Is science just a matter of faith?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-04-2011, 12:51 PM (This post was last modified: 13-04-2011 01:39 PM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
(12-04-2011 01:18 PM)Norseman Wrote:  As usual, I feel like I'm reading your post through a dense fog. I can see that there are a lot of words, but it's hard to find a meaning to them. What kind of a community or "system" is it that you are looking for?
A community that is firmly founded in only using people who are free of the stupidity caused by people who reason the presence of gods - isn't that why atheists disapprove of Bush and Palin??? I believe there is a considerable margin of human error that can be eliminated if the people making the political decisions were held to the higher review critique of such an organization of people.

Consider me for instance - obviously, I need not bother forming a presidential exploratory committee, because not only would the Christians reject me because I am an atheist, but the atheists are completely at odds with me - most of whom are like you and do not understand what I am talking about. And that is because atheists hold me to higher standard of reasoning, because they know I do not believe in gods. Where as atheists know to abandon trying to understand the Christians, especially the politicians, because atheists know the Christians are inherently erroneous, because they believe in gods - right?

Don't you think atheists should be better at community then those silly delusional Christians???

(where's that thread about religion described as baby bath water?)

Or, does it all not matter, because the average employed atheists are just as dopey as the Christians, and only the elite atheists who become scientists are of superior thinking, but that can only be relied upon for things other than guiding politics???

And there in sets-up the control and experiment groups of community (science by way of volunteer segregation). The Christians have their communities, but politically the communities are corrupted by atheists. And atheists are not happy with the secular communities corrupted by Christians either, that is why atheists perpetuate a separation of church and state campaign - if atheists could be absolutely sure there was separation then maybe they could relax and move society forward with their advanced critical thinking applied to other things. Which is fine and good, but atheists are not backing-up their ultimate theory with actual community and superior econometrics. You mention, the Scandinavian societies, and are smart to note their Christian constitutions (sounds like you have seen one of my discussions elsewhere) - I am not buying that they are what you are describing them to be if they have not yet developed a more appropriate constitution - doesn't make sense - why leave it with reverence to god if the American Atheists are all up in arms about IGWT???

And don't give me this, "atheism is not a political party," stuff either. The Republicans and Democrats do not organize themselves based on the definition of their designations, although they should for clarity - they would be better off referring to themselves as Reds, and Blues.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2011, 03:36 PM
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
Or blues and ultra-blues as would be a more fitting description seen in an international context. I don't know which discussion you are referring to. I mention the Scandinavian countries because I'm Scandinavian. Norwegian to be precise. I can assure you that we are just as I describe. In room filled with 50 people I can blaspheme and talk down on religion all I want and be sure that no one take offense or contradict me. Mostly because people agree with me, but also because the one or two people present who would call themselves religious would be to uncertain of their faith to risk a confrontation. The way I see it there are 3 main reasons why our constitution has not been changed. The first is quite simple. The Christian population have more political power than their numbers justify. This is because they "all" vote for Christian Democrats. This party got 5,5% of the votes in the 2009 election. Down 1,3% since last election, I'm glad to see. Link to wikipedia article about the election. The second reason is that very few people rally care. The vast majority of the public does not see it as a big enough problem to give a damn. The third reason is closely connected to the second. Those of us who DO care, seem to be outnumbered by those who think Christianity is needed as a form of "antidote" to the growing number of Muslim immigrants and their effect on society. Not because they themselves are Christian, but because they see it as the lesser evil. "the evil you know.." etc.
I know I said three reasons, but there could be said to be a fourth. It has to do with the Norwegian mindset, and it is best given by an example.
I do not have a single churchgoer in my family, neither does my fiancé. It might therefore surprise you to learn that when I announced that no future children of ours would be baptized, this was seen as a small scandal. I see people getting married in churches and baptizing their children all the time. People i KNOW are not the slightest bit religious. Their excuse is always the same. Tradition. We hold on to our traditions for dear life for no good reason what so ever, and that's just the Norwegian way.

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2011, 08:35 AM
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
Quote:I see people getting married in churches and baptizing their children all the time. People i KNOW are not the slightest bit religious. Their excuse is always the same. Tradition.
It's pretty much the same in Finland too. 80-90% of the population is a member of the Lutheran church, but only about half of them believe in God. The rest are ''habit-christians'' and those who just don't give a fudge, and don't care that they pay an extra tax to the church.
The most common reasons to be a member of the church:
Church weddings, funerals, baptizements, the chance of being a godparent, the church helps the third world's poor people, the church is a part of Finnish lifestyle, the values the church represents and the church keeps tradition alive.

The only people who seem to think about religion's truthfullness are the freethinkers, who succesfully make themselfs look like the assholy side, the active, but nice, christians, the 'fundies' (fundies in a different scale than the fundies on the other side of the puddle) and the JW's and the Lestadiolans (the only real fundies).

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2011, 11:09 AM
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
(14-04-2011 08:35 AM)Kikko Wrote:  the Lestadiolans

The whut?

