Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

[hugh jass]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

Homer: Lisa, if the Bible has taught us nothing else, and it hasn't, it's that girls should stick to girls sports, such as hot oil wrestling and foxy boxing and such and such.

 

[Cebrious Arcane]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I'm getting the feeling here that a description of something is only a description to you two if it is %100 accurate, encompases every aspect of whatever the subject is talking about and is able to be perceived by the descriptee just as it was perceived by you. This is not so and can never be. It is unnecessary though. A description can still be a very usefull tool. Without a description of what reality "really" is by various spiritual leaders and other flakes you wouldnt be debating most of the stuff on this thread. Most things you've learned have come initially from a description. You may get better at what you do through experience, but typically you start with pure description. How vague and personal can others descriptions be if most of your knowledge has begun with them?

Judgement. The only purpose of descriptions is to place judgement and seperation when in reality there is no distinction and judgement is merely a reflection of the ego. My point, which you keep rolling over, is that nothing can be 100% accurate because there is no way for you to verify it's accuracy outside of yourself. Your beloved science says 95% reproducability equals fact, that's far from 100%. Breaking down the descriptions we've been taught by the "other flakes" (you're so biased) is the purpose, except you don't try to break down what you've been taught by your flakes, you just support them and hope they'll define your reality for you so you don't have to worry about it.

You can't describe love Ceb? Not even to yourself? How do you know when you feel it?

I asked you to. I know my definition, but you first, hehe.

Confusion, anxiety and passion are not senses. They are at best perceptions of senses, but not always. I do not neglect the possiblity of a sense not yet defined by science. I experience 5 senses that can be stimulated externally and are verifiable. Until I experience a 6th, or someone else does and can prove it, then there are only 5.

How are they reliably verifiable? How is your proof any different than a Christian finding Jesus in his grilled cheese and calling it a message from God? Proof is personal and you refuse to allow anything outside of your religion (science) to be proven to you because it would require methods that are not accepted by your religion. Show me the difference.

Chemical equations are exercises in probabilty; the same as any example of the sub-atomic or quantum worlds. They are not chaotic or unperdictable, they're just complicated. They are descriptions of a system with known and defined variables. Because there can be other variables that we are unaware of, they can be wrong or inefficient. In some cases you may know all of the variables, you just cant do anything about them. In those cases the equations themselves will typically tell you the probabilty.

Probability. Not fact. That's my point. That percentage of fallibility makes the entire system unreliable.

Ceb, what do you mean when you say math is a system within itself? You can apply math to nearly every aspect of this reality.

So? You can apply the scientific method to everything, as well as the Touch of God theory. It's all perspective, opinion, and definitions, all of which are exclusively personal. Without giving the apples the variable names: Apple One, Apple Two, Apple Three, and Apple Four. You would just have apples. Not four apples. That's my point. Having four apples is no better or worse than just having apples.

A quick sidetrack from this argument over the validity of the physical. How do we even know the mind exists.

About time! Man, I've been waiting for this to be brought up by one of you science folk for a while now. Onward, hehe.

In my assumed (see guys, I assumed, I admit it. Just go with me cause and effect universe, everything you feel, think and do is a reaction to countless other events that have happened before. What is mind then? Just another effect in the chain. Mind is what you have dubbed your own thoughts in order to make yourself feel important or in control. Your decisions are in effect already made. Mind is your brains reactions to stimuli and the tool used in some cases to enact the next "cause" in the universe. I think my cause and effect physical universe is just as valid as your pure mind universe.

I do too, but no more valid, and no less. Equal. Though I don't think it's a wholly accurate and infallible system of belief, I can surely appreciate a person's want and need to adhere to a system that he believes in.

Though some disagreements on mind: In your system that is definitely how the mind and consciousness would come about, another link in the chain, but where is that link evolutionarily? Monkeys? Apes? Rats? Or were/are humans the first and only mammel with a mind? I would say that the mind is not dependent on stimuli, as a person in total isolation would still have thoughts. What about the different versions/layers of the mind. A person remembers photographically as well as audibly. Thinks in pictures as well as words. The biggest distinction I'm noticing between our definitions is that your system has a complete and utter lack of originality and creativity and mine is almost exclusively originality and creativity. If everything comes from the perceiver then the perceiver dynamically creates its reality every moment of everyday. If everything was caused by something else (ignoring that the original cause is still a huge undefined theory), then there is no creativity or originality because everything came from something else.

