Tattva-viveka
increasing atheist in sweden statistics(85%)
Gaura-Vijaya Das - February 7, 2009 11:36 pm
Nice O'Reilly and Dawkins argument.
infinite number of Gods and good debate.
And confluence of the big four especially
Part 11 and 12
have some self contradicting things about their rationalism.
And dawkins says that you can be touched by a myth without believing it and enjoy it.
Atmananda Dasa - February 9, 2009 4:29 am
Frankly I don't see much difference in what Dawkins is presenting and most of the Christians I have known. I grew up close to a Protestant sect, my father is a Presbyterian Minister. In my experience, most people just do the ritual, go to the social club (church) on Sunday, put up the tree for Christmas, read a few pages of the Bible each year and that's it. They don't really deeply contemplate what is at the heart of it all, because what is at the heart of it frankly doesn't really make much sense to them. It is an irrational idea that contains very little, if any, spiritual truth; the idea that God suffers for the misdeeds of humanity. It seems that Dawkins is simply honest enough with himself to admit that it just doesn't really make sense to him. There are probably many many people who profess to be members of a particular sect and who subconsciously are full of doubt, but just cannot bear the social stigma of admitting that to themselves or others.
Dawkins criticisms of the Judeo Christians and Islamists are only strengthened by the idea that those who really take those teachings to seriously, the fundamentalists, are often the last people you would really not want to be around. They are the people who are the most intolerant, arrogant and violent. However, I don't think that Dawkins has really looked far enough in his search for an objective truth. He is only addressing the popular ideas of religion and spirituality.
Interesting that Vedanta never enters into these discussions. It appears that the Vedanta tradition is the most obscure and unknown of all the major spiritual traditions on the earth. (At least in the popular mindset) I think it is also quite fair to say that it stands apart from all the other religions of the world, in a class by itself. It might also be argued that the Vedanta tradition is does not even fit the conventional idea of religion at all. Vedanta discusses the very fabric of reality in such meticulous detail. Nothing can compare with it.
The debates that I have heard between the Judeo Chistian Mulism groups and the atheists, they don't even go there. The barely even approach it at all. And they're just so emotional. Its ridiculous. 
Anyway, it seems that these fellows are indirectly doing a little service by challenging the religionists of the world to take a little deeper look at their traditions. And Swami has certainly had a little fun with them.
Bhrigu - February 9, 2009 4:37 pm
By the way, the stats quoted in the heading are way off. Two recent polls in Sweden report that 28% and 31% say that they are atheists. Large numbers like the 85% refer more or less to persons who do not agree with the official doctrine of the Swedish Lutheran church.
Gaura-Vijaya Das - February 9, 2009 5:27 pm
Frankly I don't see much difference in what Dawkins is presenting and most of the Christians I have known. I grew up close to a Protestant sect, my father is a Presbyterian Minister. In my experience, most people just do the ritual, go to the social club (church) on Sunday, put up the tree for Christmas, read a few pages of the Bible each year and that's it. They don't really deeply contemplate what is at the heart of it all, because what is at the heart of it frankly doesn't really make much sense to them. It is an irrational idea that contains very little, if any, spiritual truth; the idea that God suffers for the misdeeds of humanity. It seems that Dawkins is simply honest enough with himself to admit that it just doesn't really make sense to him. There are probably many many people who profess to be members of a particular sect and who subconsciously are full of doubt, but just cannot bear the social stigma of admitting that to themselves or others.Dawkins criticisms of the Judeo Christians and Islamists are only strengthened by the idea that those who really take those teachings to seriously, the fundamentalists, are often the last people you would really not want to be around. They are the people who are the most intolerant, arrogant and violent. However, I don't think that Dawkins has really looked far enough in his search for an objective truth. He is only addressing the popular ideas of religion and spirituality.
Interesting that Vedanta never enters into these discussions. It appears that the Vedanta tradition is the most obscure and unknown of all the major spiritual traditions on the earth. (At least in the popular mindset) I think it is also quite fair to say that it stands apart from all the other religions of the world, in a class by itself. It might also be argued that the Vedanta tradition is does not even fit the conventional idea of religion at all. Vedanta discusses the very fabric of reality in such meticulous detail. Nothing can compare with it.
The debates that I have heard between the Judeo Chistian Mulism groups and the atheists, they don't even go there. The barely even approach it at all. And they're just so emotional. Its ridiculous.
Anyway, it seems that these fellows are indirectly doing a little service by challenging the religionists of the world to take a little deeper look at their traditions. And Swami has certainly had a little fun with them.
