Iraq war documents leak shows US is ****ing awful.

[MrRubix]

Originally Posted by ledwix

OR the purpose of the universe? If you do not have arbitrary beliefs about the purpose of the universe, you either have objective beliefs or none at all. Again, which is the case?

Loaded term, because evidence suggests that we live in a purposeless universe by default. Purpose is a humanized concept that we can explain with things like evolution.

That brings us to origin. For one, it again assumes an origin to begin with -- which we don't have *direct* evidence for since we don't yet understand fully the point in time in which Einstein's equations break down, yet we have evidence in terms of quantum cosmology that suggests possible explanations for the universe's "progression" (the simultaneity of events regarding the singularity), but again, none of it is fact yet such that it explains "what the hell really happened." It doesn't mean we have to "believe" in anything until the evidence is more conclusive regarding the question we're addressing directly. Believe it or not, it's okay to say "I don't know." Because nobody does, yet. It's okay to reserve judgment until all the facts are in.

Seriously, quit being a smartass when you have *no idea* what you're talking about. It isn't a "which is it" scenario -- you're loading the terms. "Objective beliefs" in itself is a completely laughable phrasing.

[ledwix]

Well, regardless of the purpose or lack thereof of the universe, evidence has absolutely nothing to do with it. It is impossible to scientifically affirm purpose or purposelessness. If you think that evidence collected from the physical world has the ability to tell us whether there is a purpose to the universe, then you are misinformed.

Anyway, that wasn't what I was trying to get at. You believe that the universe is purposeless. But you do things. Therefore your actions are arbitrary like those of religion, in that the preference of one action over another is much like the preference of a flavor of ice cream over another. So to pride yourself in not doing things in a completely arbitrary way like religion is hypocritical.

[MrRubix]

Again, you're an idiot.

Purpose is a human construct. If you want to invoke a "higher purpose," then you might look to religion or something similar because it's assuming something arbitrary and without evidence. We have evidence for purpose where human constructs are concerned.

Way to strawman and misinterpret my argument BTW. Do you even understand evolution? It's not like we can dig in a rock somewhere and "discover purpose." Purpose is an evolved construct just like any other function of the human mind. Why do you think we feel happiness/sadness/emotion/etc? Purpose is a side-effect resulting from our evolved nature to test the consistency of the world through pattern matching and logical inferences regarding causal links. Couple that with human utilitarian concepts and you have "purpose."

Sure, we "do things." But our actions aren't "arbitrary like religion." They're, at the core, utilitarian and causal. Why do you think we "like" one thing over another? You conflate the concept of purpose in a scientific sense with "purpose" as it's typically defined in most religions. We can lead "purposeful" lives where human utility is concerned, and this is well-evidenced in practically every nook and cranny you can think of. But "higher purpose" is an invoked piece of BS that has no basis in anything and is a displacement of the human ego and utility.

I seriously can't tell if you're trying to troll me or if you're genuinely this ignorant/thick. My money's on http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/174/trollface.png but who knows. They let just about any kind of trash into UCLA these days, especially those who need to ask about "retrospective decision making" in a blatant misunderstanding of probability.

What the hell do you even learn in school? Whatever it is, you need to get better at it, because you genuinely suck.

[devonin]

Regardless of why you think he's posting what and how he's posting, at least try to keep a civil tongue?

[ledwix]

Originally Posted by MrRubix

Purpose is a human construct. If you want to invoke a "higher purpose," then you might look to religion or something similar because it's assuming something arbitrary and without evidence. We have evidence for purpose where human constructs are concerned.
Way to strawman and misinterpret my argument BTW. Do you even understand evolution? It's not like we can dig in a rock somewhere and "discover purpose." Purpose is an evolved construct just like any other function of the human mind. Why do you think we feel happiness/sadness/emotion/etc? Purpose is a side-effect resulting from our evolved nature to test the consistency of the world through pattern matching and logical inferences regarding causal links. Couple that with human utilitarian concepts and you have "purpose."

I understand the difference between an observed purpose and an ultimate, higher purpose. I’m saying that the biological purpose that we observe in species and particularly in our species, like reproduction, promoting a higher standard of living, or increasing lifespans, isn’t a purpose in itself. It’s only a purpose relative to the fundamentally arbitrary evolutionary goal of survival. “Higher purpose,” something you seem to consider ridiculous and arbitrary, is equally as arbitrary as those purposes we observe in populations like ourselves.

