The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums
-
Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community
In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
If you do not have an account, please register.
REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your InfoPLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.
How come Confucius teachings sounds much better than the 3 Abrahamic religions ?
- Thread starter Telstra
- Start date
kallipolis
Know thyself
There are posters on this site who much prefer Taylor Lautner, over Robert Pattison and vice versa.
Would you care to share your reasoning with us when stating that the teachings of Confucius sounds better than the 3 Abrahamic religions.
By the way I am a big fan of the philosophy attributed to Confucius.
You may care to read Analects of Confucius a collection of aphorisms attributed to Confucius. (1)
My favourite quote, attributed to Confucius:
"What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others."
In other words, "do under others, as you would have them do unto you."~ Luke 6:31
(1) http://classics.mit.edu/Confucius/analects.1.1.html
Would you care to share your reasoning with us when stating that the teachings of Confucius sounds better than the 3 Abrahamic religions.
By the way I am a big fan of the philosophy attributed to Confucius.
You may care to read Analects of Confucius a collection of aphorisms attributed to Confucius. (1)
My favourite quote, attributed to Confucius:
"What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others."
In other words, "do under others, as you would have them do unto you."~ Luke 6:31
(1) http://classics.mit.edu/Confucius/analects.1.1.html
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2005
- Posts
- 8,804
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 0
I think it would be great to have you learn more about Confucianism and get back to us with your thoughts. We don't have enough representation of all the world's religions.
If this is just a platform to attack the 'fairy tales' of western religion, though, you've already done it a few times.
If this is just a platform to attack the 'fairy tales' of western religion, though, you've already done it a few times.
Whether they "sound good" or not is entirely subjective; it depends on what resonates with you personally.
Bear in mind, one does not have to take what others promote as literal accounts as literal accounts. The stories of the bible, the koran, ancient Hebrew tales, folktales, ancient Greek, Celtic, Japanese mythologies etc all have some degree of metaphorical freight.
Given my own proclivities, I'd say such ideologies attain their highest possible state when they are regarded as the structures of storytelling they are.
Bear in mind, one does not have to take what others promote as literal accounts as literal accounts. The stories of the bible, the koran, ancient Hebrew tales, folktales, ancient Greek, Celtic, Japanese mythologies etc all have some degree of metaphorical freight.
Given my own proclivities, I'd say such ideologies attain their highest possible state when they are regarded as the structures of storytelling they are.
From what i understood, confucianism is not a religion.
It is just the teaching of ethnics at that time. Of course the ethnics can be updated and improved on unlike the Abrahamic books which are perfect from god and unchangeable.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2005
- Posts
- 8,804
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 0
Your understanding is in distinct contrast to widely accepted norms. Confucianism is a kind of religion.
Perhaps you will expand your notion of religion to mean possibly, the teaching of ethics at a time?
I refrain from your comment on western religion, as I hope for once to not dwell upon it here.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2005
- Posts
- 8,804
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 0
You must inform students of religion at universities around the world of their confusion.
Stupid english pronunciation.
It should be "K'ung-fu-tzu" or Kǒng Fūzǐ or master Kong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucius
kallipolis
Know thyself
Christianity is a religion filled with philosophical thought, whereas Plato's wisdom is purely philosophical; however if ones definition of religion is based on ritual, core beliefs and a philosophy that one lives by then Confucianism is also a religion led by philosophical guidance how best to live ones life for our own benefit, while also serving the greater good of mankind.
Confucius was an enthusiastic supporter of ritual, and for many centuries there were state rituals associated with Confucianism. Most importantly the Confucian tradition was instrumental in shaping Chinese social relationships and moral thought. Thus even without deities and a vision of salvation, Confucianism plays much the same role as religion does in other cultural contexts.
Thus, Plato might have said that our perspective shapes our understandings.
Confucius was an enthusiastic supporter of ritual, and for many centuries there were state rituals associated with Confucianism. Most importantly the Confucian tradition was instrumental in shaping Chinese social relationships and moral thought. Thus even without deities and a vision of salvation, Confucianism plays much the same role as religion does in other cultural contexts.
Thus, Plato might have said that our perspective shapes our understandings.
kallipolis
Know thyself
Any philosophical reasoning which also reflects ritual can be considered a religion.
Our perspective will create our understanding.
Confucianism has a measure of ritual confirming its status as a religion, despite its principle purpose being a philosophical exploration of the meaning of life.
Followers of Confucius have created various modes of behaviour of Li (a ritualised formality in particular circumstances) which demands certain protocols to be observed. Li ranges from a bow to an elder, taking off shoes before entering the house, being silent and respectful to elders, bringing a gift to the host, and writing thank-you notes to a helper. Many in Chinese society consider a serious transgression of Li as a violation of the law.(Confucian Analects, attributed to Confucius). The original purpose of Li is to assist the human person to express respectful consideration for other people through creative ways of building and maintaining caring relationships when gestures also evidence this respect.
