OK, we know who won (or: Does God exist?)

Go ahead, get it off your chest.

Who will win the presidential election?

Poll ended at Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:06 pm

Bush
12
48%
Kerry
13
52%
 
Total votes: 25
User avatar
erik
Churchill
Posts: 2341
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:06 am
Submitting as: 15-16 puzzle
Location: Austin
Contact:

Post by erik »

fluffy wrote:Hoblit did (specifically, he said that I needed to go to church to find a reason to go to church), and before that Starfinger got offended over me stating my opinion regarding religion. And before that this entire conversation was based on the merit of having a theocratic government in a country which is supposed to have an agnostic government. And before that, PinV told me that I couldn't discount the effectiveness of a discredited wine-aging device without actually trying it myself.
Of COURSE Hoblit said something. Of COURSE Starfinger said something. They said stuff because you said your stuff first, AND you asked for reasons why people should be religious. If you interpreted their answers as why YOU should be religious, well, that is unfortunate.

RIF
starfinger
Orwell
Posts: 976
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:07 pm
Instruments: electricity
Recording Method: traveler mk1
Submitting as: starfinger
Contact:

Post by starfinger »

I wasn't offended by anything you said, Fluffy. That musta been somebody else.

I just saw an opportunity to explain what Christianity is really about. It's easy to develop a skewed opinion on the subject, given the surplus of judgmental hypocrites in the world today.

-craig
"Starfinger for president!!!" -- arby
"I would 100% nominate you for the Supreme Court." -- frankie big face
c hack
Orwell
Posts: 800
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA
Contact:

Post by c hack »

fluffy wrote:Is God the empty space inside an atom?
I think Salinger said it best in his short story Teddy: "I was six when I saw that everything was God, and my hair stood up, and all that" Teddy Said. "It was on a Sunday, I remember. My sister was only a very tiny child then, and she was drinking her milk, and all of the sudden I saw that she was God and the milk was God. I mean, all she was doing was pouring God into God, if you know what I mean."
fluffy wrote:Personally, I'm an atheist who is open to the notion that religion is useful as a moral framework for people who can't see a bigger picture and so don't see why it's important to not hurt other people, and that God is just a different interpretation to the laws of physics.
I'm gonna refer you to the same book I referred Sober to: Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces. You seem like you're probably smarter than me, so I bet you'll have an easier time of it than I did. It's hard to get through, but he really makes it clear the value of religion/mythology in any society, and it's so much more than what you think. You can probably also get away with watching his "Power of Myth" videos, but the book is full of "holy shit, that's what it's about" moments.
fluffy wrote:It seems like religion's only intended purposes are to try to explain the universe and to set up an implied reward/punishment system to tell people not to be a dick to each other, and it primarily does the first part to justify the second part (and IMO, science does a much better job of trying to figure out how the universe works for the purpose of sheer knowledge).

If there's some other reason to believe in God(s) that I'm missing, then feel free to enlighten me.
I believe in God first because of Occam's Razor. But that's not enough. I think true faith isn't a shallow "I believe in something." I think if you're serious about it, sooner or later, you'll feel it for sure, like Teddy. And at that point it stops making sense to argue about it, just like it doesn't make sense to argue about the existence of say, Iowa. You can say you don't believe in Iowa, but that doesn't keep it from being there, and it doesn't change the fact that you eat corn once in a while. I feel like I'm on the cusp of it myself. I spent (and spend) a lot of time wondering, "what's it all about?" You know, why are we here? Is there a point to being alive? and from that, what the fuck am I doing here -- what am I supposed to be doing? And one day, I was like, "I feel like the Greatest American Hero. I stuck here with these powers (life), and I don't know what to do with them. I wish there was an instruction book." And I realised -- duh. That's what the Bible is. That's what the Sutras are. for (i=yourReligion; i<totalReligions; i++); But not only that, that's what the world is. The thing that really drove that home was the book "Siddartha." That's another must-read, and it's a very easy read. You could do it in a day. The world is the instruction book to life, and religious texts are guides, you could say.