Sure, we "do things." But our actions aren't "arbitrary like religion." They're, at the core, utilitarian and causal. Why do you think we "like" one thing over another? You conflate the concept of purpose in a scientific sense with "purpose" as it's typically defined in most religions. We can lead "purposeful" lives where human utility is concerned, and this is well-evidenced in practically every nook and cranny you can think of. But "higher purpose" is an invoked piece of BS that has no basis in anything and is a displacement of the human ego and utility.

Uh huh, actions are causal and utilitarian. But the same is true for religion. People become religious sometimes when they are feeling sad and are confused about where their lives are going, perhaps. That’s a utilitarian decision directly caused by a lack of drive and fulfillment, since those arbitrary ceremonies they might involve themselves in succeed if they induce utility. The goal of utility is an arbitrary goal in both cases, not only if it’s guided by religion. The truth is that all people strive for something they are not sure even means anything (while trying to avoid the implications of those thoughts), and some strive for something that they know doesn’t mean anything.

The fact that you mention purposeful lives “where human utility is concerned” shows that you believe purpose does not objectively exist but instead exists relative to some cause, in the same way that velocity does not objectively exist except when measured relative to some defined stationary point. If you want a high-paying job, you “ought” to get well-educated. If you want to become a good fisher, you “ought” to have patience. But these are conditionals that assume the purpose of the thing that came before them. I believe you would agree with me if I said that these things had no objective purpose, but instead just did something that would potentially lead to more utility. Utility is an arbitrary purpose, though, and so the rest of activity is, as well. A decision is fundamentally backed by dogma regardless of the logical validity of the argument for that decision.

[Iam90]

Utility is an arbitrary purpose, though, and so the rest of activity is, as well. A decision is fundamentally backed by dogma regardless of the logical validity of the argument for that decision.

yes this is true in a way on a very fundamental level but it's pretty irrelevant. i think we're all assuming to be operating within a human paradigm; when you get so basic as to analyze the validity of things like survival, you're deconstructing everything to the point where all discussion concerning human activity is meaningless

[Vendetta21]

Originally Posted by Zageron

Stargroup.

Take logic and reasoning. You'll find that 100% of mathematicians agree with rushy.

statistics can determine a lot of useless **** if you don't take the time to critically think about things from an inside view

i'm not saying it's possible to view as many things with an inside view than it is with a broad mathematical view but those statistics can be interpreted in a lot of useless ways

making religion the enemy is like making stupidity the enemy. it's detracting from where a real focus should be by focusing on meta-elements (and also issues that you aren't going to make a lot of progress with whatever specific problem domain they create by combating on this meta-level.) i haven't found a reason to try to deal with anything beyond a case-by-case basis. i have a feeling a smarty like rubix or iam90 could come up with something tho.

[MrRubix]

Devonin:

Alright.

Ledwix:

I'm in a mad rush this morning so I'll make this quick.

I think you're confusing what it means to believe in something, similar to the common misconceptions that atheists "believe" in something just as arbitrary as a theist "believes" in God. There's a difference between a belief and lack of belief.

Your initial point was that we are all religious because we either hold a belief about a God/Gods and/or hold some belief about the origin and/or purpose of the universe. A belief is another way of effectively saying "in my opinion" or "what we think" about some positive statement, and it may or may not be true. This is different from a factual statement where knowledge and facts are concerned, defined as "justified true beliefs" (what's true for me is true for you). A lack of belief simply means "I won't claim this to be true and I am reserving judgment until I have evidence" or simply "I don't care enough to form an opinion and therefore have no belief one way or another." Atheism, for instance, is a sort of non-theism. It simply means "lack of theistic beliefs," meaning you do not subscribe to any one theistic belief. It does not mean you are saying there is no God with certainty. But we can claim that all evidence points to other explanations that suggest that we live in a Godless universe or a purposeless universe.

"Purpose" is typically defined in religion as a sort of "higher purpose." If you want to lob "humanized causal purpose" into that category as a way to say that everyone is religious because we all "do things," then good luck to you. You may as well call an apple religious because it falls from a tree.

