Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
Get rid of religion and see how quickly evil goes away in the world.
A good experiment. Not as subtle but along the lines pursued by the experimental historian in Hard to Be a God by the Strugatsky brothers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_to_Be_a_God
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
MF: What's wrong with incomplete and provisional knowledge?
What’s “knowledge” then? Should you take it seriously? Should you take things concretely?
I would think it would call for being far more skeptical, gentle, hesitant to intervene and take control, to pass on hard conclusions, to be far more relaxed about what one considers right and wrong, good and bad, correct or incorrect, to see an emptiness in attractions and aversions.
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
I would think it would call for being far more skeptical, gentle, hesitant to intervene and take control, to pass on hard conclusions, to be far more relaxed about what one considers right and wrong, good and bad, correct or incorrect, to see an emptiness in attractions and aversions.
Sound knowledge
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
hesitant ... to pass ... to be far more relaxed ... to see an emptiness
Sound knowledge.
Yes, especially if you're a bumblie. (Or a schlup, see below.)
Don't know which way is up. Accident prone. Unsure of yourself. Likely to cause more harm than good. Better to not get involved. Better to sit on the sidelines and let the macgyvers seize the day, solve the problems, push the envelopes, etc.
And besides, it's a great pretext or rationale, if you're a schlup and you need one, to couch patato craft.
You know what I mean.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
MF: What's wrong with incomplete and provisional knowledge?
Nothing. Absolute knowledge is just a concept like perfection. Incomplete and provisional knowledge is the very grounded and practical kind of knowledge that is modified as there is further and clearer data.
What’s “knowledge” then?
See above.
Should you take it seriously?
As seriously as death!
Should you take things concretely?
I know to open a door instead of walking into it!
I would think it would call for being far more skeptical, gentle, hesitant to intervene and take control, to pass on hard conclusions, to be far more relaxed about what one considers right and wrong, good and bad, correct or incorrect, to see an emptiness in attractions and aversions.
I was really with you until the emptiness part. The emptiness works if your approach is merely hedonistic; an Epicurian approach solves that problem nicely.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
The absolute truth is that every living entity will be kicked out of its material body (so called death) after its number of breaths (prana) has been used up.
It is not a concept but the absolute truth.
Modern science is clueless to what the Absolute Truth really is since they are only mental speculators .....
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
The absolute truth is that every living entity will be kicked out of its material body (so called death) after its number of breaths (prana) has been used up.
Amebas cleverly split in two so that death is put off the track. Plus they don't breathe.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
Not as subtle but along the lines pursued by the experimental historian . . .
I'm pleased to have learned of experimental philosophy and experimental history (historical fiction?). There is experimental mathematics in which I dabble at an elementary level, and some day soon there will be experimental physics!
I can hardly wait.
|
|
rbord
Boulder climber
atlanta
|
|
Absolute truth is whatever the loudest mental speculators tell themselves it is. Life is just more fun when you believe in leprechauns.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
“The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will make you an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.” – Werner Heisenberg
Yeah, yeah I know… he was clueless.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
Chapter 16 "Scientific and Religious Truth" in Across the Frontiers, 1974, Harper & Row, p.213-229
This one by Heisenberg looks to be interesting as well and good for provoking undergraduate discussions.
|
|
Adventurer
Mountain climber
Virginia
|
|
Just saw an amusing cartoon referencing religion the other day that is food for thought. I couldn't find a link so I'll do my best to describe it.
A gray & white tabby cat is wearing reading glasses and holding a book as he lays back on a couch and is looking up at his human owner who is not in the picture. The caption on the cartoon is the wise old cat apparently responding to his owner about a statement the owner had just made suggesting that religion should be taught in all schools.
The cat says, "So, I have a question about your idea regarding mandatory religious instruction in schools. Would that be instruction in all religions or....just yours!
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
"Blackford is more concerned with the rise of the “regressive Left”: those who identify as liberals but oppose criticism of religion (especially Islam) and soft-pedal other traditional Enlightenment values like free speech."
fruity, why are you guy's so persistent with your prejudice? Is it your goal to cling onto the democratic party and infuse them with your anti-religious bigotry by yelling and screaming so loud they can't hear their own minds think? Tell me what part of science conflicts with the conservative political party? Is it the "chance" or "luck" phenomenons, or maybe the "randomness" that you see that just doesn't jive with a conservative way of life? it certainly couldn't be the "causation" or "determinism" aspects of the universe, their kinda coherent with the conservative point of view aren't they? So why is scientism anti conservatism?
Maybe easier, tell me what liberalism and scientism have in common? Do you know where liberalism even got it's start?
Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.[1] The former principle is stressed in classical liberalism while the latter is more evident in social liberalism.[2] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas and programs such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free markets, civil rights, democratic societies, secular governments, and international cooperation.
Even if Locke wrote this , doesn't it sound verbatim to what Jesus instructed? i might go so far as to say, Jesus is the King of Liberalism!
So please enlighten me why scientism and science can only be affiliated with only one of to two democratic parties? And while your at it, please enlighten me as to why one one of the parties can be affiliated with knowledge of a Creator??
Please sir
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
This should get interesting and keep the thread going for awhile.
I do agree with Blue that Jesus was a liberal (belonging to the Hillel faction of Judaism specifically). For that, the religious establishment of the scribes and pharisees wanted to put him to death. But that's the point too, that establishment religion often calls for the death of people with new ideas. Not that new ideas are immune from that either as in Karl Marx and his philosophy.
As always, the debate is the nature of human beings versus the institution of religion.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
well im impressed on who's in the peanut gallery leaning in to hear what Kim has to say. But how much are you impressed by what Kim says starting at 5min in? Ha.
And so why can't you answer my questions? Think man, Think! i've been thinkin bout yours for 5 years now.. Lend some causation, i mean courtesy.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
although I rarely post on this thread I do follow it
but I must have missed the questions Blu had for Fructose to answer
Blu, would you mind repeating them?
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
As always, the debate is the nature of human beings versus the institution of religion.
Yeah, welp, The "Nature" of human beings is, "the strongest will survive".
The institution of religion says, "join us or perish"
So what's the difference??
Jesus!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|