The thing is, there's no language to describe what's going on behind the scenes. There's no way to tell someone what the point of existence is, because the telling would fall short. So religious texts have to do it in an oblique way. That they sometimes contradict themselves is unimportant -- maybe even necessary. But of course, with Judaism and Christianity being one with the State for at least a long while, social laws got mixed up with religious ones. So it's not easy to know what to keep and what to ignore. But I think if you have a sense of what you're looking for, texts like the Bible (especially the teachings of Christ) do a great job of pointing you in the right direction. The problem is, most Christians think the finger that is being pointed is the end, and they pay no attention to what it's pointing at.

I realised not too long ago: the Bible doesn't say "don't kill" because it's bad for the other guy -- it says "don't kill" because it's bad for you. Hell is not a place of punishment, and sins aren't bad in the empirical good/bad sense of the word. When it says if you kill someone you'll go to Hell, it means it in the same manner as "if you drive down 84 you'll get to Connecticut." Sins are things that keep you from achieving a spiritual state. That's why Christ said "it's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for the rich man to get into heaven." He's not saying it's bad to have money, but that money brings attachment to earthly things. And you can't become enlightened -- see for sure that God is in everything -- if you have attachments dragging you down.

But those are just my reasons. Take 'em or leave 'em, as you will. And feel free to tell me I'm believing in old tales told by scam artists. It won't offend me, because I'm as full of doubt as you are. But I just don't think it makes any sense at all that there's nothing behind the curtain, that there's no one tending the light at the end of the tunnel. No matter how much I entertain the idea, it doesn't make any sense to me.
<a href="http://www.c-hack.com">c-hack.com</a> | <a href="http://www.rootrecords.org">rootrecords.org</a>
HeuristicsInc
Ibárruri
Posts: 5350
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 6:14 pm
Instruments: Synths
Recording Method: Windows computer, Acid, Synths etc.
Submitting as: Heuristics Inc. (duh) + collabs
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Maryland USA
Contact:

Post by HeuristicsInc »

fluffy wrote: I'm open to people having their own beliefs, as long as they're open to me having mine. For someone to tell me in no uncertain terms that I need to "have faith" or "open my mind to the possibilities" or whatever is at least as bad as me telling people that I think their gospel is a powerful allegory for why you should behave in a way which should just be common sense anyway.
That was me getting offended, 'cause that's not really what you implied, it was that religious folks were less equipped to deal with the world than you. If that's not what you meant, then ok, but it came across as all kinds of elitism and that's just as bad as what you complained about here. Dig? Let's all be happy in our own beliefs without thinking that somebody is somehow less of a person 'cause they don't believe the same stuff as you, is all I was hoping for.

I'm all with ya on the "separation of church and state" stuff, except inasmuch as the religious beliefs (or non-religious ones) are good for helping those in power to make good moral choices. Seems to me that Bush either believes or pretends to believe that he's got some sort of mandate from God to rule the world and I think that's wrong. I think we agree there. (How's that, Leaf? It's about the election!)

I think this sort of open conversation is a good thing to educate us all about the different views of people. I think we're all intelligent people and we can benefit from some frank discussions.
c hack wrote: for (i=yourReligion; i<totalReligions; i++);
Dude, get rid of that semicolon, that means that for every religion you will do nothing :)
Good words, Mr Csehack.
-bill
152612141617123326211316121416172329292119162316331829382412351416132117152332252921
http://heuristicsinc.com
Liner Notes
SF Lyric Ideas
c hack
Orwell
Posts: 800
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA
Contact:

Post by c hack »

HeuristicsInc wrote:Seems to me that Bush either believes or pretends to believe that he's got some sort of mandate from God to rule the world and I think that's wrong.
Maybe he saw "Alexander the Great" after he was having trouble untying his shoes and had to cut his laces.
<a href="http://www.c-hack.com">c-hack.com</a> | <a href="http://www.rootrecords.org">rootrecords.org</a>
User avatar
Caravan Ray
bono
bono
Posts: 8738
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 1:51 pm
Instruments: Penis
Recording Method: Garageband
Submitting as: Caravan Ray,G.O.R.T.E.C,Lyricburglar,The Thugs from the Scallop Industry
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Contact:

Post by Caravan Ray »

Leaf wrote:
So... are we still on who won the election here? .
I think so. Georg W loves quantum physics and string theory. He discusses it all the time in in his speeches (...or am I thinking of Stephen Hawking - I always get those two mixed up...)
User avatar
the Jazz
Attlee
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:49 pm
Location: Northern CA
Contact:

Post by the Jazz »

Occam's Razor
Arrrgh! Occam's Razor has no practical use, except as a time saving device. There is NO evidence which says that the universe is at its base simply logical. Using the razor as anything more than a way to efficiently direct your theoretical energies is lazy.
Let cake eat them.
Eric Y.
Niemöller
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 12:36 pm

Post by Eric Y. »

file under: other crap

occam's razor is essentially in direct opposition to one of the two primary foundations of science (well, chemistry and stuff anyway)...

not literally opposite, but in theory, anyway. i forget the exact wording, but where they say that reactions take place in such a way to move towards maximum entropy. occam's razor doesn't directly address that, but if you think about what it says, it seems to kind of contradict that concept.
c hack
Orwell
Posts: 800
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA
Contact:

Post by c hack »

the Jazz wrote:
Occam's Razor
Arrrgh! Occam's Razor has no practical use, except as a time saving device. There is NO evidence which says that the universe is at its base simply logical. Using the razor as anything more than a way to efficiently direct your theoretical energies is lazy.
What are you talking about? Let's say my car gets broken into. It's possible it was aliens, and it's possible it was a Harvard undergrad, but Occam's Razor says it was the gang members who live down the street.
<a href="http://www.c-hack.com">c-hack.com</a> | <a href="http://www.rootrecords.org">rootrecords.org</a>
User avatar
Adam!
Niemöller
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:10 am
Instruments: Drum 'n' Bass (but not THAT Drum 'n' Bass)
Recording Method: Reaper + Stock Plugins
Submitting as: Max Bombast
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Victoria, BC, AwesomeLand
Contact:

Post by Adam! »

Yeah, sorry Jazz, but CHack is right.

Occam's Razor holds no logical weight, and relying on it as proof is a fallacy (I think it's the implicative fallacy, but I'm a little rusty on my fallacies). Thankfully, we're talking about theories here (as opposed to laws), so it is essential that we use Occam's Razor. There are four criteria that make up a theory, and one of those is parsimony. Parsimony is basically how well a theory follows Occam's Razor. Occam's Razor should not be confused with the idea of Positivism, the theory of economy, which genuinely is lazy science.

CHack: Occam's Razor is the exact reason I am an atheist. To accept most theologies you have to make many assumptions about the universe that cannot ever be substantiated or contradicted by empirical science. I come from a Mormon family, and I've spent many hours attending services. When I was young I read Hawking's Brief History of Time, and it made me realize that it's possible to explain how the universe works without relying on a deity. Suddenly God didn't make any sense to me.
tviyh wrote:Occam’s razor contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics
No. Occam's Razor: "one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything". Read entities as 'logical suppositions'. The second law of thermodynamics is a single rule that arose to explain/replace many previous inaccurate rules. Also the 2nd law isn't a supposition at all; instead it arises directly from the true statement "Particles move". Occam's razor strongly supports thermodynamics.

Here's a neat thing: Delta entropy comes from particles moving, and the arrow of time comes from delta entropy. Implication: as soon as entropy stops increasing time stops. Neat.
User avatar
erik
Churchill
Posts: 2341
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:06 am
Submitting as: 15-16 puzzle
Location: Austin
Contact:

Post by erik »

c hack wrote:It's possible it was aliens, and it's possible it was a Harvard undergrad, but Occam's Razor says it was the gang members who live down the street.
Oh, Occam's Razor says nothing of the sort. Occam's Razor does not mean "Always value the least illogical premise", it says (and I'm copping Puce's translation) "one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything". In the absensce of any hard evidence as to who broke into your car, blaming it on gangbangers is just as ill-supported as blaming it on ivy-leaguers.
User avatar
the Jazz
Attlee
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:49 pm
Location: Northern CA
Contact:

Post by the Jazz »

It's so nice when people try to prove me wrong by basically agreeing with me. Again:
Using the razor as anything more than a way to efficiently direct your theoretical energies is lazy.
What irritates me is when people claim that such and such theory can be defeated or disproven by Occam's Razor.

c hack's example is incredibly ironic, considering this recent bit of local news:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/10/14/harva ... index.html
Puce wrote:When I was young I read Hawking's Brief History of Time, and it made me realize that it's possible to explain how the universe works without relying on a deity. Suddenly God didn't make any sense to me.
Science may explain the way the universe works, but you still need something more to explain why. I am also unsatisfied with theories that explain away the origin puzzle by proposing a cyclical universe that never actually "began", but repeats infinitely; I can never stop asking, "Yes, but how did that start up?" God seems to be one of the simplest possible answers to me.
Let cake eat them.
User avatar
Future Boy
Attlee
Posts: 414
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:55 am
Instruments: Keyboard, Vocals
Recording Method: Apollo Twin, Reaper, Rhodes, Casios
Submitting as: Future Boy
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by Future Boy »

What I keep wondering is why people need an answer to that question. Live in the now, fer chissakes, what does it matter how it began? Or, more mysteriously, the past is in Man's mind.
New Album: Comes Apart | Missed Connections | With Johnny Cashpoint: A Maze of Death | modular synths on Youtube
User avatar
Henrietta
Attlee
Posts: 367
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:45 pm
Instruments: Guitar, Bass, Vox, Kazoo
Recording Method: None
Submitting as: Quimby, Nouveau Pauvre
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Colorado

Post by Henrietta »

Puce wrote:Anyway, back on topic: What's everyone going to do now the GW is 'The Man' (again)? Anyone got any post-election plans/suicides?
Somebody had a post-election suicide plan...
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/11/07/ground ... index.html
Eric Y.
Niemöller
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 12:36 pm

Post by Eric Y. »

the Jazz wrote:"Yes, but how did that start up?"
...you might as well give up, it's turtles ALL THE WAY DOWN!
User avatar
the Jazz
Attlee
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:49 pm
Location: Northern CA
Contact:

Post by the Jazz »

Ha! If I had a quote to throw back at you I would, but it's been a while and I don't remember any.
Let cake eat them.
c hack
Orwell
Posts: 800
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA
Contact:

Post by c hack »

Future Boy wrote:What I keep wondering is why people need an answer to that question. Live in the now, fer chissakes, what does it matter how it began? Or, more mysteriously, the past is in Man's mind.
Let's say you're on a bus going to Chacago. You've never been to Chicago, but you've heard a lot about it. It's a long bus ride, days even, and there's a lot of fun people on the bus with you. There's a lot of stops in Chicago -- there's the ghetto, where you're sure to be mugged, downtown, where there's places to find work, and uptown, where you'll have to do some walking to get back downtown to where you can find work. Now of course you should enjoy the time you have on that bus, and the people you're with, but at the same time, doesn't it make sense to find out which stop is in which part of town? And mightn't it have something to do with why you're on the bus in the first place?
<a href="http://www.c-hack.com">c-hack.com</a> | <a href="http://www.rootrecords.org">rootrecords.org</a>
User avatar
Future Boy
Attlee
Posts: 414
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:55 am
Instruments: Keyboard, Vocals
Recording Method: Apollo Twin, Reaper, Rhodes, Casios
Submitting as: Future Boy
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by Future Boy »

That presupposes that "life" after death can be bad or good, depending on where you get off. However, the concepts of bad and good are born of our intellects, which is to say that if the afterlife is ineffable, which I think we can all agree that it is (someone will disagree, I'm sure), it's simply not possible to qualify it with mundane concepts like bad and good.

