Can we “know love on a universal level?” As far as I can tell, our social ties are proximal, though we can apply those feelings cognitively to create general principles of conduct, and thru cognitive effort affect our emotions.
Does it make sense to say , “I feel love for all creatures on the planet” ? Does it even make sense to say “I feel love for every human being in my home town” ?
Are the raw emotional materials of love, empathy, and compassion an intuitive one- individual -to-another phenomenon ?
I mean that in the sense of the raw emotional material seeping into our cognitive states where we form principles of conduct.
To what extent might we do more good by being in touch with the limitations of what we know, instead of believing, thru theology or mysticism, that we can somehow be in touch with a source of omniscient awareness ?
To what extent do you think that you can, thru prayer, achieve otherwise inaccessible states of mind ? When you pray, does its effect on your state of mind linger for days or weeks ?
What do you think of the idea that, as someone who is not religious, I can still bring about the state of mind I once had thru faithful prayer, even though I no longer see prayer as a way to be in touch with a source of universal awareness ?
Tolstoy was a great writer, but was he right about….
What do you think of the claim we’re more likely to create the least imperfect types of communities and societies if we pursue empathy, compassion, and love, without thinking of them in terms of worshiping gods ?
What do you think of the idea that an atheist can develop compassion, empathy and love as well as a person who believes she has a relationship with Christ ?
To what extent do you think it’s useful to inquire into whether mysticism is the best means of enhancing one’s empathy, love, and compassion?
Why can’t the humanities and behavioral and physical sciences be enough as means to figure out how to cultivate empathy, love, and compassion ?
What do you think of the idea that morality is a matter of using our knowledge of the humanities, behavioral sciences, and physical sciences to maximize well-being and minimize suffering on Earth, or wherever else we might find life to exist in the universe?
To what extent do you mentally associate secularism with biological determinism or reductionism ?
What do you think of the following ? (1) We don’t have all the answers thru science or rationalism in general.
(2) Our intuition, our emotions, and our instincts are vital. But (3) we are ‘irrational’ as opposed to ‘non-rational’ when we invest ourselves cognitively and emotionally into unsubstantiated claims about the nature of reality.
To what extent is there a meaningful distinction between having neither a belief against nor for claims that have no objective evidence, on the hand; and, on the other hand, believing that such claims are true or believing such claims are untrue?
In other words, what do you think of the following ? (1) Skepticism whereby we calibrate belief according to what seems supported by the evidence is not the same thing as assuming something is not the case because there is, as of yet, no evidence?
What do you think of the following ? (1) Humans can achieve neither infallibility nor omniscience thru reason. (2) With the best science humanity can muster, we can only understand fragments of the order in nature.
But (3) we are more likely to create loving societies and communities if we are honest about the limits to human knowledge instead of using mythology to try to fill those huge gaps regarding what we actually know.
Leave a Reply