Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

What is "Religion"?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-46 of 46 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 23 Sep 2011 19:45:46 BDT
Mr GA says:
Isn't theology a description of a set of beliefs relating to God.

Religion can be a much broader subject.

Posted on 23 Sep 2011 20:06:04 BDT
Chris says:
I don't know why people consider diarrhoea an illness. I love it. It's my favourite type of plop.

In reply to an earlier post on 23 Sep 2011 20:11:26 BDT
Spin says:
GA: Of course. "Truth" is not only obtained by methods which benefit the secular aspirations (an aspiration science fulfills) of mankind. Truth is sometimes hard to accept. Both theists and atheists reject any truth that counters their ability to mentally or physically profit. At last, the proposition that science is "truth" has been refuted by science itself.

In reply to an earlier post on 23 Sep 2011 21:59:59 BDT
Pendragon says:
"Do I really have to explain the consequences of the failure of science to identify dark matter"

Please do.

In reply to an earlier post on 23 Sep 2011 22:13:27 BDT
AJ Murray says:
I second this request. Spin, be a sweetie and enlighten us poor deluded fools.

Causality has been under attack since the discovery of the quantum tunneling. If this discovery means that Einstein's conception of causality doesn't hold true then, like Newton before him, the underlying paradigm is reassessed. In light of the new evidence.

Nuclear reactors and Satellites will still exhibit the same motions we already observe. We may have to deal with being existent in a in what is at some level a fundamentally acausal universe. Causality still exists in our frame of reference. It just doesn't hold at all levels.

What this would do, if true, is kill the cosmological argument stone dead. Since we would exist in a universe where events can be non-causal. :)

Posted on 23 Sep 2011 23:50:35 BDT
Religion is a tool. A tool that has been used, throughout history, to instill fear, to subjugate populations and to assert authority in primitive societies. Earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tidal waves, extreme weather, crop failures, solar/lunar eclipses, famine and plagues have all been blamed on the wrath of the gods. All of these catastrophes can be explained by simple science, but people still believe/fear the wrath of god in the 21st century.
I'm now off to do my homework, tidy my bedroom, clean my teeth and say my prayers. Santas watching.

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Sep 2011 21:08:32 BDT
Spin says:
Pendragon; Dark matter is a hypothetical construct designed to explain anomoloies in the gravitation of galaxies. In short, there should be more matter, therefore more mass, to enable galaxies, and any phenomenon in motion, to stick together and not fly off into space. (When you stir a cup of tea, the only thing that keeps the liquid from flying off into space is the sides of the cup. So it is with galaxis. As they spin something prevents them from tumbling out into space. But what? Science proposes Dark matter; it cannot be observed, nor does it have mass ( a physical contradiction) yet science insists it MUST occur. according to science, it is the ONLY explanation for the gravitation of galaxies. But it has not been found, nor has it been defined (they do not know what they are looking for), nor is there any proof whatsoever that it exists. If it is not found, our theories of "mass" are in danger of collapsing, as they are currently in danger of collapsing due to the latest discovery that a mass can travel faster than light.... Need I go on? Look it up, dude. Don't take my word for it...

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Sep 2011 21:11:21 BDT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on 25 Sep 2011 21:15:58 BDT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Sep 2011 11:52:12 BDT
"So by that definition science is a religion"
Nope, science is a methodology for determining and discarding falsehoods.

"And what do mean by "try to believe". One eithers believes or does not."
A great many famous religious people have said that they do not believe in god, but wish they could and try to believe jsut in case. It is not necessary for the follower to actually believe, just to try to and live as if he does.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Sep 2011 17:54:44 BDT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Sep 2011 09:21:48 BDT
"A great many famous scientists have said they believe in something underlying the cause and design of the natural world. So your argument is invalid."
That invalidates no argument that I have formulated.

"And what do you mean by "trying to live AS IF one believes". One believes or does not believe. There is no in-between. "
Are you really that dumb? You either move or do not move, does this stop you from trying to move? Belief is not a choice, you cannot make yourself believe at will. Some people try to believe but do not believe.

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Sep 2011 13:06:40 BDT
Huck Flynn says:
because Dear Spinny
that is what science does - it adjusted from a geocentric view of the solar system to a heliocentric one etc etc etc
how do you think we discovered about the speeding neutrino (did anyone breathalyse it?) ?
because scientists were looking for it and built big machines to detect it
science also publishes its discoveries - it doesn't keep its methods secret like certain branches of non science
it's called progress - something that doesn't often happen in these discussions :-)

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Sep 2011 13:09:16 BDT
Huck Flynn says:
and how is it that we hurt god oh great master ?
physical pain, mental pain (does he have a brain and nervous system) ?
with every little breach of behaviour across the universe he must be in constant agony. i'm tempted to say it would be better for a person to have a large rock tied around their neck and thrown into the sea than for that person to lead another person to believe this sort of twaddle.

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Sep 2011 19:37:13 BDT
AJ Murray says:
9 Lines is extensive now?

-"Science proposes Dark matter; it cannot be observed, nor does it have mass ( a physical contradiction) yet science insists it MUST occur."

In what universe does Dark Matter not have mass? Would this be the same universe in which humans are not apes and there are male and female chemical processes Spin?

In reply to an earlier post on 28 Sep 2011 20:04:41 BDT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Sep 2011 07:39:58 BDT
Spin, One believes or does not. I have already agreed. One knows or one does not know. One remembers or one does not remember.
All these things are true. But nevertheless one can TRY to believe, can TRY to know and can TRY to remember.

What happens is you are in a state of NOT believing/knowing/remembering and you actively try to take steps to get to the position where you DO believe/know/remember.
You are being really thick here Spin, and that's not my fault, it is yours.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Sep 2011 22:57:44 BDT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 30 Sep 2011 09:25:08 BDT
Spin, you are highlighting nothing not already considered in the formulation. I note, that you ahve been shown false on the score of "trying" to believe and so you change the subject to pantemporal knowledge.

My answer on pantemporality is an unpopular one, but one I think can be justified philosophically.

I know it is raining now. In the future I will know now that I remember knowing that it was raining, I will also know that I remember remembering knowing that it was rainign at intermittent times in between. (this recursion is not infinite because we do lose awareness of these things). I don't distinguish "truth" from memory because as I have said in several threads to you Spin, I don't think we can access much truth at all. But I do distinguish levels of accuracy in memory, which can be done through experience.

Essentially I don't necessarily believe that there is identity through time, what exists at any moment does not exist at any other on a level of identity, the continuation of objects happens at an identifity level (Identifity meaning the set of properties which identify an object, it's a little more complex than that but...essentially it was my first dissertation which I don't want to reproduce here)

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Oct 2011 19:09:28 BDT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on 10 Jan 2012 14:32:30 GMT
Pendragon says:
I have not yet viewed the Horizon programme on the hunt for the Higgs, but in the meantime and in similar vein there were developments yesterday in relation to dark matter. See, eg:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/01/10/astronomers_largest_map_dark_matter/

http://tech.uk.msn.com/news/dark-matters-cosmic-web-revealed-19
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  12
Total posts:  46
Initial post:  22 Sep 2011
Latest post:  10 Jan 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions