• Does just war exist？
    War is just. The modern technology-based means are unjust.
  • Mad Fool Turing Test
    ↪noAxioms


    Well... I think we can act and think AI-like but an AI can't act human-like. Unless you consider us AI robots initiated by gods.
  • James Webb Telescope
    Better than our most optimistic prediction” – first images from James Webb exceed all expectations
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    So, you don't worship god(s). It sounds to me then that YOUR god(s) are AT BEST, 'background decoration,' in your life and not as significant as your more emotive postings would suggest. — universeness

    It's quite the opposite. Science is a mere decoration. The explaining power of the sciences (insofar they have one) wrt the meaning of life (many physicists would say we're just here because of a quantum quirk or quack at the dawn of time or some fictional breaking of a gauge theory in a false vacuum) or the things we do (Dawkins gospeling the truth of organisms being machines to replicate genes or, in the case of people, memes), is non-satisfactory. The existence of gods fills life with a meaning that is non-explicable. The gods are just there eternally. How they came to be is a complete mystery. They just are. But contrary to a universe just existing and made up out of dead matter, as science teaches, life being (just?) an emergent phenomenon, it gives existence and our playing a magic load. Explaining things science cant. Gods can even be useful for physics and cosmology. Eternal inflation, for example, is an absurd idea. Like MWI and the standard interpretation in QM.
  • Omnipotence (Dictator/God)
    But in philosophy the default is it stands for someone with those three properties - omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence. — Bartricks

    No. That's what one philosopher in particular made of it. Xenophanes turned the gods into one monster super being, leading to the kind of problems you are so eager to indulge in. And no one can argue you wrong. What a likeable position! Enjoy it!
  • Omnipotence (Dictator/God)
    God is morally good by definition. A morally good person is not a dictator. — Bartricks

    My dear Bartricks, that depends on one's definition entirely.
  • What is mysticism?
    7] Mysticism is popularly known as becoming one with God or the Absolute, but may refer to any kind of ecstasy or altered state of consciousness which is given a religious or spiritual meaning. It may also refer to the attainment of insight in ultimate or hidden truths, and to human transformation supported by various practices and experiences.

    [8] The belief that there is hidden meaning in life or that each human being can unite with God

    [9] The pursuit or achievement of personal communion with or joining with God (or some other form of the divine or ultimate truth).     — T Clark

    Becoming one with gods or an absolute truth seems impossible. Gods are involved though. Mainly the mystery of their existence is healthy mystic fodder.

    6] A theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive acquisition of ineffable knowledge or power — T Clark

    That's a theory. Not mysticism.

    ↪T Clark
    Belief that union with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or the spiritual apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect, may be attained through contemplation and self-surrender. — T Clark

    I dont think so. There is no union involved. At most an intuitive mirror-neuron-like identification with the magic divine essence. Contemplation and meditation are helpful in attaining identification. Self-surrender? Hmmmm...


    The experience of mystical union or direct communion with ultimate reality

    [4] The belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate reality can be attained through subjective experience (such as intuition or insight)     — T Clark

    Comes close.

    Belief characterized by self-delusion or dreamy confusion of thought, especially when based on the assumption of occult qualities or mysterious agencies. — T Clark

    This is an evaluation, not a definition. Likewise: "Vague speculation : a belief without sound basis"
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Somehow, the atheistic worshipper - servant, if you like - only of that sublimely monstrous, self-devouring, deaf dumb & blind god, i.e, "Nature", is a carbon copy of the apocalyptic worshipper of the omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent monster god appearing in the monotheist world religions.
  • If One Person can do it...
    The thing with gods: they render every scientific explanation of the cosmos, the reason of life, or the explanation of consciousness, non-valid or irrelevant at least. The theology of the gods can be called upon even in the construction of cosmological models, the fundamental structure of matter and space, the explanation of consciousness, the theory of evolution, or the interpretation of quantum mechanics or QFT.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    I previously asked you about your relationship with YOUR god(s) as did I like sushi. At last, you have now offered a little more insight. So, you don't worship god(s). It sounds to me then that YOUR god(s) are AT BEST, 'background decoration,' in your life and not as significant as your more emotive postings would suggest. As I said, you are a mischievous provocateur, in my opinion, and an unconvincing theist. You just get a buzz out of 'annoying' atheists. But most atheists are well-practiced at dealing with such. Individuals like Matt Dillahunty would quickly chew you up, in my opinion. — universeness

    Hadnt seen this one yet! I go into it later! The dog looks at me again with waggling tale. I know what time it is!
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Technology gave us the light bulb and the internet and morphine etc and also the gun and the bullet etc but as I have said and you have not directly responded to, Nuclear bombs don't kill people, people kill people. — universeness

    Of course. Christianity doesn't kill people either. People kill people. You can't separate both though. Science and Christianity dont exist in a vacuum. They're part of human thinking and activity.

