Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 4:37 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Atheism-limits of ignorance
#1
Atheism-limits of ignorance
A scientist connected to the LHC experiment being interviewed these days said:the mission of science is to discover how the world ticks, the "why" is left to religion.
The phrase was of course expressed as a joke but it reflects a common wisdom among a lot of people , in a certain way, including between them even atheists .

Atheism is not ashamed to aknowledge that science up till now doesn't know,for instance, why evolution is going in one way only,why is time directed from past to future and not the oposite direction ,and so on,,
These are limits of ignorance explained from the Darwinistic point of view related to the level of evolution of the intelligence of humankind .

The problem is that science is not able at present stage to answer as well to many "how it ticks "problems ,examples are superfluous,for the same reason as above.

Now,if so, I would ask if there are limits beyond them atheism is compelled to give answers otherwise the field is left to religion .

One of these domaines is to my opnion the individul fate of humans.
Health,illness, life and death are milestones of every religion whether abrahamic or asiatic or of other continents,ever were and ever seemingly will be .
Any ignorant or stuttered answer on the fate related to these milestones is paramount to crack the door open for entrance of God ,the HG and his cohorts of saints, saint places ,miracle performers etc,,

To my opinion here is the point where atheism has to accept randomness whether purely scientific or ,bridgeing the controversy on that topic,as a practical law of mother Nature.

Randomness has a long list of synonime names such as :chance ,luck , accidental,unforseeable,improbable,indeterminancy,uncertainity principle,
stochasic events,and so on.
There may be nuance differences between these notions but the core of understanding is the same.

Now, one can not say about randomness "may be yes or may be no" neither "we don't know",because these are the limits of ignorance atheism can not permit to it self to leave open to religion, least it marks loosing points in the battle for the minds and hearts (not souls) of people,and this is what atheism is struggling for.
Reply
#2
RE: Atheism-limits of ignorance
But, I think the point is that there is no "why."

Try this: All of existence is the result of the interaction of possibilties in an infinite possibility field. Does anything exist? Yes and no. There is a region of existence, where the primal "superstring" exists, and a region of non-existence. Think of it as a primal particle blinking randomly in and out of existence. In the region of existence, the existence of the particle gives rise to an infinite spacial field extending from the particle to infinity. In the region of non-existence, there is no space. But since there is only one particle and space is curved, the particle "perceives" itself at the edge of infinity in all directions. It interacts with itself. But in what way? In every way. Every thing that can possibly happen occurs. The sets of happenings are arrayed in an orderly fashion as if one thing gave rise to the next. There is an illusion of causation. In one set of happenings, an animal exists and has chemical formations in its brain that records a set of these seemingly causative happenings. In another instance next to that circumstance, another animal exists that is essentially identical to the first and has the same "memories" plus a memory of having been that first animal in the previous instance. Perhaps it is a human. Perhaps it has a "thought" that there is a God that created it. Recalling that all sets of possible interactions exist in the field, it is innevitable that such an intersection of possibilites must occur. Somewhere in the field of infinite possibility, there is another animal that has memories in its brain that record a seemingly "future" occurence, and no "past" occurences. In another place, there is an animal with memories of both past and future.

Now try devising any kind of experiment to test whether or not it is the case.
Reply
#3
RE: Atheism-limits of ignorance
Why do many atheists talk of science like it belongs to them? I have talked to many religious people who think religion and science go hand in hand and yet many atheists seem to think this view is preposterus. I wonder why?
Reply
#4
RE: Atheism-limits of ignorance
I personally think the only reason people say science goes together with religion is because the religions keep re-interpreting things to go along with science. In a few hundred years you will have religions that will simply agree with whatever science says and will not make any predictions or claims other than the God one.
Reply
#5
RE: Atheism-limits of ignorance
Does science not continuly re-interprit evidence? Why can't religion do the same?
Reply
#6
RE: Atheism-limits of ignorance
The only reason science re-interprets evidence is because some new evidence comes along. Religion has no new evidence, it has supposedly infallible books that never change. All that happens is people try to change the meanings of the words to make it compatible with science. This is a ludicrous way of doing things, and nulls the possibility of any of their claims being infallible or even true.

