Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[h_k_s]

Dear philosophers,

Are there any philosophical readings that you would recommend that deals with/discusses the topics of lost faith, disillusionment, and/or despair?
And how about ones that deals in the concepts and motivations of selfishness and selflessness?


A little background about myself if any of you are interested:

I was once a deeply religious person. I would go to Church a lot, and I would ask many questions to the priests there about the Bible.
About what would happen if a baby dies if it had never accepted Jesus (since they say all humans are born with sin), and what would happen if a pious person died after that person had just committed a sin, and hadn't had the time to ask for forgiveness yet.
As the days grew by, I began to notice, that they didn't always have an answer that satisfies me. And with how the Church itself being splintered in their teachings, I began to question whether they even know where they're going themselves.

Long story short, I found myself now to be a non-religious person. And while I do not despise people with a religion/regard them as fools, I find myself unable to bring myself to believe in a religion (or in a mythical God) again.
I do believe that every person has their own "God" inside them, which is their personal principles and morals.
And I notice some resemblance in what I once read in the Bible, that "God" is within us, it always watches us and chastises us when we betray it (guilt).

This revelation didn't come without a cost though, as it costed me my one and only source for optimism. I am now left a pessimist.
I would look at any new idea, or opportunity with a critical lens (perhaps overly so).
This has also exaggerated the problem of my selfishness.


Please forgive me if this is not the right place to ask about this, (this is the first time I've ever posted anything on any serious forum) and thank you in advance for answering.

Also, a few additional info on myself:
I found this forum through Google,
I am a web/UI designer who doubles as a web developer as well, and I like to listen to podcasts/videos on various topics, from gaming to philosophical lectures on the side while working.
I am of age 30, Male, and I am currently living in Indonesia.


Sincerely, Theo

If you have lost your faith then I would surmise that you are starting to get smart.

If you want to dive right into the subject of God in philosophy then I would recommend you to the writings of Aquinas. Google "San Tomas Aquinas". He developed many classic Catholic proofs of God.

But if you are just starting out in philosophy you will need to read a historical survey such as Bertrand Russell's book "History Of Western Philosophy".

Welcome aboard. May your journey in philosophy become rewarding to you and answer all your questions.

[h_k_s]

Dear philosophers,

Are there any philosophical readings that you would recommend that deals with/discusses the topics of lost faith, disillusionment, and/or despair?
And how about ones that deals in the concepts and motivations of selfishness and selflessness?


A little background about myself if any of you are interested:

I was once a deeply religious person. I would go to Church a lot, and I would ask many questions to the priests there about the Bible.
About what would happen if a baby dies if it had never accepted Jesus (since they say all humans are born with sin), and what would happen if a pious person died after that person had just committed a sin, and hadn't had the time to ask for forgiveness yet.
As the days grew by, I began to notice, that they didn't always have an answer that satisfies me. And with how the Church itself being splintered in their teachings, I began to question whether they even know where they're going themselves.

Long story short, I found myself now to be a non-religious person. And while I do not despise people with a religion/regard them as fools, I find myself unable to bring myself to believe in a religion (or in a mythical God) again.
I do believe that every person has their own "God" inside them, which is their personal principles and morals.
And I notice some resemblance in what I once read in the Bible, that "God" is within us, it always watches us and chastises us when we betray it (guilt).

This revelation didn't come without a cost though, as it costed me my one and only source for optimism. I am now left a pessimist.
I would look at any new idea, or opportunity with a critical lens (perhaps overly so).
This has also exaggerated the problem of my selfishness.


Please forgive me if this is not the right place to ask about this, (this is the first time I've ever posted anything on any serious forum) and thank you in advance for answering.

Also, a few additional info on myself:
I found this forum through Google,
I am a web/UI designer who doubles as a web developer as well, and I like to listen to podcasts/videos on various topics, from gaming to philosophical lectures on the side while working.
I am of age 30, Male, and I am currently living in Indonesia.


Sincerely, Theo

I understand why you ended up pessimistic, though another way of looking at your progression is that you never really possessed (because it never existed) what you feel you lost when you came to your realization about the nature of religion. No loss, no need to feel pessimistic.

I agree with LuckyR that it seems like you are actually progressing intellectually.

After you read Bertrand Russell's book "History Of Western Philosophy" you will learn to classify all knowledge into 3 separate independent groups. They are:

1 - Philosophy
2 - Science
3 - Religion.

Russell makes them co-equal. However I myself view philosophy as the superior of the three.

Science is in the middle, in my view, since it is primarily inductive based on mounds of data which are factual.