So both systems offer security and the elimination of hope but in completely opposite ways:

Yours offers a sense of predictability, reliability, progression, and verifiability.

Mine offers a sense of total chaos, no predictability, no time, and personal accountability.

Supreme Order vs Supreme Chaos. But the resulting believers are not all that different in behavior and mannerisms, only in the defining beliefs behind their actions.

Why do you choose your path?

No system available is convincing enough. But regardless of that, I choose this path for the exact same reason you choose yours, because everything lines up, makes sense, and strengthens my perspective so it seems personally hindering to choose any other path.

 

[Underwater Ape]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I'm getting the feeling here that a description of something is only a description to you two if it is %100 accurate, encompases every aspect of whatever the subject is talking about and is able to be perceived by the descriptee just as it was perceived by you. This is not so and can never be. It is unnecessary though. A description can still be a very usefull tool. Without a description of what reality "really" is by various spiritual leaders and other flakes you wouldnt be debating most of the stuff on this thread. Most things you've learned have come initially from a description. You may get better at what you do through experience, but typically you start with pure description. How vague and personal can others descriptions be if most of your knowledge has begun with them?

You make the assumption of believing what you see is separate from you. That there is an external world. You've never perceived anything outside of yourself or your mind. Are the thoughts you're thinking of you? Or are they just a product of cause and effect from your external reality? Everything is in the mind my friend. Your perceptions, your understanding, all that you know, is of the mind. All came from within. Out there is an illusion. Separation is illusion. I can't better explain it.

You can't describe love Ceb? Not even to yourself? How do you know when you feel it?

You're starting to catch on. What love is, is known only to you. YOU give meaning to all things, not language. Language is of you, the definitions are defined by YOU.

Confusion, anxiety and passion are not senses. They are at best perceptions of senses, but not always. I do not neglect the possiblity of a sense not yet defined by science. I experience 5 senses that can be stimulated externally and are verifiable. Until I experience a 6th, or someone else does and can prove it, then there are only 5.

Please explain to me this external stimulation you're able to perceive? I assume that would mean perceiving your senses free from your mind? I've never done that. How is it possible? External is not verifiable in any way. External is an illusion you've bought into.

Chemical equations are exercises in probabilty; the same as any example of the sub-atomic or quantum worlds. They are not chaotic or unperdictable, they're just complicated. They are descriptions of a system with known and defined variables. Because there can be other variables that we are unaware of, they can be wrong or inefficient. In some cases you may know all of the variables, you just cant do anything about them. In those cases the equations themselves will typically tell you the probabilty.

If you can only predict the probability of outcomes, the outcome sure as fuck isn't predictable. I can't believe someone just said quantum mechanics was predictable. Just because an outcome is more probable than others doesn't mean it's what will happen.

Ceb, what do you mean when you say math is a system within itself? You can apply math to nearly every aspect of this reality.

I;m not feeling very creative, so I'll throw the basics at you. Explain yourself with a math equation. Show me the math equation that proves love exists.

Ape, what do you mean when you say that for an equation to be true it has to expalin you? There are equations to explain what you are made of and how it all works. None of it is complete of course, but it is a good start.
I get the feeling you may be talking about the why of it all? Good luck with that. Why is one of the worst questions we as a species could possibly ask at the moment.

No. I'm saying you're making an assumption that you're separate from the universe. There are no equations that explain consciousness or predict you. All theories are theories of the self. Theories of how the mind operates. They're telling you, about how you operate. Accepting that 2+2=4 not because that's how the eternal world operates, but how your mind operates, is the next step in truly understanding things. Everything is in the mind. You can't draw a line and say this is me, this is the external world. You just have to think about it for awhile. Meditate on it man.

A quick sidetrack from this argument over the validity of the physical. How do we even know the mind exists. In my assumed (see guys, I assumed, I admit it. Just go with me cause and effect universe, everything you feel, think and do is a reaction to countless other events that have happened before. What is mind then? Just another effect in the chain. Mind is what you have dubbed your own thoughts in order to make yourself feel important or in control. Your decisions are in effect already made. Mind is your brains reactions to stimuli and the tool used in some cases to enact the next "cause" in the universe. I think my cause and effect physical universe is just as valid as your pure mind universe. Why do you choose your path?