Religion is turning more and more into a mirror of science, just with a weird supernatural message placed on top. Years down the line the only way of separating the beliefs of one from the other will be to see which one denotes a supreme being.
Reply
#7
RE: Atheism-limits of ignorance
(September 15, 2008 at 9:50 am)Tiberius Wrote: The only reason science re-interprets evidence is because some new evidence comes along. Religion has no new evidence, it has supposedly infallible books that never change. All that happens is people try to change the meanings of the words to make it compatible with science. This is a ludicrous way of doing things, and nulls the possibility of any of their claims being infallible or even true.

Religion is turning more and more into a mirror of science, just with a weird supernatural message placed on top. Years down the line the only way of separating the beliefs of one from the other will be to see which one denotes a supreme being.

In order for a religion to survive to the next generation, it has to be able to evolve in such a way that it adapts to the prejudices of the populace from which it seeks contributions. Religions that cannot adapt die out.

For example, Catholicism has drawn too deep a line in the sand with the prohibition against birth control. The population explosion will highlight the necessity of birth control for everyone, and future generations will turn from it in droves. Fundamentalist Islam is in its death throws now. Of course, there will always be a few nutjobs that cling to these old beliefs, just like the ones that still worship the Norse gods.

However, I don't think that your prediction will be entirely true. There may be a religion like the one you predict, and it might be the main religion. But I think there will be others on the fringe that play to people's prejudices and make absurd claims to justify those prejudices. That is part of the lure of religion for most people. And it is how religions like Christianity have survived for so many centuries. They have scripture to justify every possible prejudice anyone could ever have, and escape clauses to let each person ignore any scripture he or she does not like. It's brilliant, really. So Catholicism will die soon, but Christianity will live on in one form or another.
Reply
#8
RE: Atheism-limits of ignorance
(September 14, 2008 at 11:13 pm)infidel666 Wrote: But, I think the point is that there is no "why."

Try this: All of existence is the result of the interaction of possibilties in an infinite possibility field. Does anything exist? Yes and no. There is a region of existence, where the primal "superstring" exists, and a region of non-existence. Think of it as a primal particle blinking randomly in and out of existence. In the region of existence, the existence of the particle gives rise to an infinite spacial field extending from the particle to infinity. In the region of non-existence, there is no space. But since there is only one particle and space is curved, the particle "perceives" itself at the edge of infinity in all directions. It interacts with itself. But in what way? In every way. Every thing that can possibly happen occurs. The sets of happenings are arrayed in an orderly fashion as if one thing gave rise to the next. There is an illusion of causation. In one set of happenings, an animal exists and has chemical formations in its brain that records a set of these seemingly causative happenings. In another instance next to that circumstance, another animal exists that is essentially identical to the first and has the same "memories" plus a memory of having been that first animal in the previous instance. Perhaps it is a human. Perhaps it has a "thought" that there is a God that created it. Recalling that all sets of possible interactions exist in the field, it is innevitable that such an intersection of possibilites must occur. Somewhere in the field of infinite possibility, there is another animal that has memories in its brain that record a seemingly "future" occurence, and no "past" occurences. In another place, there is an animal with memories of both past and future.

Now try devising any kind of experiment to test whether or not it is the case.

Infidel Hi
I hope you are not one of those infidels which the Illuminated forces of Ahmedinajad + Hizbullah + Hamas are seeking for.

