14Likes
January 15th, 2012, 07:30 PM
Go easy on me guys, I know how much room there is for flaming on a statement like this...
The Universe created us so that we can see what the Universe has created, as there is no reason to create something, if there isn't anything around to see it.
I'm not saying that I beleive this, it just came to me as I read the last few words of a book on Astromony, it was a very surreal moment actually.
Your statement appears to be a viable possibility in terms of philosophy, as a starting point for further contemplation and analysis. It is not, as it stands, science. To turn it into science you could suggest ways in which the idea could be tested. These do not need to be means of immediate testing, restricted to current technology, but testing that could be undertaken in the future. As it stands I am at a loss to see how you could do that. The problem is twofold. There appears to be no justification for the statement "there is no reason to create something, if there isn't anything around to see it." Secondly, you assume, without justification, that there has to be a reason the universe exists.
Very good answer! I was so new to the forum that I didn't know there was a Philosophy section, I'll be more vigilant in the future. I'll try comment on your answer later today...
I'll move this thread there then.
Interesting idea. That would also explain why life involves evolution of intelligence, the ability to use tools, to fly, and hopefully, interstellar travel.
So life can appreciate the beauty of the Universe.
The question is a Hobbsian curse.
My idea was shared by Chuck Lorre in his Vanity card on episode 2 of season 5 of The Big Bang Theory, but he worded it a lot better than me
Non religious people say that we are the result of the Universe trying to understand itself. Meaning, the universe exploded into existence from nothing and that we were randomly generated in the process as bi-products of that explosion. If you look at the cosmological constant vs. the energy of empty space curves, you see that they cross right when the first humans were seen.Originally Posted by Body_Fortress
I'm an ignorant peasant: what is the energy of empty space curves? How do you determine it? How do you know what value it was 200,000 years ago?
Sounds interesting, what is this? Can you explain more? Links maybe?
g6.jpg
So when you look at the figure, ok, there's the cosmological constant which has a precise value. Notice how if that value changes for higher or lower, things like galaxies or solar systems wouldn't be able to form due to repulsion. We are here because the cosmological constant of our universe has a precise value. When you understand the figure, it looks almost impossible for only one universe to exist. Because...what if the cosmological constant was higher...wouldn't we be able to exist, ever? EVER? Lol.
I can see some ancient humans pondering this very thought (or something similar) and then someone said, "Hey, that must mean the universe was created for a purpose. The universe was created so it could create us so we can see what was created".....Voila, a god is born. Of course all this prior creating could go on ad infinitum.
damn...I accidently erased the post...stupid fu*** forum software keeps rolling the page up... $@*(^(*!^$)!*@^$
Just read my next post lol.
Last edited by Oxycodone; October 14th, 2012 at 03:03 PM.
It takes neither intellect, nor systematic experimentation to reach the conclusion that the part of the body that hurts is the part of the body that hurts. I might have been impressed if the Koran had mentioned that the pain in your limb - the limb that is no longer there - is originating in your brain.
In a violent world there would be plenty of opportunities to learn that severe burns can lead to a cessation of pain, so - if that is what is being stated in the quoted passage (and I am not convinced of that reading), it is hardly surprising that the observation was made.
It takes neither intellect, nor systematic experimentation to reach the conclusion that the part of the body that hurts is the part of the body that hurts.
That's entirely right, I got no objection but I got a question. Us humans tend to define our reality through our human logic. Time, space, electrons, universal laws, good and evil, useful vs. useless, love vs. hate etc.
It takes neither intellect, nor systematic experimentation to reach the conclusion that the part of the body that hurts is the part of the body that hurts. I might have been impressed if the Koran had mentioned that the pain in your limb - the limb that is no longer there - is originating in your brain.
In a violent world there would be plenty of opportunities to learn that severe burns can lead to a cessation of pain, so - if that is what is being stated in the quoted passage (and I am not convinced of that reading), it is hardly surprising that the observation was made.
But tell me, human beings are the most creative beings in the entire solar system. Painters, artists, musicians, physicists, mathematicians, every step in our life, we create. We love it! It's part of our Universe. Creativity is perhaps the concept that fits best within our world and makes most sense to our human logic! But when it comes to speaking about a creator, they say NO, it no longer makes sense, no creator...LOL WHY THE DOUBLE STANDARDS?
Is it perhaps a blind selfishness to say we are the only ones to create, when creation is on every corner? The reason most people reject God is because they want to be in control of their life. Control...look around you. If the Sun dies, within 3 hours you'll freeze to death. We have no control...yet.
You really do like to talk crap, don't you. The majority of people reject God because they see little or no evidence for her existence. And many of us doubt God's existence for the same reason, but are unconvinced either way. Control of our life has nothing to do with it. Using your logic if I wanted control of my life I'd stop believing in government and my wife.
Point taken but what about the creation?You really do like to talk crap, don't you. The majority of people reject God because they see little or no evidence for her existence. And many of us doubt God's existence for the same reason, but are unconvinced either way. Control of our life has nothing to do with it. Using your logic if I wanted control of my life I'd stop believing in government and my wife.
What about it?Point taken but what about the creation?
And by what logical contortions does substituting one more entity into it answer that question? It simply obscures the point and creates an even more difficult problem to answer--what's the origin of this omniscient being? It ultimately just makes the question worse instead of providing a logically satisfying answer.
I don't understand the question. Are you saying since humans are creative, that is evidence we were created by something?
That seems to be his argument and is certainly consistent with his previous misapplications of logic. Oxycodone there is nothing to answer here.
This is a discussion Josh not a court of law.
Name one thing they created? Did they create the elements that make up the paint, the brush, the easel? Did they create musical notes that weren't there before, did they create the laws of the universe for physicists and mathematicians, is there anything they created from nothing? Humans utilize what has been created.
Only one thing that I know of that we might get credit for creating (bringing into existence). It had residual spin offs resulting in more creations, all of them from nothing.
