Where shall I begin?

Hello and thank you for visiting my blog.

 

This blog is yet another attempt at creating something to reach those in the world with my ideas and ideals. There will be postings on various topics however they should categorically retain a sense of cohesiveness. I welcome questions, comments, discussions and debates yet I retain the right to cull the additional postings for any comments which may seem overly aggressive, unfounded, abusive, or inappropriate. 

 

Again, I appreciate your interest in what I am saying here and I am in turn interested in what any of you might have to say.

 

Thank you and enjoy your visit.

If Socrates were alive today, we'd kill him again.

I like to think in terms of questions, this is one of the primary root of the socratic method (Or I could be wrong about that, is it really...). So I would like to (hopefully somewhat regularly) pose some of my favorite questions for you to consider. There are many different types of people so there could be many different types of responses, however it's not necessary to share them. The loss will not be to those who choose not to comment but to myself and the others who will lose a varied opinion that could give deeper insight into a mode of thinking; therefore I would like to thank those willing to share here in the philosophy section. I appreciate your help assisting me in my pursuit to become a better thinker. Enough with the pleasantries let us move on to the good stuff.

 

I have in my own amateur way studied religious, spiritual, and atheistic philosophies, and have actively pursued enlightenment in several of these traditions. What I have come to ask myself is this: when it comes down to it, at the core, is there any true difference between all of these human attempts to explain the inexplicable? Can it be agreed that regardless of the dogma entertained by an individual, the basis of any of these spiritual constructs is one of belief? Philosophers have compared knowledge and belief for many ages, the main Platonic concept is this: belief becomes knowledge if and only if the belief can be proven as true. Since one cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that any of these systems of soul searching is true then why should they not all be labeled as equally existing within the realm of belief? There is a simple question to answer the previous: why can't mankind get over themselves? I don't want to turn this into a full blown epistemological debate but it almost must be: belief is the core of any religious/spiritual/etc. debate.

 

So to sum things up I present the two main questions for today.

 

Question 1 (main discussion for today): Is there one true primary difference between any modes of human spiritual understanding?

 

Question 2 (derivative question to be discussed next time): Why do these concepts of belief continue to permeate our modern world?

 

Well thinkers I hope you have something to think about and if you know something that I do not, would you be so kind as to share it with me?

 

-ShemS