 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The God Delusion 2010
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: olddude Date: 26 Aug 10 - 08:24 PM Nothing wrong with that Art. You also don't go around putting your religion or beliefs in others face like many do here. Like I don't preach mine to others , I don't want others with their faith (and yes non belief is a faith) preaching to me. If one thinks Christians are prejudiced to them as someone here wrote, maybe it is because they came into someone's face preaching your own concept of life over and over again and then wonder why they take grief from others .... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Art Thieme Date: 26 Aug 10 - 08:15 PM As I've said, faith necessitates a leap into thought processes that I cannot make. I usually try to say I "think" something is true rather than merely leap unthoughtfully to a place where a thing is truth because I want it to be that. To me, it's just wishful thinking! Art |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: olddude Date: 26 Aug 10 - 08:05 PM And what the hell laws are you talking about that are based on christian belief ... ahhhh stuff like not being allowed to steal or kill or things like that ... oh is that ok for an athiest??? or are those laws only Christian laws ... Yea about 100 years ago there were laws you couldn't do business on sunday .. ya know what that was for .. not to go to church , to try and get folks to spend some time with their family ... ya and those laws were removed .. probably a good thing .. Wow ... tons of Christian laws .. yup .. probably that drinking and driving one also .. is that ok to do as an atheist also Why do I bother .. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: olddude Date: 26 Aug 10 - 08:01 PM When you cannot justify your actions you cry predjuice .. exactly where? I live in the same country you do ... I do not see any laws saying you go to jail if you don't go to church or if you are a non believer you get public whipping or something .. By the way the F'in country was founded by mostly people of no faith or very non christian faith ... It just so happens most of the people of faith are Christians that somehow that bothers you and now it is your mission to preach your religion of non belief to those of us that don't buy into it .. yet it is ok cause it is a non-belief .. but you cry like a little girl if someone knocked on your door with a pamphlet of the 10 commandments AHHH try the 1st Admendment .. that existed since day 1 .. no one at no time has predjuiced you because of your non faith ... but you sure as HELL want to do that to us .. Again what a Joke |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Bill D Date: 26 Aug 10 - 07:52 PM Besides what I posted in 5-6 earlier posts last night and today..(and which seem to have been WAY too long and 'middle of the road' for most others here)... I agree very much with John P about "This country, and its laws, are overwhelmingly slanted toward Christianity. As a non-Christian, I have often felt strong prejudice against me...." and "...no non-religious person will be elected to high office any time soon. That IS political discrimination, and one that is supported by many otherwise "good" Christians." That IS the way much of the situation exists currently....no matter how you view the relevance of it.... and one of the consequences of that situation is that non-religious persons are mostly relegated to writing, technical advice, blogging...etc. and other less visible posts. There is an enormous amount of experience and competence among these folks which very seldom is available thru elected officials, simply because they would never be elected once the hired 'diggers' discover they are either atheist or non-Christian. This has bothered me for 30 years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: olddude Date: 26 Aug 10 - 07:44 PM WELL SAID WES EXACTLY MY POINT. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Wesley S Date: 26 Aug 10 - 07:39 PM "You made my point in asserting that you think it would be 'not polite' for anyone to question the truth of your beliefs." And you're missing my point. I have no objection at all that you question the truth of my beliefs. You are of course welcome to your views.In my memory I've not seen a thread where people of faith tried to convert those of you who are happy in your athiesm. What I find interesting is that so many non-believers here feel it's their duty to start threads and get in the face of those people who belive in a higher power of some sort - just to tell them how wrong they are. IF people of faith were to take ACTIONS against you for your beliefs that would be wrong. But it seems to me that many of the athiests here find THOUGHTS objectionable. And I've been told that before - that my thoughts are offensive to another Mudcatter even though we've never met - and I've taken no actions against them. It appears that some of the athiests here would love to become the thought police. It's the difference of thoughts vs actions. Can you see the difference? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: olddude Date: 26 Aug 10 - 07:37 PM Lets see, all blacks are lazy right and all polish are stupid and all Irish are drunks and all Christians are Jerry Falwell ya know you are no better than those you preach against with your anti faith constant bashing .. absolute generalizations no better then those who make such comments as above .. what a sham ... the great athiest non god came down and told you exactly what life was all about and how it all worked and now it is your mission to preach to the rest of us or enlighten the rest of us on the folly of our faith ... exactly the same thing as the door knockers .. maybe worse what a sham. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Lizzie Cornish 1 Date: 26 Aug 10 - 07:18 PM 'Turn me Tender' - Martyn Joseph "Turn me tender again, fold me into You...Turn me tender again, through Union with You...." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: John P Date: 26 Aug 10 - 07:17 PM I wish there were better words than "atheist" or "agnostic", since both of these carry lots of connotations that don't apply to me. What's the word for "I've never been given any reason to even consider it" or "it really doesn't make any sense to me"? I suppose I would consider myself an atheist if I could get away from the "atheism is a belief" bullshit. The fact is that I pay more attention to my little toe than I do to my lack of belief in god, in that I wash and clothe my toes. I do think it's odd for Christians in the USA to complain about being discriminated against or insulted. This country, and its laws, are overwhelmingly slanted toward Christianity. As a non-Christian, I have often felt strong prejudice against me. I gave up any hopes of a political career long ago -- no non-religious person will be elected to high office any time soon. That IS political discrimination, and one that is supported by many otherwise "good" Christians. I like my Christian friends, all of whom are good, moral, honest people. I do think they are irrational to some degree, in that they are willing to believe something for which there is no evidence. But I suppose most of us have our own irrational quirks . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Smokey. Date: 26 Aug 10 - 07:03 PM If you play it backwards at 16rpm, you get to hear the subliminal messages.. And I wouldn't tell that to just anyone.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Aug 10 - 06:44 PM Dear Guest, Suibhne Astray - If you understand the nature of a hologram, each tiniest part of it contains the essential structure and nature of the entire hologram. If the hologram sprang out of something deemed "divine" then every least part of it is likewise deemed divine. This would include the song "My Ding-a-Ling". You are now free to debate about what the word "divine" means, and I happily leave you to it, not particularly caring one way or the other whether your view of it resembles mine... ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Aug 10 - 06:10 PM Tommy Cooper: Two blokes knocked on my door last Sunday morning. They only wanted to talk about vacuum cleaners. That's all I need, I thought. Bloody Jehoover's Witnesses. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Smokey. Date: 26 Aug 10 - 05:56 PM He moves in mysterious ways. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 26 Aug 10 - 05:31 PM Chuck Berry? In what way is My Ding-a-Ling a manifestation of the divine? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: MGM·Lion Date: 26 Aug 10 - 05:20 PM Wesley S ~ Your post of 3.36 missed my point by so huge a distance that I hardly know where to begin to reply. Of course I think one should be civil. I would regard it as very rude to insult anyone's wife or children, and would never dream of doing so. BUT I regard the questioning of metaphysical concepts which I find absurd to be a different order of communication altogether; & I think it is cheating for a religious person, when his faith is treated with less than unquestioning respect, because 'religions must be regarded as sacrosanct, & it is unseemly to question them', to come on as if one had done something equivalent to being less than civil to his family. You made my point in asserting that you think it would be 'not polite' for anyone to question the truth of your beliefs. I consider the appeal to the concept of 'politeness' a feeble evasion, a pusillanimous cop-out, in this context: but one which the religious are only too prone to resort to. THAT was my point. Can you really not see this distinction? ~Michael~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Art Thieme Date: 26 Aug 10 - 05:14 PM I'm a completely secular Jewish atheist who has been married to a Jehovah's Witness for nearly 44 uniquely great years. Now, at age 69, I am finally able to see that I got married for the friction! The friction is what informs my life--and myself. I've learned so much. The mutual loving friction makes for incandescent orgasms. Art |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Smokey. Date: 26 Aug 10 - 05:05 PM McGrath, this is my universe, and I say so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Smokey. Date: 26 Aug 10 - 05:03 PM "They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong ergo, if one is wrong, they're all wrong." That seems to be a bit flawed, Sweeney.. One of them could be right. But I doubt it :-) They could all be a bit right, though. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Aug 10 - 04:58 PM How would you set about "proving" that Duke Ellington (or Chuck Berry) is good? You believe he is, and so do lots of other people, but that's a matter of "faith"... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Smokey. Date: 26 Aug 10 - 04:52 PM Pah. Chuck Berry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray Date: 26 Aug 10 - 04:42 PM The equation is simple enough - it runs: They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong ergo, if one is wrong, they're all wrong. Truth on the other hand is that which is common to all and entirely falsifiable - the rest is just funny hats & hoo-hah; folklore, superstition, myth, mumbo-jumbo and other such cosmic debris that we could really do without taking too seriously. Personally, I am an Athiest because I can't conceive of a greater divinity than Duke Ellington. