The essay topic assignments were difficult to choose from. I feel like I have hug biases in them. In the end I chose to where on essay topic one because it has more than one question. I feel like discussing multiple ideas in this paper will give me the best idea of where I stand in regards to the larges set of values and ideas. I am just going to go over each of the quotes and ideas in order and share my beliefs and reasoning towards each one.
The first idea presented in the topic is that everything is given to us in a neutral state that is that there is no apparent good or evil from god but rather just things from god or nature/universe depending I on if you look at a godless world or a religious one. I personally come from a religious background …show more content…
I really like that idea and have always been into motivational sayings and speeches. The problem is that there is not really a way to have strong people without having week people. There has to be a contrast. In other words there can’t be good without bad. I feel like that is a huge thing people have issues with while thinking about religion. They don’t realize that religion has to explain the world and the event that happen here just a science has to. If they do understand that its job it to help fill in the gaps of science and give us a better understanding of yourself and society then most just say well why is there suffering if god created us to be …show more content…
To me it seems horribly wrong. It seems very inconsistent. A man like Viktor would probably argue that without a god there is still need for morals and that morals are not a God given thing but rather a human way of achieving greater through self-sacrifice and perseverance to rules/ governing of the individual. On the other hand when the question is pointed at uncomfortable/ suffering they say they need not explain it. To me you can’t logically chose to have a need to explain everything including religious beliefs and instinctual felling, but then not need to explain the things you don’t care about. It is inconsistent. Another thing I fell wrong is the assumption that because a man is religious he/ she needs to explain why god would create pain. Rarely do you hear a person wonder why god caused pain until someone confronts him usually with the intention of persuading them that belief in a deity is unnecessary. Wait … but if the religious man is the one who brought it up in the first place then doesn’t that mean that they had to justify it in the first place. It seems to me that the clam is very one sided. People who have views like thins seem to me a least to get them mainly from looking for ways to attack religion and not really
The first idea presented in the topic is that everything is given to us in a neutral state that is that there is no apparent good or evil from god but rather just things from god or nature/universe depending I on if you look at a godless world or a religious one. I personally come from a religious background …show more content…
I really like that idea and have always been into motivational sayings and speeches. The problem is that there is not really a way to have strong people without having week people. There has to be a contrast. In other words there can’t be good without bad. I feel like that is a huge thing people have issues with while thinking about religion. They don’t realize that religion has to explain the world and the event that happen here just a science has to. If they do understand that its job it to help fill in the gaps of science and give us a better understanding of yourself and society then most just say well why is there suffering if god created us to be …show more content…
To me it seems horribly wrong. It seems very inconsistent. A man like Viktor would probably argue that without a god there is still need for morals and that morals are not a God given thing but rather a human way of achieving greater through self-sacrifice and perseverance to rules/ governing of the individual. On the other hand when the question is pointed at uncomfortable/ suffering they say they need not explain it. To me you can’t logically chose to have a need to explain everything including religious beliefs and instinctual felling, but then not need to explain the things you don’t care about. It is inconsistent. Another thing I fell wrong is the assumption that because a man is religious he/ she needs to explain why god would create pain. Rarely do you hear a person wonder why god caused pain until someone confronts him usually with the intention of persuading them that belief in a deity is unnecessary. Wait … but if the religious man is the one who brought it up in the first place then doesn’t that mean that they had to justify it in the first place. It seems to me that the clam is very one sided. People who have views like thins seem to me a least to get them mainly from looking for ways to attack religion and not really