Last edited by zinjanthropos; October 14th, 2012 at 10:04 PM.
Exactly. A discussion. Previously you said "Creativity is perhaps the concept that fits best within our world and makes most sense to our human logic! But when it comes to speaking about a creator, they say NO, it no longer makes sense, no creator...LOL WHY THE DOUBLE STANDARDS?"This is a discussion Josh not a court of law.
This implies you think that our creativity is evidence of a creator. Now please answers the question. Is that what you think?
I'm not trying to be legalistic, I just don't understand what you're trying to say. As in, you said a thing that doesn't make sense to me, and I need you to rephrase it or expand on it or confirm that my paraphrasing was correct.
If you're at the entry of a cave and you see huge paw steps going into the cave. Additionally, you smell something weird and you can even hear a growling coming from the cave. Then the scientist argues, "if I have not seen the bear, there is no bear! So it's safe to go in!" and then walks in. Scripture is not a book of science or a book of Police evidence, it's a book of of signs!! Those who reject the signs walk into the cave, those who do not, don't. The choice is yours. God mentions it, that he has created human beings with a free will so they can choose weather or not they want to obey him so your behavior is part of God's plan, from the persopective of someone who believes in God (not mine).Exactly. A discussion. Previously you said "Creativity is perhaps the concept that fits best within our world and makes most sense to our human logic! But when it comes to speaking about a creator, they say NO, it no longer makes sense, no creator...LOL WHY THE DOUBLE STANDARDS?"This is a discussion Josh not a court of law.
This implies you think that our creativity is evidence of a creator. Now please answers the question. Is that what you think?
I think you mistook scientific and believer, or people that "argues" with you with heretics.
What scientific minded people will do is to measure the number of footprints, the pitch of the growling and eventually discover the law that relate it to the reported number of missing person in front of caves with such properties...
Maybe some of them will enter, the very curious will, and then their curious gene will be lost trough the selection process (if they have not yet bred, at least).
So scientifics may be curious, but it is really not their main characteristics, it cannot be, you made it perfectly clear.
Those kind of observation/deduction "wisdom", through age of selection, has enter the sapiens genome, and also their Meme - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia in the form of revealed religion or grand-ma stories and their latest and most efficient instance: science
This thread is empty of meanings from the start, so I take upon my duty to fill it with even more shallowness
Last edited by Boing3000; October 15th, 2012 at 09:24 AM.
I think the meaning or purpose of life is to counteract entropy. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. For this to hold true then entropy would need to have an equal and opposite reaction; Life.
Take Higgs boson for example. The scientific comunity had a smell of it, had footprints and signs. Why did they discover it? THEY BELIEVED!!!!! If they had not believed it could exist, the LHR machine was never going to be built and humanity would have never known that the boson exists. THAT'S WHY BELIEVING IS IMPORTANT. In Matrix, when the architect asks the oracle, "did you always knew about it", she replies "No, but I believed!". So the oracle was an inteligent entity superior to the architect of the matrix! Superior! Believing in something is superior than sitting on your testicles waiting for proof! Believe, and look for proof yourself!
So does it work to apply the logic: "If humans don't find something, it doesn't exist." or "higgs boson didn't exist until humans found it". Brothers and sisters, if the Higgs boson did not exist, humanity wouldn't exist to discover that it exists! What we find and discover is worth crap on the scale of existence. God is like the Higgs boson, science has not yet discovered God.
There was many scientists who said "Higgs boson is a delusion, only idiots believe in that, it's no more real than the pony in my garage or the huge sausage in my pants!" Yes...after July they felt like shit I bet! Your turn to feel like shit will soon come, mark my words. The machine will find God, weather it's 5, 10 15 years. It will, and when it does, go back to this topic! Go back to this topic and give Cesar what Cesar holds!
Some argue that no persons were reported missing(in the cave). To that I answer, the number of humans present today on the planet is negligeble compared to the number who died ever since humans first appeared. Where did they go? Where did dead one go? Science has no answer, yet.
I agree with Oxycodone's rationale on belief, because you had to believe in DNA, Quantum mechanics, and anything that you could not detect with your natural senses before you would go about seeking proof. Religion is no different, if one did not have faith (belief) that something existed would one continue to seek evidence? I think not.
I am SAD to report that SCIENCE has no justification whatsoever for life and it's meaning. According to science, life is meaningless! If you want to find guidance with respect to the meaning of life, the best document to consult is the Quran, Bible or Rigveda! I don't say that the Quran is the word of God, that is up to you to believe. What I am saying is that the book will give you a meaning of life and if you follow it, your life will have meaning, weather it's the truth or not.
Assume it's a false belief and there's no God...what bad can happen when you die? Will you receive 100 lashes? Will you fall into a pit? What? What's the disadvantage of believing in something? And if the belief is true, then you go to Heaven. You have nothing to lose if you believe.
It is mentioned in Rigweda book number 8, Hymn number 1:I'm not trying to be legalistic, I just don't understand what you're trying to say. As in, you said a thing that doesn't make sense to me, and I need you to rephrase it or expand on it or confirm that my paraphrasing was correct.
"Do not worship any one beside Him"
Chandogya Upanishad Chapter number 6, Section number 2, verse number 1:
"God is only one, - not a second"
Yajurveda 32:3:
"na tasya pratima asti "There is no image of Him."
NA TASYA PRATIMA ASTI. God has no prastima, no image, no sculpture, no statue, no portrait, no photograph!
Quran 112.3:
"He is God, the One and Only God, the Eternal, Absolute. He begets not, nor is He begotten. And there is none like unto Him."
Quran mentiones that God has no pratima, yajurveda mentiones God has no pratima and the veda is the highest hindu scripture with most authority. Tell me, why do...half the people on the planet believe that God is one and God has no pratima? Why?
Can one simply will themselves into faith? Is true belief really a choice? I ask this because my logic (gained from life experience and observation) will not allow me to be a true believer of the doctrine of my choice.
