leonAzul
Illuminator
In a recent thread called "The Buddha Was Wrong - Reloaded", "onemind" submitted a rough draft entitled "The Buddha Was Wrong", and this appears on page 48:
"However, why reduce the sheer enigma and complexity of existence to the limiting and human centric religious dogmas that the past few millennia have provided us?"
This raises several interesting questions, which I would like to separate from the thread that spawned it.
1) Is there practical value in reducing the complexity of events to patterns and principles?
2) Has any religion ever been able to effectively propagate useful abstractions, information critical to survival, or methods for effective decision-making, in the absence of critical information?
Please, no apologetics. I have no dog in this race, although I have admittedly biased the response with the topic heading
Peace,
paul
"However, why reduce the sheer enigma and complexity of existence to the limiting and human centric religious dogmas that the past few millennia have provided us?"
This raises several interesting questions, which I would like to separate from the thread that spawned it.
1) Is there practical value in reducing the complexity of events to patterns and principles?
2) Has any religion ever been able to effectively propagate useful abstractions, information critical to survival, or methods for effective decision-making, in the absence of critical information?
Please, no apologetics. I have no dog in this race, although I have admittedly biased the response with the topic heading
Peace,
paul