Religion. The evolution, creation and everything in between megathread

[Bell]

Another more "moderate" take on the koran
[video]wseFgBocQrw[/video]

[UppityDuck]

I guess. But it's one joke in a thread of 200 pages.

I'll warrant there's more than one joke in here, lol.

Depends on your perspective

[Zig]

I'll warrant there's more than one joke in here, lol.

Depends on your perspective

^ Found one....

Rarf rarf...........................rarf...

[swindle]

I'll warrant there's more than one joke in here, lol.

Depends on your perspective

Wait.

I was treating this like the Rolls Royce of comedy threads.

Are you telling me, they're not taking the piss?

[Dante]

I'm surprised that neither Dr_Woohoo or Uppityduck have had anything to say or any thoughts in response to my post on the previous page.

Oh wait, no I'm not...

[Dr Woomanchu]

By "someone" do you mean a western person, a non-western person, an islamic leader in a western country, an islamic leader in a non-western country, a western politician or a non-western politician?

Or can I pick whoever I want? cause that seems too easy

For instance I found this in about 30seconds

I thought that I didn't need to specify that finding someone from these groups of thugs supporting it doesn't count. May as well post a clansman saying KKK isn't racist, or a catholic claiming condoms don't help prevent the spread of AIDS

I was specifically referring to your claim about PCness which implies liberal westerners

[Dr Woomanchu]

I'm surprised that neither Dr_Woohoo or Uppityduck have had anything to say or any thoughts in response to my post on the previous page.

Oh wait, no I'm not...

I will go an look for it. brb

[Dr Woomanchu]

"It could be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure."

 -- Albert Einstein

Nothing to reply to. It's self evident and actually sums up what I have been trying to say, but not nearly as well as Albert.

[Dante]

Really? I thought what you have been saying all along is that life and the Universe, to you, is inherently meaningless, therefore we should be satisfied with self-created subjective realities instead of seeking objective truth and meaning...

That's clearly not what Einstein was saying however. Do you believe the universe doesn't make any sense? If not, how can it make any sense to you if you believe it is entirely meaningless?

[Dr Woomanchu]

You've put your own meaning into the quote . Fair enough.

To me Einstein is saying that things are more than their descriptors. That the subjective experience enhances and expands the dry objective reality.

Objectively Beethovens music is just variations in air pressure. It can be described precisely with mathematics. That's pretty much what an MP3 file is. Knowing that in no way lessens the subjective experience of listening to it

The subjective experience of the objective reality is what we live our entire lives in. When I state that gods exist only in the subjective. i.e without humans to conceive of them they don't exist, I don't see that as demeaning or derogatory, even though I understand how believers might.

The only life we live is a subjective one. To people whom god is real for, he IS real. They're not any less real because they don't exist in my subjective universe.

You're right. I don't believe there is any objective "truth" as I think you mean it. I also appreciate and understand that idea is very distasteful to a lot of people, and I've long thought that's a key motivator for external deities.

There's one point I've tried to explain before, but I haven't found the right words yet. It comes across clearly that many religious people perceive atheists as lacking meaning or fulfilment in their lives. They couldn't be more wrong. I gaze in rapture at sunsets. The fact I know the scientific detail behind how and why I am seeing such beauty, including the scientific basis for why seeing such things gives me pleasure, in no way lessens the sense of awe and wonder I experience.

I've never understood why ignorance should be required for bliss.

My own philosophy is that life is in some way the universes consciousness. That in some fundamental way we need to witness the universe. I believe deeply and vehemently in the true sanctity of human life, because in my philosophy, each human consciousness is a unique subjective experience of the objective universe we all share.

For all our speculation we have no idea whether the incomprehensibly large we universe we inhabit contains other sentience. In the absense of data it is sensible to assume it doesn't, in which case each human consciousness is even more precious. I'm almost evangelical in the belief that we need to eliminate our dependence on a sole biosphere.

That's plenty of meaning for me.

I love science because it gave me the language I needed to help me understand the world I inhabit. In many ways language IS sentience. Science is a specialised language for dealing with the objective universe. Because we all live in subjective universes we need that language to enable us to communicate about what's really outside our senses. The language of religion is utterly different.

/end super long spiel even though I haven't wrapped it up

[UppityDuck]

I'm surprised that neither Dr_Woohoo or Uppityduck have had anything to say or any thoughts in response to my post on the previous page.

Oh wait, no I'm not...

No, I'm not either.

If you look at the history of my posting in this thread you will see that it is sporadic at best , fits and starts....

Sometimes I'm too tired to bother with much, then I get a burst of enthusiasm, but demanding an answer isn't much of a way to go. There's plenty I would like fuller replies on too, but I let it slide.

