On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If the physicists at CERN announced that all life including human life >> was created by the Klogknee Field but didn't even attempt to explain how it >> had done this miraculous thing would you be satisfied? I wouldn't be. >> > > They will name it the Higgs instead, and then you will be satisfied. > That is a foolish remark. The Higgs, if it exists, can't even explain gravity much less life or mathematics or why God exists or why there is something rather than nothing.
> > Species = life. Nothing in the Origin of Species pertains to anything > outside of biology. > I don't see your point. And by the way, Lee Smolin has a very interesting cosmological theory involving many worlds, Darwin's ideas, and black holes. > > God isn't a theory, it is a character in a story. > Yes, and the Hebrew god Yahweh in the old testament is the most unpleasant character in all of fiction. > > It does not address explanation, it specifically makes explanation > irrelevant in favor of identification with the miraculous. > Yes, and that is the reason religion is so evil, or at least the most important reason. > > Like it or not > Not. > > religion is the universal dynamo which generates civilization. > Religion certainly played a important part in the history of civilization, so have intestinal parasites. > > if we literally believe that all we are is molecular processes, > Shakespeare's life work is a finite sequence of ASCII characters and there is no doubt about that, but that's not the only way to describe what his life's work is. One way to describe what we are is that we are what a finite amalgamation of molecular processes do, but that's not the only way to describe what we are. And if you literally believe that all you are is a immaterial soul why would that make you feel better and get you out of this sad existential funk of yours? > > then there could be no reason to prefer any one set of processes or > outcomes over another. > I don't follow, those very molecular processes cause you to prefer one outcome over another. > > There would be no difference between one opinion and another or one > person and another. > There would be if there were differences in those molecular processes between one individual and another, and of course in the real world there always are differences. > >>> I don't see that it would be a problem for God to make physics >>> >> >> Great, so how did He do it? I'm all ears! >> > >Let there be Physics! > Don't be obtuse, bullshit explanations like that allowed religion to get a foothold in unthinking people. I want a real explanation. I want to know how God made physics. I also want to know why God always existed rather than always not existed. > > You misunderstand the purpose of religion. It isn't supposed to explain > anything > I see, religion isn't supposed to make sense, In that it is successful. And they try to peddle the idea that the more ridiculous your beliefs are the more virtuous you are because that means the more faith you must have. And faith, they want you to accept as being obvious without even thinking about it, is a good thing. > > it is supposed to unify human beings > More people have been murdered for religious reasons that any other single cause, > > to a common sense and motive for political purposes. > So you think religion is a useful lie. I disagree, I find nothing useful in it. Religion is a parasite, its a virus of the mind. > >>> randomness becomes another name for God. >>> >> >> Yet another example of someone willing to abandon the idea of God but >> not the 3 letter word "G-O-D". >> > > Huh? We can call it R-A-N-D-O-M-N-E-S-S if you prefer. > Thank you, I do much prefer that because otherwise when I say "I don't believe in God" people will think I don't believe in randomness. If "God", or any other word, can mean anything at all then the word is of no use to anyone at all. > > There is something that prevents infinite nonsense universes > I have no way of knowing if infinite nonsense universes exist or not. > > It is symmetry and relation. Sensitivity. Being. Experience. > This is a very good example of a very bad explanation. It would be far better and certainly more honest to simply say "I don't understand why the world is the way it is nor does anybody else". And the worst part is if you keep repeating bullshit explanations like this eventually you might actually start to believe it when you really don't, and that is a recipe for stagnation. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
