Hilbert's Hotel

Diskussionsforum zur Unendlichkeit: Theismus, Atheismus, Primzahlen, Unsterblichkeit, das Universum...
Discussing Infinity: theism and atheism, prime numbers, immortality, cosmology, philosophy...

Gamestudio Links
Zorro Links
Newest Posts
Zorro Trader GPT
by TipmyPip. 12/04/23 11:34
Newbie Questions
by AndrewAMD. 12/04/23 11:14
Square root rule
by Smallz. 12/02/23 09:15
RTest not found error
by TipmyPip. 12/01/23 21:43
neural function for Python to [Train]
by TipmyPip. 12/01/23 14:47
Xor Memory Problem.
by TipmyPip. 11/28/23 14:23
Training with command line parameters
by TipmyPip. 11/26/23 08:42
Combine USD & BTC Pairs In Asset Loop
by TipmyPip. 11/26/23 08:30
AUM Magazine
Latest Screens
A psychological thriller game
SHADOW (2014)
DEAD TASTE
Tactics of World War I
Who's Online Now
2 registered members (TipmyPip, izorro), 556 guests, and 2 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
fairtrader, hus, Vurtis, Harry5, KelvinC
19019 Registered Users
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: Why_Do_I_Die] #206313
05/12/08 22:08
05/12/08 22:08
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
fastlane69 Offline OP
Senior Expert
fastlane69  Offline OP
Senior Expert

Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
Quote:
If there is no god , [...]what reason is there to not do what we all want ?


Here is my personal philosophy:
I argue that performing a kind act towards another human being of your own volition, without having to resort to what one person or book has to say, is always better than having to "google" what that positive action is through a text or person.

An example:
you help a little ol' lady cross the street because page 10 of the boy scout manual says "help little ol' lady cross the street or you don't get your little lady merit badge"
OR
you help a little ol' lady cross the street because you see another human being who needs help?

In other words, is doing good to avoid punishment (as per many religious dogma) better than doing good "just because"?

Quote:
if there is no god , there is no reason to not steal kill and rape ,


I can argue the opposite: without a god, there will be no need to kill or rape as we understand ourselves scientifically instead of emotionally.

In proof of my argument, I present the following:

From Wikipedia
"An estimated 0.2% of Roman Catholic priests have been proven to be [sexual] abusers"

From this blog which points to a very neat analysis
"In short, eight-hundred and nine million people have died in religious wars. That’s nearly a billion people."

From this canadian paper
"Father says God told him to kill his daughter
Former pastor Blair Donnelly, 48, stabbed his daughter, Stephanie, 16, to death in the family home
By David Carrigg, The Province
Published: Friday, January 25, 2008"


Quote:
if there is no god , there is no reason to not steal kill and rape ,


Can you provide evidence of anything like this coming from science, physics, or evolution:

"An estimated 0.2% of Theoretical Particle Physicists have been proven to be [sexual] abusers"

"In short, eight-hundred and nine million people have died in scientific wars. That’s nearly a billion people."

"Father says Science told him to kill his daughter
Former Physicist Blair Donnelly, 48, stabbed his daughter, Stephanie, 16, to death in the family home
By David Carrigg, The Province
Published: Friday, January 25, 2008"


Quote:
if there is no god , there is no reason to not steal kill and rape ,


The inverse of your statement is "IF there is a god, there is a reason not to steal, kill, and rape."
How do you reconcile this statement with the fact that .2% of all Catholic Priest, people that have dedicated themselves to their god, are acknowledged rapists?


"IF there is a god, there is a reason not to steal, kill, and rape."
How do we reconcile this statement with the fact that several followers of Allah, another god, are among the most violent killers in the middle east?

How can you argue that the loss of religion will l

Quote:
it would in fact mean , that we should actually be steaking killing and raping people


This clearly means that your belief in god is the only thing keeping you from stealing, killing, and raping people. That if you stopped to believe in god, you "should" by your words, go killing, stealing, and raping.

Why_Do, please, please, please believe in god. With all your heart. I don't want you to be a killer, murderer, or rapist so please, keep believing. I'm truly sorry I ever doubted or tried to sway your mind. But if I do succeed in changing your mind about god, please don't rape or kill me... I can deal with stealing so maybe that will do. I know that's not going to happen, but I just wanted that for the record.

