Google+
This blog has moved. Please go over to this link to see my new website.
Showing posts with label Religious belief. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Religious belief. Show all posts

Friday, 2 December 2011

Stuart's Daily Word Spot: Fable/truth


Fable/truth – antonyms.

Fable: noun - a fictional narrative or statement; a myth or legend; a fiction devised to deceive; a ridiculous or dishonest story; idle talk; something falsely claimed to exist, or not existing outside legend; a short story with animals as characters conveying a moral; someone or something that has become proverbial.

Truth: noun - faithfulness, loyalty, constancy; trust, confidence; belief, a creed; disposition to speak or act truly or sincerely; truthfulness, sincerity; fact, facts; the matter or circumstance as it really exists; the real thing, as opposed to a representation or imitation; a Religious belief or doctrine held to be true or orthodox; orthodoxy; conduct in accord with a divine standard; spirituality of life and behaviour; what is true or real; reality; a true statement; something held or accepted as true; a fixed or established principle; conformity with fact; genuineness; authenticity; accuracy of representation in art or literature; lifelike quality; in Architecture, without pretence or imitation; conformity with a standard, pattern, or rule; accuracy, precision, correctness.

'Most of the stories and reports concerning religious entities are fables; that these myths and legends have long been mistaken for truths is a matter for great concern amongst those who understand the value of honesty.'

'The behaviour and values of the vast majority of politicians, in particular the leaders in that field, demonstrate that they have no understanding of the meaning of truth. Like so many journalists, they mistake opinion for fact and proceed as though their particular beliefs about social matters equal truths, when, in most cases they represent only their own narrow and often distorted views of reality.'

2/12/1697 - St Paul's Cathedral was opened in London
2/12/1755 - The second Eddystone Lighthouse was destroyed by fire.

Pic:  Barmouth beach, Dorset.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, 11 September 2011

Stuart's Daily Word Spot: Persuade or convince?

The Pursuit - Nudes Swimming (1922) by Charles...Image via Wikipedia
Persuade or convince?
Persuade: verb - using a person as the object – be successful in urging someone to do, or not to do, something; lure, attract, or entice to something or in a specific direction; lead, cause, or make to believe a statement, doctrine, or the truth of it; try to lead to do, urge or advise strongly: using an idea as the object - recommend the acceptance of a statement or opinion; inculcate, advocate or recommend an action; prove, demonstrate; talk earnestly with someone to gain agreement or compliance; expostulate with, plead with.

Convince: verb - master in argument, confute; persuade someone to believe firmly in the truth of something; satisfy by evidence or argument; persuade someone to do something; bring someone to awareness of their sins or error; prove; expose the true character; disprove or refute some idea or doctrine.

Another example of the subtlety of the English language, and an illustration of why it is easier to say something precisely in this widely understood tongue.

In general terms, you motivate someone using persuasion, but you change their minds by convincing them.

'In spite of her natural modesty and a certain prudery, inherited through her father's career as a minister, Prudence was persuaded by Gerald to indulge in moonlight skinny-dipping, and discovered the joy and freedom  of swimming without the encumbrance of a costume.'

'You'll never convince any man of reason that the myths of religion are anything more than stories unless you're able to provide some hard evidence that they're more than the words of mere men.'

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, 19 April 2011

Stuart’s Daily Word Spot: Gabija

Gabija, goddess of fire. Granite mosaic in the...Image via Wikipedia
Gabija is one of my occasional god items.
(sometimes known as Gabieta or Gabeta) she’s a goddess of fire and hearth in Lithuanian myth. Considered to protect home and family and provide happiness and fertility. A shape-shifter, Gabija can appear as a stork, cat, rooster, or a woman in red. Her fire is respected and cared for, often fed with offerings of bread and salt. Fire was laid to bed and women covered charcoal with ashes overnight to stop the fire wandering. Clean water might be left near the hearth so that Gabija could wash herself. Myth suggests an ill fate for any who offended Gabija by spitting, urinating or stamping on fire, with an angry Gabija taking a walk and burning the house of the offender. 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, 21 March 2011

Stuart's Daily Word Spot: Fable

DrumnadrochitImage via Wikipedia
Fable: noun - a fictional narrative or statement; myth or legend; fiction devised to deceive; ridiculous or untrustworthy tale, idle talk; falsely claimed to exist, or without existence beyond popular legend; short story, with animal characters, conveying a moral; an individual or thing which is now proverbial.