Oxy, I still don't get that. How is a book a sign? I could pick up any old book and interpret it--that's called bibliomancy.
You don't answer my question. Why do half of the people on the planet believe that God is one and that God has no pratima? Why? Have you ever heard of something completely illogical in which 4 billion people believe in? Tell me? I say 2+2 equal to 5. Will 4 billion people believe it's true?
That depends on how good you are at marketing a belief. Billions of people buy things by being convinced of things that are not true, so I think if you ran a good enough marketing campaign along with the elders indoctrination of the youth ( they know of nothing else) then yes with enough time I think you could convince 4 billion people that 2+2=5. People like being with a majority more so than standing alone or with the few.
I think there are 2 simple things happening:
1) Most people need direction. They don't have time to ponder the mysteries of the universe or even care about it.
2) Most people are afraid of death. They would like comfort in this area; they would like to not be living in fear.
These 2 things are enough to explain the prevalence of religion. If you give a person an explanation of the meaning of life and give them some comfort, they will accept what you tell them, including "do not believe anyone but me!"
(Also, there is nothing phenomenal about the different scriptures containing the same message--they influence each other in a long line of thought, borrowing from each other.The Quran is the most blatant and obvious in this regard, you can see all the places it just borrowed from all the past scriptures.)
Abrahamic-Religions-Timeline1.jpg
If you are asking for the basis on how beliefs are formed;
It is a combination of the amount of trust people place on the source/intermediary in which an idea/concept is passed along, repetitive rituals and suggestions, how easily the would-be believers can be persuaded, the intellectual/emotional gratification that comes with having a more complete narrative on how the world is suppose to work, etc.
Just about any superstition that we can come up with. Or if you prefer something more specific; ghosts?
edits: Or lucky charms?
Stop Preaching. No one cares to read it.
Speak for yourself. I am enjoying everyone's opinion.
I am sorry that you feel that way. You must know that this is not the right state of mind to visit a cave. Curiosity may be a better one, but then PROCEED WITH CARE.... My grand-ma-level knowledge call that a "pandoras box"
Maybe you should try to use the word "science", on a science forum, by using its scientific meaning. Go and look-it up in a dictionary, which is the scientific approach to words and their (manyfold)meanings.
Religion would just make you repeat endless psalms, even some that explains how "right" and "smart" you are not to BELEIVE in science (lol, as it was possible to believe in science).
Go ask your grand-ma and she'll tell you how science is all a useless pretty things that won't bring meat on the plate.
And then ask science: It will tell you that it is the domain of DOUBT (the oposite of beleives) and that to make some assertion you must back it up with EXPERIMENT (sometime immensely expensive like LHC), and LOGIC/MATH.
Not true. Science grossly define life as a auto replicating/sustaining system. But I doubt that is can help you in any way, so you deny it.
My take on this particular point is quite opposite. Now I understand some urges inside me, and the reason it seems to be like a most primordial things in my life to get laid. Sorry to be crude but it is science. It could help you if such kind of though make you feel sad/guilty.
You see, science can help, even about basic meaning, and religious people HATE that, because it kill their business, build upon those kind of mixed feeling.
I agree Oxy, that faith can bring meaning to peoples lives and that is a good thing. But when people are willing to oppress others or even to kill other people over faith... well that is not good at all. And that is why more people are becoming atheists. We want some peace for once!
So tell me brother, if the Quran copied from the past scriptures, how come it only copied the correct statements. We know that the Bible has over 300 obvious scientifical mistakes, so how come the Quran didn't copy those ones too? If you copy you copy everything! Unless, you are an expert scientist and say: ok this is correct, I copy it, oh! this is not correct, I don't copy. The copy or borrow argument doesn't work because Quran only "copied" what's right! How do you explain that.
If during an exam, I look to the left and copy from my mate, but only copy what's right and get a much higher grade than my mate, did I really copy?!?!? I didn't copy...maybe I was looking left because the girl was hot and so happened to look on her paper! Quran mentions 1400 years ago that the Earth is spherical in shape, while the Bible says it's both flat and round! What is that, a disk? LOL Is the Earth a disk brother? Why didn't Quran copy that? You want verses? I give you verses! 100 verses!
Out of the box, since you are new around here, I will explain further. I was speaking as a moderator, hence the blue text. Most of the mods use a text feature of some sort to distinguish between member comments and mod/admin roles .Speak for yourself. I am enjoying everyone's opinion.
We don't abide preaching, such as "What I am saying is that the book will give you a meaning of life and if you follow it, your life will have meaning, weather it's the truth or not."on this forum. If you like that sort of thing, there are hundreds of other forums that can fill that role.
Lynx
On another forum a guy comes saying : "I'm an athiest! I'm an atheist! God is like a pony! No exist!" He says he's parents are christian. So I ask him, have you read Rigveda? "huh no" Have you read the Quran? "huh no" HAVE YOU READ YOUR OWN BIBLE?? "huh no" So I tell him, you're not an atheist, you're an idiot! To be an atheist you need to read your own scripture, if you don't believe in it, read other scriptures, and only if you don't believe in any scripture should you be an atheist! It's like you handing in an exam to your teacher and the teacher fails you with F without reading your paper. It's idiotic!
Righhhht, so I suppose this is "correct statement"? Qur'an 7:107
Not to mention Pythagoras theorized the earth was a sphere hundreds of years before the Quran.
So by your logic a person should read the stories behind hundreds of religious beliefs before rejecting god(s)?
I think not. Most reasoning people would recognize this as the burden of proof logical fallacy. I don't have to conduct a detailed survey of all the space in Earth's orbit to conclude it's unlikely a magical teapot is controlling our actions. It doesn't completely discount the possibility of a magic teapot, but convincing a reasonable person should take extraordinary evidence. Many atheist, or at least the ones sometimes called soft-atheist, approach deistic religions the same way.
