|
Cognitive_Shift
CS actual




Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 29,591
|
Re: do you believe science? [Re: RennHuhn]
#21767221 - 06/05/15 07:12 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
So the atomic bomb was made by hope and chance? You don't have an a bomb with out science.
-------------------- L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
LunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story


Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said: So the atomic bomb was made by hope and chance? You don't have an a bomb with out science.
True, but it took some real a holes to unleash that monster. And don't tell me how great nuclear is for power, it isn't.
-------------------- Anxiety is what you make it.
|
Cognitive_Shift
CS actual




Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 29,591
|
|
I don't feel strongly about atomic science one way or the other. I'm just curious how you apply that to your own theory.
-------------------- L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
LunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story


Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said: I don't feel strongly about atomic science one way or the other. I'm just curious how you apply that to your own theory.
Unlike some, I don't worship those that create weapons regardless of the "science" involved. The above ground nuclear bomb testing of the 50s is a good example of science "in action" poisoning people with radioactive fallout. Now we have a weapon that threatens our very existence on this planet, and a fearless leader who appears stupid enough to provoke the other major superpowers.
-------------------- Anxiety is what you make it.
|
i like cow poo
Nature Lover


Registered: 10/20/09
Posts: 4,041
Loc: Mother Nature's Vagina
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
|
Bombhrt
|
Cognitive_Shift
CS actual




Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 29,591
|
|
"Worship weapons" What are you talking about? So believing the scientific method is the best thing we have so far = weapon warship?
I'm curious how you came to this conclusion, assuming you think logically?
What about biological poisons also viruses and bacteria killing untold millions?
-------------------- L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
Edited by Cognitive_Shift (06/05/15 09:47 PM)
|
Rahz
Alive Again



Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,230
|
|
It's possible to have a kind of faith in science that is irrational. In a practical sense science doesn't deal in absolutes. The excitement of science is in what it may portend but nowhere in there does it become a substitute for a faith crutch or offer any guarantees on what the future holds. Science is a method of inquiry. It does provide results but not always the results we are hoping for.
-------------------- rahz comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace "You’re not looking close enough if you can only see yourself in people who look like you." —Ayishat Akanbi
|
Cognitive_Shift
CS actual




Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 29,591
|
Re: do you believe science? [Re: Rahz]
#21768453 - 06/06/15 12:45 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Science is science. It's simply the best method we've got for understanding things. It's not a metatheory. To compare it to religion or faith is apples and oranges.
-------------------- L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
circastes
Big Questions Small Head



Registered: 01/14/10
Posts: 8,781
Loc: straya
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
|
|
The problem with finding proof of God is that it's down to individual experience, that's the sphere where understanding takes place, and it's the one place science completely discounts. If God is in the mind how will science ever find proof of it? It's down to you, and what you understand. No one can investigate your present apprehension of immediate experience but you.
The ruling class don't want you to know about this space, because there you rule over everything and they no longer exist.
Scientific knowledge is a team effort. Understanding reality is not. Understanding is down to you and you best be trusting yourself now, ya hear.
-------------------- My solitude... My shield... My armour... TESTED WITH FULL FORCE
Edited by circastes (06/06/15 03:57 AM)
|
mustangbob3
Mad Myrmecologist



Registered: 10/15/14
Posts: 1,685
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said: You would have to define strongly suggested, and no I wouldn't because something unprovable can never be suggested one way or the other, it's just unknowable. I lean towards no god, I mean all the human religions are 100% bullshit if you have half a brain, at the same time i'm not arrogent enough to claim I know something about reality when my species and myself have only occupied .00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% (probably less then that) of the entire universe.
jainism the oldest religion is pure in its virtues and nobody who looks into it can disagree. its the religion for the masses. seem quite ascetic at first glance but a further look will see lay follows rules are really relaxed and should be tried to observe and respect not have to be followed whole heartedly. more a gradual progression of enbetterment is expected and respect thats all.
hers the stages you should be trying to achieve to go through. really relaxed and funny really
01 Wrong believer 02 One who has a slight taste of right belief 03 Mixed belief 04 True belief but no self-discipline 05 Partial self-control 06 Complete self-discipline with some negligence 07 Complete self-control without negligence 08 Gross occurrence of passions 09 Utilizing meditation to further minimize passions 10 Subtle occurrence of passions 11 Every passion is suppressed but still does not possess omniscience 12 Every passion is annihilated but still does not yet possess omniscience 13 Omniscience (Kevala Jnana) with activity 14 Omniscience without any activity
the rest is more a moral code of conduct between man. oldest and purest religion and a religion for the masses if it had been adopted in modern times.
check this link and you will see how far removed from mainstream religion it is and how it suits the philosophys of most psychedelic substance users.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism
--------------------
|
SeaShrooms
The dude



