Random Christianity Discussion

[Melena]

Don't know if this has been posted yet since I got to leave for work and only at the start of page 5, but this I feel is appropriate for this thread and sums up my opinion on religion.

http://toothfairyagnostic.com/wp-con...1/08/penn1.jpg

[Siatdiat]

Why is it that all the great videos like this on youtube are made by british dudes?

I think the final derail of any of these religious discussions comes down to people sticking to social norms. Someone starts mocking religion, then people who may or may not even believe in it start defending it, because it is "holy" to some. But plenty of other things that are deranged are fair game for derision. No one will defend things that society as a whole accepts as being full of shit. Its the ethics of what is ok to mock, and most people, even non-believers feel the need to protect "holy" stupid shit from assault.

I'm pretty sure if I started talking shit about scientology or people who believe in bigfoot, kaylia wouldn't put on his Capt Save-a-god uniform and come to the rescue.

If anyone who believes in any religion wants to have an actual discussion thats cool, but Moosey started this thread with the goal of witnessing to people. He never makes any claims besides he is a believer, religion changed his life, etc. There is really not much from his posts to argue, he doesn't even have a solid grasp on the ID argument. I don't think I have ever seen more words have less value.

[Greatguardian]

Education needs to keep up with the development of machines to replace jobs that uneducated(relative to the standard) humans get.

If it doesn't then unemployment will logically go up and people will be upset. We'll need more religion to keep those guys happy and not rioting because their lives will suck.

I'm not sure if this part was meant to be sarcastic or not, but if not then I think you're missing the point. Unemployment will become completely irrelevant. Obviously, capitalism is incompatible with a post-computer age future. You can't supply people with varying means of survival based on their labor input when labor input is irrelevant and survival is not remotely difficult to guarantee.

The fundamental shift is from "working because we have to" to "working because we want to". This is important. Humans are not a sedentary species. We're dynamic, evolutionary, and damned restless. When people are free to pursue their passions, you get artists who love art, musicians who love music, scientists who love science and people who do what they do because they love to do it. And if some people choose to be sedentary, so what? To be perfectly honest, it's their loss. It's not my concern, or yours. There will be more than enough for everyone regardless.

As far as machine intelligence goes, there's a big difference between automation and sentience. Even so, so what if we create a new species? If we can't get along with a species that we ourselves create, then we have no business trying to get along with anyone else in the cosmos.

[Byrthnoth]

I'm worried there is a large subsection of humanity that would be destructively incompatible with the vision you're describing... but not too worried because I expect humanity won't reach that point until long after I am dead.

[Greatguardian]

I'm worried there is a large subsection of humanity that would be destructively incompatible with the vision you're describing... but not too worried because I expect humanity won't reach that point until long after I am dead.

That's why I mentioned earlier that there's a good possibility that we'll destroy ourselves upon reaching this point. It's all dependent on how people choose to process the change. People are already aware of the possibility of this paradigm shift. The ones who will be left behind are the ones screaming the loudest right now. They can delay advancement, but they can't stop it. The big question is whether or not they decide to take us all down with them.

[Sera]

Don't know if this has been posted yet since I got to leave for work and only at the start of page 5, but this I feel is appropriate for this thread and sums up my opinion on religion.

http://toothfairyagnostic.com/wp-con...1/08/penn1.jpg

This.

Religion is a security blanket. Warm fuzzies when you need em. Nothing more.

[Jefe]

http://toothfairyagnostic.com/wp-con...1/08/penn1.jpg

I heard that on Adam's podcast. There are so many things wrong w/ it I wouldn't even know where to begin.

[Yugl]

I'm not sure if this part was meant to be sarcastic or not, but if not then I think you're missing the point. Unemployment will become completely irrelevant. Obviously, capitalism is incompatible with a post-computer age future. You can't supply people with varying means of survival based on their labor input when labor input is irrelevant and survival is not remotely difficult to guarantee.

The fundamental shift is from "working because we have to" to "working because we want to". This is important. Humans are not a sedentary species. We're dynamic, evolutionary, and damned restless. When people are free to pursue their passions, you get artists who love art, musicians who love music, scientists who love science and people who do what they do because they love to do it. And if some people choose to be sedentary, so what? To be perfectly honest, it's their loss. It's not my concern, or yours. There will be more than enough for everyone regardless.

As far as machine intelligence goes, there's a big difference between automation and sentience. Even so, so what if we create a new species? If we can't get along with a species that we ourselves create, then we have no business trying to get along with anyone else in the cosmos.

His point is that the development is gradual, not instant. Until you reach the ultimate goal, you displace people along the path.

[hey]

I heard that on Adam's podcast. There are so many things wrong w/ it I wouldn't even know where to begin.

Everything happens for a reason, amirite? If god wants you to be killed by a 50 ton truck, who the fuck are you to interfere with god's plan by stopping at a red light? And if he doesn't want you to die there, then you won't, so obviously it doesn't matter if you stop or not.

