ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by Dashing_Chap

You're still skipping merrily around the question without actually coming to terms with the fundamental point - other intelligent life forms have no need for Christianity. Just because science doesn't have all the answers is irrelevent.

Higgsy has pointed out in his post that Dolphins, Elephants and other intelligent creatures have no need for a Jesus figure or Messiah, they can live and love in harmony without the need for magic words, prayer or confusing sermons. Where's the Elephant God? I have pointed out in plain terms that religion is the direct result of man trying to give nature a purpose when none exists. There's no getting round that, the evidence is clear.

Religion didn't matter for life in the Deep Time of the past and it probably won't matter for whatever life exists in the Deep Time of the future. If we're lucky we might survive another few thousand years, if we're very lucky indeed we might even make a million. But one million years is still a pathetic attempt compared to our predecessors. A million years into the future we're likely to have evolved into something else too, and in three billion years life will be as different to us now as we are to early forms of bacteria. Religion doesn't have anything at all to say about these simple truths.

Why people should go on believing that God came to earth and pretended to be a man is beyond me. Why is it so hard to see that the world goes ahead of its own accord and we're just temporary passengers?

I found the Elephant God...



Guess I slipped up a bit on that one.

Originally Posted by BoomShackerLacker

I can see the value of your points and their emphasis and glad of the challenge. I think you're right Nihilism is a philosophical position, but philosophical positions are intrinsic to worldviews, and worldviews contain our belief systems (in generic sense).

The argument on offer is the success of the sciences in physics (objective real world) leads to Truth about Life (in the subjective private world). That is we have great success in physics therefore the assertion is made that there is nothing, categorically nothing, beyond this data set: This is actually a wild and erroneous extrapolation. Your indignation, if you weren't tempting dis-ingenuity yourself, should be rightfully horrified as such untruth on such a scale. This domain-stretch is known as Scientism (back to belief-systems).

Psychology of any kind is a natural philosophical pursuit reliant on scientific method, which means it can only detect natured-self, not human being. Its data is drawn from hard patterns of observable and publicly available data (of only embodied self). It can't gain access to being-human as human beings live according to their own volition, directed from reflective thought, generated only subjectively (privately). If they're not acting from reflective thought then they've lost their capacity to be human beings, by definition (they are therefore non-beings). Science, by its own system, cannot operate in this domain. Its methods cannot deal with the actual volume of data generated in the social world or via conscious thought, in 'ordinary lived experience'. I am very genuinely defending the limits of good science.

So because science cannot explain the finer aspects of consciousness JC must be the Lord? Where's the explicit connection there between human consciousness and Jesus being the son of God?

Just because we don't know the answer to something doesn't mean we have to take the irresponsible leap of saying "magic man did it". It is simply the unknown, that's the only answer anyone can give. From a logical perspective it is likely that we evolved consciousness, it's a by-product of advanced group cohesion and communication, there's no grand design. One day we simply began thinking, but that doesn't mean there's a purpose to our being able to think.

Originally Posted by Dashing_Chap

So because science cannot explain the finer aspects of consciousness JC must be the Lord? Where's the explicit connection there between human consciousness and Jesus being the son of God?

Just because we don't know the answer to something doesn't mean we have to take the irresponsible leap of saying "magic man did it". It is simply the unknown, that's the only answer anyone can give. From a logical perspective it is likely that we evolved consciousness, it's a by-product of advanced group cohesion and communication, there's no grand design. One day we simply began thinking, but that doesn't mean there's a purpose to our being able to think.

No. Reminding our readers that the wild mis-use of science outside of its domain is unfaithful to science.

Faith does life as it is lived moment by moment (subjective experience). Science does things (objective reality).

Your attributing consciousness to the science domain is without scientific foundation.

Originally Posted by BoomShackerLacker

No. Reminding our readers that the wild mis-use of science outside of its domain is unfaithful to science.

