is religion merely an unproven theory, in particular the christian faith

[Lucky Luke]

you guys are gonna suck a fat one when you die and it turns out there is a god lol. do you know how unlikely it would be that this is all random? its pretty obvious to see that there is a design of sorts. a master creator if you will. this is a pretty cool article. doesnt prove theres a god but its interesting

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/01/20/can-science-prove-the-existence-of-god/#276e5045adae

I don't see anyone here saying there is not a god or gods or something else we cannot explain. Your now talking about an afterlife which is a different topic.

You are assuming there is a God ,and one you can relate to from what you believe, that there is an after life and there is a judgement day and there is a heaven and a hell. Considering the Catholic God forgives all I don't see the point of a judgement day..... If its a Jewish God it wont matter unless your Jewish anyway as they are the only chosen people.

Maybe there is a creator of some sort but when we die...we die. We carry on by enriching the soil of mother earth. Maybe..

 

[NanoGadget]

you guys are gonna suck a fat one when you die and it turns out there is a god lol. do you know how unlikely it would be that this is all random? its pretty obvious to see that there is a design of sorts. a master creator if you will. this is a pretty cool article. doesnt prove theres a god but its interesting

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/01/20/can-science-prove-the-existence-of-god/#276e5045adae

That argument (the article you linked) has already been torn to pieces by people far smarter than myself, but even I know that it's a bullshit line of reasoning. We only think it's indicative of something because we happen to be sentient beings who happen to exist in a universe that has conditions suitable for life to develop. It's really just circular reasoning.

 

[alltatup]

you guys are gonna suck a fat one when you die and it turns out there is a god lol. do you know how unlikely it would be that this is all random? its pretty obvious to see that there is a design of sorts. a master creator if you will. this is a pretty cool article. doesnt prove theres a god but its interesting

That is a weird thing to say: "god's" gonna laugh at us and say you fucked up? That's one fucked up god...

 

[NanoGadget]

That is a weird thing to say: "god's" gonna laugh at us and say you fucked up? That's one fucked up god...

Seems consistent with the judeo-christian god... you know, the one that sends to to hell to be tortured for all eternity if you don't love him enough or say naughty words.... yup, seems about right.

 

[alltatup]

I personally find comfort in my belief in infinity, which makes our entire universe a speck on a speck of star dust in the cosmos. Which leads me to assume that we aren't the only life forms around. What the amazing telescopes are able to map out in our "corner" of the cosmos is a speck. There is no totality in infinity: this gives me comfort, because it demonstrates the extreme limitations of human knowledge.

As for institutionalized religion: it's been the bane on human existence for the past 2,000 years give or take a few years. When Christianity got "institutionalized" in Europe during the Dark Ages, it became an extraordinarily repressive force. No one was allowed to learn to read and write outside of the clergy. (Printing press was about 1,000 years in the future.) Our species is still so brutish and primitive: it has used all the technological advances to flush the planet down the toilet. When you stop to think what 2 thousand years means in the evolution of our species, it's just a speck of time.

But "mother nature" persists around us, and will clean up after we're gone. That's my spiritual refuge...

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

it's not that no one but clergy was allowed to learn to read and write, nobility was not only allowed to learn, it was encouraged. the common folk could have taught themselves pretty easily, IF, as you said the printing press was extant. no press means books are very rare, and valuable. so the guys digging shit all day don't have any.
the clergy was taught to read and write so they could spend most of their days copying books, for the nobility and higher ups in the church

 

[Lucky Luke]

Masses were even done in Latin, which the common man didn't speak.

 

[alltatup]

I personally find comfort in my belief in infinity, which makes our entire universe a speck on a speck of star dust in the cosmos. Which leads me to assume that we aren't the only life forms around. What the amazing telescopes are able to map out in our "corner" of the cosmos is a speck. There is no totality in infinity: this gives me comfort, because it demonstrates the extreme limitations of human knowledge.

As for institutionalized religion: it's been the bane on human existence for the past 2,000 years give or take a few years. When Christianity got "institutionalized" in Europe during the Dark Ages, it became an extraordinarily repressive force. No one was allowed to learn to read and write outside of the clergy. (Printing press was about 1,000 years in the future.) Our species is still so brutish and primitive: it has used all the technological advances to flush the planet down the toilet. When you stop to think what 2 thousand years means in the evolution of our species, it's just a speck of time.

But "mother nature" persists around us, and will clean up after we're gone. That's my spiritual refuge...

Right, I forgot about the nobility. My point was that the church was extremely repressive and controlling; you can pretty much look at any time in history and see that. It really didn't want anyone else reading the Bible. It wanted control over everyone.

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

that's the purpose of all religions. to control people. spirituality and religion are two very separate things. the church still wants to control everyone. it always will, as that is its only purpose. how do you control what people think? teach them from childhood that the myths you believe (possibly) are real, and that you are their direct conduit to God.....people that believe that will do pretty much whatever you tell them.

 

[alltatup]

that's the purpose of all religions. to control people. spirituality and religion are two very separate things. the church still wants to control everyone. it always will, as that is its only purpose. how do you control what people think? teach them from childhood that the myths you believe (possibly) are real, and that you are their direct conduit to God.....people that believe that will do pretty much whatever you tell them.

Institutionalization is death to free, creative thought: we've seen it over and over throughout history. The pressures to conform seem to drive all institutions; I can't think of one that doesn't demand conformity: education, military, religion, politics....