[Sera]

Religion is a giant teddy bear. People go to it for comfort. Whether it is in a time of crisis or need to make themselves feel better, or a way to comfort themselves re: their self image, or a way to comfort themselves re: their guilt. It is nothing more than a security blanket. The official mascot of all religion should be Linus from Peanuts, because that is what all religious people look like to me.

[Kaylia]

I think the final derail of any of these religious discussions comes down to people sticking to social norms. Someone starts mocking religion, then people who may or may not even believe in it start defending it, because it is "holy" to some. But plenty of other things that are deranged are fair game for derision. No one will defend things that society as a whole accepts as being full of shit. Its the ethics of what is ok to mock, and most people, even non-believers feel the need to protect "holy" stupid shit from assault.

I'm pretty sure if I started talking shit about scientology or people who believe in bigfoot, kaylia wouldn't put on his Capt Save-a-god uniform and come to the rescue.

Religion bashing is the "social norm" more often than not to be honest. My desire to defend a specific side doesn't come from the topic itself, but how people reach their conclusion. We could argue about the color of a virtual armor for all I care, if someone isn't being rigorous in his method, I will disagree with the conclusion, even if the actual result appears to be correct.

It doesn't help that most opinions I read are filled with emotions, contradictions, or are subject to bias. People aren't even trying to understand the other side in these discussions and automatically label it as "stupid".

Back in my college days, I used to be an atheist who was bashing religion at every opportunities. My opinion on the topic became way more moderate after doing sciences for 9 years...which according to everyone, should have the opposite effect. My situation might be an exception, but if I look at people around me, who are also doing sciences for a long time, I don't seem to be the only one who think that way.

[Jefe]

Everything happens for a reason, amirite? If god wants you to be killed by a 50 ton truck, who the fuck are you to interfere with god's plan by stopping at a red light? And if he doesn't want you to die there, then you won't, so obviously it doesn't matter if you stop or not.

lol.

[Thunder]

Spoiler: show

I'm not sure if this part was meant to be sarcastic or not, but if not then I think you're missing the point. Unemployment will become completely irrelevant. Obviously, capitalism is incompatible with a post-computer age future. You can't supply people with varying means of survival based on their labor input when labor input is irrelevant and survival is not remotely difficult to guarantee.

The fundamental shift is from "working because we have to" to "working because we want to". This is important. Humans are not a sedentary species. We're dynamic, evolutionary, and damned restless. When people are free to pursue their passions, you get artists who love art, musicians who love music, scientists who love science and people who do what they do because they love to do it. And if some people choose to be sedentary, so what? To be perfectly honest, it's their loss. It's not my concern, or yours. There will be more than enough for everyone regardless.

As far as machine intelligence goes, there's a big difference between automation and sentience. Even so, so what if we create a new species? If we can't get along with a species that we ourselves create, then we have no business trying to get along with anyone else in the cosmos.

I was being sarcastic with the religion line, yeah.

I think(ironically enough, I think "I believe" can be interchangeable here because this is about as scientific as predicting what aliens look like) that before the world moves forward in science we will need to ramp up education severely. Eventually I assume a level of education is achieved where the standard is well above a stephen hawking. I do not think there will be people, or enough of them to care about, who are sedentary. Yes, people will pursue their passions, but that's not a "waste" as being a dumb-ass couch potato is. The arts are very important. So basically, we agree on that segment.

That's why I mentioned earlier that there's a good possibility that we'll destroy ourselves upon reaching this point. It's all dependent on how people choose to process the change. People are already aware of the possibility of this paradigm shift. The ones who will be left behind are the ones screaming the loudest right now. They can delay advancement, but they can't stop it. The big question is whether or not they decide to take us all down with them.

I like this, your last sentence is a pretty powerful question. But all humanity needs to do is make it past a certain point in science where humanity is literally immortal and nobody can take us down from the inside, so to speak. Until then it's scary timez because there are people who are literally scared of advancement and could take us all down with them.


But all-in-all I seriously question whether or not we can be sure what society will look like at a point in time where we are extremely advanced. Will there be any sedentary people? Will be be able to get along with everyone, and furthermore everything? Will we have sentient machines yet? Will those sentient machines try and eradicate humanity? What if before we create sentient machines we understand the brain and are able to augment ourselves to the intelligence of fantasy sentient machines? What if instead of creating super intelligent machines, we become super intelligent machines! Can't be sure. But what I am sure if, is if humanity makes it to a super advanced state they will laugh at us.
Our world still ran by people who are swayed by homosexuality, contraception, terrorism, religion, and we want to theorize about sentient machines taking over.

[Kerberoz]

Religion bashing is the "social norm" more often than not to be honest. My desire to defend a specific side doesn't come from the topic itself, but how people reach their conclusion. We could argue about the color of a virtual armor for all I care, if someone isn't being rigorous in his method, I will disagree with the conclusion, even if the actual result appears to be correct.