Faith does life as it is lived moment by moment (subjective experience). Science does things (objective reality).

Your attributing consciousness to the science domain is without scientific foundation.

I'm attributing the evolution of consciousness to the scientific domain. I'm not attempting to explain the mysteries of consciousness itself using the scientific method. I'm merely making a logical step as to how we came to be thinking apes rather than banana chomping gorillas - it was most likely a prolonged random process via freak mutation and this is where we ended up.

Faith is not required for this explanation, consciousness is the unknown and we acquired this odd ability through biological chance, not the grace of God.

Originally Posted by BoomShackerLacker

This is HB a Belief System in itself. It is the Gospel of Nihilism. Nihilism is a 'strong hand' to play. The cold hard rationalist against the world, armed with Knowledge and sharp elbows, pouring scorn on the weak with their passions. I think some of it is needed, in business, during attack in war, but not surely as a whole 'life orientation'.

Also, nothing in physics points to the above 'life orientation'. Physics points to objects represented as phenomena. Nihilism is a human choice of 'how to be'. The notion that science has dealt or even buzzed close to the notion of 'human being' and 'meaning' is an insult to physics and science. Science is a wonderful thing, but it deals with phenomena and wild claims about 'it pointing' anywhere towards human being is grossly unscientific and outside of its domain. Like the TV set's exposed wiring suddenly commenting on the programme content from within its circuit boards. Humans interpret all according to their life politics.

Of course the human being is the only being ... and the only creature that can stand outside of its desires. Making them entirely unique and rather wonderful and special.

Life and the world beyond phenomena is as dark and mysterious and free to examine by those with a serious concern.

A system of known facts can't be bad in my opinion. Scorn for stupidity is also a good thing. The effect of fools on the world is too much to bear in silence...religions must be called out. A passion for the absurd does not justify it.

You are apparently unaware of how modern sciences deal with the relationship between physics and life...No stone is left unturned these days. You are indulging in the area of woo woo... a non existing, imagined domain that is well understood and documented as a psychological condition. Don't underestimate what we know about you BSL, both the cause and effect have been exposed throughout these emails. You are claiming that your circuit board is receiving signals from a programme that is not being transmitted! It's a dummy fault... The TV man understands interference and background radiation but if the set has been exposed to water cannot repair it under warranty.

I challenge you to explain what you define as "Human being" and I'll pop back by return with a scientific explanation...see if I can't eh. But if you refuse to accept that we are in a physical existence then I'm afraid that you are the one that is insulting science.

Originally Posted by BoomShackerLacker

No... as your fears and concerns drive it to be.

Please trust me...I live without fear of anything unknown. I thrive on and enjoy what life has allowed. Freedom from dogma is not a driven state by any italics pal. Curiousity and discovery are natural pursuits. When one finds the way it is one can be excused for screaming eureka!

Originally Posted by BoomShackerLacker

No. Reminding our readers that the wild mis-use of science outside of its domain is unfaithful to science.

Faith does life as it is lived moment by moment (subjective experience). Science does things (objective reality).

Your attributing consciousness to the science domain is without scientific foundation.

Very wrong indeed... evolutionary biology has it covered.

The strange intuition that you cling to is an evolutionary phenomena but not actually containing knowledge. Often feelings that are from the subliminal can be useful. I observe my Koi fish as they surface for food... a mixture of fear and hunger. Eventually they take a risk and it's ok. Knowledge reaps the rewards.

My 'intuitions' about gods and fears of the unknown are gone thankfully.

I reckon that these godly people have it covered: What is it like to be an atheist? - The Landover Baptist Church Forum

Originally Posted by exbluejob

I reckon that these godly people have it covered: What is it like to be an atheist? - The Landover Baptist Church Forum

Priceless - I particularly like this from Billy Bob -

"Brother, from the way atheists treat eachother's asses, I am not sure if they love anus, or hate it. They destroy everything they touch."