Any scientist who argued this would be a very poor scientist. Fortunately Darwinian selection would generally take care of him.If you're at the entry of a cave and you see huge paw steps going into the cave. Additionally, you smell something weird and you can even hear a growling coming from the cave. Then the scientist argues, "if I have not seen the bear, there is no bear! So it's safe to go in!"
Your words have become as sounding brass, not because you have not charity, but because you lack logic. You attack fabricated strawmen.So does it work to apply the logic: "If humans don't find something, it doesn't exist." or "higgs boson didn't exist until humans found it". Brothers and sisters, if the Higgs boson did not exist, humanity wouldn't exist to discover that it exists! What we find and discover is worth crap on the scale of existence. God is like the Higgs boson, science has not yet discovered God.
Are you aware that ethnic cooking also has no justification for life and its meaning. Nor do railway timetables. Or training relating to ones golf swing. You clearly have no idea of the function of science.I am SAD to report that SCIENCE has no justification whatsoever for life and it's meaning.
I suppose if you wish to have other people do your thinking for you that could be a practical approach. I prefer to assign my own meaning.What I am saying is that the book will give you a meaning of life and if you follow it, your life will have meaning, weather it's the truth or not.
I think it is related to the fact that left to their own devices half the people on the planet would prefer to watch X-Factor or Big Brother rather than do something productive.Tell me, why do...half the people on the planet believe that God is one and God has no pratima? Why?
.You don't know what you are talking about. I mean that as both a generic statement and a specific one. I intend no malice by it. You seem to have a modest intellect. Once you learn to use it I imagine you won't keep blundering so much.So tell me brother, if the Quran copied from the past scriptures, how come it only copied the correct statements. We know that the Bible has over 300 obvious scientifical mistakes, so how come the Quran didn't copy those ones too? If you copy you copy everything! Unless, you are an expert scientist and say: ok this is correct, I copy it, oh! this is not correct, I don't copy. The copy or borrow argument doesn't work because Quran only "copied" what's right! How do you explain that
Ugh. Viral memetic infection.
There are many cults brother, there are Satan and monkey worshipping cults and scriptures. I only ask you to read the veda, the bible and the quran. 3 books. How many books have you read in your life? Is 3 books overwhelming?So by your logic a person should read the stories behind hundreds of religious beliefs before rejecting god(s)?
I think not. Most reasoning people would recognize this as the burden of proof logical fallacy. I don't have to conduct a detailed survey of all the space in Earth's orbit to conclude it's unlikely a magical teapot is controlling our actions. It doesn't completely discount the possibility of a magic teapot, but convincing a reasonable person should take extraordinary evidence. Many atheist, or at least the ones sometimes called soft-atheist, approach deistic religions the same way.
It's neither right, neither wrong. It's a miracle! Just because you can't do it with your broom at home it doesnt mean that someone, at some point couldn't do it with permission of God. I can answer all your questions.Righhhht, so I suppose this is "correct statement"? Qur'an 7:107
Not to mention Pythagoras theorized the earth was a sphere hundreds of years before the Quran.
[QUOTE=John Galt;359097]Is that so? I challenge you to point out a single statement in the Quran that is scientifically false and I will bow down to you and call you God.You don't know what you are talking about. I mean that as both a generic statement and a specific one. I intend no malice by it. You seem to have a modest intellect. Once you learn to use it I imagine you won't keep blundering so much.
So in your racist opinion, religious people have a low IQ and that's why they believe. Why don't you post it as a forum stickie with a nice racist statement "this forum is free of beleiving junk!"
Baqarah 2:171!!!!!!! God has a name for people like you!
I think this speaks for itself. >>
I never said such behaviour was stupid, I said it was non-productive. I suggested the same drives that encourage the masses to follow religion are related to or identical with those which promote such 'easy options'. However, you seem to go further than me, since you also characterise them as stupid.
Since I believe this behviour (easy option/ non-productive) is shared fairly equally between all races (whatever they are), ethnicities, cultural identities, sexes and ages (excluding children and aged persons with deteriorating minds) I fail to see how my view can be characterised as racist. Correction: I see precisely how - it is because once again you are talking crap.
I'm sorry . You aren't one of the chosen.I challenge you to point out a single statement in the Quran that is scientifically false and I will bow down to you and call you God.
Never read the Veda..probably would be interesting. Was raised Catholic---once quite familiar with the Bible having read it once in its entirety and like most Christians often in bits and pieces. The Quran came later--read in it's entirety as a teenager, early 90s as part of military studies, and slowly with some guided formal lessons in the year before I lived with Muslims as an Iraqi Army adviser and during that year in hundreds of conversations among Shea and Sunni Iraqi Soldiers. I'm not an expert by any standard but I seem to know a great deal more about Islam than most Americans and frequently correct misconceptions about Islam on this forum. Sorry Oxy..they don't do a thing for me. I find those books to be an interesting combination of hard won wisdom in a primitive world, some reasonably good story telling, and reflections from morally bankrupt, xenophobic, and astonishingly ignorant cultures. Other religions such as the Yazidi and Zoroastrians, I met in Iraq, were equally interesting but no more attractive. I could go into dozens of other religions I've at least touched on--the creation stories from Polynesia, the Native American ones I learned out of interest in that side of my ancestry etc. All interesting, sometimes even beautiful--but all clearly developed by ignorant peoples.
Last edited by Lynx_Fox; October 15th, 2012 at 08:38 PM.
That explains your signature. I was wondering about that!
And ignorant people who generally could not help their ignorance. An excuse not enjoyed today by fundamentalist adherents of any of these superstitions, I mean religions.
You ask this platitude a question. That is old kinderhook. But you also start of like life HAS a meaning, already.
Maybe meaning had a life as soon as humans were born.
The only reason why people ask why they do exist is because they do exist. And that is more than your average butterfly would even dare to know, if it could at all. Somehow not all people familiar with Darwin's revelations are feeling the cold barren impersonal landscape that it left behind.