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Aug 10 - 04:27 PM Good point. But you don't introduce drink to tiny babies! I'm not saying that children should be kept ignorant about religion until they reach the age of majority. Religion has been part and parcel of world history and no school education would be complete without an objective consideration of it. I am saying that I think it's wrong to give children a set of beliefs, presented to them as truth, without telling them that this is simply one set of beliefs that one body of people hold to be true, and here are some others that you may consider to be equally valid (or equally invalid even). And they should be listening to their science teachers telling them to accept nothing as fact/truth until they have been presented with evidence. Real evidence, not witness or hearsay. The Bible contains very little evidence. I'm not sure I accept your juxtaposition of hostile values with informal atheism... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Aug 10 - 04:03 PM atheistic posters on billboards around every corner Have you ever looked at the posters that are up on virtually every billboard? They might not be formally atheistic, but they certainly propagate a pretty hostile set of values. As for children, the analogy with drink isn't bad, but I suggest it points the other way. Growing up in a family where drinking in moderation is part of the way of life is a better preparation for handling it in adult life then keeping it at arms length until you are suddenly exposed to it, and get overwhelmed by it. The same can be true with religion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Aug 10 - 04:01 PM Even tough-guy soldiers are not immune! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-rodda/us-soldiers-punished-for-_b_687051.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 26 Aug 10 - 03:54 PM As someone who holds to a very minority style spiritual belief system (Gnosticism) I find it impossible to be offended by atheists who scorn what I believe in. I'm more often offended by the BIG religions telling me I'm wrong or will burn in hell-fire of I don't convert, especially as historically they didn't bother waiting for spiritual fires but instead literally did burn people in the flesh and en masse who believed as I do! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: VirginiaTam Date: 26 Aug 10 - 03:51 PM There was nothing offensive or oppressive in the original post. The fact remains horrible things have been and are still being done in the name of religion (pick one). I neither like nor approve of Dawkins' style but I agree that religion can often be and is dangerous. And not just the acts of war and personal physical violence but the psychological damage it does to its own followers and non believers. Any system that promotes intolerance, exclusivism, misogyny, to name a few, is unacceptable to my mind and makes no valuable contribution to society. Not saying I DO or DO NOT believe in a supreme thinking creative energy (god if you like). I just do not and will not follow a religion. I never felt more isolated, terrified and excluded than when I was a praying, bible reading, church going "believer." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Aug 10 - 03:45 PM Well, as the chap who brought the ubiquitous bell-ringing and crucifixes into it ("I can't go into my town without being regaled with large crosses, clanging church bells and wayside pulpits everywhere I go" quoth I), let me just say that these things don't actually annoy me at all. In fact, I listen to "Bells On Sunday" on BBC Radio 4 every Sunday. I didn't say they annoyed me or that I was complaining about them per se. I was simply pointing out that we are expected to experience these things as part of the assumed default position of religion (even in our secular nation, in which fewer than one person in fifteen ever attends a regular church service). Whenever I get the chance to visit cities I never miss the opportunity to visit great cathedrals, and Bach's Mass in B minor is one of my desert island discs (conducted by Giulini, please). I wonder what the average believer would think of atheistic posters on billboards around every corner (one poster per church crucifix would be about fair). It's the sheer arrogance of believers in assuming that the rest of the planet should put up with this not-so-subliminal proselytising that's so amusing ("Get over it": - sorry, Joe, but you said it!) As for christening being harmful to infants, pray tell me what would be so wrong with waiting until the child is old enough, and informed enough about all the alternatives, to make their own mind up. That would be a far more moral approach. I'm not allowed to join the Campaign For Real Ale until I'm old enough (legally) to understand beer. I suppose I know the answer really. Religions are scared stiff of doing that because they know that very few people would ever sign up! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Aug 10 - 03:41 PM indoctrination disguised as education. The curious thing is that a big problem for such schools in England tends to be parents with no religious beliefs faking it so as to get their children in, because the educational results seem so much better than schools with no religious connection... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 10 - 03:41 PM Give me a break, Richard. If you want to condemn religious fundamentalists, you'll get no disagreement from me. But if you want to continue paint your condemnations with the wide brush of condemning all religion, then all I can say is that you're as blind as the fundamentalists are. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: GUEST,Wesley S Date: 26 Aug 10 - 03:36 PM "Someone wrote a few posts back that a good reason not to ridicule religion, even if one thinks it a ridiculous concept, is that it would not be 'polite' to do so. Can none of you lot recognise that as the con-trick that it is?: if we question your tenets you come over all wounded, as if we had said we think your wife is ugly and your children boorish and stupid; we are made to feel we have committed an error of taste and etiquette. That is not fair dealing." MtheGM - That was me a few posts back. My name is Wesley. I'm sorry that you feel that asking for polite behavior is a con of some sort. And - yes - I would feel all wounded if you were to say that my wife was ugly and my child was boorish and stupid. Even if it were true. Wouldn't you? Why is it out of the question to ask that you respect my beliefs - whatever they are? It's not that I mind your disbelief. It's the ridicule that goes along with it. I can understand why someone would chose to be an athiest. It's a very logical choice to make. What I don't understand is why a few of the athiests here find that it's necessary to go out of their way to poke fun at others. I don't like Swedish fiddle music. I've never felt the need to start a thread to say so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Richard Bridge Date: 26 Aug 10 - 03:27 PM Hello? Religion depends on faith and authority. Those are not evidence. Believe what you like. Do not impose irrationality or your faith-based rules on others. Christening (or the equivalent if any in other religions) is trivial (although I'm not so sure about a briss) - but religious parents go much further than that when they sign their children up for indoctrination disguised as education. Joe, it is you who is misrepresenting what critics of religion say. I should, however, like to see more evidence of religious moderates disliking or disapproving of religious extremists. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 10 - 03:17 PM Oh - I almost forgot to point out the silly contention that christening is somehow harmful to an infant. I suppose it's also wrong for parents to even discuss religious ideas in front of their children, for fear their little minds may be perverted. That's what I'm talking about - the idea that people on both extremes seek the same thing: to suppress and control what people say and do. There has rarely been any attempt at Mudcat to discussion religion as it is for the vast majority of people who take the middle road. Here at Mudcat, religion is almost always defined according to the actions of the extreme, fundamentalist minority. Get this straight: most religious people are plagued by fundamentalists, too. In fact, they have a far greater effect on us, and we may dislike them even more than you do. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 26 Aug 10 - 02:43 PM "the complaint against the bell-hearings and cross-sightings" yeah, that's daft too. I might as well complain about the vast amount of bedding plants there are to be seen around my village. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 10 - 02:30 PM It's interesting to see how quickly the usual pattern develops. The religion-haters make their foray, and those with religion make a response (which I consider to be a rational response). Then the religion-haters make their counterattack - but notice that by this point, they have redefined all religious people as ludicrous fundamentalists. As usual, the primary argument against religious people has to do with religion's rejection of the idea of evolution, and with the contention that religion is some kind of control mechanism designed to rule the lives of mindless people. But the fact of the matter is that there are few, if any, religious Mudcatters who reject evolution or who accept any sort of religious control over their lives. Steamin' Willie says this about Mr. Dawkins:
We have a few new elements in this thread, like annoyance at being forced to see crosses (on church property) or hear church bells. Can't say I have any answer to that, other than to say, "Get over it." But except for the addition of the complaint against the bell-hearings and cross-sightings, it's the usual argumentum ad absurdum - redefine all religion as fundamentalism so it's a sitting duck, and then shoot it down. For shame. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:58 PM I do find the idea of blasphemy or indeed taking offense at another's ridicule or dismissal of ones umm 'preferences' really daft. Eg: I like Modern Art but most people shout about it being total shit. Rather than being offended however I can retreat into my smugly self-satisfied awareness that I am right and they are just dumb. Christians of course have something even more brilliant to console themselves with, and that is the fact that they know everyone who disses them and their liking for god will burn forever in boiling blood and hell-fire... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:54 PM CREAK! CREAK! CREAK! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Richard Bridge Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:50 PM If an atheist believes there is no god, even though he cannot prove it, he is in the mirror position of a believer. He may still be a scientist but his belief is not susceptible of scientific proof. And to return to the irrationality of religious groups - http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=801 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:46 PM "Religion and science are not mutually exclusive." I have a strong feeling that they might be. You see religious people advance the hypothesis: 'there is a God' and a scientist is entitled to ask them to prove the hypothesis (probably not a wise thing to do - but there you go!). The scientist cannot prove that there is no God because you can't prove a negative (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence). Hence a true scientist, who must follow the laws of logic, can only be an agnostic - not an atheist. Note that, in a scientific context, the burden of proof lies with the religious person (it is he/she who has advanced, and who 'owns', the God hypothesis). On the other hand religious people tend to assert that they don't need 'proof' of the existence of God because they have 'faith' in His existence. To my mind this assertion of faith negates any possibility of dialogue between the religious person and the scientist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: MGM·Lion Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:44 