Dubstepforum.com

narcossist wrote:Re science and religion: Isn't a lot of science based on approximations anyhow? Physics in particular as a model which happens to work in a lot of instances, but a lot of which is unprovavble and thus reamins theory rather than fact?

Nothing in science is "fact". It's a constantly evolving self correcting set of hypotheses, formulated based on evidence and crystalised through extensive repeatable and falsifiable testing. The wikipedia page on Scientific Method explains this far more thoroughly that I have the time to do right now.

Most things outside of Pure Mathematics are fundamentally unprovable at the moment. I say "at the moment" because it may be that one day we will totally understand the interaction of all matter and be able to conclusively say why such-and-such-a-thing happens.

For the moment, however, we can only look at experimental data, observe trends and attempt to form "theories" based on them. Note that the meaning of theory in Science is subtly different from the more broad definition of theory used in English. (e.g. That's true in theory). Gravity is "only a theory", but don't expect to see your house floating away any time soon. Rest assured, if you jump off a cliff you will go splat.

This neatly illustrates the fundamental difference between Science and Religion: Religion is certainty without evidence, Science is evidence without certainty.

Religion is certainty without evidence, Science is evidence without certainty.[/quote]

TechMouse wrote:

narcossist wrote:Re science and religion: Isn't a lot of science based on approximations anyhow? Physics in particular as a model which happens to work in a lot of instances, but a lot of which is unprovavble and thus reamins theory rather than fact?

Nothing in science is "fact". It's a constantly evolving self correcting set of hypotheses, formulated based on evidence and crystalised through extensive repeatable and falsifiable testing. The wikipedia page on Scientific Method explains this far more thoroughly that I have the time to do right now.

Most things outside of Pure Mathematics are fundamentally unprovable at the moment. I say "at the moment" because it may be that one day we will totally understand the interaction of all matter and be able to conclusively say why such-and-such-a-thing happens.

For the moment, however, we can only look at experimental data, observe trends and attempt to form "theories" based on them. Note that the meaning of theory in Science is subtly different from the more broad definition of theory used in English. (e.g. That's true in theory). Gravity is "only a theory", but don't expect to see your house floating away any time soon. Rest assured, if you jump off a cliff you will go splat.

This neatly illustrates the fundamental difference between Science and Religion: Religion is certainty without evidence, Science is evidence without certainty.

POINT how do we know wot things do. evrything could be a evil tool for torcher that we adaptid 2

oh and i red about that I.P.U Thing some sence

Music is my Religion & Dubstep is the Gosepl & The earth is my temple.... -As far as being into a Corporate Church orReligion Not for me-Although i'm willing to research any to see what peoples trip is... But Usually Far too many technicalitles corrupted Mainly for control over people....Specially when your talkin like god on your side for WAR-(Holy War) is the biggest Oxy-mormon..... But i have and will continue to experience healing through music!!! Also i like to be an optimist in hopes that slowlly through Higher conicious media Such as art an music we can Wake people up & evolve-But seems on the realls were all in for some shit planetarily over the next ten years...-No matter what be your the Faith if any....I just know i don't want live out the "Armaggedon" they re skriptin!!!! - PEACE-Nuff said

i'm a great believer in personal religion. if you feel the need to heap praise on whatever entity/entities you believe blessed you with life, then go ahead - but i don't see the point in making everyone else (often painfully) aware of it. all this lavish organised religion seems to be an overly self-satisfied and pompous way to go about it to me.

as for forcing other people to keep up a similar level of praise or taking 'gods will' into your own hands....well, fuck that.

i was a practising catholic up until about 14 or 15 (mainly due to my parents), now i'd say i'm probably a...materialistic buddhist. i don't want to hurt anybody or anything but i like buying stuff. i hope that there's an immortal soul inside us all - but if there isn't, i won't be around to worry about it so who cares?

pk- wrote:i'm a great believer in personal religion. if you feel the need to heap praise on whatever entity/entities you believe blessed you with life, then go ahead - but i don't see the point in making everyone else (often painfully) aware of it. all this lavish organised religion seems to be an overly self-satisfied and pompous way to go about it to me.

as for forcing other people to keep up a similar level of praise or taking 'gods will' into your own hands....well, fuck that.

i was a practising catholic up until about 14 or 15 (mainly due to my parents), now i'd say i'm probably a...materialistic buddhist. i don't want to hurt anybody or anything but i like buying stuff. i hope that there's an immortal soul inside us all - but if there isn't, i won't be around to worry about it so who cares?