Death is even harder to separate from ratio than religion.
Thats why death is both the inventor of religion and also the end of religion.
After reading and studying those scriptures, I don't believe in any of them and although I don't fully reject the concept of God, I do have my uncertainties for the following reasons:
Bible: It says that Jesus died for my sins on the cross and whoever believes in him, his sins are erased. If that's true, I can believe in Jesus Christ and tomorrow become a murderer or a rapist and it's ok because whatever sins I do it's paid for! Is that logical? I am the director of a company, where my employers cheat, rape and do idol worship. So I take my innocent son, kill him, and tell them that hey! Look! This is my son! I kill him so that your sins are erased, so whatever sins you do keep at it, it's paid for! If God is just, how is that justice? The Bible according to me is the most illogical scripture of them all, even Satan worship scriptures!
Quran: Strongest scripture I've read. Quran mentions that the Universe was created in 6 days but that the word for "days" could also mean "periods". I personally don't buy that, I think it's just twisted language to fit modern science. Also Quran mentions: "killing an innocent human being is like killing the whole humanity". So they condemn the killing of innocent human beings. I disagree with the word innocent. My question to the muslim doctors of divinity is: If I am a capitalist, profit oriented, working in a World Trade Center tower, am I a guilty person or am I innocent? I have not raped, cheated or murdered, the only criteria is capitalism. So far, no doctors of divinity were able to answer this. They gave me a load of crap that simply did not answer the question.
Veda: Weaker than the Quran, slightly stronger than the Bible but the veda does not prevent many hindus for doing idol worship. They simply don't follow it so why should I?
That goes back to my question in thread #33: Can one simply will themselves into faith? Is true belief really a choice? I ask this because my logic (gained from life experience and observation) will not allow me to be a true believer of the doctrine of my choice.
If that's true, I can believe in Jesus Christ and tomorrow become a murderer or a rapist and it's ok because whatever sins I do it's paid for! Is that logical?
I thought you said you read the bible? Gigantic loop holes aside, if you believe in Christ you won't be a murderer or rapist.
I've noticed that the original thread question has evolved from a subjective meaning of life into a question regarding faith and the known concepts of religious deities.
If by "will themselves into..." you meant make or allow themselves to accept something on faith; Yes, it is possible. All it takes is a desire to so for whatever reason they justify to themselves.
Can you elaborate a little on what "true belief" means to you?
Out of the box, this might be a little out there for most readers, so I apologize up front, but for me I found this question answered primarily by the ideas summed up here on memetics. That concepts and beliefs propagate themselves, meaning most believers did not "choose" anything. Which isn't to say you can't choose at all, but it can be very difficult. Here is one woman's story of how difficult it can be to choose: Ayaan Hirsi Ali - On Losing Faith In Islam - YouTube
It's possible! Why? Because Christians have a HISTORY of not following the teachings of Jesus. Jesus was circumcised, are Christians circumcised, no, Muslims are. Jesus says not to eat Pork, Christians have pork, Muslims don't have Pork. Jesus says don't drink alcohol, Christians drink alcohol, Muslims have no alcohol. So if a christian is someone who follows the teachings of Jesus Christ, Muslims are more Christians than the Christians themselves! You say that if I am a Christian and believe Jesus died for my sins, I shouldn't disagree with his teachings and go rape and murder? Why? Christians do it, they eat pork and get drunk with wine, why? Because it doesn't matter, in their book, they can commit any sin, it's paid for! Jesus died for their sins so whatever they do it's paid for.
Does it make sense to you to punish an innocent human being for the evil done by the others? Is God an idiot? Plus, if you read the Bible carefully, especially when it speaks of King Asha and Basha, you realize that all mighty God does not know simple addition! Also, it talks about a father and a son where the son is 2 years older than the father. Even in Hollywood movies if you try to produce it you'll fail!
Plus, Jesus Christ in the Bible never claimed divinity. I challenge you to point out a single unambiguous statement where Jesus Christ himself say's he's God or worship me! Gigantic loops aside, don't leave them aside, share them here, I shall answer all of them point by point. Share the hole!
I'm not really interested in pig piling religion with you.
I think we both agree that many people find a meaning for their lives in their religion--regardless of whether that meaning is based on logic, reason or just an unquenchable need to fill a void.
Yes, many do, but it's a false meaning! You can find meaning and peace in worshiping Satan, but it's false peace!
I can narrow down your beliefs if you answer a few questions, do you believe that idol worship is wrong?That goes back to my question in thread #33: Can one simply will themselves into faith? Is true belief really a choice? I ask this because my logic (gained from life experience and observation) will not allow me to be a true believer of the doctrine of my choice.
Can you stop multi-quoting ? I need my computer's RAM to compute some fractal ...
Because I can see the meaning of live into them. Endless repetition of sameness, so beautiful then you won't dare close your eyes, you'll even wish you where here, and never die.
So I worship Mandelbrot ... I also worship Pink Floyd. I have big picture of them in my bedroom, and each day I pray for them to came back to the world and save me from boredom.
So narrow me down a little, give me some perspective.
Philosophy is the science of thinking. I take it seriously. I you feel that I am joking, maybe it is because I am. If you intend to do philosophy try not to answer to "What is the meaning of life" as there was one answer. There is not. It is just a 6 words question like "What does a unicorn(c) drink" is a 5 words one.
Both have as many answers that people that would ponder on them.
If you want to be the Einstein of philosophy, try to find the invariant, of all these relative perceptive, and build upon it.
One thing that you should know: No amount of book you are gonna read will help you discover the "correct" answer. "Harry Potter" may help you discover that life is "saving the world from evil". But it is fairly fantastic, and difficult to believe. There are many^many others even more ridiculous, and less fun, like the bible or the quran, based on the same plot.
Can I prove that book (why do you call them scripture ?) is not the answers ? Yes easily:
Some people cannot read. Some people are so "primitive" they cannot even understand why on earth you would waste your time on such wondering, nor why you work your ass of, 8h a day, in a world that is so insecure and make you sick.