Thanks for your great analysis
Gaura-Vijaya Das - February 9, 2009 5:29 pm
By the way, the stats quoted in the heading are way off. Two recent polls in Sweden report that 28% and 31% say that they are atheists. Large numbers like the 85% refer more or less to persons who do not agree with the official doctrine of the Swedish Lutheran church.
In my experience of meeting 15-20 swedish and norwegian people in the university not even one bothers about religion. Maybe I am taking a wrong sample as I am in engineering school. With such a great welfare system in place what is the need for God there unless somebody really wants to search for the absolute like you!!!
Syama Gopala Dasa - February 9, 2009 6:17 pm
Come on, Gaura-Vijaya. You met 15-20 Scandinavian youngsters. They don't represent a whole population.
A welfare state does not take away the need for searching the Absolute. Because how empty is one's life when there is nothing to fight for anymore?
In my experience of meeting 15-20 swedish and norwegian people in the university not even one bothers about religion. Maybe I am taking a wrong sample as I am in engineering school. With such a great welfare system in place what is the need for God there unless somebody really wants to search for the absolute like you!!!
Gaura-Vijaya Das - February 9, 2009 7:45 pm
Come on, Gaura-Vijaya. You met 15-20 Scandinavian youngsters. They don't represent a whole population.
A welfare state does not take away the need for searching the Absolute. Because how empty is one's life when there is nothing to fight for anymore?
First of all bhrigu and syama gopal 85% is not my statistic ; it was provided in the news link which I pasted here.
I just said that statistic does not seem unreasonable based on my experience. If the statistic itself is wrong then we can sue the news channel not me.
Syama Gopala Dasa - February 10, 2009 7:33 pm
I won't sue any one, no worries. 
Don't believe Fox news any way. The way they recently portrayed Amsterdam was totally nonsense. I don't understand why people actually watch it.
First of all bhrigu and syama gopal 85% is not my statistic ; it was provided in the news link which I pasted here.I just said that statistic does not seem unreasonable based on my experience. If the statistic itself is wrong then we can sue the news channel not me.
Madan Gopal Das - February 10, 2009 10:26 pm
I don't understand why people actually watch it.
Because they want entertainment, not news! When I first saw this thread I didn't watch the video. But now that I see that it is Bill O'Reilly, I know I don't have to. That dude is nuts, no matter who he argues with.
Atmananda Dasa - February 21, 2009 4:36 pm
Frankly I don't see much difference in what Dawkins is presenting and most of the Christians I have known. I grew up close to a Protestant sect, my father is a Presbyterian Minister. In my experience, most people just do the ritual, go to the social club (church) on Sunday, put up the tree for Christmas, read a few pages of the Bible each year and that's it. They don't really deeply contemplate what is at the heart of it all, because what is at the heart of it frankly doesn't really make much sense to them. It is an irrational idea that contains very little, if any, spiritual truth; the idea that God suffers for the misdeeds of humanity. It seems that Dawkins is simply honest enough with himself to admit that it just doesn't really make sense to him. There are probably many many people who profess to be members of a particular sect and who subconsciously are full of doubt, but just cannot bear the social stigma of admitting that to themselves or others.Dawkins criticisms of the Judeo Christians and Islamists are only strengthened by the idea that those who really take those teachings to seriously, the fundamentalists, are often the last people you would really not want to be around. They are the people who are the most intolerant, arrogant and violent. However, I don't think that Dawkins has really looked far enough in his search for an objective truth. He is only addressing the popular ideas of religion and spirituality.
Interesting that Vedanta never enters into these discussions. It appears that the Vedanta tradition is the most obscure and unknown of all the major spiritual traditions on the earth. (At least in the popular mindset) I think it is also quite fair to say that it stands apart from all the other religions of the world, in a class by itself. It might also be argued that the Vedanta tradition is does not even fit the conventional idea of religion at all. Vedanta discusses the very fabric of reality in such meticulous detail. Nothing can compare with it.
The debates that I have heard between the Judeo Chistian Mulism groups and the atheists, they don't even go there. The barely even approach it at all. And they're just so emotional. Its ridiculous.
Anyway, it seems that these fellows are indirectly doing a little service by challenging the religionists of the world to take a little deeper look at their traditions. And Swami has certainly had a little fun with them.
It appears that I have not been listening closely enough. Here is a quote from one of Swami's lectures where he is speaking about Dawkins, Harris etc. After hearing from Swami, it has become apparent that some of my statements above are unnecessary. Please ignore them.
"...you might as well not criticize religion, even though its worth criticizing in many respects and it is dogmatic and so forth, none the less, there may be many schools of religion who incorporate all sorts of religious dogma, happilly, and they don't fight with anybody and it serves the purpose of pursuing experiential spiritual life"