Seriously though, this idea fit's with all the evidence above: if god is the only reason I don't rape, when I lose god as a priest, rape is okay.
If god is the only reason I don't kill, then it makes sense that if I lose god as a pastor, I would be inclined to kill my daughter.



Quote:
trick young humans into fighting for "their" country , to be used as mercenaries , and expendable assets.


The Crusades, or the inquisition, or the current Islamic Jihad, or North/South Irish wars, or the Pope allying himself with the Nazis... are these better examples of what we should follow instead?

Quote:
The Bible clearly states


Which one:
Protostant?
Anglican?
Gnostic?
Satanic?
Greek Orthodox?
Ethiopic Church?

And which translation:
ALT?
AMP?
ASV?
BBE?
Book of Mormon?
BWE?
CET?
CEV?
Darby?
DKJV?
Douay?
GW?
HNV?
ICV?
ISV?
JB?
JNT?
JPS?
KJV? (King James Version)
KJ21? (King James 21st century)
LB?
LITV? (Literal translation of the bible)
MLV?
NAB?
NCV?
NET?

You have to be more specific when you say "The Bible" since there are so many out there and I want to work from the same references you are.

Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: Why_Do_I_Die] #206317
05/12/08 22:26
05/12/08 22:26
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,134
Netherlands
Joozey Offline
Expert
Joozey  Offline
Expert

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,134
Netherlands
Quote:
(we are all bacteria right)
Now there's an interesting statement.

As Mr. Agent Smith likes to say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TboJUxTIaC4

"You humans move to an area and you multiply. Multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way humans can survive, is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern... a virus. The human being is a disease, a cancer of this planet, a plaque."

I think hes not that far off, if we sceptically look at ourselves and our past. We started at some place small, we grew, and we (over)populated our little planet. We are depleting natural resources very fast. One can argue that this is were it went wrong, yet, it happened anyway. And if you think about it, nobody was capable of stopping this. Questions that now arise are; was this the intention of god? Was this the inevitable result of evolution? Was there only one path to get where we are now, a path set up by a designer?

You could support them all, or argue them all, but you wont get the answer. And meanwhile we keep spreading and depleting our resources. But not even the most important, richest, loved person in the world can stop this process. It's the uncontrolable nature of life. And although we think that it's morally wrong what we do, we remain a part of nature, we are born from nature and we die in nature. Thus every action we take is on behalf of nature.

Concerning god, designers and evolution, I get the impression of the following:
"No god or designer means: we are in control of what is going to happen next."
"A god means we are bound to live the way this god 'demands'."
"A designer means we can do what we want, it was all about to happen like this anyway."

Which one does concerns you most?
*Evolution, as it will give us freedom to do what we want? We can murder everyone with the knowledge that we're not getting punished by a higher power.
*A designer, as it gives us one way to walk, and nomatter what you do, in the end it was all ment to happen like that.
*Or a God, Which shows us the right way to walk, and we should follow it for the better. But we can do everything we want nonetheless.

If it wasn't for those morons of scientology and many other religious people who urge you to believe in God and do as he commands, I'd be more than happy to believe in one. Not a God as in a big higher power watching from above, but a God as in a way to live. To give us morality and understanding. It makes people think before act.


Quote:
So think about what all this means to you , if there is no god , there is no reason to not steal kill and rape , it would in fact mean , that we should actually be steaking killing and raping people , since our sole purpose is our survival and every human on earth is a worthless bacteria.

If there is no god, it would be nessecarely to make one, and so we did.



Click and join the 3dgs irc community!
Room: #3dgs
Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: fastlane69] #206949
05/16/08 18:26
05/16/08 18:26
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
A
AlbertoT Offline
Serious User
AlbertoT  Offline
Serious User
A

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
Originally Posted By: fastlane69

neither science can speak to love and hate. That is where I feel religion is necessary and reigns supreme: in the realm of human relationships.



