The New Atheists; The Cult of Science?

[Tormod]

After having shared a hotel room with you I would say more "godlike" than "godless". :) :friday:

 

You're a true Believer.

[freeztar]

After having shared a hotel room with you I would say more "godlike" than "godless". :(

 

:friday:

 

That's it. I'm not going camping with you, Tormod. :)

[Boerseun]

Hey - a little less of the BrokeBackBigDog, mmkay?

[Hawkins]

The stone age men told me that nothing exists outside their stone age science and the evidence gathered by their fellow stone age guys. I truly want to show them my iphone, mobile tv, telescope, and my other electronic devices though they believe that electrons never exist. But those equipment are not available at hand at that time.

 

So I told them directly that they are atheists. :)

[freeztar]

The stone age men told me that nothing exists outside their stone age science and the evidence gathered by their fellow stone age guys. I truly want to show them my iphone, mobile tv, telescope, and my other electronic devices though they believe that electrons never exist. But those equipment are not available at hand at that time.

 

So I told them directly that they are atheists. ;)

 

Show me the "iphone, mobile tv, telescope" of the future. And I'll tune in. :)

 

In other words, there is no proof. There never will be. :)

 

We're a cult ya know? ;)

[Hawkins]

Show me the "iphone, mobile tv, telescope" of the future. And I'll tune in. :)

 

In other words, there is no proof. There never will be. :)

 

We're a cult ya know? ;)

 

That's your belief, believing in evidence. It's just another kind of religion, still the kind of belief says none about what the actual truth is.

 

And here's the question for you,

 

What happens after death, does soul exist? It's a question you have to answer within your life-time under the condition that no evidence is provided, whether your answer is a yes or no.

[Boerseun]

Strange that the believers' iPods and Cellphones always seem to be missing...:)

 

Hawkins, Science is not a belief. Science is a method. The two are light-years apart.

 

It's like saying that writing with your left hand is a religion.

 

Why is it that religious types always try to equate science to religion? Is it because they feel threatened, and want to belittle Science on equal terms?

 

Show me where a scientist is required to make a leap of faith, and we can have this discussion again.

[freeztar]

That's your belief, believing in evidence.

 

Ok, I'm cool with that label. :)

 

It's just another kind of religion, still the kind of belief says none about what the actual truth is.

In my world, truth is discovered in the same world. There is no "higher" "power".

 

And here's the question for you,

 

What happens after death

 

If you're lucky, you might get some worms in you and the whole thing will be done (minus bones) in a few decades. Most likely, the fermented body filled with formaldehyde and other stuff is lowered into the ground and there the body will lay for a long, long time.

 

does soul exist? It's a question you have to answer within your life-time under the condition that no evidence is provided, whether your answer is a yes or no.

 

Does the tooth fairy exist?

 

It's a question you have to answer within your life-time under the condition that no evidence is provided, whether your answer is a yes or no.

[alexander]

What happens after death, does soul exist? It's a question you have to answer within your life-time under the condition that no evidence is provided, whether your answer is a yes or no.

A much more relevant question is not whether or not it exists, but why i should concern myself with it. There are great many things that i ponder on a daily basis, from whether having only one pop-tart is morally right and acceptable, to whether or not particle collisions in the LHC would be capable of producing a black hole even in worst case (if its a collision of particles with a fully powered magnet), to how to best approach building of a MySQL cluster, to whether i should pick up some cod or trout or flounder to turn into yet another one of my culinary creations later on tonight. But i dont care about whether or not i have a soul and what will happen to it after death, i just dont care...

 

It's just another kind of religion

 

Yeah, if you take religion as "a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects", but then again, law is then a religion, driving is then a religion, basketball is then a religion, walking down the street is then a religion, farting is then a religion (i think by now you know where i'm going)

[Galapagos]

Dogmatic and intolerant New Atheist Fundamentalist youtuber Qualiasoup has released another video that will enable and empower those dastardly New Atheists:

YouTube - Putting faith in its place http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wV_REEdvxo

 

Damn you New Atheists,,,, and your evil Cult Of Science too!!!!!! :rolleyes:

[paigetheoracle]

Dogmatic and intolerant New Atheist Fundamentalist youtuber Qualiasoup has released another video that will enable and empower those dastardly New Atheists:

 

Damn you New Atheists,,,, and your evil Cult Of Science too!!!!!! :)

 

The way I see it is that as we learn more about the universe and how to control its energies, the more Godlike we become 'but' as the video suggests, if we don't become more ethical (honest), we run the risk of destroying ourselves and losing any advantage this technical power may bring us: In other words, understanding the external world is not enough. We must couple this with understanding our own motives for actions, to avoid the traps that lead to suppression through word or deed (Trying to shut up alternative opinions [no freedom of speech/mind] and physically stop rebellion against the urge to progress as a society).