    If you want to insist that science can cause as many problems for human as religions can then I really have few problems with that insistence — universeness

    I think it causes problems as well as good things. But the balance is totally unbalanced, so to speak.

    Perhaps we can agree that both require far more rigorous checks and balances than exist at present. I agree, but, technology will take this species beyond this planet which will give us much better protection against extinction, nothing in theism offers that unless you think god(s) will eventually give us good spaceships. — universeness

    Not sure what you mean by "far more rigorous checks and balances than exist at present".
    The spaceship argument is...well...ridiculous. or should I say ludicrous. My native tongue aint English (wished Glasgowian were!). No offense! I know you are serious about that stuff.

    Could be another story for your writing hand. You know enough about the physics involved so you could give Torus guy the powers he needs to control his Universe, just like the old human storytellers did for all the gods they invented! :wink: — universeness

    Could be a new title on the list! "TG and the dark solution"

    As usual, the pleasure was mine uni! :wink:
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    5D torus guy — universeness

    Torus Guy! Is that a Marvel character yet? Stan Lee would have been jealous! "Said nuff!".

    Due to its historical use by nefarious humans to facilitate small elites to control large populations. Its power has been reduced since but remains still very very powerful and it still presents clear and present danger to the progression and survival of the human species. — universeness

    Doesn't science have the same feature? The difference though that its power has grown exponentially...
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    No, these are your concerns EugeneW, not any god( — universeness

    I think these are the worries of the gods. That's why they attempt to communicate.


    What about the ones we didn't make extinct? 99.9% of all species that there have ever been on Planet Earth have gone extinct. The number of species that human activity has made extinct is depressing but it is small in comparison. We didn't make the dinos extinct? Are you suggesting the dinos have heavenly counterparts? — universeness

    That's a good question! The dino-gods lay back in rest maybe. Realizing they have played their part.

    BTW, you show (,luckily!) a lot of interest in theism/gods/God. Why?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    ↪universeness


    Write what you want, from 'a pissed off at science' perspective or not. You are a free man. I fully support you in this. — universeness

    Again: You're my man Earthling! I guess we're not that different after all! Both looking for meaning. You find it in science, I think it doesn't provide meaning at all. But we're both seekers! :smile:
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    So how else will we be able to leave this planetary nest EugeneW? should we wait for god instructions on how to extend humanity beyond our little pale blue dot. Should we just stay here forever and just control our population better? Why did your god(s) create such a vast space? are we not allowed to explore it? — universeness

    I have no intentions leaving the planet, universeness. The colonialization of the Milky Way is another myth cooked up in the fantasy blender of science. Nice to write about but to actually undertake is something completely different!

    The gods created that much space for making possible a csrbon copy for all heavenly creatures, god-kind. They don't forbid anything. They are just worried that we fuck up nature and kill species, even make them extinct. Because all the creatures we made extinct, have a counterpart in heaven. You could say, then why dont these continue their life in heaven. Indeed! I havent an answer yet.

    Page 32! And counting!
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Ok EugeneW, I have to accept your word — universeness

    Im serious! I wanted to write it but then thought you would say me writing it is actually a sign I am pissed off... Well, maybe I am, but then only at a personal level.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Make up your mind, do you welcome the technologies produced from science or not. — universeness

    I value a very limited part of the fruits hanging in the trees of science. Why is science named in one breath with technology. I really don't get the awe for technology. Just saw a commercial on TV (a flat one!) asking for employees in technology sector... "We create the future, you work along with us?" A scala of tech was shown. Tech. The future. ?????
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Your hypothesis has not moved past the posit stage yet.
    I hope the fact you are pissed off at the current cosmology and physics worlds has not influenced your wink towards theism.     — universeness

    I knew you would bring this up. No its not because Im pissed that my cosmology isnt accepted or understood. It's just that its importance is way overestimated.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    I disapprove — universeness

    But it happens. Not in the name of god but in the name of science, the magic words which, when uttered, legitimize.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    If I am wrong then I am sure some god will permit his 'essence' to comlink with me in one of my dreams to correct me — universeness

    :lol:

    I don't think so. Why should they do that?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Back to the cave for you then, to cower in the corner at all the scary noises outside.
    I won't be joining you.     — universeness