They are called "primitive", and I bet they know the answer.
You may learn something by trying to stop "preaching" and start "living".
Maybe you'll get nearer this "life" thing. Maybe then when you'll get there, you'll discover that there is no point to search for it. It is there already.
Last edited by Boing3000; October 18th, 2012 at 05:36 AM.
Did anyone mention 42 yet?
I see it as harmless. Do I worship idols? Yes, my parents and others in my ancestry.
Why is Satanism or any other out-there belief system a "false peace"? That's just your ignorant opinion because you read a few books and suddenly think you have some answers. Ridiculous. Utterly ridiculous. I have not yet used the ignore function, but my trigger finger is getting itchy.
Do you worship Satan brother?
So, according to you, if I go masturbate in a dungeon while getting beat up by naked women, that's true peace? And I am the one ignorant...LOL
It is only your opinion that the above referenced is not "true peace". What is your definition of "true peace"?
True peace requires doing something peaceful, to you and to others, like meditation. You cannot say, I go have a boxing match and I am peaceful. It's false peace. You may think you're peaceful but you're not. You can run a test to confirm it, a cp scan, shows cerebral activity bouncing all over the place. Peace is quiet and steady. No ups and downs.It is only your opinion that the above referenced is not "true peace". What is your definition of "true peace"?
I think that's an invalid measure. A severely depressed person also shows very low cerebral activity, but few of us would call that peaceful--tortured is more like it. I used to sense some of the most peaceful moments during long runs when I was younger and still do when I'm relaxed when I'm fly fishing and studying the water looking for sign of a monster trout below. Resolution after a good orgasm is also very peaceful for most; probably why many men want nothing more than a good cuddle and a nap --those natural drug cocktails must be potent.You can run a test to confirm it, a cp scan, shows cerebral activity bouncing all over the place.
I don't see why it matters to you, but no, I do not worship anything or anyone. I am a skeptical agnostic taoist.
How is this "according to me"? You mean based on your assumptions about what so-called Satanists do? That's like me saying, "Oh you are Christian, so you like whipping yourself to absolve your sins? You like burning people at the stake?" or perhaps "Oh, you're Islamic, so you like blowing yourself up with homemade bombs in order to kill the infidels? That's Jihad afterall!!" That would be stupid. I don't say those things because they would be ignorant and fallacious, don't you agree? So ask yourself: are you just making assumptions? Are your assumptions even grounded in reality?
EDIT: Maybe the language barrier between us is too vast, I don't know. But I fail to see how someone's sexual preference has anything to do with "true peace". Sex is a purely physical need, augmented by our psychological needs. If those psychological needs mean you can't get off without a spiritual component, then so be it, but that hardly says anything helpful about anyone else. We are animals. Very unique animals, to be sure, but still animals.
"The Universe created us so that "
I dont think there is any "so that" to it.
If our present universe did not allow for fusion to combine hydrogen into more complex atoms with greater variety in interaction, there would be no one wondering how come the universe didnt create them so that...
Go back billions of years, theres probably no one wondering if the universe created them, and not for a purpose. Right at this moment, between our sun and the nearest star, theres probably no one wondering how come they dont exist in a region devoid of sufficient variety of interaction. So imo, we just exist, theres no greater meaning. We are here and not on an asteroid because this chunk of rock with liquid oceans and and atmosphere was a place where the hodge poge interactions between atoms allowed complex and more diverse types of molecular interaction. One of these interaction eventually ended up allowing colonies of cells to obtain better information about the environment (does it burn, does it move, etc). Over time simple information about the environment grew more rich and complex, with modelization of objects, an increasingly better representation of the surroundings, for some, since there's still a truck load of atoms that are part of single cell organisms, or part of relatively inert(very little interaction) rocks, lava, and beyond our planet theres still a truck load of hydrogen atoms that are just drifting around in space. So theres a tiny amount of matter that has grown to be part of complex interaction that see/visualize/represent their environment, thats us. We are a small part of the universe, and it so happens that our current universes parameters allows for perception, and theres no mystery why we are not flaoting somewhere in space, because its here among other places where sensory molecular interaction was possible.
There is no meaning to life, you are free to make your own.
How awesome is that?
I have a caution sign at the beginning of my street. It says, "caution children playing". Are you telling me that if I don't see any children the do not exist on my block?If you're at the entry of a cave and you see huge paw steps going into the cave. Additionally, you smell something weird and you can even hear a growling coming from the cave. Then the scientist argues, "if I have not seen the bear, there is no bear! So it's safe to go in!" and then walks in. Scripture is not a book of science or a book of Police evidence, it's a book of of signs!! Those who reject the signs walk into the cave, those who do not, don't. The choice is yours. God mentions it, that he has created human beings with a free will so they can choose weather or not they want to obey him so your behavior is part of God's plan, from the persopective of someone who believes in God (not mine).Exactly. A discussion. Previously you said "Creativity is perhaps the concept that fits best within our world and makes most sense to our human logic! But when it comes to speaking about a creator, they say NO, it no longer makes sense, no creator...LOL WHY THE DOUBLE STANDARDS?"This is a discussion Josh not a court of law.
This implies you think that our creativity is evidence of a creator. Now please answers the question. Is that what you think?
You entire analogy of the bearcave is ridiculous. Seeing a bear foot imprint is a warning. In science this is called "indirect evidence". If you do not heed indirect evidence, you are the fool.
Saying that a compilation of books written by ancients (smart but ignorant) is the literal word of God is itself an argument from ignorance.
Why are we here? A lousy, ill-conceived poem by yours truly.
The meaning of life is important to all
it's a long-pondered thought.
It's hard to accept that when we die
we simply return to naught.
Reincarnation's a tempting idea
it seems like it might be nice.
But knowing my luck I'd come back as a mutt
covered in ticks and lice.
