Instigator / Pro
0
1589
rating
218
debates
54.36%
won
Topic
#6307
Buddhism is superior to christianity philosophically, scientifically, and psychologically.
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
0
Better sources
0
0
Better legibility
0
0
Better conduct
0
0
After not so many votes...
It's a tie!
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- None
Contender / Con
0
1597
rating
32
debates
64.06%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Pro
#1
- Philosophy: “It may be described in many ways. It is a reasoned pursuit of fundamental truths, a quest for understanding, a study of principles of conduct. It seeks to establish standards of evidence, to provide rational methods of resolving conflicts, and to create techniques for evaluating ideas and arguments. Philosophy develops the capacity to see the world from the perspective of other individuals and other cultures; it enhances one's ability to perceive the relationships among the various fields of study; and it deepens one's sense of the meaning and variety of human experience.” Philosophy
- Science: “Science as a collective institution aims to produce more and more accurate natural explanations of how the natural world works, what its components are, and how the world got to be the way it is now. Classically, science’s main goal has been building knowledge and understanding, regardless of its potential applications” Science
- Psychology: “psychology offers us a framework to help researchers and mental health practitioners study the mind, spot patterns, and find ways to improve our well-being and daily lives.” Psychology
Buddhism & Philosophy
Since the foundation of philosophy is rooted in understanding, framing of ethics, truth, and methods of proof/evidence. We must now observe how buddhism more closely meets the goals of philosophy. Buddhism addresses the controversial subject.: The main problem of life which is suffering. Its religion establishes four facts, which are referred to as The Four Noble Truths:
- True suffering
- True cause of suffering
- True cessation
- True path
Christianity doesn’t have an adequate means of identifying, defining, or explaining suffering. These are the philosophical advantages of buddhism over christianity. Suffering materializes in plenty of ways.: Sickness, aging, death, and starvation. The other point is that all suffering is impermanent and will eventually pass, and the way to permanently free oneself from suffering is to embrace emptiness. Christianity proposes that the cause of all suffering is God, and that the solution is to establish a relationship with God. But this is paradoxical because if God is the cause, then getting rid of God should fix the problem.
This theistic system uses a very arbitrary code of ethics that rely on programming through mechanical instruction rather than encouraging the individual to think freely or develop their own ethics through experience.
Buddhism on the other hand teaches compassion for people, animals, and other organisms. And that wisdom and compassion are a way to eventually achieve the state of detachment from suffering. The incentives for acquiring these qualities are developed naturally rather than instilled through indoctrination. Buddhist vs Christian Philosophy
“According to Buddhist philosophy, both the problems we call therapeutic and the problems we call spiritual are a product of not seeing things clearly,”
If understanding is critical to philosophy, then buddhism is correct in pointing out that spiritual problems are caused by lacking clarity. Another factor of philosophy is perspective. A way of attaining a different perspective is through empathy and experience, understanding life through other people.: “he tells us about an enlightened man who tastes wine without the contextual tales about vintage, varietal, region. It tastes . . . less emotional.”
Christianity encourages us to reject empathy or clarity by labeling differences of opinions as heresies or demonic, and branding its idealists as heretics or pagan. It proposes a hypothetical model of creation as being the source of all existence, in which the evidence is scarce if there even is any. Everything about christianity relies on making assumptions about what is misunderstood, instead of observing and judging based on the discoveries.
A manufactured system built upon an arbitrary code of ethics, and programming through mechanical instruction.
Buddhism & Science
Both Buddhism and science are atheistic in concept, share the same universal concepts of the energy of change, and nothing can be created or destroyed. The other two similarities between Buddhism and science are logic and understanding, as factors paramount to the two systems. The other factor is that perception does not define reality, and is a limited point of view that is completely subjective. Siddharta Guatana even encouraged his followers to have a critical mind and to learn by experiencing or experimentation rather than accepting dogmatic views blindly. Science is also built upon the same principle of testing claims to reach answers and draw conclusions. Science of Buddhism
Buddhism & Psychology
While buddhism leans inwardly into the subconscious, or the soul. The mind is heavily emphasized as an important tool to be exercised and used regularly. Meditation is done through channeling the mind to block out thoughts, distractions, and to instead focus on exploring the senses and being aware of one’s surroundings. According to The National Alliance on Mental Illness, there are lots of studies that conclude buddhism alleviates depression, anxiety, and stress by addressing negative thoughts with a different mindset. With the goal being to achieve enlightenment, AKA Nirvana - Nirvana is a mental state of peace and happiness; it is the highest state someone can achieve in Buddhism. Buddhism & Mental Health
There is a huge emphasis on mental clarity, which is comprehending and understanding existence. As well as mindfulness, which is essentially awareness of what is currently going on. Buddhist Meditation and The Mind
Con
#2
I have 30 mins to post. This got lost in mafia notifications. My bad.