You're trying to argue that any sort of "purpose" is somehow "religious" in nature. I am saying this is clearly false -- "purpose" is, in itself, a highly loaded term. We can define it as either a function of "higher purpose" (a certain end-goal or meaning invoked by a higher authority) or a "human purpose" (something we do in our everyday lives with some desire or goal). The former has no evidence and the latter does -- the latter one isn't a "belief" in the same manner. I don't hold any positive beliefs about the purpose of the universe. I hold true to the facts and evidence that tell me that I do what I do because of utility, which is a well-evidenced concept that ties into events just as arbitrary as the apple example I mentioned earlier (at their origin and core). This isn't a religious statement, but is instead a simple function of causality through evolution and necessary conditions. But again, if you want to define this "purpose" as "religious," then you must, logically, claim that an apple falling from a tree is religious or that a bear eating fish is "religious" or that a rock sitting still for centuries is "religious."

[Iam90]

Originally Posted by Vendetta21

statistics can determine a lot of useless **** if you don't take the time to critically think about things from an inside view

i'm not saying it's possible to view as many things with an inside view than it is with a broad mathematical view but those statistics can be interpreted in a lot of useless ways

making religion the enemy is like making stupidity the enemy. it's detracting from where a real focus should be by focusing on meta-elements (and also issues that you aren't going to make a lot of progress with whatever specific problem domain they create by combating on this meta-level.) i haven't found a reason to try to deal with anything beyond a case-by-case basis. i have a feeling a smarty like rubix or iam90 could come up with something tho.

i actually mostly agree with u i just dissent to a certain degree. obviously the consequences of religion aren't truly inherent to religion, but underlying factors - ignorance, fear, etc - basic human problems - but i do think that religion, given its specific subject matter, is an incredible amplifier of these basic human problems. i don't know any other system that can take problems like fear and amplify them and justify them to such a degree with its dogma - because it necessarily invokes the highest justifications; eternity, omnipotence, etc.

that's why i'd like to see people more educated on the subject of religion... if we didn't have concepts like God to fall back on, maybe we wouldn't be so deft at justifying our basic flaws...

but probably we would. who knows

[MrRubix]

The problem is that people do things in the name of religion. It augments and organizes unjustified thought into a potential weapon, and that's what I dislike about it. You don't see atheists organizing together and doing awful things in the name of atheism.

As religion is an emergence of the human psyche/ego, again, the only way to stomp out the negative effects is to promote education. We typically find that the more educated/intelligent one is, the less likely they are to be religious. I don't have a problem holding an arbitrary belief in a God as long as it doesn't hurt anyone. But what I DO have a problem with:

-Telling kids that they will burn in hell for their sins
-Promoting nonsense about not questioning authority under rule of God
-Teaching falsehoods and spreading misinformation about science based on religious scriptures (such as trying to argue that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, etc)
-Trying to push religious doctrine into schools, public policy, government, etc.
-Causing harm to others in the name of your religion or scripture

[Oni-Paranoia]

Originally Posted by MrRubix

The problem is that people do things in the name of religion. It augments and organizes unjustified thought into a potential weapon, and that's what I dislike about it. You don't see atheists organizing together and doing awful things in the name of atheism.

As religion is an emergence of the human psyche/ego, again, the only way to stomp out the negative effects is to promote education. We typically find that the more educated/intelligent one is, the less likely they are to be religious. I don't have a problem holding an arbitrary belief in a God as long as it doesn't hurt anyone. But what I DO have a problem with:

-Telling kids that they will burn in hell for their sins
-Promoting nonsense about not questioning authority under rule of God
-Teaching falsehoods and spreading misinformation about science based on religious scriptures (such as trying to argue that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, etc)
-Trying to push religious doctrine into schools, public policy, government, etc.
-Causing harm to others in the name of your religion or scripture

Completely agree.

[kommisar]

but then morals and assimilation!!


the least america could do is remove religion from their system entirely. I'd be sad to see an excellent presidential candidate not get voted in because he doesn't believe in god.

[D!LL]

I look through this thread and see a lot of people that just shouldn't be in here talking about anything.

More so than anything else.

War is hell. Don't pretend to understand it.

For those of you who have a semblance of what's going on, more power to ya', and for those of you who actually know what's going on... You're too far and in between.

Zat is all.

[fido123]

Originally Posted by D!LL

War is hell. Don't pretend to understand it.

You don't have to know what it's like to be in a war, to try to understand and think about the politics behind it.

[stargroup100]

Goddamn I need to stop posting this late at night. I don't even remember typing that.

I'll have to find some time to read this thread at some point because I'm too sleepy right now. -__-