As for the Christians, they just don't buy it
so long as you're just some poor sod.
Good luck coming back to this Heaven on Earth
unless you're the son of God.
For the Muslims this life is just a big test
to see what virtues you lack.
It's no wonder a few are so quick to leave
And have no interest in coming back.
Were we put here on purpose by an awesome creator
and told to live without sin?
So many ponder the roller coaster of life
while the Hindus ride it again.
Some people think this is our only trip 'round
and we haven't got time to lose.
As for me, I couldn't care less.
I'm just here for the booze.
Nice little poem flick. Good insight between the christian faith, hinudu faith, muslim faith and the hopeless faith which leads to self serving alcoholism. I really don't thinks its very responsible to promote your extremist alcoholistic philosophy.
It's my way of expressing interest in a topic without committing myself in any significant way. Entering the neutral zone, shields raised.
I know the meaning of life. But I won't tell you
What 'meaning' can we guess life might have?
The meaning of life... The only sensible reason I can think is to grow. Thats what living things do, they grow.
Life forms grow on an automatic cycle of death, decay and rebirth.
Individual lives are units in this cycle.
In an individual life, not only do we physically grow according to a pretty much automatic process, we also can grow by directing our energy towards certains kinds of growth and development.
We can pass our growth onto our young probably through the DNA which is part of the automatic cycle, but also through teaching our young how the grow and develop within there own lives.
The aim of the adaptive growth which is both automatic and consciously directed (in the case of humans)... is to be better able to flourish, thrive and survive.
So they aim of life is survival...
But if there is more to life for our soul, our centre of consciousness our spirit, then the growth takes on another dimension. It is not just part of a physical cycle of adaption and survival to the physical environment. it would also be to develop in a more 'spiritual' sense, learning lessons about how it isnt just our own offspring we should worry about in the ongoing cycle of life and death, it is also all other life that we should help to nurture as we would realise that our existence is not about growth, but about love, as love is the thing which makes it all worthwhile. A certain form of love called joy, would be most fully realised by knowing that each of us are related and our happiness is dependent on the happiness of others.
If we are all animals who only care for ourselves, we will be eternally miserable, only gaining the odd moment of joy following a victory, in a life of insecurity. But if we work together and love everything we will be progressively more joyfull in our existence.
Even without the concept of an 'afterlife'... We would still be more joyful if we look at the meaning of life as love, rather than as competition.
So the meaning of life... is to grow towards bliss? how about that? can anybody think of a more noble aim?
I don't think I have worked out the meaning of life here... btu I did a better job than monty python, ust not as funnily.
We, as individuals, ain't the meaning of life. We're just some of it's end products.
The meaning of life---the only meaning of life is procreation. The goal is to not be the end product of evolution.
Now, within our short lifespans, You may attach any meaning that you choose. You might want to be a hairdresser, and help your fellow creatures look better(better is subjective).
You might want to spend years at the academy, in a growing thirst for knowledge, convinced that academic knowledge held the cutting edge on science, philosophy, etc...etc...
You might want to till the soil and feed your family and others.
It really doesn't matter which choice you make, as all choices tend to blend together into a common effect.
Effect on your mind and body, effect on your polity and community and culture, effect on your biom...etc...etc
Everyone gets to choose their own meaning and path.
All paths are one path
and the one path is TAO
(but, then again, I could be wrong)
[QUOTE=sculptor;362673]We, as individuals, ain't the meaning of life. We're just some of it's end products.
The meaning of life---the only meaning of life is procreation. The goal is to not be the end product of evolution.[QUOTE]
Hmmm... Life as a whole may have a meaning, but life itself which is always carried in individual units called lives... must also have meaning.
The function of lives is to procreate, amongst other things, in order to sustain evolution of life. That is the mechanism by which life evolves, but it is not its meaning, it is the effect, not the cause.
The way of life is not the meaning of life... The way comes after nature, but before nature there may have been meaning and reason for the way to exist.
can an individual meaning of life also be a universal meaning of life?
....
as/re what is the meaning of life
to the best of my knowledge
thousands of discussion groups, clans, tribes, polities, religions, and philosophies (exercising billions of man hours) have addressed this very issue,
and, to the best of my knowledge come up dry
Hell, i'd even take a bet that our "primitive" ancestors, sitting around a camp fire 1 million years ago discussed this very question.
and, no single concept has come to fruition encompassing both an individual meaning, and a universal one.
maybe, they are only seemingly seperate?
for a universal meaning, just look around and see what we, as a species, are doing
and think, maybe, just maybe, that what you see is exactly what we are supposed to be doing, and then that is our universal meaning/
Some people seem to be seeing that anthropogenic global warming will end this ice age, (and curiously seem to fear this warming) maybe that is the universal momentary meaning?
Some people seem to see us learning evermore about our fellow creatures, so that we may use them and preserve them, and basically be natures ultimate "control freak".
Even individual visions of who we are and what we are doing seem dissimular, so how can they be associated with meaning?
perhaps we need to go way beyond subset and set and "super set" if we are to have a momentary vision of universal meaning?
Perhaps, there is none.
..............
could a meaning of life transend even time itself?
Last edited by sculptor; October 30th, 2012 at 11:13 AM.
You mean 'can the meaning of an individual life be the same as the universal meaning of life'?
Or... ' can meaning of an idividual life be the same as the meaning of all life universaly'?
It might be a micro and macro version of the same thing... or there may be differences.
As yet we dont know for sure when the individual life ends, or begins. It's pretty much the same for the evolution of life universally.
We can only guess about the meaning of either, or if they have any meaning, or what meaning might mean relation to these questions.
Why does life have to have inherent meaning? I always thought you had to give yourself purpose.
"Meaning"as mostly treated in here is "satisfaction", how to be satisfied with personal existence. "Meaning" can also be interpreted as "function" and again mixed with satisfaction... how to fit into a social perspective. But for the moment leaving satisfaction out of the picture: what is the function of life? What effect have life? What does it do?