But this is my world view and these are my beliefs and perceptions; I'm not trying to convince anyone that I'm right. I've always been an outsider, which is why I never joined in any organized religion or any other kind of group for long. And why I critique institutionalization. I couldn't stand the pressures to conform, and how threatened people can feel by those who think and act differently. Mejor andar solo que mal acompañado: Better to walk alone than in bad company.

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

some things require conformation, but that doesn't have to be a life long habit. if you're in the military, you're expected to follow the same rules, the same way, as everyone else, every time. there's a reason for that, and i not only understand it, i support it. but when you leave the military, there's no requirement to maintain that habit.
nor does that apply to all things, religion and education should be personal experiences. people shouldn't have cookie cutter lessons shoved down their throats. there's no way to have a room with 20 or more students all keeping pace together. some people will pick up on things right away, some will take a little longer, some will have to have flash cards with pictures to take home, and a few will just never get it. to treat them all the same way doesn't make sense. the ones that get it right away are held back, bored. the ones that will never get it should be in other classes, the ones that need flash cards should be using them with each other....

 

[alltatup]

Roger: I teach college students and I agree that I can't teach them all the same way, but I wouldn't ever want to segregate them into groups like you describe. The classroom is a micro model of the world they'll be entering after they graduate, and in the real world, we have to cooperate with people who are very different from us. I teach outsiders; many of them come from extreme socio-economic disadvantage--I live in a southern state that leans towards numbering among the least progressive southern states.

I just spend a lot more individual time with the ones who struggle, and it seems to make all the difference in the world to the majority of them. Many college kids still need a lot of mentoring, guidance and remedial instruction.

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

i agree with you as far as the sociological aspects go. i wasn't suggesting segregation because of social stratification, i was suggest it because of intellectual disparity. the more intelligent are held back by the less, and the less intelligent feel inadequate next to the more intelligent

 

[alltatup]

i agree with you as far as the sociological aspects go. i wasn't suggesting segregation because of social stratification, i was suggest it because of intellectual disparity. the more intelligent are held back by the less, and the less intelligent feel inadequate next to the more intelligent

I'm not sure we can separate social stratification from "intellectual disparity": I think they go hand in hand in a white supremecist society and culture.

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

i don't feel like any kind of supremacist. i never suggested that i'd be in the "more intelligent" segment.....i'd just be glad to fall in that middle ground.

social stratification is artificial, people can buy their way into a different, "higher" social strata, and lose their standing and be forced into a lower strata, with no regard to intelligence or ability. even if you're part of a "layer" you're still mobile within that layer.

intellectual differences are real. the reason they measure IQ is that they can....(not that its a useful metric in the real world)
some people learn faster. that's real. makes no difference that the slower learners feel bad, it's still real.
people should have to earn self esteem. if you hand it to someone on a little certificate, they didn't earn it, and it's not real. earned self esteem is what gives you the ability to deal with adversity later in life. holding people back from their potential so that others won't feel bad, is supremely stupid.
separate them, give them separate curricula, give them different goals to reach, and they can all feel that they've earned what they have.

 

[Lucky Luke]

Interesting convo. My mum once told me that when she went to school there was three scools in the local area. 1 was for "smarter" kids. 2 was for the avg and 3 was for the trade school kids.

Not sure if that model has a place today but sometimes we need to look at the past for answers to the future.

Was a headmaster on the news/current affairs here last night that the students pick their own subjects (over 100 to choose from including robotics, coding etc) and can even pick there teacher. Idea is that the kids are more engaged and feel in control and therefore have better results that suit them. My internet is playing up but I believe it was this episode https://tenplay.com.au/channel-ten/the-project

 

[alltatup]

Roger, I never meant to imply that you were a supremecist!!! I'm talking about our society, which I perceive as white supremecist. And most white people don't have the slightest idea of just how priveleged they are in our society, or how disadvantaged some minorities are because the middle class and above are so economically segregated and distant from impoverished communities. It never ceases to amaze me how sheltered the vast majority of white folks are.

Reminder: these are my views, my perspectives, so I assume nothing about yours.

"IQ" differences are not the only kind of differences, and intelligence does not have merely one measurement because there are many ways that it manifests. Being able to read Shakespeare or do calculus is only one measure. Humans possess so much more intelligence (or lack thereof) on various levels and in various capacities.

I value emotional intelligence highly, and I value all kinds of artistic intelligence very highly as well.

 

[Beefbisquit]

Seems consistent with the judeo-christian god... you know, the one that sends to to hell to be tortured for all eternity if you don't love him enough or say naughty words.... yup, seems about right.

You mean, the god who knew exactly what you were going to do before you did it, had the power to stop you, chose not, then chooses to punish you based on his plan that he put in motion?

 

[alltatup]

You mean, the god who knew exactly what you were going to do before you did it, had the power to stop you, chose not, then chooses to punish you based on his plan that he put in motion?

That god, as well as the one who says, "I'll make a deal with you. If you accept me as your personal savoir, I will send you to heaven. If, however, you decline this offer for whatever reason, you will burn in hellfire for eternity."

 

[Bugeye]

You mean, the god who knew exactly what you were going to do before you did it, had the power to stop you, chose not, then chooses to punish you based on his plan that he put in motion?

Ha ha! Can God make a rock so big and heavy that even He can not lift it?