On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 21:07:58 +0530, Alin Marin Elena <alinm.elena@gmail.com> wrote:
in a general sense all of us are believers. all system of thoughts are based on believing something... or if you want to be scientific,assuming some hypothesis. This is the place where the believers start to split... in what I like to think dogmatic and critical thinkers.
the science which is the example you used... indeed starts with the statement there is X... and then puts all the machinery of critical thinking to establish some value of true or false to that statement... if true... the machinery continues and nice consequences areobtained... making your life better. if false a new statement is generated and the critical thinking process continues...
the problem with the statement there is a god... or if you want in a more philosophical manner, there is a primordial cause... is that once one applies the critical thinking process the outcome is the there is a god or there is not god... cannot be proved...
yes, it's beyond our ability to prove, or even to understand. people xxx years ago couldn't have conceived of electricity, or whatever. there are things we can't wrap our mind around, which aren't subject to the scientific process we understand; doesn't mean they can't exist.
The critical thinker... will say... I cannot use something I cannot prove to get a system of thoughts... the dogmatic believer will say there is a god... and then build his system of thoughts... with the consequences that we see today... probably Nietzsche put it the best with his God is dead.
since it can't be proven either way with the means at our disposal, saying "yes, there's god," or "no, there isn't one" are equally supported by scientific evidence. it _is_ a question of belief, either way. now there's plenty of quotes from scientists like altbert einstein and god knows how many others [pun intended], and equally or more quotes of others saying the opposite. confirms the 'scientific' result: is a matter of faith (and not only idiots believe). unfortunately there are idiots in all of these camps, and they'll as happily misuse religious sentiments (belief based on faith only, without critical thinking) as they misuse results of scientific research that weren't really meant for bad purposes.
Of course you will find well versed believers how will tell you... that science cannot give you a moral system... law of gravitation will not tell you what is good to eat... to rich heaven. indeed moral systems come from ethics... And ethics is fully under the governance of critical thinking... and absurd outcomes are discarded..
in my opinion that should be applied to any moral code, if it's based on religious traditions or not. we, humans, are apt to make mistakes and worse: use anything to our own advantage. there has to be critical thinking.
On the other hand certain system of thought, of religious inspiration will not change their moral rules even when the absurdity is shown via the critical thinking process and they will dismiss the outcome on the base of work of devil, devils, negative forces. In past times and even nowadays religion equates ethics in certain spaces, as source of moral... and that is in my humble opinion a sorry state.
i agree. i don't see it as "the work of religion," but as the work of bad or selfish people. if they use religion or something else depends on what's available. do you really think they fought those crusades because they believed in god, or was it for the plunder and whatever political gains they wanted to achieve? are the polititians of a certain super-power fighting the "axis of evil" only for moral reasons?
Now you may come with the argument that many people cannot be wrong, and there are plenty being religious around.
ahem, i didn't make this argument and don't support it.
I will invite them, then to see if a statement like that stands the critical thinking process. Who were the wrongs or the rights? The Christian who massacred Muslims or the Muslims who massacred the Christians. these are just simple facts that happened in the last 1000 years in Europe and Middle East. The Hindus who hacked to pieces Muslims or the Muslims who hacked to pieces Hindus... that was sometime in the last 100 years on the Indian subcontinent.. and all of them started simple by the fact that there is a god (in its various flavours) was assumed true by many.
in my opinion, that was not the reason for any of these massacres. it's that people in general don't think very much, don't like to ask themselves and others uncomfortable questions. talented people w/o scruples can misuse that, and if there's no "religion" around, they'll use something else. it's not that by abolishing religion you'll make people more critical; they'll find something or somebody else to follow; they'll be made an "offer they can't refuse."
And of course one can give a lot of examples of the absurdity that assuming true a statement like there is a god!
...and the other way around.
Personally I think more the religious ideas are exposed to critical thinking better for society... more people are allowed to question them faster the society will move towards a better place... but maybe all this is just wishful thinking...
and here i finally agree with you. there's so much BS around, not only but also in the garb of religion. -- phani. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org