Uhmm..suppose that science can prove , without any reasonable doubt, that human behaviours, feelings and emotions, depend upon the neuro network layout
You short circuit some neurons, you fix some of them and ..zac..you turn a serial killer into a benefactor of humanity.
Would it still make sense to speak of sin, free will, heaven and hell, salvation ?
Of course not
There is not alternative in my opinion
either Religion get along with science or religion is lost

Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: AlbertoT] #206956
05/16/08 18:45
05/16/08 18:45
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,967
Frankfurt
jcl Offline

Chief Engineer
jcl  Offline

Chief Engineer

Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 27,967
Frankfurt
Originally Posted By: AlbertoT
Uhmm..suppose that science can prove , without any reasonable doubt, that human behaviours, feelings and emotions, depend upon the neuro network layout
You short circuit some neurons, you fix some of them and ..zac..you turn a serial killer into a benefactor of humanity.
Would it still make sense to speak of sin, free will, heaven and hell, salvation ?
Of course not

You need to make a difference between sin and evil.

Sin in the religious sense is disobedience to God. Eating an apple can be sin; refusing god's command to kill an innocent is a sin. Sin can be both good or bad and thus is unrelated to morale.

Evil however is related to morale, as it's always bad. Doing evil means unnecessarily harming someone. As in the example with killing the innocent above, you can be in a situation where you only can choose between sin and evil.

So, under your hypothesis that all human behavior can be derived from neural effects, both sin and evil still exist. You can still be disobedient and you can still do evil. The neural discoveries would only affect our view on human motivations and free will.

Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: AlbertoT] #206972
05/16/08 19:37
05/16/08 19:37
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
fastlane69 Offline OP
Senior Expert
fastlane69  Offline OP
Senior Expert

Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
Quote:
Uhmm..suppose that science can prove , without any reasonable doubt, that human behaviours, feelings and emotions, depend upon the neuro network layout
You short circuit some neurons, you fix some of them and ..zac..you turn a serial killer into a benefactor of humanity.
Would it still make sense to speak of sin, free will, heaven and hell, salvation ?


Even if we had perfect understanding of the circuitry of the brain, the serial killer may still NOT want to be a benefactor for humanity and thus free will remains. They will therefore continue killing that is evil. As for sin, heaven, hell, and salvation, I don't see what the brain has to do with that at all. wink

Unless, of course, you are suggesting a world like the Union of Cyteen fame where we understand the brain to such an extent that we can try to control all human impulses and desire from birth to death in order to make a "perfect" and "sinless" society?

Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: fastlane69] #206973
05/16/08 19:48
05/16/08 19:48
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
A
AlbertoT Offline
Serious User
AlbertoT  Offline
Serious User
A

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
" if there is no god , there is no reason to not steal kill and rape "

Should I understand that you have not yet killed your boss just because you are a religious guy ? smile

The picture is not so dark

Modern people have lost the killer instincts of their wild ancestors because violent behaviours are not anymore a benefit for the survival of the individuals and of the comunity they belong to
Consequently the gene of violence has been almost phased out from the genoma of the modern people
Once again evolution played the main role rather than religion

Last edited by AlbertoT; 05/16/08 19:49.
Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: fastlane69] #206986
05/16/08 20:55
05/16/08 20:55
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
A
AlbertoT Offline
Serious User
AlbertoT  Offline
Serious User
A

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
Originally Posted By: fastlane69

the serial killer may still NOT want to be a benefactor for humanity and thus free will remains. They will therefore continue killing that is evil. As for sin, heaven, hell, and salvation, I don't see what the brain has to do with that at all. wink



You are making a circular reasoning
If our behaviours, emotions, feelings, in one word , if our " coscience " is fully controlled by our brain activity than it does not make any sense to claim " He may not want" since his will and his brain are the same stuff

The consequence are obvious as far as religion is concerned
Sin will be synonimous with disease

Maybe one day , neuro scientist will throw the sponge
Maybe they will be forced to admit that human coscience entails the existence of a spiritual entity
We will see

The point of this thread is however that you can nor separate science and religion

Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: jcl] #206993
05/16/08 22:32
05/16/08 22:32
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
A
AlbertoT Offline
Serious User
AlbertoT  Offline
Serious User
A

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,245
Originally Posted By: jcl


The neural discoveries would only affect our view on human motivations and free will.