 

Outmoded ideas must be left behind as equally outmoded machinery must be left behind, to ensure we face the enigma of a united world, behind the freedom of the individual (Conformism is a defence mechanism that has its place but it must not stultify society or deny the truth, even if it means at some point that we are redundant as a race or must change mentally or physically to adapt to changed conditions: Adapt or die (out) is still valid).

[HydrogenBond]

Religion and belief in god is a human thing that is not displayed by animals. I am not saying all humans believe in god, just animals don't. Does this make atheists closer to animals or at least to a state of humans, before god/religion appeared in the mind? Is this state retro or is it progressive?

 

One way to answer the last question is the tendency to use animals to correlate human behavior. We use a state of life, without a conscious god connection, to correlate humans. Does this sort of stack the deck and become self for-filling?

[Boerseun]

Religion and belief in god is a human thing that is not displayed by animals. I am not saying all humans believe in god, just animals don't. Does this make atheists closer to animals or at least to a state of humans, before god/religion appeared in the mind? Is this state retro or is it progressive?

How do you know that animals don't have gods?

 

In my opinion, the belief in the supernatural is merely a misunderstanding of causality, and nothing else. For instance, if you pray that Spring will return, the snows melt away and the sun come back, and by Jove, it happens every year you pray for it, you might start to think that the gods favour you and brought the sun back because you prayed for it.

 

Consider a dog. Give it a piece of meat every time it rings a bell with its paw, and it will eventually ring the bell every time its hungry. Food follows the ringing of the bell, although the two has absolutely nothing to do with each other apart from making Pavlov crack a grin.

 

I believe that there is much more comparisons to your average church-goer and Pavlov's mutt than meets the eye, or what fellow church-goers might be comfortable with.

[sman]

Consider a dog. Give it a piece of meat every time it rings a bell with its paw, and it will eventually ring the bell every time its hungry. Food follows the ringing of the bell, although the two has absolutely nothing to do with each other apart from making Pavlov crack a grin.

 

Pavlov rang the bell, not the dogs. After 50-odd times being fed after hearing a bell they began to anticipate food upon hearing a bell. I can't blame them.

 

Associationism is dead, man. Contemporary cognitive science has no need for it.

 

As for the causes of religion, IMO, it is more complicated than you would have it.

[alexander]

Ok, hopefully this will break this whole discussion of science being some sort of a belief system.

 

What 3 things identify a religion as a religion?

 

Religions:

1) Assure Salvation

2) Have a precise Theology

3) Attempt to convert people who do not believe, actively or passively

 

when and only when all 3 are satisfied, does one have a religion. So science is NOT a religion, simply because it meets one of the three concepts, scientists dont promiss you any salvation, have no agreed upon theology (there are plenty of scientists who are jews, christians, muslims, buddhists, etc) and lastly no scientist will ever attempt to convert anyone into a scientist, if you want to you can become one, but if you dont, noone will ever purposefully try to make you into one...

 

Neither is this topic about that! Now if you start calling it a clut, i would have to smack you even further... Infact the name of this thread is incorrect, because the term "cult" does not deal with any "concepts", cult is a system of a religious worship, but not describing an ideological system, a cult is a system of manifesting of worship of a particular religion, thus its the system of ceremonies and traditions, not beliefs...

[Qfwfq]

What 3 things identify a religion as a religion?

 

Religions:

1) Assure Salvation

2) Have a precise Theology

3) Attempt to convert people who do not believe, actively or passively

 

when and only when all 3 are satisfied, does one have a religion.

Not all religions comply with these requisites. In any case, I have never seen the point here as being whether science is a religion. Further, a cult isn't necessarily a religion.

[alexander]

Not all religions comply with these requisites.

pretty sure they do, maybe not always in traditional ways to think about those points, but i'm pretty sure about this ;) But if you have some examples, i'd love to reconsider :)

 

I have never seen the point here as being whether science is a religion

I agree, the point of this thread is to discuss something completely different, and yet it gets turned to that for some reason...

 

cult isn't necessarily a religion

I should have kept it at worship, let me rephrase that, cult comes from latin cultus, meaning care, cultivation, worship... Wasn't till 19th century that it was referenced to ancient rituals and changed defitition to "devotion to a person or thing" (ref. some etymology dictionary i dont have time to find atm)