I have already stated in my previous post that Plato's wisdom is purely philosophical. And I have read Plato's Republic several times.
kallipolis
Know thyself
Your assertion is noted. All religious ritual is cultural arising from its source, and the influences of the civilisation where it has developed.
Religious protocols as it relates to ritual, and ceremony is pertinent to the life of those who follow Confucianism when observing those protocols that translate the ethical code into gestures that signal respect for all human life.
I quote from Lin Yutang, The Wisdom of Confucius.:
What I have learned is this, that of all things that people live by, Li is the greatest. Without Li, we do not know how to conduct a proper worship of the spirits of the universe; or how to establish the proper status of the king and the ministers, the rule and the ruled, and the elders and the juniors; or how to establish the moral relationships between the sexes; between parents and children, and between brothers; or how to distinguish the different degrees of relationship in the family. That is why a gentleman holds Li in such high regard.
In this sense there is a religiously observed ritual that is driven by a code of ethical behaviour rather than by a focus on a creator guiding us through life.
The three Abrahamic religions are also based upon a code of ethical conduct that invites the practitioner to treat our fellow man, as we would wish to be treated, with the creator as the source of the wisdom that inspires man to rise above his selfish wants to better serve the common good.
If you say Communism, capitalism, stalinism, Nazism, Facism are religions,
yes Confucianism is a religion too then.
Religion to me means something to do with the supernatural.
There is no supernatural in Confucianism.
yes Confucianism is a religion too then.
Religion to me means something to do with the supernatural.
There is no supernatural in Confucianism.
kallipolis
Know thyself
Ancestral worship is part of Confucianism. How do you reconcile this with your understandings?
I also understand that Confucianism is definitely non theistic, focused on a humanistic code of ethics, a golden code also discovered in the three Abrahamic religions.
There are definitely religious qualities attached to Confucianism such as ancestor worship, ritual and sacrifice.
A narrower interpretation of Confucianism reveals a moral science, or a philosophy if you wish but according to our perspective, a broader understanding recognises that these religious traits can be traced back to pre Confucian folk religious beliefs which today can be discovered in the practices of Chinese Buddhists. In this sense we can identify religious elements within the ethical code of conduct which drives Confucianism.
To ignore the ritualistic practices within Confucianism is to blind oneself to the religious sources of pre Confucian China from where Confucianism derives its rituals.
We see what we wish to see.
kallipolis
Know thyself
Ritual is an important component of Confucianism.
I never heard confucianism have any rituals.
Maybe you are confused with ancestor worships, spiritual worships such as fire cracker the ghosts/spirits away. They are way before Confucianism.
The core component that seperates Confucianism from, for example, the manner in which the traditional Abrahamic religions teach their adherents is in terms of dynamic; rather than providing set in stone rules and laws; tenets of perception, thought, feeling and behaviour, Confucianism insteaqd attempts to encourage a more dynamic form of intellectual engagement in the manner of Plato's various episodes and stories; metaphorical problems and situations are provided, and the adherent invited to engage with them to logically determine their significance, or to achieve the particular state of mind in which they can realise some semblance of truth for themselves.
By contrast, the Abrahamic traditions simply state what is correct and fundamentally true according to their requisite God-figure. There is little in the way of dynamic engagement; only a threat of punishment or a promise of reward if said laws are breached or fulfilled.
The most enlightened adherents of the latter generally forego the coercion inherent and instead take the various stories and situations presented in the same manner as an adherent of Confucianism would; as metaphors and parables that can be engaged with more dynamically, thereby developing or realising personal truths rather than simply accepting those that are proscribed or imposed. Blake and the Romantics are excellent examples of this. Then you have your literalists and fundamentalists, who are terrified of that dynamism, placing, as it does, responsibility for self determination directly in their laps, so instead assert the absurd as literally true, clinging to that as a child might cling to its Mother's skirts, all the while not realising what a disservice they are doing to the ideologies they promote as gospel.
By contrast, the Abrahamic traditions simply state what is correct and fundamentally true according to their requisite God-figure. There is little in the way of dynamic engagement; only a threat of punishment or a promise of reward if said laws are breached or fulfilled.
The most enlightened adherents of the latter generally forego the coercion inherent and instead take the various stories and situations presented in the same manner as an adherent of Confucianism would; as metaphors and parables that can be engaged with more dynamically, thereby developing or realising personal truths rather than simply accepting those that are proscribed or imposed. Blake and the Romantics are excellent examples of this. Then you have your literalists and fundamentalists, who are terrified of that dynamism, placing, as it does, responsibility for self determination directly in their laps, so instead assert the absurd as literally true, clinging to that as a child might cling to its Mother's skirts, all the while not realising what a disservice they are doing to the ideologies they promote as gospel.
