God the know it all;

flashgordon · 2005-04-01 00:40:12

God believers go around saying how they don't need to learn anymore - that their minds are at peace now that they believe in god.

But of course, any supernatural concept doesn't explain anything! You can go around saying 'god did it' all day long and never explain or do anything.

Not only is the supernatural concept empty, but the god believers go around saying they've got everything solved because their algebraic X standing for "i don't know" which is " God did it " suppossedly solves everything in their minds.

But, as I've already said, god despite what god believers keep thinking, solves nothing!(that means, go back to the first paragraph and read and think about what each and every word means)

For a more mathematical treatment; in 1931, Kurt Godel published his proof that no finite set of axioms can prove an infinity of truths, if they were consistent; if they are 'inconsistent', then they can prove anything and everything. Well, science as any real scientific thinker knows falls under the first category, and the god concept obviously falls under the second category.

But! God believers keep going around trying to make science out like they say they've solved everything!

Well, I think I've had enough fun for tonight.

John Creighton · 2005-04-01 01:43:06

Well, that sounds pretty insulting to the religious types. Hopefully you aren’t painting them all with the same brush. Anyway, if there is any statistical truth to what you say it kind of supports the phrase religion is the opium of the masses. Why confront the concerns of the world when you can partly kill of your worries with easy answers or intoxicating substances. Anyway, to some degree we are all mentally and physically lasy. There is some evolutionary advantage to a bit of laziness. For instance you don’t need to hunt for food, and you have the health benefits of less mental stress. Wait, evolution doesn’t exist

flashgordon · 2005-04-01 02:04:01

Alright, you hit on something where I do have a softer side towards religion in general and god believers specifically, but right now, I'm feeling tired; so, i'll try to get back to this as soon as possible.

flashgordon · 2005-04-03 16:29:23

About that painting them all with the same brush; for one, i actually have an intellectual interest in mythology(isn't it curious how the religion section is separate from the philosophy/mythology sections in bookstores?) which is that mythology is poetry, or analogy. In mythology, they compare and try to attach themselves to various nature phenomenon and animals by ascribing personal characteristics to them; snakes are wily; sheep are meek and so on and so forth; i recently saw that the egyptians had a temple of the ram(sacrifice that ram!). When the ancients conquered each other, they'd take in the various people's gods and permutate and combine them with their own gods; this is what poetry does; it combines by metaphor and similies(analogy) various aspects of our world. By the way, this is seen quite clearly in the Hebrew religion of Lord God; Lord is Adonai in hebrew who was a summarian god, and God is Elohim a Phoenician god(s); so, they combined the two at some point when those two were dominant in their region of the middle east.

But, why is this interesting to science? Because, science is an analogy also; two apples and two oranges are concrete instances of the number two; the laws of physics holds for many different phenomenon from the workings of machines down here on earth to the motions of the heavens; they all have analogous physical behaviors.

The interest is one of how the mind works and the nature of knowledge; mythology just isn't precise and constructive; scientific analogies are made based on actual experimental laws that are about actually doing something.

The above leads me to my softer side about supernatural believers as an understanding of humans stages of thought evolution.

That's all nice and dandy, but it's time to move on! When we corrupt thought just to preserve our parents mythology because they picked up from their parents, even though humanity has now taken steps away and beyond such antiquated thoughts, it slows mankinds chances of survival down(see my post about peak oil at the sci/tech board). There's only one reason why people would chose to ignore science and kiss ass; because they are terrorists(in some capacity) who want to bring down civilization.

clark · 2005-04-04 08:11:19

Science can tell me what the universe is, but it can never tell me "why" the universe is.

At the heart of all religion and science is to find a fundamental truth to understand what is going on, and why the heck it is going on.

So why? Well, various religions all throw their hat into the ting and give a reason. Even science has a bunch of hypotheses (which of course can never be tested, thereby obviating any rational purpose to the endeavour) such as "this is a permutation of possible physical laws that allow for universal exsistence, blah blah blah." Or, "a natural phenemonon with no underlying purpose other than what developed intellect proscribes, blah blah blah."

Mythology was a blend of science and paganism as humanity developed from living in cave dwellings. In essence, it is observational science that tried to understand the environment in the context and relation to humans lives.

What is a snake? Why is a snake? Mythology explains it in terms understandable at the time to humans coping with a natural world that they didn't fully comprehend. Science developed further through concrete classifications that stripped the relational understanding components to humanity. A snake is a snake, that's what it is. Why it is? Well, science hasn't much of a clue (other than an evolved multi-cellular organic life-form that eats other multi-celleular life-form in order to propogate and sustain its particular DNA sequence and establish a balance upon the food chain.