PM Someone wrote a few posts back that a good reason not to ridicule religion, even if one thinks it a ridiculous concept, is that it would not be 'polite' to do so. Can none of you lot recognise that as the con-trick that it is?: if we question your tenets you come over all wounded, as if we had said we think your wife is ugly and your children boorish and stupid; we are made to feel we have committed an error of taste and etiquette. That is not fair dealing. Why, please, has "God" got so many things manifestly wrong? Take that concept you all came up a few years ago of "Intelligent Design", which was supposed to be another name for God but one that wouldn't offend us. When I pointed out that the phenomenon of childbirth in its present form [which thank providence I shall never have to undergo], or the necessity for all of us creatures of whatever degree of sentience or development to piss and shit regularly, however disagreeable, inconvenient, or worse, the circumstances, all point rather to Unintelligent Design, I would generally get looked at, and the subject would change, or my interlocutors would go away. ~Michael~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Smokey. Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:42 PM ...is a moron. Complete, total, utter, mouth-breathing, knee-walking, nanocephalic wanker. The cockles of my heart are truly warmed by such a display of charitable Christian tolerance. I must away to God's house and give thanks immediately, for I am divinely inspired. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Richard Bridge Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:41 PM The idea, however, that evidence can be dismissed on grounds of faith is surely not rationally defensible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Will Fly Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:33 PM Yup - time to jump off... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:29 PM Hark! I hear the sounds of the perpetual motion machine cranking on its endless round yet again. CREAK! CREAK! CREAK! It can drive you crazy, that thing. ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Will Fly Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:26 PM Georgiansilver: What I can't get my head round in that context is the way things are.... The intricate make up of the human body... the make up of a tree from its roots to the tiny veins in every leaf.... to the diversity of different flora and fauna.. the aqua dwelling life... Then why not read about it? There are perfectly good, straightforward scientific explanations for of these things. The real no-brainer for most people is that the immense time scale over which genetic diversity takes place is almost impossible to imagine. A lot longer than the 6,000 years which some otherwise rational people would have you believe is the age of the earth. mousethief: the idea that there is ANYBODY in the WORLD who only believes things based on reason, logic, science, and math is a moron. Complete, total, utter, mouth-breathing, knee-walking, nanocephalic wanker. Which says more about you than anyone else, I'm afraid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Smokey. Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:23 PM I just can't do faith, my head won't let me. In the words of Gerald Bostock, "God is an overwhelming responsibility." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:08 PM Exactly, Smokey. Militant believers are extremely uncomfortable taking on us, er, non-believers, or a-theists (you see? I have to define myself in their terms!) unless it's on their own ground. These days, if anyone asks me if I believe in God, I tell 'em they're asking the wrong question. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Bill D Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:06 PM "All Dawkins asks you to do is to insist on evidence ..." *smile*...yes...a fine idea! I'm convinced.... Please tell Dawkins he gets to explain that to these folks |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Smokey. Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:03 PM Believers like to characterise atheism as a belief system, which it patently isn't. I've never really worked out the motive for that. Because they can't discredit it on their own terms otherwise, and some feel a need to discredit it to lessen the insecurity of their own beliefs which are based on no more than faith. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The God Delusion 2010 From: Stu Date: 26 Aug 10 - 01:00 PM " The thought that a cell (where did it come from in the first instance) decided to split into two and so everything living begun does not compute within my brain." But it does compute in lots of people's brains, and those who dedicate their lives to finding out how and why these things have occurred and continue to occur can and do tell us. The whole thing is marvellously complicated, but the awe felt when contemplating the natural world and the universe we live in isn't the result of some deep intuitive revelation it's from the mind of a divine creator, it's the deeper understanding that we are the universe contemplating itself and understanding itself. Stop and think about that; we're made of the same stuff as supernovae and planets, interstellar gas clouds and comets - we are those things and we can recognise our own consciousness, contemplate the fact we are a product of a set of rules we are beginning to understand. A concept far more profound and beautiful any religion on earth has yet to get close to; all we have to do is recognise it ourselves and we can develop moral codes that recognise the sanctity and preciousness of all life (even that we don't even recognise at the moment) and the entire physical universe. We're only scratching the surface at the moment with our infant sciences; it's going to be a whole lot more incredible in years to come. I can't wait. |