Sensible way of looking at it, but I do think that too much faith in something that is unprovable, may keep people from finding real world solutions to their problems and make them accept the unacceptable as part of "god's plan" which I think may actually be detrimental to that person's existence, which is a shame in humanist terms, and stops folks reaching their full realisable potential. If people are happy in their delusions, I suppose that's up to them, but if or when it all comes crashing down, the old belief will not save them.

there's quite a few religions that are based on sound values even if their beliefs do turn out to be wishful thinking rather than anything realistic.

i still have quite a bit of time for christians - the non-fundamentalist flavour - because their general philosophy is a sound one whether or not their spiritual beliefs are true. charity, humility and general 'being nice' are good character traits to promote, even if they don't actually lead to eternity playing a harp on a cloud somewhere.

I do think that too much faith in something that is unprovable, may keep people from finding real world solutions to their problems

this is the sad truth about religion though isn't it. i'm sure there's a definite collaboration between the strength of religious conviction and the local economic & social hardships, because faced with a life of hardship the human reaction to it is often to look forward to a better life after death.

lol...not really sure what point i'm trying to make here. case of the verbal diarrohea i think

TechMouse wrote:Kevin Smith said it best in Dogma:

fuckin love Dogma!

Religion and Science are both human creations.

Both are flawed in many aspects.

Personally I prefer science, since it can be changed over time as we gain intelligence grows.
Religion on the other has remained the same for roughly 2000 years or more (depending on the religion), and stops the path to knowledge.

If something happens it is "The Will of God"
Thats their only explanation for the unknown. And if you have a talent or skill "God" Gave it to you.

I think you should live your life the way you want, within reason of course.
Everyone should have some sort of morals even without religion,
I mean some one pisses you off don't kill em.

Religion is a Touchy Subject,
But this forum has been pretty relaxed about their opinions, there hasnt been any flaming or name-calling

I particularly liked this article http://skepdic.com/atheism.html, especially this line -

"All theists are atheists in the sense that they deny the existence of all other gods except theirs, but they don't consider themselves atheists."

Which I thought was pretty canny

Followers of all religion feel that its their duty to convert those who dont believe.

Its like a "religious draft", join or go to hell

ZGK wrote:Followers of all religion feel that its their duty to convert those who dont believe.

Its like a "religious draft", join or go to hell

The "christian" guy at work (goes to church, attends meetings, utterly unaware of others thoughts and intolerant, if otherwise ok bloke), only ever tries to encourage the less bright staff members to meetings, presumably as he knows that anyone with a bit of a clue could probably point out the flaws in his thinking immediately.

There was a group in my old hometown, the Revelationists, who seemed to prey almost entirely on middle-class kids at a bit of a spiritual impasse, and ex-alkies and junkies (bit like the Manson family in that respect).

Two of my friends were in that group, and they ended up crashing in a car driven by a drunk driver that they were getting a lift home with. One of them, a promising young dancer was crippled for life - they visited her in hospital, and told her that this was God's will and that obviously her purpose was not to be a dancer. The more logical reason that she had lost her mobility due to a drunk not being able to control a car at high speeds seemed to have escaped them.

The other girl figured this out for the disgusting opportunism that it was, woke up to them and left. For months they rang her, popped round her house, and harassed her in every possible way, telling her God was upset at her turning away from him. Must be nice having to deal with this whilst recovering from your injuries and heartbroken as to what's happened to her friend.

Can't be totally against them even for this, as another mate probably would have killed himself if he hadn't joined them, so I'm grateful for that even though I think he's misguided.

This does seem like quite repulsive manipulation of vulnerable people though, and regardless of how decent most religious people are, this is far more twisted than anything I could comprehend doing to anyone in my godless ways.

[quote="ADRUU"] agnostic -> to atheist after 9/11 with some lingering secular buddhist psychology and aesthetic respect for religious symbolism...

What! How did 9/11 shake your belief in anything????!!!! Nothing changes man...

ha o.k. well...my agnosticism was just a polite, developing, non-confrontational atheism in disguise so there wasnt a huge jump, and when i refer to 911 i mean the events of the day and the dumb military reaction in iraq and afghanistan as a whole. most of us knew iraq was going to happen that month by the way.

i guess they were just the final justifications for apostasy. end result being i am actually willing to tell people their god doesnt exist now, and that religion is a giant collective failure.

So would you say you went from agnosticism to weak atheism, or from weak atheism to strong atheism?