It also presupposes that there is an afterlife at all.
New Album: Comes Apart | Missed Connections | With Johnny Cashpoint: A Maze of Death | modular synths on Youtube
User avatar
Adam!
Niemöller
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:10 am
Instruments: Drum 'n' Bass (but not THAT Drum 'n' Bass)
Recording Method: Reaper + Stock Plugins
Submitting as: Max Bombast
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Victoria, BC, AwesomeLand
Contact:

Post by Adam! »

I agree that the past is just a product of the Temporal Lobes. I've never heard a good argument as to why the past exists in any form other than memories. The perception of time's passage is caused by the Hippocampus.
Future Boy wrote:The concepts of bad and good are born of our intellects.
I agree, but there are a lot of people (atheists included) who do not. I'm taking an ethics class currently, and the teacher shot me down (using a fallacious argument) when I said the same thing you just said. Ethical Ontologists believe that good and bad are concepts that are written in the stars or something, in so much that even if no people existed there would still be rules of good and bad. The idea bugs me.
c hack
Orwell
Posts: 800
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA
Contact:

Post by c hack »

Future Boy wrote:That presupposes that "life" after death can be bad or good, depending on where you get off. However, the concepts of bad and good are born of our intellects, which is to say that if the afterlife is ineffable, which I think we can all agree that it is (someone will disagree, I'm sure), it's simply not possible to qualify it with mundane concepts like bad and good.
Maybe I made a bad analogy. I'm not talking about bad or good, but the fact that many of us figure that death is just another journey, rather than an ending. So it makes sense to try and find a map, or guidebook.
Future Boy wrote:It also presupposes that there is an afterlife at all.
That's where conservation of energy comes in. What happens to your consciousness when you die, if there's nowhere for it to go? Everything else in existence, including quantum particles, obeys that law; why shouldn't consciousness?
Puce wrote:Actually, I agree that the past is just a product of the Temporal Lobes. I've never heard a good argument as to why the past exists in any form other than memories. The perception of time's passage is caused by the Hippocampus.
Yeah, there is no past or future, there's only now. Of course, now changes, much of the time predictibly.

Unless, of course, you subscribe to the idea that everything happens at once, and time is just a way for our consciousnesses to deal with it.
<a href="http://www.c-hack.com">c-hack.com</a> | <a href="http://www.rootrecords.org">rootrecords.org</a>
User avatar
Adam!
Niemöller
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:10 am
Instruments: Drum 'n' Bass (but not THAT Drum 'n' Bass)
Recording Method: Reaper + Stock Plugins
Submitting as: Max Bombast
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Victoria, BC, AwesomeLand
Contact:

Post by Adam! »

c hack wrote:That's where conservation of energy comes in. What happens to your consciousness when you die, if there's nowhere for it to go? Everything else in existence, including quantum particles, obeys that law; why shouldn't consciousness?

But your consciousness isn't the product of energy, but instead a pattern of order and information. Information can be destroyed; the entire universe is constantly becoming less ordered (2nd Law of Thermodynamics). Any ordered system that exists forever violates the 2nd law.

I guess that's a bit of a downer, now that I think about it. :(
User avatar
Future Boy
Attlee
Posts: 414
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:55 am
Instruments: Keyboard, Vocals
Recording Method: Apollo Twin, Reaper, Rhodes, Casios
Submitting as: Future Boy
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by Future Boy »

c hack wrote: Maybe I made a bad analogy. I'm not talking about bad or good, but the fact that many of us figure that death is just another journey, rather than an ending. So it makes sense to try and find a map, or guidebook.
Nobody gave me a map or guidebook of my current existence when I was born, why should expect to find one for the "next life" in THIS one, of all places?
c hack wrote: That's where conservation of energy comes in. What happens to your consciousness when you die, if there's nowhere for it to go? Everything else in existence, including quantum particles, obeys that law; why shouldn't consciousness?
What happenes to music when you turn off the stereo or you stop playing your guitar? The music was there, right? You heard it, right? And I'm not talking about the sound waves, I'm talking about <i>the music</i>.

Or, alternatively, what happens to all of the active processes when you turn off your computer?
New Album: Comes Apart | Missed Connections | With Johnny Cashpoint: A Maze of Death | modular synths on Youtube
Post Reply