But what's the point? What's the purpose?

Religion gives a point, a purpose. Or at least it offers one (or several) that lead ultimetly to an unseen force that either guides, or at the least, started the whole show.

Science is based on our parents facts, what previous scientific thought was valid, which leads to further conjecture and development. Yes, it is self-examining, but only so much as it deems certain areas open to further review if facts warrant.

Case in point, do black holes exsist? Some say they do, some say they don't. Used to be a time that very few believed they exsisted. Even assuming they answer the question, will they ever answer what the "pupose" of a black hole is? What's the point?

Most of the religions I am familiar with answer the "pupose" question. It is either part of God's master plan, and we are here to try and glimpse but just a part of it, or hey, if we don't understand it, no sweat, it is God, and he is, like, way big and cool, so just be good, multiply, and eco-friendly.

If you want the human answer though, science and religion are both means by which human beings understand and cope with their environment by placing a coherent structure that allows for maintenance of the ego and the ability to positvely navaigate their environment to sustain and propagate their particular DNA sequence.

Cheers, my fellow DNA sequence.

Dook · 2005-04-04 08:28:28

The meaning of life? I lean toward these possibilities.

The universe is matter and energy. Matter becomes energy easily, simply burn a piece of paper but you can't make energy into matter. Maybe the meaning of life is that this is simply a way to join energy (sentient energy=soul) with matter.

Another idea is that God is energy. God released a huge amount of energy that formed into all the matter in the universe. Now this matter is changing, evolving, into sentient matter (life) that will continue to evolve and eventually become pure sentient energy that returns to God.

Or it could simply be that God was lonely.

clark · 2005-04-04 08:36:09

Ah, but!

Energy becomes Matter!

The process of fusion which occurs in stars creates individual atoms, which form over millions of years into larger molecules of matter, which as we understand it, develop into larger mass objects (like planets), and then inorganic matter somehow achieves a reaction state that creates the basic organic matter (all over billions of years).

But why? What's the point? Some say no point, it just is, and ascribing a point is merely conjecture created by the hard wiring of how the human mind perceives the environment.

Dook · 2005-04-04 08:39:54

Case in point, do black holes exsist? Some say they do, some say they don't. Used to be a time that very few believed they exsisted.

Now virtually everyone believes in black holes. Black holes didn't suddenly become true when most people began to believe in them. They were always there.

That is my argument against human created religion, it's inability for evolutionary thought. Religious leaders think that everything you need to know is in the bible but the bible is thousands of years old.

The truth is the truth whether we choose to believe it or not. The sun is the center of the solar system. Humans and apes have a common ancestor. The universe is a very big place and there are probably millions of life forms out there. Accept it and move on.

clark · 2005-04-04 08:44:12

Ah, but Dook, you are pigeon=holeing all religion on the basis of some who interpret their view in a certain way.

Many religions accept evolutionary development and reinterpret their religious doctrine in light of exsisting scientific data.

The same way science reinterprets its own data based on new facts to reform their own doctrine.

Dook · 2005-04-04 08:45:04

Ah, but!
Energy becomes Matter!
The process of fusion which occurs in stars creates individual atoms, which form over millions of years into larger molecules of matter, which as we understand it, develop into larger mass objects (like planets), and then inorganic matter somehow achieves a reaction state that creates the basic organic matter (all over billions of years).
But why? What's the point? Some say no point, it just is, and ascribing a point is merely conjecture created by the hard wiring of how the human mind perceives the environment.

The sun just changes the matter, it doesn't create it. Helium and Hydrogen become heavier, more dense, atoms.

The point? I cannot accept that everything 'just is'. There are things in the universe that are incredibly precise, very defined, 100% accurate, for atoms to stay together and eventually life could form. It's so far beyond possibility that it had to be by design.

Dook · 2005-04-04 08:51:36

Ah, but Dook, you are pigeon=holeing all religion on the basis of some who interpret their view in a certain way.
Many religions accept evolutionary development and reinterpret their religious doctrine in light of exsisting scientific data.
The same way science reinterprets its own data based on new facts to reform their own doctrine.

What religions change based upon scientific data?

Catholicism and Christianity in general absolutely does not change based upon science. The Jewish religion doesn't. Islam doesn't. Hindu and Buddhism don't. Native American (and other, tribal people) Animistic (the wind, earth, sun, moon are spirits) religion doesn't.