- Buddhism makes no actual claim at all about why Karma matters.
This means that in Buddhism, the entire framework of morality has 0 motive to obey it. You can do anything at all you want and even if you get reborn as a cockroach, you can then be reborn as a king or queen. It is a pointless cycle where the entire aim of your life is just to live for the sake of it.
In contrast, Christianity has Heaven as a positive aim. To be close to God up there eternally happy and at peace. It also has a Hell, to negatively motivate you away from sin.
This creates a positive and negative motive to help you feel both a reason to stick to it passionately and a reason to avoid straying.
- Christianity fills, Buddhism solely empties.
In Christianity, you meditate with things like Rosary prayer. Your entire way of praying, meditating and avoiding sin becomes clinging to your close relationship with the triune God (most typically with the Son but also the Holy Spirit and of course Father). For Catholics, Orthodox and certain Protestants such as Anglicans, you can also have relationships with Saints as intercessors.
The entire concept is one that soothes the crippling aches of emptiness, loneliness and meaninglessness.
Buddhism teaches solely to fight all desire and attachment. This means you also kill off your desire and attachment to do good, be good and feel loved. You will basically become a total hermit and not care.
- Buddhism is noy sensible or as atheistic as Pro implies.
Buddhism says god is in all of us. Not as in god can fill us but as in all of is are god(s). This god-essence concept is one it stole from Hinduism (primarily Vaishnavist sects that focus on Vishnu) which had and has far more God figures to repredent that concept.
This panentheism means if you even rape or murder you are just god roleplaying with itself, rendering it okay as regardless they will be reborn anyway.
Buddhists of the priginal Mahayana sect say Buddha as in Siddharta was a unique Jesus-loke figure for them. Yet if we are all god that would not matter.
In fact the entire aim seems to be to eliminate yourself on a suicidal quest for some shambala or nirvana where you lose yourself entirely.
Christianity actually has God separated from us. The aim is to connect with God and earn your way into his kingdom of Heaven.
Buddhism is not at all more sensible.
- The animal rights red herring
Christian nations brought animal rights to the world. Research the world leaders in stopping animal abuse worldwide. They are Christian nation inspired and/or run very often.
Round 2
Pro
#3
Con's Case:
- Buddhism has no moral incentives. It is absent of a reward or consequence system. But christianity has heaven and hell.
- Life has no purpose or meaning, and to be moral, you need a desire to be good. Buddhism eliminates that desire and your life will be plagued with apathy and indifference, but christianity gives your existence fulfillment through living the holy life.
- Buddhism actively encourages and honors suicide.
- Christians believe in and stand up for animals' rights.
Rebuttals:
Moral Incentive
Buddhism plays the long game. There is a huge moral incentive within the karmic cycle. Your bad actions and deeds in a past life will return to haunt you in your future life. To do good or evil is a loan with a huge return investment. Showing compassion and empathy are part of The Eightfold Path, the steps required to break the cycle of suffering and achieve enlightenment AKA Nirvana. Since every action creates its own cycle of effects, it is more ideal to act in alignment with the good of The Universe by becoming a better person.
Desire
Con's claim that the desire to do good is required to be a moral person is his most baffling take. Desires are known to be temporary. What is his solution when the person becomes jaded, burntout, and loses that desire? They no longer have any incentive for becoming a good person.
Buddhism teaches you that desire is not a requirement to do good or be a moral person. Desire implies you do not already have something, and as long as you are chasing, then it is running. By desiring morality, you are actually distancing yourself from morality, as it implies it is not already yours.
Desire leads to attachment which leads to dependency. By eliminating desire but keeping their goals and intentions the same, morality and being a good person is something the buddhist already has. Whereas desire implies a sense of lack.
A starving person can enjoy any food, as their brain will no longer be able to distinguish the difference from a michelin-star meal versus raw food. And because this starvation tricks their brain, they are unable to truly appreciate the cooking or effort that went into the michelin-star meal.
But a well-nourished person does not experience starvation will reject the raw food, to avoid poisoning themselves. The well-nourished person will therefore be able to experience more pleasure from the michelin food, since their body is not plagued by starvation. Their senses are greater, so their brains are able to notice subtle details about the food that the starving person would not notice.
Desire is a metaphor for starvation. The truly detached person without desire will therefore be able to truly reap and enjoy the benefits of being a moral person, than a person with the desire to be moral ever could. The person with the desire to be good will eventually grow bored and tired in their struggle and pursuit for morality, and give up. It is therefore desire that leads to apathy and feeling burntout.
The truly starving person will feel drained and wornout, becoming too weak or tired to fight for their survival or find food. The nourished person who does not experience hunger or starvation on the other hand feels satiated and fulfilled.
Detachment is not apathy. Detachment is nonchalance, being carefree.:
Apathy - behavior that shows no interest or energy and shows that someone is unwilling to take action, especially over something important.
Nonchalant - feeling or appearing casually calm and relaxed; not displaying anxiety, interest, or enthusiasm. (Oxford Languages.)
Buddhism gives you a sense of fulfillment and purpose, encouraging you to live. It does not endorse suicide, and Con is unable to provide a source for this.
Buddhism also teaches that all lives have significance, whereas christianity teaches the sovereignty of mankind as being superior to all other lifeforms.
"If we contemplate desires and listen to them, we are actually no longer attaching to them; we are just allowing them to be the way they are. Then we come to the realisation that the origin of suffering, desire, can be laid aside and let go of.
How do you let go of things? This means you leave them as they are; it does not mean you annihilate them or throw them away. It is more like setting down and letting them be. Through the practice of letting go we realise that there is the origin of suffering, which is the attachment to desire, and we realise that we should let go of these three kinds of desire. Then we realise that we have let go of these desires; there is no longer any attachment to them."
How do you let go of things? This means you leave them as they are; it does not mean you annihilate them or throw them away. It is more like setting down and letting them be. Through the practice of letting go we realise that there is the origin of suffering, which is the attachment to desire, and we realise that we should let go of these three kinds of desire. Then we realise that we have let go of these desires; there is no longer any attachment to them."
Since philosophy is also a study of the way we lead our lives or how we should lead our lives, this observation of buddhism provides a reliable framework that philosophers do and should consider. The founder of buddhism, Siddharta Guatana, is considered a philosopher. The founder of christianity, Jesus, is not.
Since Buddha is considered a philosopher and buddhism is a system that is considered a religion and a philosophy, this is also another reason why buddhism is superior philosophically. As it is a philosophy.:
- "The Buddha will here be treated as a philosopher." Buddha (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
- "He is one of the most important Asian thinkers and spiritual masters of all time, and he contributed to many areas of philosophy, including epistemology, metaphysics and ethics. The Buddha’s teaching formed the foundation for Buddhist philosophy, initially developed in South Asia, then later in the rest of Asia. Buddhism and Buddhist philosophy now have a global following." Buddha | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The other impact we have to consider is the stronger impact that buddhism has had on Western Psychology. As buddhism is the foundation of the famous psychologist, Carl Jung, and his work.:
"Carl Jung was one of the most influential early proponents of Buddhism in the west and he was the leading mental health theorist who openly championed the systematic psychological value of this ancient religion." Dr. Zuniga's Blog - David Zuniga, PhD, Austin Psychologist
In psychotherapy, buddhism preaches self-awareness and mindfulness which are two components that have been used by psychologists today. Which establishes that buddhism is in-fact closer to psychology than christianity.
"Philosopher Alan Watts once wrote, “If we look deeply into such ways of life as Buddhism, we do not find either philosophy or religion as these are understood in the West. We find something more nearly resembling psychotherapy.” Indeed, Buddhism and modern psychology both seek to understand the nature of consciousness and strive to benefit humankind through increased understanding and insight. Buddhism offers a path to achieving the types of insights one might expect to gain through psychotherapy, such as increased self-awareness, enhanced acceptance of life as it is, and an improved capacity to live with meaning and gratitude." Buddhism's Place in Psychology | Psychology Today
Important Qualities in Science
Since skepticism and reason are two important characteristics that scientists apply and use on a regular basis, it would therefore be no surprise that buddhism also utilizes these qualities. Sometimes buddhism is even considered a science.:
- "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."—The Buddha
- "Buddhism is most widely known as a religion. But it has also been called a philosophy and a science. Because these terms—religion, philosophy, science—originated and evolved in the West, and Buddhism did not, it is perhaps not surprising that Buddhism defies easy categorization. In this article, I offer a preliminary discussion of the scientific nature of Buddhism and its contribution to psychological science." Buddhism's Place in Psychology | Psychology Today
Buddhism and science are also both atheistic, as they deny beliefs in the idea of a hypothetical creator.