One answer is that it consumes potential energy. If it keeps on multiplying exponentially all potential energy within the universe will be consumed much faster than otherwise. Compare with a kettle of water on a stove... there will be convection currents helping transporting heat to the surface... isnt life such a current?
To me theres some satisfaction in understanding that life is a natural phenomenon needing no more than a universe to explain it...
I've been wondering where Sigurd is... Good to see your still here Sig.
What happened to sigW?
Its all the time been sV not sW, that came about once when I couldnt enter and created a new nick in here. Im happy seeing you too
The nice thing with this thermodynamic approach towards the meaning of life is that it supports the view that life is a high probability event.
To which Im committed for other reasons... Well then friendz, now to the follow up question: Whats the meaning of Universe?
(Im leaving out article since we do it with "life".) Am I alone in thinking Universes are high probability events?
I bet most of you will obey tradition and claim that "the facts" better fit an explanation where universes have low probability
and are in need of divine intervention or other desperate measures in order to come into existence.
long ago
photosynthetic life evolved and developed here on earth
before long(a billion years or so) they had so poluted their environment with their waste product (oxygen) that they needed us, who consume oxygen and exhale CO2, to help control their waste----------we are waste consumers operating in a symbiotic relationship with the photosynthesizers.
so, as far as plants are concerned, your meaning of life is to exhale------------(do it often)
IMO, the creation of the universe was inevitabe. Probability is a time dependent concept (given enough time a monkey can compose a sonnet).Its all the time been sV not sW, that came about once when I couldnt enter and created a new nick in here. Im happy seeing you too
The nice thing with this thermodynamic approach towards the meaning of life is that it supports the view that life is a high probability event.
To which Im committed for other reasons... Well then friendz, now to the follow up question: Whats the meaning of Universe?
(Im leaving out article since we do it with "life".) Am I alone in thinking Universes are high probability events?
I bet most of you will obey tradition and claim that "the facts" better fit an explanation where universes have low probability
and are in need of divine intervention or other desperate measures in order to come into existence.
But in the absence of time, eternity itself is always "now" and the dependence on time is removed and a probability becomes certainty.
From Alice in wonderland by Lewis Carrol
‘If I’d been the whiting,’ said Alice, whose thoughts were still running on the song, ‘I’d have said to the porpoise, “Keep back, please: we don’t want you with us!”’
‘They were obliged to have him with them,’ the Mock Turtle said: ‘no wise fish would go anywhere without a porpoise.’
‘Wouldn’t it really?’ said Alice in a tone of great surprise.
‘Of course not,’ said the Mock Turtle: ‘why, if a fish came to me, and told me he was going a journey, I should say “With what porpoise?”’
‘Don’t you mean “purpose”?’ said Alice.
‘I mean what I say,’ the Mock Turtle replied in an offended tone. And the Gryphon added ‘Come, let’s hear some of your adventures.’
Hi! I dont understand your concept "eternity"! Also I cant understand how there can be a "now" without time. Maybe you and I dont use the same meaning for "time"? (Do we even use the same meaning for "meaning"?) As I see it the essence of time is order, something is time dependent if it is an element in some ordering of elements. So if eternity has an order it has time. And if hasnt then it doesnt exist unless itself is an element in some existing ordering of elements.IMO, the creation of the universe was inevitabe. Probability is a time dependent concept (given enough time a monkey can compose a sonnet).Its all the time been sV not sW, that came about once when I couldnt enter and created a new nick in here. Im happy seeing you too
The nice thing with this thermodynamic approach towards the meaning of life is that it supports the view that life is a high probability event.
To which Im committed for other reasons... Well then friendz, now to the follow up question: Whats the meaning of Universe?
(Im leaving out article since we do it with "life".) Am I alone in thinking Universes are high probability events?
I bet most of you will obey tradition and claim that "the facts" better fit an explanation where universes have low probability
and are in need of divine intervention or other desperate measures in order to come into existence.
But in the absence of time, eternity itself is always "now" and the dependence on time is removed and a probability becomes certainty.
Ok, let me rephrase, "in the absence of time before the beginning of space, the beginning of space was also the beginning of time.Hi! I dont understand your concept "eternity"! Also I cant understand how there can be a "now" without time. Maybe you and I dont use the same meaning for "time"? (Do we even use the same meaning for "meaning"?) As I see it the essence of time is order, something is time dependent if it is an element in some ordering of elements. So if eternity has an order it has time. And if hasnt then it doesnt exist unless itself is an element in some existing ordering of elements.IMO, the creation of the universe was inevitabe. Probability is a time dependent concept (given enough time a monkey can compose a sonnet).Its all the time been sV not sW, that came about once when I couldnt enter and created a new nick in here. Im happy seeing you too
The nice thing with this thermodynamic approach towards the meaning of life is that it supports the view that life is a high probability event.
To which Im committed for other reasons... Well then friendz, now to the follow up question: Whats the meaning of Universe?
(Im leaving out article since we do it with "life".) Am I alone in thinking Universes are high probability events?
I bet most of you will obey tradition and claim that "the facts" better fit an explanation where universes have low probability
and are in need of divine intervention or other desperate measures in order to come into existence.
But in the absence of time, eternity itself is always "now" and the dependence on time is removed and a probability becomes certainty.
Eternity has no order. Not if it has no time. But, IMO order can exist in potential (latent) form which is also time independent.
a) Before the BB , no time exists, thus the beginning of spacetime is the true beginning of the universe.
b) After the BB (a single mega-quantum event), the universe expanded at superluminal speed (inflationary epoch), which means time was not measurable for that incredibly small moment. It was the moment where literally everything happened at the "same time in the same place", ie. total chaos.
c) After sufficient spacetime was created, the universal constants like SOL and Gravity began to take hold and events could be measured in time.
e) Continued evolution of the universe (spacetime) as we know it.
| « If you're dead, does the world exist? | Humans and Animals » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