    It will be dark then in our cozy cave! I would miss your cuddling. Why should we go back to the caves? It's only that science should be separated from state. It's the same unholy pairing up as God and state once formed. The bible replaced by the science books. A one and only objective reality. Now every creature has its own objective reality, but should one be given privilege to others, which is clearly the case in society?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Would you prefer it if the Nazis had produced the Abomb first? — universeness

    Without science no A-bomb.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    No, I said that, I think, one of the techniques you employ on a discussion website like this, is to ask 'but why why why? — universeness

    That's the scientist speaking in me! If I knew I wouldn't ask. You presuming me to use that tactic is just a tactic. It's he "fallacy of the vacuous premise to obfuscate and sew confusion to evade the question". A red herring, in ordinary colloquium.
  • Philosopher = Strange Identity
    Wait a minute! What if some audacious philosopher, knowing ultimate laws of everything must paradoxically fail, intentionally sets about attacking the quest for a theory of everything, being fatally curious about the nuggets that shower forth from this Hadron Super-Collider of a theory? — ucarr

    Why must ultimate laws fail?





    Herein, my word choice of "attack" is unfortunate. In this context, "attack" means "line of attack," or "approach to the solving of a problem," not "attack" as in "find fault with," or "criticize."     — ucarr

    So he tries to solve the problem of finding a unified theory how? When I criticize the standard model of unification, the unifying principle, in particle physics, and by that same criticizing, a new unifying principle comes along, should I criticize that also?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    It you keep stretching the elastic of your rebuttals EugeneW, they will snap! — universeness

    Einstein said: "der Herr Gott würfelt nicht"... How clear can it be?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    and you lay this confidently at the door of science? — universeness

    And again... you lay the Christian monstrosities at the door of Christians? Then I have more right to do so. Oppenheimer was involved in the making of the A-bomb. And what to think of Teller, proudly presenting his thermonuclear toy? Oppenheimer thought he had become dead, but after the fact. What about them scientists torturing animals to know how the brain works and even get paid or prizes? And what's so important about finding a small fucking particle at CERN. I can tell them right now without having done one experiment.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    No its pantheist — universeness

    Pantheist is theist also.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Then copy the quote you are referring to, I don't recall typing that or the context you present. — universeness

    I mean, you said I asked a question I have an answer to.

    If you think I worship gods, absolutely no. But they add an unexplainable element to a world where science claims that everything is answerable. Well, it cant explain where the universe came from, but it says we just wanna procreate genes or memes. Life becomes meaningless then.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Albert Einstein's religious views have been widely studied and often misunderstood. Albert Einstein stated that he believed in the pantheistic God of Baruch Spinoza. — universeness

    Aint that theist?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    What?? have you read my previous comments on this issue at all? — universeness


    I know I know... Just returning the fear-inspired image of gods you paint. Why should one believe outa fear?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    should effectively 'mind my own business.' — universeness

    He/she's right uni! You should effectively mind your own business! :lol:
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    What?? — universeness

    And that, Stephen my man, is what theists can say as well. I just saw a plane crashed. 135 people killed. In hospitals thousands of people die unnecessary each year. Thousands of maimed bodies by a lefthanded medicine that should be righthanded, Bridges collapse, cars crash, spacecrafts explode, buildings crumble down, animals tortured in the name of, atomic bombs exploded, cancer, zyclon B, technological warfare, Tjernobyl, disappearance of indigenous cultures, depression, global warming, species extinct, natural order fucked up,... should I continue?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    What's your personal opinion got to do with science's projected ability to extend human lifespan? — universeness

    You said that I know why people wanna prolong their life artificially. I dont, so I asked why. Are you afraid there is nothing after this life? Is your certainty the reason?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    As is yours — universeness

    That's my hat!
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    Agree! and each also has its associated measure of fact against fiction. — universeness

    Agree! That's why you dont believe in gods. Your measure is one amongst many though.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    there is no upper limit to the amount of memory capacity — universeness

    There is.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    ↪universeness


    The number of particles in the universe, 10exp90, is by way not enough to even approximate brain memory capacity. Can you use more particles than in the universe for a computer memory?
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    I am going to use an old politician's response to your employment of repetition EugeneW — universeness


    The point is, it's childish to come up with complaints about whatever religion. Every way of life, way of thinking and being, has its pros and cons.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    I think we all have faith regardless of what we say. But that doesn't mean everything in life will turn out okay. We need to ward off the forces of 'evil' for one thing. Atheism is one of those. — Gregory A

    Well, if people don't believe in god, who am I to tell them they should? I don't understand it but its up to them. And to be fair, no one really knows. Im convinced gods exist, for atheists also. But that's my objective reality.
  • The Invalidity of Atheism
    ↪universeness


    There are no doubt other species in the universe. But they are no gods.
Home » EugeneW