Those cover about 95% of the worlds population.

clark · 2005-04-04 08:53:13

The point? I cannot accept that everything 'just is'. There are things in the universe that are incredibly precise, very defined, 100% accurate, for atoms to stay together and eventually life could form. It's so far beyond possibility that it had to be by design.

More power to your belief.

However, if things were not as they are, we wouldn't be here, now, having this discussion.

You roll a bunch of dice, say ten of them, you roll them often enough, eventually you will end up with 10 dice all with the same side showing. Is that design, or is it chance?

If time is infinity, then the probability of exsistence is certain, eventually. That isn't design, that's simply playing the odds.

clark · 2005-04-04 08:56:20

What religions change based upon scientific data?
Catholicism and Christianity in general absolutely does not change based upon science. The Jewish religion doesn't. Islam doesn't. Hindu and Buddhism don't. Native American (and other, tribal people) Animistic (the wind, earth, sun, moon are spirits) religion doesn't.

Dogmatic believers and practioners don't change their views, true, but not every believer is dogmatic.

Take for instance the Christian church used to teach the world was flat and the earth was certain of the universe. They don't teach that anymore, do they? (generally).

Here you see dogmatic interpretation and teachings changing to fit into exsisting data and understanding of the world and universe. Of course it dosen't change quickly, and it dosen't change as you or I may wish, but it does change, it does reevaluate... which undermines your whole basic stance. [shrug]

Dook · 2005-04-04 09:03:26

More power to your belief.
However, if things were not as they are, we wouldn't be here, now, having this discussion.
You roll a bunch of dice, say ten of them, you roll them often enough, eventually you will end up with 10 dice all with the same side showing. Is that design, or is it chance?
If time is infinity, then the probability of exsistence is certain, eventually. That isn't design, that's simply playing the odds.

However, if things were not as they are, we wouldn't be here, now, having this discussion.

And the universe would be a void, empty. The only thing that comes from nothing is...nothing. But we are here.

A bunch of dice? Not a bunch, a billion of them had to come up exactly alike. Take a mechanical watch and beat it with a hammer, then toss all the pieces up into the air until it reforms exactly into a working watch. Possible given enough time, maybe. Probable? Nope.

clark · 2005-04-04 09:07:31

A bunch of dice? Not a bunch, a billion of them had to come up exactly alike. Take a mechanical watch and beat it with a hammer, then toss all the pieces up into the air until it reforms exactly into a working watch. Possible given enough time, maybe. Probable? Nope.

So a billion. Maye it a trillion, dosen't matter. If something is possible, and infinity certain, then all things become probable.

Maybe it took more time than we can possibly comprehend, but eventually the dice roll would be hit. That's my point, which shows that the certainty of an actual underlying point is not certain.

Dook · 2005-04-04 09:09:45

Dogmatic believers and practioners don't change their views, true, but not every believer is dogmatic.
Take for instance the Christian church used to teach the world was flat and the earth was certain of the universe. They don't teach that anymore, do they? (generally).
Here you see dogmatic interpretation and teachings changing to fit into exsisting data and understanding of the world and universe. Of course it dosen't change quickly, and it dosen't change as you or I may wish, but it does change, it does reevaluate... which undermines your whole basic stance. [shrug]

Yes, in the course of hundreds of years it does change. They used to burn people for claiming the earth was not at the center of the universe. What good is a religion that murders people? And the people were right!

Do you want to follow a man (pastor, father, preacher...) who is supposedly key to your eternal salvation and who's belief's evolve at the speed of the crustal plates?

The church needs to stop telling God how He created the universe.

clark · 2005-04-04 09:13:06

But do you want to follow a man (pastor, father, preacher...) who is supposedly key to your eternal salvation and who's belief's evolve at the speed of the crustal plates?

No, but that is just me. And there are a lot of other faifths that do not rely on intermediaries for salvation.

Yes, in the course of hundreds of years it does change.

Just as in Science, it changes in the course of hundreds of years. It dosen't change over night.

Dook · 2005-04-04 09:16:23

A bunch of dice? Not a bunch, a billion of them had to come up exactly alike. Take a mechanical watch and beat it with a hammer, then toss all the pieces up into the air until it reforms exactly into a working watch. Possible given enough time, maybe. Probable? Nope.
So a billion. Maye it a trillion, dosen't matter. If something is possible, and infinity certain, then all things become probable.
Maybe it took more time than we can possibly comprehend, but eventually the dice roll would be hit. That's my point, which shows that the certainty of an actual underlying point is not certain.