Well, by your own admission the quantum world is that of probability. I don't see how you can then make the conclusion that the mind is predictable. As if to say you're separate from the quantum world?

 

[Mara]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

i'm not going to get into an indepth religious discussion, but i will say that i cannot stand it when a religion takes a "my way or no way" approach.

Very appropriate point. That's the real problem with Western religion and Islamic Fundamentalism. The older I get, the more I realize that religious leaders have no greater knowledge of God than anyone else. There has been many a time throughout history when certain religions became powerful enough militarily, that they have brought out the convert or die approach. It's hard for me to take tear-wrenching discussions about the Holocaust, for example, seriously from people who are Catholic. Ultimately when you are putting a dollar into the tithe bucket of a Catholic church, you are supporting the Pope and his missions.

Historical accounts about what the Pope did to the Cathars, and the inquisition itself should be clear enough evidence that this guy has no direct pipeline to a supreme power. And if he does, well then I'm happy being on the other side of the battle for my soul. So in my mind, followers of Catholicism are little different than members of the Neo-Nazi party. But hey, I don't want to single them out, it's all about the my way or the highway approach they have taken in their past, and the refusal of current people to acknowledge their sordid past.

Religion is a form of government. Built to control the masses. If it gets too powerful, bad things start to happen.

As far as polls go. Most polls never come out and tell you directly how or where they collected their information. For all I know, this could be an exit poll from a local Sunday church session. Lately I've started asking myself the question, why are they telling me this information - and what can be gained by who by giving it to me. I think polls are generally used for peer pressure motives, like - this is what most Americans think, why don't you?

There are so many persuasive tools that government and religion have at their disposal, it is no wonder we can get really caught up in things that aren't based on factual evidence. All I know is that I just don't know, and neither does anyone else with any reliable certainty.

 

[Underwater Ape]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

Very appropriate point. That's the real problem with Western religion and Islamic Fundamentalism. The older I get, the more I realize that religious leaders have no greater knowledge of God than anyone else. There has been many a time throughout history when certain religions became powerful enough militarily, that they have brought out the convert or die approach. It's hard for me to take tear-wrenching discussions about the Holocaust, for example, seriously from people who are Catholic. Ultimately when you are putting a dollar into the tithe bucket of a Catholic church, you are supporting the Pope and his missions.

Historical accounts about what the Pope did to the Cathars, and the inquisition itself should be clear enough evidence that this guy has no direct pipeline to a supreme power. And if he does, well then I'm happy being on the other side of the battle for my soul. So in my mind, followers of Catholicism are little different than members of the Neo-Nazi party. But hey, I don't want to single them out, it's all about the my way or the highway approach they have taken in their past, and the refusal of current people to acknowledge their sordid past.

Religion is a form of government. Built to control the masses. If it gets too powerful, bad things start to happen.

As far as polls go. Most polls never come out and tell you directly how or where they collected their information. For all I know, this could be an exit poll from a local Sunday church session. Lately I've started asking myself the question, why are they telling me this information - and what can be gained by who by giving it to me. I think polls are generally used for peer pressure motives, like - this is what most Americans think, why don't you?

There are so many persuasive tools that government and religion have at their disposal, it is no wonder we can get really caught up in things that aren't based on factual evidence. All I know is that I just don't know, and neither does anyone else with any reliable certainty.

I don't think like your blanket assumption that religion is a form of government built to control the masses. I don't see that applying to a lot of eastern religions. Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism for example. All of these are extremely tolerant of people of any faith or no faith at all. They all focus entirely on improving and understanding yourself. It's all your choice. Finding out for yourself. They simply provide a path. They won't ever ask you to believe in anything. Discover what's true to you. I don't think I've ever seen someone say living a Buddhist lifestyle gave them a false understanding of the world or that it was used to control them. It's far far from that.

 

[Mara]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I don't think like your blanket assumption that religion is a form of government built to control the masses. I don't see that applying to a lot of eastern religions. Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism for example. All of these are extremely tolerant of people of any faith or no faith at all. They all focus entirely on improving and understanding yourself. It's all your choice. Finding out for yourself. They simply provide a path. They won't ever ask you to believe in anything. Discover what's true to you. I don't think I've ever seen someone say living a Buddhist lifestyle gave them a false understanding of the world or that it was used to control them. It's far far from that.