Registered: 09/13/05
Posts: 1,989
Loc: Hitchhiking
Last seen: 3 years, 10 days
|
|
I find it interesting how both sides of this have made it very clear they can never be wrong.
-------------------- The life of a condemned soul is hatred.
|
crumblebum
The Guy Who's Really Bad At Sex


Registered: 04/24/07
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
MushroomTrip said:
Quote:
SeaShrooms said: Would you believe in anything with enough evidence? If it was strongly suggested God was real (not saying that's the case), would you even consider it?
If there was evidence I would believe he exists, but I wouldn't worship the little asshole 
Same.
--------------------
|
LunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story


Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said: "Worship weapons" What are you talking about? So believing the scientific method is the best thing we have so far = weapon warship?
I'm curious how you came to this conclusion, assuming you think logically?
What about biological poisons also viruses and bacteria killing untold millions?
I wouldn't even know how to respond to your drivel.
-------------------- Anxiety is what you make it.
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder



Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 3 days
|
|
Quote:
Hippocampus said: nah man, you're not that small compared to the universe. Unless you're using some larger size for the universe than what we can observe. if the universe is a sphere with a radius of 9.5e15 m, then the volume is around 3.5e48m3. And if your volume is around .0664m3 then your ratio is going to be somewhere around 1.75e-50 of the entire volume of the observable universe. So that's like what you wrote but with only about 47 zeros in front.
This is very interesting mathematically. But the assumption of 'size' is of course based upon defining oneself as a physical object bounded by skin, embedded in and comprised of the same space-time continuum as the rest of the expanding universe. There is also the ontological definition of a human being as 'being' as well as 'human.' Most people never tease the linguistic expression 'human being' into its existential and ontological components, as say, Buddhism does. Only in the existential and 'common-sensical' definition can quantification even be considered. Otherwise, 'being' is co-extensive with whatever is fundamentally, Ultimately Real. That would be the Metaphysical Mystery which Originated the universe.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder



Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 3 days
|
|
Quote:
MushroomTrip said:
Quote:
SeaShrooms said: Would you believe in anything with enough evidence? If it was strongly suggested God was real (not saying that's the case), would you even consider it?
If there was evidence I would believe he exists, but I wouldn't worship the little asshole 
If the linguistic convention 'God' is equated with 'THAT which is Ultimately Real,' there can be no denying that 'God is Real' because logically then, 'God = Ultimate Reality.' Whatever is ontologically prior to physics (nature) is called 'metaphysical.' One does not direct an emotional response towards the incomprehensible, metaphysical Reality. There are no known attributes to be the focus of human contempt. Only to a human anthropomorphized mental construct, an idol based on a middle eastern despot, can an emotional response make any sense, especially if 'belief' in such an idol is the immediate cause of all manner of atrocities perpetrated in its name.
It is understandable to object to a tribal deity like YHVH in the Tenach (Old Testament) for being a genocidal tyrant, oppressor of womankind, and general demiurgic monster. BUT, it is difficult to express the same emotions towards the Tao as expressed in Chinese Taoism, which also admits of a transcendental principle that orders primal chaos into an intelligible and intelligent universe. Both the tribal deity and the Tao are mental constructs, but the latter is an open-ended construct into which the human mind can expand to the point of identity.
One can only marvel at the symmetry formed of random iron filings on a sheet of paper, placed over a common magnet. The "evidence" of intelligence is this conversation, and intelligence is not an epiphenomenon of molecular biology so much as a signal 'received' by us "carbon units" from the 'carrier wave' of Ultimate Reality in which Ideas are encoded. If you strike a piece of iron with a hammer, the iron becomes magnetized. Is the magnetism produced by the iron? Our consciousness may well be droplets, momentarily cast off from the Ocean, alienated in our free-fall of life, only to reunite with it again in the end.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
BeyondScience


