Enough of the cryptic, Imaz. If I want to listen to half-baked crackpot waffle I'll tune into David Icke.....................or Oddball
BrixtonR wouldn't have let this run thus far. Oh, the irony. Swords and Stroller, I only begged the question. It wasn't an ultimatum. I'm relying on you all to self moderate yourselves on this stuff. This is beyond the realms of QPR fans dealing with QPR issues. That we can handle adequately. Politics and religion is not something we signed up to deal with. You are on your own here. It seems that you all love it, hence it's allowed. You'll have to deal with any consequences should they occur.
I actually think that Science and Religion are, in fact, getting closer to each other. More and more people with a religious faith appear to say that they realise that books like the Bible etc are a guide to how to live your life: Be kind to one and other; live life in an honest way etc etc. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that and is very laudable. I believe that life can be lived in this way by being moral and is perfectly possible without religion, but I digress. Certainly Religion is a very big support system for many people, although it was created to control the masses, it does help a lot of people through very difficult times. Clearly it is the extremists on all sides who are the problem! The reason I believe that Religion and Science are getting closer to each other is this. The more science reveals about our Universe the more it seems to point to something creating our Universe. I don't, for a single second believe that this was done by a Religious God, but I do rather suspect that "some kind of intelligence" kicked the whole thing off. I watched Stephen Hawkings try to explain how something could be "created" from absolutely nothing, but he didn't really manage to explain it (although I admit that an awful lot of it went right over my head!). I don't accept that the Universe could have started "from nothing" so the only alternative for me is that there was some intelligence behind it. There are many alternatives to this, for instance, we could be one of many Universes that are in some way "side by side" and that when people think they have seen a ghost, it is in fact, these other Universes somehow getting intertwined. Another possibility is that this Universe was created by an advanced human race from a previous Universe who, having developed "thinking, feeling" computers (we are getting closer to this right now!) have "created" our universe as a kind of computer generated matrix. This would mean that we are all actually just simulated. Or we could all just be a giant experiment in a scientist's Petri dish. The "big bang" could have been the end of one Universe and the start of this one. Whatever the actual cause of our existence and unfortunately I don't think we'll ever know what this was, or at least not for many thousands of years, it could be that Religion and Science are both right, in that "something" created us. What drives me mad is that even if we discover how we were "created", we then need to ask how that "creator" was made.
Keep this going, it's a good read. Some really interesting views IMO, and lets face it whilst there are still nutters out there who are convinced their interpretation of a 2000+ or 1400 odd year old fairly tale, from the brothers very Grimm entitles them to do horrible **** because something as simple as a drawing might hurt the feelings of their imaginary friend, it won't be all that long till the next terrorist attack. People feel free to believe whatever insane **** you want!!! Just don't oppress or preach to others who don't buy what you have been TOLD is your ideals!
The thing is, I rather like the thought of a Christian God with something of a laissez-faire approach to his worship, but keeping some sort of personal balance sheet on you for the final reckoning. If we really all knew that to be so, perhaps we'd all live happier, better, more considerate lives. Instead we live in a world where there's no accountability other than to your fellow man. That in itself ought to be sufficient, I know, but what if your fellow man is a particularly unpleasant sort of fellow? I'd much prefer to be held to account by a higher being that has laid down a set of clear rules, than to be held to account by a myriad of fellow men with their own individual agendas. Alas, this all seems very unlikely, and those that have discovered the truth, first-hand as it were, have found it pretty challenging to come back and share it with the rest of us.
I too like the idea of a God. I think it would be wonderful if it were true. I just can't accept that a religious God exists and usually, when I get into a debate with someone who has faith, the whole thing falls apart as soon as they start quoting the Bible or any other holy book as some kind of informative proof.