It doesn't help that most opinions I read are filled with emotions, contradictions, or are subject to bias. People aren't even trying to understand the other side in these discussions and automatically label it as "stupid".

Back in my college days, I used to be an atheist who was bashing religion at every opportunities. My opinion on the topic became way more moderate after doing sciences for 9 years...which according to everyone, should have the opposite effect. My situation might be an exception, but if I look at people around me, who are also doing sciences for a long time, I don't seem to be the only one who think that way.

So many words, without actually saying anything.

It's easy to be not-wrong when you don't make any arguments.

[Greatguardian]

So many words, without actually saying anything.

It's easy to be not-wrong when you don't make any arguments.

I thought his over-arching point was pretty clear.

>People accuse Kaylia of being a religion whiteknight
>Kaylia says he'll whiteknight anything if the people bashing it are doing so with faulty methodology
>Methodology used by half the posters in any religion thread is always fairly poor, as they are not scientists and this is the internet
>Argument is formed that Kaylia is not defending religion, but taking offense to shitty attacks on it.

To be perfectly honest I don't disagree with him, either. I've made the same point in other threads on this topic.

[Siatdiat]

I thought his over-arching point was pretty clear.

>People accuse Kaylia of being a religion whiteknight
>Kaylia says he'll whiteknight anything if the people bashing it are doing so with faulty methodology
>Methodology used by half the posters in any religion thread is always fairly poor, as they are not scientists and this is the internet
>Argument is formed that Kaylia is not defending religion, but taking offense to shitty attacks on it.

To be perfectly honest I don't disagree with him, either. I've made the same point in other threads on this topic.

Kudos to both of you for your service to humanity. Neither of you has ever responded to me or anyone else who has suggested that your attitude would be different if someone made a thread about bigfoot, or transcendental meditation, or something more acceptably silly because it does not have the ring of holiness to protect its foolishness.

[Thunder]

Back in my college days, I used to be an atheist who was bashing religion at every opportunities. My opinion on the topic became way more moderate after doing sciences for 9 years...which according to everyone, should have the opposite effect. My situation might be an exception, but if I look at people around me, who are also doing sciences for a long time, I don't seem to be the only one who think that way.

That's pretty normal, since the "socially normal", in your words, athiest hates religion because it's a fairytale or whatever, but they don't understand it and are frustrated with how powerful it is. Like that picture on the top of this page. It's stupid and quite frankly, I'm embarrassed by it as an athiest if anyone takes it for anything but a funny jab at religion.

Higher education should make you much more apathetic towards religion(ala, no more religion bashing as you say you did in college). Is that what you mean when you say you've become more moderate? Or do you mean you've started to believe in the doctrine of a religion? If it's the former then yeah, that's what happens when you mature and are educated. You fight less over inconsequential bullshit. What do you care if they're religious or not? I don't.

By the way, I'm very certain the social norm is NOT more often than not to bash religion(for being a religion, e.g. non-believers vs believers). Atheism is still a huge minority between all of the religions. Let alone atheists who aren't retarded and go on to discuss religion using pictures like the red light thing and "believing" god wont let you die. That's not what anybody believes, obviously.

[Nevex]

The problem with atheists who hate religion is that they think that religious people are complete and utter morons who are devoided of common sense and their only purpose in life is to spread misinformation.
That's the result of poor education, not religion.

Atheists who don't tolerate religion are just as socially inacceptable as any other form of fundamentalism.

That picture is meaningless. Just like freaking out when you're about to die and ask mercy to God doesn't make you a Christian (something that seems very common among atheists), taking medicine instead of asking God to heal you doesn't make you an atheist.

Atheists are aware that they're a minority, which is why they want to others to believe that they're more numerous than they truly are. All minorities do that, like the "born this way" BS gay people have been spreading for years. That mentality is what makes them a minority.

[Jefe]

Is there a one thread where you guys don't end up sucking each other's cocks?

[Siatdiat]

The problem with atheists who hate religion is that they think that religious people are complete and utter morons who are devoided of common sense and their only purpose in life is to spread misinformation. That's the result of poor education, not religion.

Religion is a symptom of mental deficiency. Religion doesn't make people stupid, people get religion because they are stupid.

93% of the members of the Academy of Sciences are atheists. 91% of Americans believe in god. Does that say anything to you?

I think I have been clear in some posts in the past that I have no issue with a deistic view, where they believe either agnostically that its possible but we can never really know, or they believe there is some kind of god like conscience in the universe very specifically, but still will not claim to actually know anything about it. I can respect that view.

My issue is when people take religions that are very clearly a load of shit if you spend even a minute amount of time making critical judgements about their claims, and follow it faithfully, and claim it to be a clear and rational explanation of reality.

These are two very different outlooks that have to be judged in a different manner from one another.

Edit: You added a bunch of really worthless shit to your post after I quoted part of it, and its so bad that I think even moderate people like GG or Kaylia will let you know, so I will leave it to them.