[FairfieldLife] Re: The Creationist Morons
We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing, all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes. -- Gene Roddenberry Science without religion is lame, but Religion without Science is blind. - Albert Einstein TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:52:18 - Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Atheist Delusion I have to agree. To me this seems like the projection of purpose onto a universe that is in no need of one by someone who is in desperate need for one. Religionists need to see a purpose to life, because 1) they tend to have a need that someone or something guiding it or designed it, and 2) because they are deeply imprinted by dogma that's been telling them since they were born that there *is* a purpose to it all, and a designer behind the scenes. So *naturally* they look at the world and tend to see purpose and design behind it. Someone with no dogmatic alliances doesn't necessarily see the world that way. There is a precedence implied in the words that the author used in the excerpt above that's telling IMO, about the world that we have to integrate into our religious visions. The religious visions have to stay intact, while integrating the world into *them*. That's what I think is going on with most attempts to justify religion with pseudo-science. It's making the results fit the dogma, drawing bulleyes around the arrows. It's the same thing we see in the TMO ME studies. The results of a large group of people bouncing on their butts is a foregone conclusion because that is part of the religious vision and thus sacrosanct. The facts must be integrated *into* these religious visions, even if a lot of squishing square pegs into round holes is involved, because the visions represent truth. And they suggest that atheists are deluded? :-) For me, it's like what Curtis said earlier about a type of music he just doesn't get or resonate with. I just don't get the desire to find a purpose behind life. It's the *same* life, purpose or not. I could waste my incarnation pondering what it means and the whys of everything, or I could just enjoy the fact that life is pretty groovy. - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Creationist Morons
--- Thanks, one writer in a previous post says science is blind to the purposful intensification of consciousness (presumably in human observers, for example); but the writer infers wrongly that this is outside of science. Actually, there's a non-purposeful possible explanation, fully within the realm of science: Backward causation. Causation in two directions is an accepted property of quantum realms; but due to the decoherence principle, instances of backward causation seem to fizzle out or become less common in the macroworld. Possibly, not...just overshadowed by causation going in one direction,f rom past to present to future. The future not only casts a shadow into the past, but can cause it, to a certain extent. The bottom line is that if one starts with a presumption of pre- existing creatures (human, godlike, in some dimension), the very existence of such entities will send causes into new, formative baby universes, acting as a type of non-purposeful guide. Then, what people grok/feel regarding evolution (many Hindus for example), will be that evolution was guided. Actually, the veneer of supposed guidance may actually be a form of backward causation. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We must question the story logic of having an all- knowing, all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes. -- Gene Roddenberry Science without religion is lame, but Religion without Science is blind. - Albert Einstein TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:52:18 - Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Atheist Delusion I have to agree. To me this seems like the projection of purpose onto a universe that is in no need of one by someone who is in desperate need for one. Religionists need to see a purpose to life, because 1) they tend to have a need that someone or something guiding it or designed it, and 2) because they are deeply imprinted by dogma that's been telling them since they were born that there *is* a purpose to it all, and a designer behind the scenes. So *naturally* they look at the world and tend to see purpose and design behind it. Someone with no dogmatic alliances doesn't necessarily see the world that way. There is a precedence implied in the words that the author used in the excerpt above that's telling IMO, about the world that we have to integrate into our religious visions. The religious visions have to stay intact, while integrating the world into *them*. That's what I think is going on with most attempts to justify religion with pseudo-science. It's making the results fit the dogma, drawing bulleyes around the arrows. It's the same thing we see in the TMO ME studies. The results of a large group of people bouncing on their butts is a foregone conclusion because that is part of the religious vision and thus sacrosanct. The facts must be integrated *into* these religious visions, even if a lot of squishing square pegs into round holes is involved, because the visions represent truth. And they suggest that atheists are deluded? :-) For me, it's like what Curtis said earlier about a type of music he just doesn't get or resonate with. I just don't get the desire to find a purpose behind life. It's the *same* life, purpose or not. I could waste my incarnation pondering what it means and the whys of everything, or I could just enjoy the fact that life is pretty groovy. - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Creationist Morons
I think in Paramahansa Yogananda's book, 'An autobiography of an Yogi' this concept of creating universes is discussed. If you go to Brahma Loka, the Causal dimension, you can create your own baby Universe.!! Science is yet to prove it. Time flows in one direction. But now string theories having two time dimensions are emerging.!! Sure to complicate things. matrixmonitor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:04:57 - Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Creationist Morons --- Thanks, one writer in a previous post says science is blind to the purposful intensification of consciousness (presumably in human observers, for example); but the writer infers wrongly that this is outside of science. Actually, there's a non-purposeful possible explanation, fully within the realm of science: Backward causation. Causation in two directions is an accepted property of quantum realms; but due to the decoherence principle, instances of backward causation seem to fizzle out or become less common in the macroworld. Possibly, not...just overshadowed by causation going in one direction,f rom past to present to future. The future not only casts a shadow into the past, but can cause it, to a certain extent. The bottom line is that if one starts with a presumption of pre- existing creatures (human, godlike, in some dimension), the very existence of such entities will send causes into new, formative baby universes, acting as a type of non-purposeful guide. Then, what people grok/feel regarding evolution (many Hindus for example), will be that evolution was guided. Actually, the veneer of supposed guidance may actually be a form of backward causation. - Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