Yeah, you are right. Good reply, I shouldn't have made a blanket statement. I don't have too much of a problem with the religions you've mentioned. I still maintain the idea that 'certain' religions operate as a form of government. They get people to do or not do things the church leaders deem necessary. They collect funds. They form a sort of faction of like minded individuals that are loyal to eachother. Sometimes this sort of thing is necessary, but it certainly comes with a lot of problems and corruption.

 

[Underwater Ape]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

Yeah, you are right. Good reply, I shouldn't have made a blanket statement. I don't have too much of a problem with the religions you've mentioned. I still maintain the idea that 'certain' religions operate as a form of government. They get people to do or not do things the church leaders deem necessary. They collect funds. They form a sort of faction of like minded individuals that are loyal to eachother. Sometimes this sort of thing is necessary, but it certainly comes with a lot of problems and corruption.

I agree with you. But I lean more towards the greed of man being at fault rather than a religion itself. If it's not religion being used as the tool it's something else. Oil for example. We've built our entire way of life around it. You've got no choice but to believe in oil in this country. Sure you can live without it, but not easily. Not as easy as one can live without the belief in a God or religion. What are you really a slave to? Slaves to materialism, not to a religion or God.

 

[Cebrious Arcane]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

There is a God, plain and simple. Something had to create everything in the universe.

Why?

Physics is ignorant. The Big Bang theory is not logical, and sounds more ridiculous than a superior being.

Why?

I mean, the atom is still a theory, and they can't even prove that, let alone how the universe was created.

You can see the atom using a microscope. Why is that not proof?

"The probability that the universe came into being by chance is analogous to the notion that the dictionary originated from an explosion in a print shop."

- Albert Einstein

Good quote.

 

[tangerine1490]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

my god is an indian who turns into a wolf. the wolfen will come for you with his razor.

 

[LKP]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I am not religious. For me, religion is a weird concept. You have to believe in something that can never be proven and it is used to excuse a lot of stuff. I prefer logic and science to explain how things work, even if not all things can be answered that way.

The opposite is also true. For the last few centuries, religious people have cited the "God of the Gaps," using God to explain away things they couldn't prove. Now, you see atheists claiming there's no God just because there's no undeniable proof. There is, however, quite a bit of evidence for God's existence, and it was logic that led me to my religious views.

 

[Mara]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I believe it is quite possible that there is a God, but then again it's possible there isn't. It's even possible that God is dead, or that he could care less about the human population. Anytime I inadvertently step on an anthill, Im thinking - damn - they must think that God is pissed off at them.

What I think is impossible, is the notion that some being that created all things we know - then decided to convey his message through things scrawled in a book by old men. Given man's nature for deceit of their fellow man - could you get a more unreliable method of conveying your wishes to your people? Not likely.

 

[GradGT]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I'll start by saying some things:

It is absolutely not possible that if there is a God, he is dead. I think that "God" is not the word you're looking for if you make that statement.

The big bang theory has a substantial amount of evidence to support it's truthfullness. (all other galaxies are moving away from ours, this makes it obvious that the universe is expanding)

the Catholic church is full of flaws and does not and should not represent Christianity. Jesus never dressed in big hats, fancy clothes, and gold necklaces. Jesus said to give away all your money, as it's extremely difficult for a rich person to enter heaven. How is it then the Catholic church can afford a 660 million dollar payout to the victims of sexual molestation?


Experiments in quantum physics also give credence to the atomic theory.


And finally, the theory of evolution has one great big fatal flaw, that humans are less adapted for survival than the apes that are supposedly our ancestors.

Mankind is now entering it's teen years, no longer do we believe ignorantly the way a child does. That's why now you're seeing blasphemy everywhere- much like the way a teenager says "i hate my parents". But when that teenager grows up, they realize that although the things their parents said didn't make sense, they should have listened.

 

[Mara]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I'll start by saying some things:

It is absolutely not possible that if there is a God, he is dead. I think that "God" is not the word you're looking for if you make that statement.

.

No, that pretty much was the word I was looking for. Some power far supreme to our comprehension, that is no longer here or involved in our well being for any number of reasons. As far as we know, the planets could be some mechanical toy of some other creature. Perhaps there actually is more than one God, and the one that created us got killed. Maybe the spirit known as Satan by millions of true believers is actually God the Creator, and everything else is just a clever rewriting by the side that won. Or maybe it's all a bunch of bs, and we don't anything about anything. But I do think, anything is possible.