think this way - but that's because most of us are not prepared to think through our positions and what they really mean. Theists like everybody else are happy to slumber in the blind comfort their beliefs provide them.
THE PROBLEM with atheists is that they truncate the entire cosmic existence to a simple human life and try not to step out of that simplistic setting. Contrarily Hinduism confronted head on the onerous task (of cosmic proportions) to offer an explanation on the entire cosmos and the relevance of biological life within its (cosmic) realm. At least the wise ancestors stretched their imagination to define everything that is out there, both seen and not seen. In comparison the atheists sound like kids with no clue about what the heck is going on with life and its presence on this tiny planet. They don’t even want to look up and gaze at the blue sky so very conveniently. None stated that the cosmos is infinite officially so far!! Hands down the ancestral wisdom wins overwhelmingly.
Yes...our ancients were bold to speculate on the ultimate nature of existence. The question is whether some of Hinduism's speculations are ultimately falsifiable. Has the universe always been existing? Have there been cycles of existence of the universe?
I can think of one falsifiable claim of Hinduism - and that is the existence of such an entity as a "soul".
If, as per materialists, the soul or consciousness is an emergent property of matter, I think Hinduism falls apart.
But will science ever be able to answer the question of emergence of consciousness? i.e. can scientists produce consciousness given insentient stardust?
Before one can falsify, one must define.Quote:
Originally Posted by wundermonk
I think, in its very practice, science can never tell us whether or not you, or I, or anything is sentient, much less microscopic life forms or even seemingly insentient material entities. It simply isn't possible to know. What we do is we make assumptions in some cases, that the other person or entity is in fact conscious, because it acts in such and such a way behavior-wise. But, really, according to evolution, why couldn't all this have happened in the dark?Quote:
Originally Posted by wundermonk