Don't worry your pretty head, I'll get around to it, seriously :asian:

[Dante]

I didn't put my own meaning into the quote, you're just not understanding it or purposefully trying not to... (like many other things, apparently..)  I'm not sure which. Did you read any of the other quotes?

Like many of the great scientists throughout history, Einstein lamented those like you who are content to live with their own self-created subjective meanings rather than seeking ultimate truth in all things.

If you believe there is no such thing as truth, and therefore everything is inherently meaningless, how can you then go on to say that you perceive beauty in a sunset - how can beauty have any kind of meaning in your worldview? It's just a word that means nothing and is of no inherent value whatsoever ... Yet, coincidentally, almost everyone perceives beauty in nature to some extent. You then go on to say that you appreciate the scientific understanding behind a sunset - so I am assuming therefore that you also appreciate the rationality of the natural laws that govern the sun and it's precise movements? But I would ask of you, how can you appreciate the rationality in nature if you believe there is no ultimate principle of logic or rationality behind any of it?  How can nature be subject to rational laws if it is, as you say, ultimately random and meaningless? It makes no sense.

Everything you say is foolish and contradictory. But I'll reply at length tomorrow as there is a lot more I would like to say on this...

[Dante]

Fuck this, new page is needed... I really dislike scrolling in order to read to posts...

[Dante]

........

[Dante]

......

[Dante]

.....

I didn't put my own meaning into the quote, you're just not understanding it or purposefully trying not to... (like many other things, apparently..)  I'm not sure which. Did you read any of the other quotes?

Like many of the great scientists throughout history, Einstein lamented those like you who are content to live with their own self-created subjective meanings rather than seeking ultimate truth in all things.

If you believe there is no such thing as truth, and therefore everything is inherently meaningless, how can you then go on to say that you perceive beauty in a sunset - how can beauty have any kind of meaning in your worldview? It's just a word that means nothing and is of no inherent value whatsoever ... Yet, coincidentally, almost everyone perceives beauty in nature to some extent. You then go on to say that you appreciate the scientific understanding behind a sunset - so I am assuming therefore that you also appreciate the order and rationality of the natural laws that govern the sun and the Earth's precise movements in relation to the sun? But I would ask of you, how can you appreciate the rationality in nature if you believe there is no ultimate principle of logic or rationality behind any of it?  How can nature be subject to rational laws if it is, as you say, ultimately random and meaningless? That makes no sense. Or what about gravity, or the movement of the planets in the solar system? These are all rational, natural laws that have distinct purpose...

All of these scientific geniuses of the ages, from Galileo and Kepler to Einstein were motivated by their deep convictions that the Universe is subject to rational and logical laws that could be understood through human reason, because of the very fact that they believed God is the supremely rational creator (or) governance behind it all.  They had to have faith in their convictions that nature was both meaningful and rational, were they to have any success whatsoever in unraveling it's mysteries through scientific observation and experiment.

Do you think these scientists would have had as much success as they did if they believed, as you do, that the universe and the entirety of existence is irrational, absurd and meaningless?  If that had been the case - why should they have bothered trying to understand anything at all? It would have been a pointless exercise in futility and thus we wouldn't have any of the magnificent scientific theories we have today.

I find your worldview to be ridiculous and absurd - I don't mean that to insult you at all, I'm just saying that I feel you are incredibly misguided. Everything you say is foolish and contradictory. But I'll reply at length tomorrow as there is a lot more I would like to say on this...

[Dr Woomanchu]

Ah well. I tried.

Einstein would shudder if he heard some of the things people try and argue in his name.

Anyway thanks for the reply. It's counterpointed my post nicely. You don't understand how anyone could do things without some sort of god involved so it can;t be true, yet I can easily provide proof that people can and do provide meaning to their lives without some sort of god, and make all sorts of advances, every bit as profound as the theists you have claimed.

Your unwillingness to accept that people can have the same emotions and feel a sense of fulfillment and purpose from having different answers to you is a bit sad tbh. Anyway, you seem happy to be you, so I'm not fussed. I won't bore you further.

if I happen to accidentally one of your posts at some point in the future, I apologise in advance

[Zig]

There's one point I've tried to explain before, but I haven't found the right words yet. It comes across clearly that many religious people perceive atheists as lacking meaning or fulfilment in their lives. They couldn't be more wrong. I gaze in rapture at sunsets. The fact I know the scientific detail behind how and why I am seeing such beauty, including the scientific basis for why seeing such things gives me pleasure, in no way lessens the sense of awe and wonder I experience.

I've never understood why ignorance should be required for bliss.

I understand most of what you are saying, and even agree with you to a certain extent, but would just like to clear this up.

