<p>I think it is terrible that you think that those people only survived because they had to.</p>
<p>Those people who are alive today are some of the strongest people in their faith.</p>
<p>And for the record, it was pretty easy to not survive the Holocaust, considering that the final solution to the Holocaust were to kill the people in the camps.</p>
<p>But suicide naturally occurs. People want to end their suffering, so they die. How is that not rational?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Religion</a> in Haiti - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Haiti]Religion”>Religion in Haiti - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>[Religion</a> in Nicaragua - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nicaragua]Religion”>Religion in Nicaragua - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>[Religion</a> in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo]Religion”>Religion in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>[Religion</a> in Somalia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“Somalia - Wikipedia”>Somalia - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>And:</p>
<p>[Religion</a> in Norway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Norway]Religion”>Religion in Norway - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>[Religion</a> in France - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“Religion in France - Wikipedia”>Religion in France - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>[Religion</a> in Sweden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Sweden]Religion”>Religion in Sweden - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>[Religion</a> in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_United_Kingdom]Religion”>Religion in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The chances against being dealt a royal flush 3 times in a row in poker are astronomical. While it would be irrational to conclude that such an event is impossible, if it were to occur it would be rational to suspect that the deck was rigged.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I can only speak for my own religion, but we don’t believe that our church beliefs are “made up”. We believe that they have been passed down in a chain of witnesses from God himself.</p>
<p>But you knew that, right?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is only reasonable if you believe all religions are the same. They aren’t.</p>
<p>Wasn’t this on the latest Glee episode?</p>
<p>
Tell me, why is suicide an act instead of an event of a natural succession? Why do suiciders die by starvation, or harming themselves with an external object, rather than by just losing their will?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That doesn’t make suicide rational.
An event’s occurence does not make it natural. </p>
<p>Hobbes’s first law of nature:
“every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it, and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek and use all helps and advantages of war.” Men naturally seek peace to secure their property–first and foremost, their lives."
"“A law of nature is a precept or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to do that which is destructive of his life or taketh away the means of preserving the same, and to omit that by which he thinketh it be best preserved.”
"</p>
<p>Rousseau: “Man’s first feeling was that of his own existence, and his first care that of self-preservation.”</p>
<p>
All humans are rational creatures (Aristotle, Locke). As laws of nature are derived through reason and not by philosophers’ decree, they are indeed incontrovertible. Hobbes’s successors have disagreed with him on almost everything, but not on his first law of nature.</p>
<p>Why don’t I believe in God? Probably because I’m intelligent enough not to be brainwashed by the Church.</p>
<p>Hey guys, I already ended this thread when I posted “Pascal’s Wager.” The thread is over.</p>
<p>The /thread tag has been broken on HSL for some time.</p>
<p>Fix it! Fix it now!</p>
<p>/fixed</p>
<p>Yes!</p>
<p>/thread</p>
<p>OK, I am convinced that antonioray is ■■■■■■■■.</p>
<p>^???</p>
<p>Doesn’t seem like that to me…</p>
<p>^^ Why do you think that? To me he seems like just another armchair philosopher like myself.</p>
<p>His arguments are ostensibly utter nonsense. He seems to be arguing that anything that is not rational is not natural (but what else could it be?), that philosophers centuries ago just reasoned upon the incontrovertible “laws of nature” (but how can they be laws, when they don’t agree with all occurences in reality i.e. suicide?). I can quote philosophers too: </p>
<p>“It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this.”
-Bertrand Russell</p>
<p>Well, you don’t have to be a ■■■■■ to repeat faulty rhetoric. And he’s been fairly reasonable.</p>
<p>If he was ■■■■■■■■, he could do a much better job of it.</p>
<p>But it really doesn’t matter much. I assume good faith, but if he is ■■■■■■■■ then it doesn’t really hurt me.</p>
<p><em>face palm</em> </p>
<p>This is why I don’t come on HSL. ■■■■■ thread turns into a religion-anti-religion p***ing contest.</p>
<p>^This thread isn’t that at all. Did you even read it?</p>
<p>^ I made it through about half way and gave up. I got to where they were talking about God not existing because of the horrors of the Holocaust and MM posting numerous links contradicting that. </p>
<p>That’s a p***ing contest IMO.</p>
<p>Sithis, do you even know what rationality is?
Nowhere did I say that everything irrational is also unnatural. The two characteristics are separate from each other. Suicide is both. You’ve found Russell–I congratulate you. Now can you find anything that proves suicide rational and natural? </p>
<p>Also, humans are by natural national creatures–but they think irrationally and make irrational decisions at times (Freud, Albert Ellis). Suicide would be one of those times.
But go ahead, prove me wrong.</p>
<p>Russell’s quotation may be nothing more than a cutting remark on the stupidity of his peers. He is a renowned philosopher, no doubt, but that quotation may also have been taken out of context. Does he actually prove it? I doubt it; that’d be quite the feat. For you see, he not only has to disprove Aristotle’s proof provided in Nicomachean Ethics, but also those of Locke, Rousseau, Kant, and others who have agreed with Aristotle through the annals.</p>