Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 08:42am PT
|
Service?
Self-service, perhaps.
Call my crazy, but my definition of 'service' is doing things for others they want or need done without compensation.
I haven't seen much of that, here.
Um...I haven't seen that in this thread.The OP kicked off this thread with typical, provocative innernut name calling. That's fine with a bit of humor.
I haven't detected any of that from this source either.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 08:50am PT
|
Whether agnostic, theist, or atheist, an individual either attempts to define reality for others or not.
So far, I've seen no atheists here attempt to do that, but plenty of theists and agnostics sure have.
Control issues, probably. It isn't the 'ism', it's the individual.
Perhaps Miss Manners 101 would be a better class for you, Locker!
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 08:56am PT
|
I'd respond, but I'm too busy checking everyone's typos.
I believe in service.
|
|
rbord
Boulder climber
atlanta
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 09:29am PT
|
Thanks Jawon.
My point is this. You started this thread of mass spewing about Christianity on our pubic discussion forum. You started it by implicitly disparaging the conversation that we're having (spewing). You created the thread because YOU need to tell everyone that you know the TRUTH, and if we don't change our beliefs to match yours, we will suffer eternal consequences.
But I'm the bully? When I said that self interest is high for all of us, was I bullying myself?
Thanks for your participation. I've offered a question that bothers me.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 09:36am PT
|
Jesus loves you, Locker.
Not like He loved your mom, perhaps, but still....
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 09:39am PT
|
I think the distinction between 'not knowing' and out-and-out disbelief may blur a bit at the 99.9% mark, but I can't really know for sure.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 10:20am PT
|
Seems like ego is at the center of the belief that the sciences that we have invented and the models we have developed account for all of reality and are perfectly accurate. -Mark Force
That is seriously messed up.
Perhaps this is one that just slipped out, that MF keeps in reserve to tell his anti-science, uber-religious clients?
|
|
Byran
climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 11:14am PT
|
Man I can't even tell you how many people I've come across who claim that the current scientific models 'account for all of reality and are perfectly accurate'.
Oh wait, actually I can.
It's exactly zero.
But if I do find one, i'll let em know how egotistical they are.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 11:30am PT
|
It's the sad little 'science = religion' argument - put out by the religious in an attempt to degrade the credibility of evidence-based theory so as to put in on the same intellectual and logical plane as desire-based faith. A purely defensive maneuver.
They attempt to foist the same on atheism, too.
Essentially -
"Well, if I'm an idiot, then so are you."
Not that the religious are all idiots. Just the religious who try to conflate faith with the credibility of well-supported scientific theories.
Apples (get it?) and oranges.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 12:17pm PT
|
Spoken like Hitler.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 12:41pm PT
|
HFC, I may not have articulated well. I'm primarily a science guy. I work in in the realm of science applied clinically as best as I can determine. Love the method and the models and the process of discovery and understanding. My belief is that the science perspective of reality is overall the closer model to what is going on in what we call reality. The stand I'm making is that it is common for the science types to overestimate the reality of scientific models of reality. There are the rough edges and there is the stuff we just don't know. There's science that's pretty well worked out basic physics, mechanics, gravity, chemistry, evolution, geology, etc. and there's stuff that there are questions - cosmology anyone?
My belief is that religion isn't an accurate model of reality, but that there is room for some form of intelligent force that underlies observable phenomena at some level (particle physics? the presence of homeostatic adaptation in living systems?) that is not completely accounted for in our reductionistic scientific models, as useful as they are. The method can be useful to the psyche it seems (archetypal insight?) for some, though the exercise of it from most examples seem to be primarily oriented around politics, economics, and control. Ethics that may come religion seem to often be useful - love/compassion, charity, service, non-judgement, forgiveness.
IMHO ;-), the only completely science based position is that there are some things we seem to know well, some things we sort of know, and some things we just don't know.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 01:02pm PT
|
Paging Donald Rumsfeld. Donald Rumself, to the Spew Ward.
That one's choice of ethics can be informed from a variety of sources, including religion, is a given among the non-religious. Some of us also recognize that, historically, many religious ethics are borrowed either from other religions or previous, non-religious sources. To the non-religious, the source of ethics may be interesting, but action is everything.
Fundamentalists, in contrast, insist that morality hail from their god. Given this, the non-religious are assumed to either be a) ignorant of the 'true' source of their morals or b) not as moral as a religious person, because that is simply not possible without fealty to their god. While action is important to a fundamentalist, the ethics that drive those actions must also be pure.
Such xenophobic viewpoints are characteristic of cults. The exclusivity necessary for cult survival is defended by de-legitimizing non-members using measures that society values most greatly. We see this in nearly every thread involving fundamentalist Christianity. It is a divisive and wholly unnecessary byproduct of absolutist thinking.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 01:08pm PT
|
Tvash, yes, the idea that ethics and morality can only come through believing in god and following some religion is a silly notion.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 01:09pm PT
|
I'm not responding to you. I'm merely making an observation.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 01:11pm PT
|
IMHO ;-), the only completely science based position is that there are some things we seem to know well, some things we sort of know, and some things we just don't know.
That's the way I learned the scientific method, and I don't think it's changed. After all, if scientists really thought they knew everything, they'd have nothing to do.
John
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 01:25pm PT
|
Given this, the non-religious are assumed to either be a) ignorant of the 'true' source of their morals or b) not as moral as a religious person,
Where's ur source for Objective Morality?
|
|
Byran
climber
San Jose, CA
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 01:30pm PT
|
Every time someone pulls out the "science doesn't know everything, so there's a chance God could exist" argument, it makes me think of this scene
[Click to View YouTube Video]
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 02:18pm PT
|
As a human, our 'fundamental reality' is what our senses have evolved to tell us. Even that is incredibly fallible. And it doesn't really tell us much.
Past that, 'reality' is what our instrumentation and scientific models tell us. That's all we get.
That we will somehow get 'beyond that' is a human construct. The idea that there is some implicit order that we can 'know' without some form of observation is just that, an idea. We can predict such an implicit order, but if we can't test it, we can't validate it.
And if we could, we'd still be faced with - what's the implicit order underlying the implicit order?
|
|
Norwegian
Trad climber
dancin on the tip of god's middle finger
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 02:23pm PT
|
god believes in me,
and she is arguing with her
peers about whether i exist or not.
they are fighting wars over
who's the spiritual boss,
some of them believe in
dingus, others chuck clance.
there's a sect voting for neil young
and one for robin williams.
though your god believes
in and worships me.
and she thinks that jim morrison
is my son and is awaiting his re-birth.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2014 - 02:54pm PT
|
Moosedrooll and Tvash, now that's what I'm talkin' about!!!!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!