'It seems to me that all religious scripts and sacred texts are, in reality, no more than fables designed as ways to either explain what was once inexplicable or, more sinisterly, to form a hold over people to make them obedient to some hierarchy.'

'Aesop designed his fables to educate folk into ways that are more tolerant, wise and thoughtful.'

'Stories of the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot and the Yeti are clearly nothing more than fables, since extensive attempts to prove the existence of these creatures have always failed to come up with any reliable evidence.'   

Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, 13 November 2010

God: a Reality, a Fantasy, or an Unknown?

If you’re easily offended by religious ideas that fail to match your own, please don’t read on. But, if you have an open and enquiring mind, you might like to share your thoughts and comment on what I intend to explore here.
Raised as a Christian, I passed through atheism, induced by my mother’s death in a road accident when I was 16, to my current state of agnosticism. The agnostic stance, as with most religious viewpoints, has several manifestations. My own is quite simple:

I believe that IF there is a God, that being or power is certainly not in any way a personal deity and can have no gender. I believe such an entity is likely to be too complex and ineffable to be even remotely comprehensible to humanity.

As a result of this philosophical stance, I see ALL definitions of God as inadequate and sometimes downright insulting to this power. However, because I have no emotional bond to the idea – it’s an academic consideration rather than a sentimental desire to have unanswerable questions easily answered – I feel no personal concern at such insults. I do, however, find sympathy with some of Richard Dawkins’ ideas, especially regarding the indoctrination of children in Faith schools.

If we are brought up, steeped in any religious tradition, these ideas are so deeply ingrained into our consciousness that not only are they difficult to counter in later life, but they exist as a subconscious set of rules for our later beliefs and behaviours. Language itself is difficult to use without, in the case of Christian countries, Biblical references; the same applies in Muslim countries with the Qur’an. No doubt there are similar ties in other languages with Hinduism and Buddhism, though the latter is a little less aggressive than most religions. If children are taught a certain dogma as fact, then they are less likely to view opposing ideas with sympathy and, in some cases, are likely to view such opposition as hostile. We educate our children in a specific religious belief at the expense of their intellectual and spiritual freedom. That this is done by the religious groups primarily as a way of perpetuating and increasing their particular viewpoint, is undeniable, though they will all deny it, of course.

It strikes me that most religious doctrine (by which I mean the dogma; the insistence that their version of events is the only one, the right one) is so clearly based in factually questionable ideas as to be transparently doubtful. However, most adherents, disciples and converts to the various faiths are so desperate to be seen as members of their particular club or tribe that they willingly paper over the obvious cracks. Often, the arguments brought to bear in defence of their particular stance are so far-fetched as to be risible when subjected to rational analysis. Religion is the only area of human life where a belief in something which cannot be proven is considered a positive quality. There’s as much evidence for the existence of fairies, a flat Earth or a Moon made of green cheese, as there is for the existence of the type of God described by most religions. (This, of course, is only the case if you remove from consideration as evidence the religious books – Bible, Qur’an, Torah, etc, - since history proves that these were clearly written by men and have nothing whatsoever to do with any higher power) Yet believers in the other fantasies listed are pilloried and ridiculed, whilst believers in the faiths are praised, especially by others of the same persuasion. Faith in things intangible encourages our children to believe myths, mistruths, rumours and lies, instead of promoting questioning everything around them and fostering the search for evidence. Do we really want to steep our children in dubious myths, which have long since been discredited, and thus perpetuate divisions caused by loyalty to organisations that exist primarily as power bases for those with a personal need for authority and control over others?

So, no doubt having enraged members of all major faiths, I invite all and sundry to comment, refute, agree or question. BUT I’ll delete any comments that are simply insulting or deliberately offensive, whatever side of the argument they support.   

Enhanced by Zemanta