Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Jackson who wrote (141261)	1/6/2002 8:46:56 PM
From: jcholewa	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1585802

> I see no evidence of any god around me, > all is evolved from the primordial soup Two quick things: 1) those two statements of yours are not mutually exclusive 2) absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (I love this saying ^_^ ) The problem I am having is that I cannot see how you draw many of your conclusions ("nothing remains", "Men have no ... souls") simply from a total lack of clues. I mean, if somebody told you eight hundred years ago that Earth revolves around Sol, would you pretty much dismiss them due to lack of evidence (yeah, there may have been ways of acquiring evidence back then, but that's knowledge in hindsight)? I do agree that many religions tempt people with promises and hold them with threats. Of course, on the flip side, many religions teach people to be more socially oriented and increases the happiness quotient of the majority. My mother recently decided to regain the faith that she had lost for the last few decades. She is now a happier person, she has more friends, she has read up on some excellent philosophers (you know, Kant, Descartes, etc..) and is making up her own mind about her beliefs (the Christian-Catholic church in the US encourages this, a fact which you may find surprising). My mother reads more now. She spends time helping others in non-religious ways. She can assert herself and is less easy to bully around (which is a family problem -- I have that difficulty, and it'd be nice to not have that). Her beliefs may be wrong, and they may be right, but she is less uncomfortable with the idea of dying, so she can go about her life in some sort of normal fashion. And she has to write papers for school, which I find really funny. ^_^

To: Bill Jackson who wrote (141261)	1/6/2002 11:06:36 PM
From: TechieGuy-alt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1585802

JC, I am 100% sure that religion is all false, that there is not now, nor has there ever been a god. The problem with religion is that you are born in a world with so much of it around you. One is constantly brain washed to no end- from all directions, that to evolve into a questioning frame of mind takes a herculean effort- a difficult deed indeed- something that not all can accomplish. Some try it, but their minds cannot let go and they "lapse" back into blind faith with their belief re-affirmed (the born again types). Dare I say it, religion is like the "Matrix", it's all around you. To deny it is to deny your very existence because a persons mind is never given a chance. It's insidious as a mind develops. I believe that most folks have not thought this thing through. They make an argument that how can a complex thing such as the universe have developed on its own, etc. etc.- thus there must be a God- then make the gargantuan leap that that God is a listening, interactive, forgiving God, punishing God, not just a god- a powerful force that was involved in creation, but that cares no less no more about us and "intelligent" life than it cares about the fusion temperature inside stars. I think that it is much easier to believe in the latter type of god, than the former type of God. As you can easily subsitute the term "nature", "physics", "cosmos" etc. for the latter god. But what purpose does a God serve? Why the choice I ask? It all comes back to that leap called "faith". No one's been able to answer this question of mine (to my satisfaction at least). Why all this hoopla (the choice, the accountability, the punishment, the reward, the universe etc.) at all? The other day I read an interesting article that pointed to the experimentally measurable positive power of prayer. The only catch was that there was no measurable difference between what the control groups were praying to (i.e. which God of theirs!). As a logical person, I can believe in the healing power of prayer (as some physical phenomen that has yet to be discovered). Most "faith" based systems would of course reject this even though ironically it would prove the power of "faith" and prayer :) TG

To: Bill Jackson who wrote (141261)	1/7/2002 12:58:15 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1585802

After we live we die and nothing remains, save our DNA descendants and out bones. We may creat a permanent thing, like a pyramid, or we may paint some graffiti that persists Men have no more souls than cats and ants or bacteria, but men have a better operating knowledge and intelligence about the universe. Bill, I am unclear how you know this......I don't think its clear one way or the other. Do you believe these things from faith? I mean, that's how people believe in a god without any scientific proof.......they have faith! ted

To: Bill Jackson who wrote (141261)	1/8/2002 10:45:50 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1585802

JC, I am 100% sure that religion is all false, that there is not now, nor has there ever been a god. Atheism is itself a religious belief (a belief about God or about things related to religion) that is no more supported by logic then religion is. Either belief in God or belief that there is no God requires faith. Agnosticism requires no faith, but since you are 100% sure that religion is all false and there has never been a god then you are not an agnostic. Many tell those that believe in them that they will go to heaven or hell, depending on how much $$ they give the priests. Very few people priests or not say anything like that. Also even if there is no god that doesn't mean that all religions are con games. A con game would imply not only that the belief was false but that those pushing it know it is false. I think that for the most part this is not true. Tim