It is what I meant

Of course, you can still speak of evil , if the word " evil" stand for behaviours which damage the rest of the comunity, but from a completely different point of view

You can still punish a criminal , if it helps to prevent "evil", but you can hardly blame him if his behaviours depend on electrical signal in his brain

However my intention was to comment the following claim

" science and religion inhabit "to non-intersecting planes "

IMHO It is absolutly false for the reason explained above


Last edited by AlbertoT; 05/16/08 22:39.
Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: fastlane69] #206995
05/16/08 22:49
05/16/08 22:49
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX Offline
Senior Expert
PHeMoX  Offline
Senior Expert

Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
Quote:
In other words, is doing good to avoid punishment (as per many religious dogma) better than doing good "just because"?


Excellent point and it also proves that we don't need a bible or boyscout manual or whatever for morality. I don't want to hate on any religious texts, but in the context of logic can't religious people agree that doing good 'just because' instead of doing it because it might influence their karma or afterlife is much better? It has been something I've been wondering everytime the 'you don't know morality' "argument" gets brought up in these kind of discussions.


PHeMoX, Innervision Software (c) 1995-2008

For more info visit: Innervision Software
Re: compatibility of science and religion [Re: PHeMoX] #206999
05/16/08 23:27
05/16/08 23:27
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 819
U.S.
Why_Do_I_Die Offline
Warned
Why_Do_I_Die  Offline
Warned

Joined: May 2005
Posts: 819
U.S.
"In other words, is doing good to avoid punishment (as per many religious dogma) better than doing good "just because"?"

Well we arent good , and thats the problem. We have choice , and it is very true that we are part beast and part spiritual. So , while there is a part of us thats good , and loves people , there is a part that is bad , and wants to cut people into pieces . Without a definitive reason or argument for good or bad , then cutting a person into pieces is not a bad thing , and if there is no real good or bad , then how can you punish the act ? Should we put in jail animals for killing other animals ? We are , after all , animals right ? See the trail this leads to ?
So , lets tone it down a bit , from mutilating our fellow people , to a more realistic scenario , how about , finding a way to have thousands of slaves , working constantly , to produce recourses , for say myself , if there is no wrong and right , what stops me from doing it ?

Yes , and then you realize the world you are living in today , where the human race is basically enslaved , it is estimated all of the wealth in the US is owned by the wealthy 1% of the polulation , everyone else just works to live , it's really a clever system of fake money and deceiving evonomics that keeps people working like idiots to barely have enough to live. It's like the carrot that hangs from the stick infront of the horse face , thats how they have all of the people. Do you know that workers , get paid so little , that the government has to supply them with food stamps and some even with housing ? So , you work all day , every day , and they dont even pay you enough to provide food and shelter for your family ? This , is abysmal , but its true. So , in time , we are all going to be full slaves , it's the way the world is progressing towards (how about them sweatshops? the corporations LOVE them) , and without no God , then there is really nothing wrong this people are doing , they have over time become powerful entities , and according to the laws of evolution , they then deserve to enslave all humanity for their own benefit. I however , dont see things like this , and it is clearly stated in scripture that all of the systems of man will be destroyed , and a new system will be put in place.

So , morality cannot exist without GOD , How convinient is it that thats the only part of religion people like , " no , dont kill me " , "hmmm , why ? " , " hmmm , well because , hmmm , well the bible says it's wrong" , " Hmmm , i'm an athiest baby , I believe in germs baby , now open wide and say ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh"

The morals we have today , have all stemmed from religion , thye have provided a moral template so correct our judicial system still follows it's same rules, if we are to just forget about religion , then we should just forget about the judicial system as a whole , since it is heinous to punish and encarcerate a human being for doing something thats in his very bare nature and which in all reality is not wrong, so we go back to the jungle , which , if you believe in evolution , is where we belong.


Edit: Well I might be exagerating on the current situation with the human race exploitation , but I'm seeing where this world is headed and I dont like it , which is what stems my arguments. If you really look at the big picture , you would see what I see.

Last edited by Why_Do_I_Die; 05/17/08 02:00.
Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  jcl, Lukas, old_bill, Spirit 

Kompaktes W�rterbuch des UnendlichenCompact Dictionary of the Infinite


Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1