Registered: 03/26/15
Posts: 86
Last seen: 4 years, 3 months
|
|
I wish i had some of the photographs, because His latest creations are amazing- things like Frylock (aqua teen hunger force), Towlie (southpark), and gorgeous looking people and technology. Its art come to life. I've actually been to Rhea on a rocket ship; Rhea is a moon of Saturn.
So, what mankind ultimately needed was to understand the laws of physics, and his own limitations, which amount to the inability to create intelligent life the way evolution has done so with him. God currently walks the Earth, and is drawing art and having it come to life, and be useful and enlightening.
|
Hippocampus



Registered: 04/01/15
Posts: 753
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
|
Quote:
MarkostheGnostic said:
Quote:
Hippocampus said: nah man, you're not that small compared to the universe. Unless you're using some larger size for the universe than what we can observe. if the universe is a sphere with a radius of 9.5e15 m, then the volume is around 3.5e48m3. And if your volume is around .0664m3 then your ratio is going to be somewhere around 1.75e-50 of the entire volume of the observable universe. So that's like what you wrote but with only about 47 zeros in front.
This is very interesting mathematically. But the assumption of 'size' is of course based upon defining oneself as a physical object bounded by skin, embedded in and comprised of the same space-time continuum as the rest of the expanding universe. There is also the ontological definition of a human being as 'being' as well as 'human.' Most people never tease the linguistic expression 'human being' into its existential and ontological components, as say, Buddhism does. Only in the existential and 'common-sensical' definition can quantification even be considered. Otherwise, 'being' is co-extensive with whatever is fundamentally, Ultimately Real. That would be the Metaphysical Mystery which Originated the universe.
I agree that it's completely unreliable to figure out a person's ratio to the universe. But I'm coming from more of a physicalist atheist philosophy. I just think the observable universe and the true universe could be completely different sizes. It's not a very good assumption that as far as we can see is the only universe that exists. If the universe is expanding, then what is it expanding into? And what about inflation from the early universe? We have yet to catch up to that expansion. I was just having a little fun doing a little light-hearted math exercise.
|
Cognitive_Shift
CS actual




Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 29,591
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said: "Worship weapons" What are you talking about? So believing the scientific method is the best thing we have so far = weapon warship?
I'm curious how you came to this conclusion, assuming you think logically?
What about biological poisons also viruses and bacteria killing untold millions?
I wouldn't even know how to respond to your drivel.
That drivel is your logic. Thank you for finally seeing how nonsensical it is.
-------------------- L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
LunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story


Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said:
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said: "Worship weapons" What are you talking about? So believing the scientific method is the best thing we have so far = weapon warship?
I'm curious how you came to this conclusion, assuming you think logically?
What about biological poisons also viruses and bacteria killing untold millions?
I wouldn't even know how to respond to your drivel.
That drivel is your logic. Thank you for finally seeing how nonsensical it is.
What about the live anthrax the DOD shipped out recently "by mistake". Was that a "good thing" because they are a research lab? What if they develop some amazing vaccine with the live anthrax that only makes a few thousand sick but saves millions of lives? Why would you fight that?
-------------------- Anxiety is what you make it.
|
Cognitive_Shift
CS actual




Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 29,591
|
|
I think theres only a handful of people who think live anthrax being shipped with out proper safety protocols is not a good thing, i'm one of those people.
Danger is danger biological or man made. I don't hold one higher or lower than the other.
-------------------- L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
|