Con
#4
This thing about Buddhism being a fake religion
I am torn whether to prove this correct or incorrect. The Mahayana Sect asserts it is a full religion and that Sect is the biggest and oldest. The Therevada sect admit it is atheistic yet they collect tax-exdmpt donations as 'monks' (not Tibetan theyre the Vajrayanans).
The reality is, I agree with Pro that even Siddharta himself was beginning to lose any semblance of actually founding a religion when he began spouting things that directly went against the notion.
The problem is they do believe they are a religion. The Asian nations (and even Western) with Buddhism in them give it tax-excempt status for running the shrines and temples... You know what...
I will just agree. Whatever Buddhism is, is like taking Hinduism, deleting all that makes it a religion and then you have that.
Genocide, abuse and corruption seems inherent to Buddhism whereas in Christianity its incidental
My opponent talks about benefits. So what benefit is there to a religion tied ti the Rlhinghya fenocide and abuses of power in Sri Lanka, China and more?
I actually wont go into that it is Round 2 and unfair to my opponent plus I'd source a lot for little gain to the topic. I will lead to this extension from my Round 1:
What is 'good' or 'Karmic' in Buddhism is totally arbitrary.
In Buddhism, they cannot make their mind up if we all are god roleplaying with itself (oneness pantheism) or if we are lesse entities that are inside a greater god (panentheism). The reason they cannot decide this is because they made it all up and had a plothole.
The Mahayana lean a lot more to Panentheism (that we are inside of a much greater God entity but are made by that outer god and are not directly god), which is why I say they are more religious in a sense of what religiosity actually is. The Therevada and Vajrayana and most less known sects have a more atheistic Pantheist view (that we are all part of God roleplaying as alter egoes with itself).
Let us even look at how Karma is defined, ignoring the god part for a moment:
This actually reads as a 'might is right' psychopathic mantra. You see, Buddhism is actually atheism masked. This is why I am saying I concede to Pro that Buddhism is not a true religion even in qualifying as a full religion.
If you properly analyse Buddhism, you have no way to feel good for doing good or bad for doing bad.
It even teaches you yo kill all desire. By all desire I mean literally even the desire to do good and feel good.
Buddhists then say there are good desires, yet the philosophy says to kill desire.
Christianity in contrast separates unhealthy desires to over indulge in ever (7 deadly sins for instance) from the desire for God, to do good and vanquish evil and resist the devil.
It very clearly guides you to identify good and want to do good.
This debate is not about which one is correct. It is about which benefits us more.
Psychologically, physically and scientifically, Chrjstianity murks Buddhism.
Science has nearly entireky been foubded by either Greek Pagans or Christians, incuding some later Greeks.
This article backs me up:
Newton and many more were devout Christians.
The reality is that the big bang theory was theorised by a Catholic Priest. Atheists hijacked this idea to back them up.
God making us via big bang was a Christian idea... Darwin's roots were agnostic.
Buddhism leads one to have no hunger for science and very little thirst for knowledge. It teaches to go within and only within. It teaches that you and I are god itself and we need only channel that.
Modern therapy is the result of concepts rooted Christianity, specifically Catholicism, by the way. Venting to god, confessing to a Priest... Strength in admitting how helpless you feel even as a tough man. These conxepts are alien to Islam, alien to all Asia, Buddhism included.
You are meant to aim to be an emotionless robot in Buddhism. Christianity is rooted in empathy, love and a very healthy relationship with our creator.
Round 3
Pro
#5
I'll wrap up this last round by concluding the following rebuttals.
Firsthand, it is important to note that the general consensus on whether buddhism is a religion or not is a controversial discussion in western society. That is not the scope of this debate. We are here to compare the system of buddhism and the system of christianity in terms of philosophy, psychology, and science.
Con arguing about specific branches of buddhism is like me arguing certain denominations of christianity.: Irrelevant.
This is on-balance, as mentioned in the short description. Con did not do enough to establish their case.
Dropped Arguments
- Extend that buddhism identifies the main facets of philosophy by acknowledging and addressing the main problems of life, which is suffering. And that the cause of suffering is attachment.
- Extend that christianity doesn't directly acknowledge the true problem of life, and that it attempts to fill in the gaps with assumptions and speculation.
- Extend that buddhism is more closely associated with philosophy on the basis that it focuses on the clarity of perspective and experience. Both of which are crucial to philosophy.
- Extend that buddhism and science are identical in the sense that both are atheistic, acknowledge the energy of change and that nothing can be created or destroyed, logic and understanding, and to embrace critical thinking and skepticism.
- Extend that buddhism is closer to psychology because of its emphasis on the mind and the subconscious. Meditation is a routine which helps to bring about clarity and alleviate anxiety, depression, or stress. And that a person is encouraged to seek self-development through cultivating mindfulness.
Rebuttals
Genocide, abuse and corruption seems inherent to Buddhism whereas in Christianity its incidentalMy opponent talks about benefits. So what benefit is there to a religion tied ti the Rlhinghya fenocide and abuses of power in Sri Lanka, China and more?I actually wont go into that it is Round 2 and unfair to my opponent plus I'd source a lot for little gain to the topic. I will lead to this extension from my Round 1:
This is prejudiced and bigoted.
Corruption exists in every popular religion. Christianity has the crusades, colonialization, puritanism, and the salem witch trials. To make such an ignorant statement targeted towards buddhism is to deliberately overlook and undermine the abuses and genocide committed by christianity.
What is 'good' or 'Karmic' in Buddhism is totally arbitrary.In Buddhism, they cannot make their mind up if we all are god roleplaying with itself (oneness pantheism) or if we are lesse entities that are inside a greater god (panentheism). The reason they cannot decide this is because they made it all up and had a plothole.The Mahayana lean a lot more to Panentheism (that we are inside of a much greater God entity but are made by that outer god and are not directly god), which is why I say they are more religious in a sense of what religiosity actually is. The Therevada and Vajrayana and most less known sects have a more atheistic Pantheist view (that we are all part of God roleplaying as alter egoes with itself).Let us even look at how Karma is defined, ignoring the god part for a moment:
Karma in buddhism exists as a universal concept to reduce harm in the world and mitigate the suffering that people cause others, whether deliberate or unintentional, and is predicated on logical reason. The concept of right and wrong, as it exists in christianity on the other hand is based on the commands given by authority. People are instructed not to work on sunday, and someone was gathering sticks for fuel as fire in The Old Testament. And God ordered the person to be stoned to death.
There is no logical reason for why what this person was doing is immoral, and it seems that the price of such a small defiance is targeted homicide.
This actually reads as a 'might is right' psychopathic mantra. You see, Buddhism is actually atheism masked. This is why I am saying I concede to Pro that Buddhism is not a true religion even in qualifying as a full religion.If you properly analyse Buddhism, you have no way to feel good for doing good or bad for doing bad.It even teaches you yo kill all desire. By all desire I mean literally even the desire to do good and feel good.Buddhists then say there are good desires, yet the philosophy says to kill desire.Christianity in contrast separates unhealthy desires to over indulge in ever (7 deadly sins for instance) from the desire for God, to do good and vanquish evil and resist the devil.It very clearly guides you to identify good and want to do good.This debate is not about which one is correct. It is about which benefits us more.Psychologically, physically and scientifically, Chrjstianity murks Buddhism.Science has nearly entireky been foubded by either Greek Pagans or Christians, incuding some later Greeks.This article backs me up:Newton and many more were devout Christians.The reality is that the big bang theory was theorised by a Catholic Priest. Atheists hijacked this idea to back them up.God making us via big bang was a Christian idea... Darwin's roots were agnostic.Buddhism leads one to have no hunger for science and very little thirst for knowledge. It teaches to go within and only within. It teaches that you and I are god itself and we need only channel that.Modern therapy is the result of concepts rooted Christianity, specifically Catholicism, by the way. Venting to god, confessing to a Priest... Strength in admitting how helpless you feel even as a tough man. These conxepts are alien to Islam, alien to all Asia, Buddhism included.You are meant to aim to be an emotionless robot in Buddhism. Christianity is rooted in empathy, love and a very healthy relationship with our creator.
Con is confusing buddhism with nihilism. And regardless of whether or not a catholic priest came up with the concept of the big bang theory makes no difference at all. As most of these scientific ideas are anti-christian in nature, including the big bang. The timeline of christianity puts the world at around 6,000 years old which contradicts the big bang's estimate of the universe being billions upon billions of years old.
Buddhism does not preach numbing one's emotions or suppressing them, but to acknowledge and observe them. This is a practice that has been used by modern psychologists to develop Cognitive Behavorial Therapy. Through cultivating mindfulness, a person evolves in clarity and understanding and is no longer controlled by these feelings.