I would never consider somebody else to be lacking anything...You are more than entitled to your beliefs, as am I, and neither of those beliefs makes us any less of a person...

And I too, am more fascinated by the science behind the beauty than I am by the theology. Ignorance is not bliss, and anybody who thinks so needs a slap in the face with a wet fish.

[cobra]

I find your worldview to be ridiculous and absurd - I don't mean that to insult you at all, I'm just saying that I feel you are incredibly misguided. Everything you say is foolish and contradictory. But I'll reply at length tomorrow as there is a lot more I would like to say on this...

you are psyche right? all the "famous scientists believe" stuff and plagiarising most of your posts?

[UppityDuck]

How can nature be subject to rational laws if it is, as you say, ultimately random and meaningless? That makes no sense. Or what about gravity, or the movement of the planets in the solar system? These are all rational, natural laws that have distinct purpose...

I haven't read all your post yet, I've got to go to work...but I wanted to answer this section.

We make the laws. They give us meaning.
'Nature' is like Nico: Above the law.

you are psyche right? all the "famous scientists believe" stuff and plagiarising most of your posts?

I've had those unclean thoughts too.

[ThaFleastyler]

I'll warrant there's more than one joke in here, lol.

Depends on your perspective

I see what you did there :chuckle:

[cobra]

If you believe there is no such thing as truth, and therefore everything is inherently meaningless, how can you then go on to say that you perceive beauty in a sunset - how can beauty have any kind of meaning in your worldview? It's just a word that means nothing and is of no inherent value whatsoever ... Yet, coincidentally, almost everyone perceives beauty in nature to some extent. You then go on to say that you appreciate the scientific understanding behind a sunset - so I am assuming therefore that you also appreciate the order and rationality of the natural laws that govern the sun and the Earth's precise movements in relation to the sun? But I would ask of you, how can you appreciate the rationality in nature if you believe there is no ultimate principle of logic or rationality behind any of it?  How can nature be subject to rational laws if it is, as you say, ultimately random and meaningless? That makes no sense. Or what about gravity, or the movement of the planets in the solar system? These are all rational, natural laws that have distinct purpose...

you talk (misguidedly be it) that athiests have no meaning - can you tell be what meaning your god offers and what the ultimate principle of logic and rationality your god gives you?

[KiLL3r]

Theory of Dante having no clue whatsoever about what he is talking about. Section A - Test 1

Characterization:

1. Subject states his opinion and world view as fact with absolutely nothing to back it up.

2. Subject quotes scientist without any context as to what they were saying then manipulates it to fit his side

Hypotheses:
To test if Dante has any clue as to what he is saying and/or to prove that he has absolutely no clue.

Predictions:
It will be proven that dante has no idea what he is talking about and will result in a flame reply or an attempt at a calm and rational response that will further prove he has no clue.

Experiments:

1. Analyzing his previous post to decide whether any intelligent discussion can be found.

2. Monitor replys to this theory and see what responses are given.

3. Ongoing study of subjects posts.


Conclusion: To be announced.

This theory is open to any and all peer review.

[Iblis]

Another more "moderate" take on the koran
[video]

Sadly, this will show nothing to the christians in this thread. As moderate christianity claws to survive in modern western culture, it no longer condones slavery, showing your wife who's boss, selling your daughter into slavery (also letting the angry mob outside your door rape her instead of the angel guests), nor does it condemn eating shellfish, cutting your hair above your ears, or wearing two different types of cloth. Many christians will tell you that the old testament stuff is irrelevant, except for the ten commandments, the abomination of homosexuality, and anything else that is picked to suit whatever the fleeting moral issues on the evening news is. Others will tell you that Jesus died for your sins so these "minor" sins are immediately forgiven, but will readily remind you that murder, adultery, and homosexuality are not forgiven if you do them more than once. Finally christian apologists will tell you that it is all metaphorical and symbolic and that Jesus was a cool guy and that's all that really matters and never mind the fact that you just swept 2000 years of blood, sweat and tear-ridden belief of a large majority of humanity under the carpet to become relevant to modern society and not have your agnostic/atheist friends think you're ridiculous for subscribing to such absurdity. All or nothing, either way you look at it christianity is either taken literally in which case it is not currently being practiced correctly by anyone on this earth, or it is only to be be taken as an open interpretation in which case what real basis does it have anyway. I will no doubt be refuted by the christians in this thread with long-winded circular logic that only serves to leave any judgement open-ended and wildly subjective.

[Distorted]

It all comes down to rationality and logic. It is irrational to believe in a higher power and so-called "miracles" do not 'prove' the existence of a higher power.

The only logical answer is atheism. That and it would be irrational to go back and read 200 odd pages of this thread.