The universe is so complex that it's not just a roll of a billion dice. It's roll, after roll, after roll that hit exactly as they need to be. It's so improbable that it is no longer considered possible.

clark · 2005-04-04 09:21:14

It's unprobable to win the lotto, but people somehow manage.

I gladly grant you that the odds are stagering, but ultimetly, there is an odd of 1 to the ba-zillion. Given enough time (which seems to be infinite) then eventually all things become certain.

Put another way, let's say that you need a billion different factors for our exsistence, and those billion need to be exact for formation of this universe. ANy deviation from those factors results in an unstable universe that cannot exsist for any appreciable length of time. If that is the case, then what you end up with is the universe running through billions and trillions of possible variations until it achieves a state of appreciable permanence.

Dook · 2005-04-04 09:44:10

From nothing you don't even get the chance to start all those billions, trillions, and gazillion attempts at creating a stable universe.

You have to have something to start it all.

flashgordon · 2005-04-04 13:07:51

i'll get back to this after I finally get around to answering CobraCommanders 'Rare Earth' stuff . . . .

Michael Bloxham · 2005-04-04 14:22:59

The chance of life is infinite-to-one, I once heard. Impossible, therefore, unless there are an infinite number of varying 'universes'. And if that be the case, there must be an infinite number of 'universes' which evolve to form life (because the ratio of 1:infinity is the same as infinity:infinity*infinity), in which case intelligent life would eventually evolve to find itself, stranded in it's own lifeless universe; A purely rational point of view. However, if life is found to have evolved twice (i.e non-DNA based) within the same universe (especially within the same solar system), the existence of a 'creator' must be considered, as the odds of such an eventuation would be unimagineable.

The existence of non-DNA based life on Mars (or any other planet) would therefore prove that 'God' exists.

Personally, I don't think we're that lucky...

-Mike

Dook · 2005-04-04 17:32:32

The existence of non-DNA based life on Mars (or any other planet) would therefore prove that 'God' exists.
Personally, I don't think we're that lucky...
-Mike

Non-DNA life?

There are billions of different life forms on the planet now. If you count up all life ever on this planet it would be in the gadzillion-gadzillion-gadzillion range, all unique and all based on DNA or a segment of DNA.

Seems likely that the entire universe is full of life all based on DNA. The variety should be incredible.

Either way it does not prove or disprove God.

Michael Bloxham · 2005-04-04 18:28:13

By non-DNA based, I mean to say life that eventuated (evolved) seperately from earth-life (or the source of life on earth). The probability of DNA-based life evolving seperately throughout our universe, in either case, is very very slim.

Dook, what makes you think life is plentiful throughout the universe? The odds of a single occurance are infinite to one...

dicktice · 2005-04-04 19:09:01

Unless "God has faster than light existence" it disproves.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-04-01 00:40:12

Re: God the know it all;

#2 2005-04-01 01:43:06

Re: God the know it all;

#3 2005-04-01 02:04:01

Re: God the know it all;

#4 2005-04-03 16:29:23

Re: God the know it all;

#5 2005-04-04 08:11:19

Re: God the know it all;

#6 2005-04-04 08:28:28

Re: God the know it all;

#7 2005-04-04 08:36:09

Re: God the know it all;

#8 2005-04-04 08:39:54

Re: God the know it all;

#9 2005-04-04 08:44:12

Re: God the know it all;

#10 2005-04-04 08:45:04

Re: God the know it all;

#11 2005-04-04 08:51:36

Re: God the know it all;

#12 2005-04-04 08:53:13

Re: God the know it all;

#13 2005-04-04 08:56:20

Re: God the know it all;

#14 2005-04-04 09:03:26

Re: God the know it all;

#15 2005-04-04 09:07:31

Re: God the know it all;

#16 2005-04-04 09:09:45

Re: God the know it all;

#17 2005-04-04 09:13:06

Re: God the know it all;

#18 2005-04-04 09:16:23

Re: God the know it all;

#19 2005-04-04 09:21:14

Re: God the know it all;

#20 2005-04-04 09:44:10

Re: God the know it all;

#21 2005-04-04 13:07:51

Re: God the know it all;

#22 2005-04-04 14:22:59

Re: God the know it all;

#23 2005-04-04 17:32:32

Re: God the know it all;

#24 2005-04-04 18:28:13

Re: God the know it all;

#25 2005-04-04 19:09:01

Re: God the know it all;

Board footer