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2011, 11:39 AM
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
(14-04-2011 11:09 AM)Norseman Wrote:  
(14-04-2011 08:35 AM)Kikko Wrote:  the Lestadiolans

The whut?

It's this weird sect that doesn't allow you to watch telly, listen to non-gospel music, go watch a theater play, use contraception and other weird stuff. Just a few days ago the magazines told about child molesters in the sect, apparently they're doing the Catholic church's job in Finland.Dodgy
_________________________
Sorry, I got the name wrong. Apparently it's ''Laestadian'' in Inglish (checked wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laestadianism]).

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2011, 12:20 PM
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
Interesting. Seems like they started out as quite calm people, quickly turning into another "thou shalt not" sect. Is it just my impression or is this a very common memetic mutation?

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2011, 08:03 AM
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
(14-04-2011 12:20 PM)Norseman Wrote:  Interesting. Seems like they started out as quite calm people, quickly turning into another "thou shalt not" sect. Is it just my impression or is this a very common memetic mutation?

If I've understood right, memes replicate through mimicing, so I think it's more likely that someone(s) in the sect mimiced the ''thou shalt not'' meme and spread it to the whole sect. Or maybe someone from the sect read the bible and got it from there.Angel

Btw, thou also shaltn't use make up.
Btw2, is there any great book that would sort of summarize the pros and (the possible) cons of looking at culture from the point of view of replicating memes? Or a book like ''The Selfish Meme''.Smile

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2011, 09:23 AM (This post was last modified: 15-04-2011 09:31 AM by TrainWreck.)
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
(13-04-2011 03:36 PM)Norseman Wrote:  Or blues and ultra-blues as would be a more fitting description seen in an international context. I don't know which discussion you are referring to. I mention the Scandinavian countries because I'm Scandinavian. Norwegian to be precise. I can assure you that we are just as I describe. In room filled with 50 people I can blaspheme and talk down on religion all I want and be sure that no one take offense or contradict me. Mostly because people agree with me, but also because the one or two people present who would call themselves religious would be to uncertain of their faith to risk a confrontation.
How often are you in such a setting, and how often is it about religion? It seems like it would get boring. How often do you talk down religion in more personal groupings? I think you are exaggerating the culture to fit your argument.

(13-04-2011 03:36 PM)Norseman Wrote:  The way I see it there are 3 main reasons why our constitution has not been changed. The first is quite simple. The Christian population have more political power than their numbers justify. This is because they "all" vote for Christian Democrats. This party got 5,5% of the votes in the 2009 election. Down 1,3% since last election, I'm glad to see. Link to wikipedia article about the election.
The Christians control the political system - its a scandal, and everybody knows it is and they do not fight it.

(13-04-2011 03:36 PM)Norseman Wrote:  The second reason is that very few people really care. The vast majority of the public does not see it as a big enough problem to give a damn.
That's right - nobody is being persecuted, like in some Muslim countries.

(13-04-2011 03:36 PM)Norseman Wrote:  The third reason is closely connected to the second. Those of us who DO care, seem to be outnumbered by those who think Christianity is needed as a form of "antidote" to the growing number of Muslim immigrants and their effect on society. Not because they themselves are Christian, but because they see it as the lesser evil. "the evil you know.." etc.
So the Christians do very well at controlling the community compared to the toleration issue that the atheist doctrine would not be able to handle as well.

(13-04-2011 03:36 PM)Norseman Wrote:  I know I said three reasons, but there could be said to be a fourth. It has to do with the Norwegian mindset, and it is best given by an example. . . Their excuse is always the same. Tradition. We hold on to our traditions for dear life for no good reason what so ever, and that's just the Norwegian way.
Sounds like dogma, or memes - right?

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2011, 11:30 AM
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
(15-04-2011 08:03 AM)Kikko Wrote:  Btw2, is there any great book that would sort of summarize the pros and (the possible) cons of looking at culture from the point of view of replicating memes? Or a book like ''The Selfish Meme''.Smile

Not that I know of. That would have to be The Selfish Gene. I think I remember you mentioning that you have read it, so you know what I'm talking about. I think memetics is a good theory in one way, and not so good in another way. I think it's great at explaining what it is meant to explain and I can't seem to find any flaw with it myself. On the other hand good theories are supposed to make predictions and I can't see what predictions it makes other than "things will change". Undecided

I want to rip off your superstitions and make passionate sense to you
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2011, 12:12 PM
RE: Is science just a matter of faith?
"Btw2, is there any great book that would sort of summarize the pros and (the possible) cons of looking at culture from the point of view of replicating?"

There is, I am reading it right now. Susan Blackmore : The Meme Machine You might as well call it 'the selfish meme' .
Great book if you are interested in memetics. (how's not? Big Grin )

..."we can be truly free - not because we can rebel against the the tyranny of the selfish replicators but because we know that there is no one to rebel."
Susan Blackmore : The Meme Machine
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: