Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Calm. You believe in something and understand that others believe in something different. This is not limited to religion at all, we all have beliefs and values and these things are essentially faith, there can be no rational arguments for them.
But at the same time, we must understand that there are limits to this peace of mind – I don't care if a person believes in Christ, Allah or Krishna, but if he eats babies, then my peace of mind will end. In a general sense, tolerance is acceptable in metaphysical matters, but here on mortal earth, I care about how people behave, and my views on how to behave would be worthless if I didn't think that others should behave the same way.
We can also say that tolerance is a game, and it is played only with those who agree to play it.
In my opinion, if it is already quite correct, then look ; If I am a Muslim, I must comply with all the prescriptions of the Muslim religion if I am a Christian, then Christian well, if an atheist, I must be either a Buddhist or a communist…
Ignosticism.
The ignostic is of the opinion that he cannot even answer whether he believes in God or not until the questioner gives a definition of God/gods.
The difference in simplified form can be expressed as follows::
Atheist: “I don't believe God exists”
Agnostic: “I do not know whether God exists or not”
Ignostic: “I don't understand what you mean when you say 'God exists/doesn't exist'.”