Religion is the lowest form of knowledge because it is mythical and strictly doctrinal. If you need to believe in something then religion is there for you.

Everyone should believe in something. I believe I will have another drink.

[TheoDoesBurg]

It's about God or the absolute made manifest in nature, or 'incarnation'.

I see, thank you Belindi!
As for Fatalism, I think I can say that I do not believe in fate (because I think fate is unknowable, and is therefore meaningless), but simply that I am biased towards seeing the negatives/possible problems in every opportunity presented to me.

Burning ghost , from what I've read of Tractatus so far, it's quite heavy, hahaha.
And I have a feeling I need to study the historical aspect of Spinoza's life as well to give proper context and understand why he said certain things.

But if you are just starting out in philosophy you will need to read a historical survey such as Bertrand Russell's book "History Of Western Philosophy".

Thank you h_k_s! Yes, I am pretty much a beginner, a clueless freshman in the study of philosophy. Hahaha.
Though my first goal of learning philosophy, that I feel I must set for myself is a selfish one, that is to first solve my own problems in life,
I do enjoy thinking, and talking about philosophy as well (at least until my friends started looking confused or bored hahaha).

After you read Bertrand Russell's book "History Of Western Philosophy" you will learn to classify all knowledge into 3 separate independent groups. They are:

1 - Philosophy
2 - Science
3 - Religion.

Russell makes them co-equal. However I myself view philosophy as the superior of the three.

Science is in the middle, in my view, since it is primarily inductive based on mounds of data which are factual.

Religion is the lowest form of knowledge because it is mythical and strictly doctrinal. If you need to believe in something then religion is there for you.

Everyone should believe in something. I believe I will have another drink.

It's an interesting classification.
If I have to judge and put myself into that classification, I would probably say I'm just starting to realize the complexity of Philosophy above Science.

In Science, what you need to differentiate between a star and other clumps of mass, is a simple rule: "Does it maintain a fusion reaction in its core?"
And pretty much now, I still feel that drive to find the simplest rules that can explain anything in philosophy.

I do find difficulties in doing so, but I still believe that it is due to Philosophy having to deal with the extreme complexities of human life.
Things that are so complex, that Science is still unable to describe them. (perhaps due to our limitations as a human, and our methods of observation)

And I do believe that we as humans are the most complex thing to exist in this galaxy.
That we are Mother Earth's crowning achievement, a part of her that can look back unto herself, and think of ways to save her.
(that is why I disagree with the concept that humans are a disease, because while we did hunt some animals to extinction,
not all extinctions are caused by humans and humans are the only ones that have any hope to be able to prevent an extinction from happening)

P.S. Are you Canadian or American? (just curious because you write "Rocky Mountains" as your location)

[Fooloso4]

Philosophy since its beginning has been a love of wisdom. For the pre-Socratic philosophers this was often but not exclusively a desire to know the whole of the cosmos. The story of Thales illustrates this. He was so preoccupied with contemplating the heavens that he was unaware of what was under his feet, fell in a hole, and was laughed at for being so out of touch. With Socrates there was a turn to the question of human things - the examined life.

For all the ancients philosophy was a way of life.

This stands in stark contrast to the “professor of philosophy” as depicted by Thoreau. Philosophy as a way of life is not philosophy as it is generally practiced today, it was not some set of problems or questions that the philosopher dealt with at work and then went home to live a life indistinguishable from his neighbors. Thoreau is not alone in standing with the ancients in this regard.

In the universities we often find a split between those who treat philosophy as some set of problems or areas - metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, philosophy of science, philosophy of religion, political philosophy, and so on, and those who engage the works of the philosophers. Those who deal with the former may see themselves as progressing the discipline and regard the latter as historians of philosophy. But those who read the philosophers may see themselves as part of a living tradition in which the former have cut themselves off from due to their ignorance of the philosophers. As part of a living tradition those who study the philosophers do not simply gather information about what others may have thought but are involved with thinking along with the great thinkers, of learning to see things from their perspective. They may regard this as a form of self-knowledge since what we think is shaped by what they have given us to think. Those who read the philosophers typically do not recommend reading histories of philosophy except perhaps as a supplement to reading the works of the philosophers.

For some philosophy is a matter of inquiry, of questioning, but others are in search of answers and hope or expect that they will find these answers in the books of the philosophers.

My advice: follow your interests. If what you are reading interests you then continue reading and see where that leads. If it does not interest you then try something else. You might also look into online lectures and videos. Some people find this much more accessible than reading.