Your highly scientific explanation which I had to make an effort in order to understand ,lacking this level of Physics,points in simpler words to the principle of indeterminism.
Have I understood you right?
If yes then that's what I am trying to forward in that forum ,uptill now with little success ,namely that science has to recognize indeterminism as a basic law of nature on an equal foot with determinism.
RD in his TGD seems to me ,may be that I'm wrong ,pretty ambiguous on this subject.
It would be very interesting to hear your opinion ,in simple words accesible to a layman of Physics,on this topic.
Reply
#9
RE: Atheism-limits of ignorance
(September 15, 2008 at 12:19 pm)infidel666 Wrote: For example, Catholicism has drawn too deep a line in the sand with the prohibition against birth control. The population explosion will highlight the necessity of birth control for everyone, and future generations will turn from it in droves. Fundamentalist Islam is in its death throws now. Of course, there will always be a few nutjobs that cling to these old beliefs, just like the ones that still worship the Norse gods.

But you know that when there's enough pressure from society, politicians, and the congregation, that they're going to change their views on safe sex due to 'divine inspiration'. It's amazing what peer pressure can do as long as you give them the opportunity to save face and make it appear as though it were their own initiative all along, but I suppose religion has been doing this for centuries.
Atheism as a Religion
-------------------
A man also or woman that hath a Macintosh, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with used and abandoned Windows 3.1 floppy disks: their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:27
Reply
#10
RE: Atheism-limits of ignorance
'Of course, there will always be a few nutjobs that cling to these old beliefs, just like the ones that still worship the Norse gods.'

How offencive to the Astur religion! Have you ever taken the time to sit down and reaserch there belifes? Have you ever reaserched any religion? I am intrested to know.


'The only reason science re-interprets evidence is because some new evidence comes along. Religion has no new evidence, it has supposedly infallible books that never change. All that happens is people try to change the meanings of the words to make it compatible with science. This is a ludicrous way of doing things, and nulls the possibility of any of their claims being infallible or even true.'

Says who? Religion takes the new evidence brought forward by science, philosophy and others and shapes a new belife around that. Darwinism has done the same countless times. For instance, in the 1970's some die hard evolutionists refused to even concider the possibility that astroids existed and could wipe out species on earth because this added a new dimension to evolution they were not willing to concider. They are largly discredited. There is no reason religions can not do the same, they just take longer to do it because of stiffed backed conservitives who flock to various religions for some reason.

Holy books never change? Thats rubbish. Holy Books change all the time. The Mormons added a whole new book to the bible. New translations are constantly forcing us to re-evaluate certian passages and a universal version of the bible wasn't decided apon untill about the 6th or 7th century. Even then certian groups were always sproutting up to challenge scripture. And then there are Gnostic Satanists who put a whole new spin on the bible. I am sure other religions are simmilar.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  These People Truly Have No Limits athstmike 18 3160 June 13, 2018 at 3:22 am
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  Atheism VS Christian Atheism? IanHulett 80 26875 June 13, 2017 at 11:09 am
Last Post: vorlon13
  The ignorance of Ph.Ds schizo pantheist 44 7893 January 25, 2015 at 8:03 am
Last Post: Creed of Heresy
  Atheism, Scientific Atheism and Antitheism tantric 33 12380 January 18, 2015 at 1:05 pm
Last Post: helyott
  Strong/Gnostic Atheism and Weak/Agnostic Atheism Dystopia 26 11973 August 30, 2014 at 1:34 pm
Last Post: Dawsonite
  Debate share, young earth? atheism coverup? atheism gain? xr34p3rx 13 10393 March 16, 2014 at 11:30 am
Last Post: fr0d0
  [split]Atheism is based of ignorance. Sword of Christ 158 41565 November 8, 2013 at 9:07 pm
Last Post: Whateverist
  Theism doesn't corner the market on ignorance. The Reality Salesman01 10 3731 October 13, 2013 at 12:19 am
Last Post: Vincenzo Vinny G.
Shocked If ignorance is bliss... Tea Earl Grey Hot 42 9542 February 21, 2013 at 11:34 am
Last Post: PyroManiac
  A different definition of atheism. Atheism isn't simply lack of belief in god/s fr0d0 14 11962 August 1, 2012 at 2:54 pm
Last Post: Mister Agenda



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)