Another problem to Con's argument is that he indirectly implies that the requirement to be a good person is the desire to do good. This is a problem because buddhism addresses the fact that all desires are fleeting and temporary. So when that desire fades, that person will fallback and cease to be a good person because they have no biological incentive to do so.
Buddhism on the other hand teaches that desire is irrelevant to being a good person, and that being a good person is more attainable by detaching yourself from desire. Most desires like addictions, greed, or gluttony are actually distractions that prevent you from focusing on being good. By refusing to be controlled or dependent on these desires, you regain your control. Which is the goal of psychology.
Con
#6
I am going to make this simple. If my opponent brings bbrand new points in a final Round, it is unfair because I may have to bring brand new points then.
The reality is, I am telling you this entire topic is a false clash even. Why it is a false clash is Pro makes clear that to him, Buddhism lacks religiosity in a true fundamental sense.
Philosophically how can a religion with no clear description of God nor way to attain a good afterlife other than being reborn in a form some may call better or being annihilated in form and attaining Nirvana or approaching Shambala, be superior to one that describes God, aims to have a loving relationship with God and teaches you how to serve the God and worship him in hooes of eternal paradise and making him happy with you?
How can, philosophically, a religion that does not know whether we are all a god roleplaying with itself or if instead we are lesser beings inside of a greater God that then have real souls ourselves, be superior to a religion that makes very clear we are separated from God for now and the aim of life is to reunite with him, in behaviour on Earth (or this reality in outer space potentially, though the Bible's book of Genesis is sepcific to this World) and more literally in Heaven?
You are comparing not apples to oranges even, rather raisins to cucumbers and trying to say the apple is superior as a face mask item.
Buddhism has a philosophical structure where you have no reason for existing, poorly explained reason to obey its Karmic rules since you can do better in the next life anyway and no reason to love God either since the proposed god literally would be also all evil if Pantheism is true or have all evil inside itself if Panentheism is true.
Even the humility aspect makes less sense. If we are all god or are inside God what is the cause for humility? That is sheer arrogance.
Christians pioneered so much science. Christian countries were the first to codify animal rights to the world.
Most scientific and technical innovations prior to the Scientific Revolution were achieved by societies organized by religious traditions. Ancient Christian scholars pioneered individual elements of the scientific method. Historically, Christianity has been and still is a patron of sciences.[1] It has been prolific in the foundation of schools, universities and hospitals,[2][3][4][5][6] and many Christian clergy have been active in the sciences and have made significant contributions to the development of science.[7]
Henry Salt, is credited with popularizing the concept of animal rights with his 1892 book, Animals' Rights: Considered in Relation to Social Progress.However, the Catholic Church and many saints, particularly St. Francis of Assisi, have long emphasized kindness and respect towards animals, laying groundwork for animal rights discussions.Here's a more detailed explanation:
Google AI it cites:
- https://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/christianethics/animals_1.shtml
- https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/the-morality-of-animal-experimentation#:~:text=The%20Morality%20of%20Animal%20Experimentation%20*%20the,to%20care%20for%20or%20saving%20human%20lives.%E2%80%9D
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_animal_rights
And more.
Henry Salt that it describes was an agnostic but the nation of Britain was not.
As for 'psychologically'.
I leave it simple. I said earlier here that one faith leaves you empty and alone and teaches you to be content with that. The other teaches you to feel God's presence, Catholics also teach the love of Mother Mary and other Saints. It encourages you to love others and receive love.
No content
Looks like there is nothing here yet
I’m open to a debate on the subject, and I agree with 50% of what you wrote.
But you are right that my response was disrespectful
Welcome to the website btw
👏 brilliantly put
"It is not possible to culturally appropriate catholicism.
The system as a whole is an amalgamation of every form of cultural plagiarism at its final form."
Calling Catholicism ‘cultural plagiarism’ is either ignorant or hateful. It didn’t steal culture, it built culture. You don’t get millenials of art, philosophy, music, and architecture by copying (without mentioning that there was/is nothing even similar). Catholicism shaped Western civilization more than any other institution. But maybe let's leave this to a future debate.
Ps: Surprising statement from someone who keeps baldwin as a pfp.
He did but it likely was less well shaped/formed.
It is not possible to culturally appropriate catholicism.
The system as a whole is an amalgamation of every form of cultural plagiarism at its final form.
And my pfp is not of the real King Baldwin, but his movie depiction. The real King Baldwin never wore a mask.
Do yourself a favour and stop culturally/religiously appropriating Catholics with that pfp when debating this.