Alright Imaz, lets cut the bullsh*t. Sometimes I read your comments like earlier in this thread and I think "this guy's talking some sense. He's against imperialism and State bullying/terrorism". Then I read on and I realise its too good to be true and you're as fanatical as the western "Tally ho" colonial gang. You're actually hell bent on your own form of imperialism which takes the shape of the most bizarre - indeed, grotesque - coming together in the history of post-war Europe. A cross between far left, liberal, PC apologism and a far right, repressive, misogynistic, fascist ideology in Islam. How you mange to reconcile the two is a gift only fruitcakes like you can accomplish. Make no mistake Imaz, the British people despite their State's past mistakes in many arenas, must take every measure to make sure your type never take hold in their Country because if they do, god help the civilised World. Islamofascism must be put to death ASAP
No bites Swords? I you keep throwing your rod in, you're bound to catch something eventually. (that may or may not be a fishing analogy)
Reference to Ninses' post, I think. That's the beauty of this stuff, none of it's 'real', like a tree or a river, it's all speculation. Have to say that I think religion has nothing in common with proper science though. Religion is entirely based on faith in something that is not provable - otherwise it has no value, because it doesn't involve faith. You have to believe in something literally unbelievable and without evidence for it to be worthwhile. The genuinely faithful would, I think, agree with me on this. Science is the opposite - a process of learning based on evidence, iterative, taking time, involving mistakes. Religion emerged as a way to answer questions which were unanswerable at the time - how do things grow, why does lightening happen etc etc - and evolved (quickly) into a means of social control and harnessing collective effort - I don't know these blokes, but we believe in the same God so I'll work with them to build this cathedral (or road), or trade with them. Other human fictions - things which don't really exist, but do in our collective imagination - include nations and limited liability companies. And credit. And for that matter freedom of speech. It's powerful stuff, the collective imagination, and of course these fictional things have a massive impact on the real world. And its all about us being able to identify and cooperate with people we don't actually know. [this is stolen from Yuval Harari's 'Sapiens" a very readable book, the first few chapters of which, on the cognitive revolution, are brilliant. Goes off the rails a bit later on though] The trouble for religion, particularly nasty monotheistic religions based on self contradictory books from the Middle East, is that science has eaten away a lot of it's original reason to exist. Science can get it wrong, it's a process of trial and error, and hasn't answered all of the questions. Perhaps it never will, or perhaps our brains simply aren't big enough to understand the answers. Mine isn't, I was asked to stop studying physics at age 13, for being a disruptive influence. As for petri dishes, computer simulations etc - just as valid as any creation myth, but you don't actually change the way you live because of those possibilities, do you? So it's idle curiosity really. I gave up on that type of curiosity (not that there is anything wrong with it) a long time ago. I like uncertainty in some things, and doubt that I'll be around when we have a credible (or understandable to me) answer to 'creation' etc. And will it make any difference to the way I live anyway....probably not. And a scientific answer to creation should make no difference to the faithful anyway. Unlike you and Uber though the idea of a God existing makes me nauseous. If we agree the simple defintion of a God (in the monotheistic sense - the Greek and Roman Gods were much more like us - violent, jealous, fallible and multiple in number) would include all powerful, all seeing, interested in us and 'good', what the **** has it been playing at looking at the state we have got ourselves in, since the beginning of recorded time? Anyway Uber, you want a judge, not a God. I'll volunteer, if Judge Lionel Nutmeg and his wheel of justice are unavailable. Read somewhere recently (not sure where, the brain is going) that 44% of Britons believe in at least two of the five core aspects of religion - God, Heaven, Hell, miracles and sin. Make of that what you will. (May have misremembered the figures, but roughly accurate). This is way too long for anyone to be arsed to read, but I quite enjoyed writing it.
Interesting stuff mate. I have to admit that I can't just accept that we don't have the answers and I ache to know if I'm honest. I think mankind in general tends to strive for the unknown, whether it is setting sail across a sea that you fear you may fall off the edge of or sitting in a giant rocket full of fuel to blast off into space. We always want to "know". I agree that, although I find the idea of a Religious God romantic it simply could never be true for all the reasons you state (probably!!). Thing is, there is so much about ourselves and the universe that we simply don't know or understand, it really is a case of almost anything is possible (Petri dish and all). I think that probably makes me agnostic, all be it at the atheist end of that scale.....maybe?
It's a good post Stan. In the same way I don't share your outrage at the very existence of religion - I gave up trying to disprove God when I realised people need their religion (unless they try to convert me then they get both barrels). I also can't take the use of some insipid but partially powerful being filling an unanswered void - it defies the point that Science has progressed to the point of huge complexity and yet is creative in terms of trying to explain it by the use of mathematics (hence the additions of dimensions because they form a neater solution). To go through all this to find a sentient being that chooses indifference and anonymity seems more absurd than universes vibrating on superstrings. My faith is science and the ideas that remain unanswerable in my lifetime. I believe that everything could be predicted (including spontaneous human response) given a full understanding of the rules and starting conditions of the universe (albeit incalculable as it would be). I believe that the Universe can't be unique (whether others exist simultaneously or as seems increasingly unlikely, a series of Big Bounces or maybe something different) because we, as humans, aren't so special. My faith is in a progression that leads to truth (via many cul-de-sacs) whereas theistic belief directly hinders progress (or wastes resources trying to prove their own truths via the futile religious sciences). It's faith because I'll never see it's fulfilment but it's rational at least.
Dieu et mon droit*, eh Stan? Yeah, I'd like that. I'd like the impossible idea of a laissez-faire God who then looks at your balanced scorecard at the final reckoning. If you fail, you go to a lake of fire and fry (can't see 'em again 'til the Fourth of July). If you pass, then it's wall to wall pussy and Wispa Golds. •it was troubling me ever since I typed it and it doesn't mean anything like this ignorant prat (me) thought.
Wispa Golds! Heretic! Splitter! The book promises creme eggs or the pit! PS read the last (I think) chapter of Julian Barnes "A History of the World in 10 and a half chapters". It's about a man who gets everything he wants in heaven (a Leicester City fan at that). Very funny. The whole book is very good actually. I'm increasingly convinced Tony Fernandes is Suleiman Usman's reincarnation from Flashman's Lady.
