Now, I don’t think anyone can say, and probably never will be able to say, how all this stuff happened. I’ve been an atheist most of my life, until I realized my views were a belief.
How is that possible? Science is rational, right? Sure, it’s rational, as a product of our senses. But, the Matrix showed us we cannot trust our senses. There are a whole bunch of folks who like the trendy “We are in a simulation” Gig. How is that rationale? Well, it’s not an irrational possibility, because all we really know for certain is, well nothing.
In order for us to know something for certain, we have to trust our senses. But can we? Well, the simulation concept, no different than the “God” concept (I mean they got through chapter one: God the engineer made everything, but I suppose God the engineer is somehow more rational), and so the answer is simply this.
Trusting you senses is a belief. You have no way of knowing whether you can trust them or not. It’s indistinguishable from something that could be “simulating us,” as the cool kids on the block tell us.
The end result is Science is a religion in that you have to believe your senses.
So, I have to wonder, given that Science is a religion, and the Bible is a religion, and MultiCulturalism and its evil twin sister Political correctness is a very broken religion, as it’s axiomatically inconsistent, why all the hatred?
Shouldn’t those who are tolerant think “Hey, whatever gets you through this unknowable life?”
I think it’s arrogant to think there is a God. As I can’t rule out “God” as in the God that created a simulation, vs. “God” the God in the Bible, in a rational evaluation, who am I to say “Hey, this is truth?”
And furthermore, it’s my view that truth in the evolutionary sense, which is a belief because we could have been turned on two seconds ago and can’t tell, is simply another religion.
Now, I happen to think it’s a good religion, for me, but at the same time, in looking at the destructiveness of evolutionary forces due to religious ideas today, such as “There is no difference between men and women,” demonstrably false if you believe in female selectivity, then isn’t the prescription for one size fits all wrong?
After all, if you look at lineages of males and females in Europe, for instance, there are far more lines of female lineages that have reproduced than have male lineages. And even here, in the United states TODAY, for every 4 men that reproduce, 5 women do, perhaps these concepts, even if they are in a simulation, or caused in fact by some origin we can’t understand, Science has failed us, at least to the extent that our progressive government in the US thinks that fairness means unfairness.
Yet, with the Grand Compromise in the Bible of one man, one woman, there is more fairness to MEN. It reduces the control of evolutionary forces due to female selectivity, I think, as you don’t obtain the VAST differentials in female reproduction vs. male reproduction as has been evidenced in the past, when up to 19 women reproduced at one time for every male.
So, I have to question whether the new “Scientific” approach to rules in the US are better than those in the Bible, or many other religions that have popped up all over the world.
In fact, some might even say the religious fervor which SOME attack those who believe differently than they do, though truth be told, at the bottom there is NO proof that any views are certain, that in fact these people, like Dawkins are simply mean spirited and wrong.
The Bible and our culture have spun around each other for thousands of years, interacting and changing each other.
It seems to me the innate differences in men and women are captured in the Bible as a way for the sexes to interact with each other in consonant ways given the evolutionary pressures on us. Is it wrong? Probably. But everything is probably wrong that almost anyone thinks, because at bottom it’s all belief, and no one can know.
I like a lot of the tenets in the Bible, and amazingly, it works as a template for human interaction. Ultimately it doesn’t matter much what your ultimate goal is, because I agree the most likely explanation is evolution, and that’s outside of the Bible. However, there is human wisdom of human nature learned over the millennia that is not captured by today’s “Scientific” approach to governmental organizations, or scientists like Dawkins who dogmatically harm those whose views seem to provide more consonant views on human nature than his do, as evidenced by our destructive Western Civilization new “Gods,” who tell us all kinds of falsehoods to establish their new religion, supplanting the old, only without the millennia of wisdom in the Bible.
OK, that’s the point. I would be a capital “A” Atheist, but I’m humble enough to know “No one can know.” Those who attack others because they think they know the “Truth,” when they cannot, as evidenced by their belief you can trust your senses (coming under increasing attack by Science, I might add), informs that those who take away happiness and consonance from people due to THEIR religious fervor, are in some ways worse than those who think this is God’s creation and it allows them to live in harmony in their male/female relationships, and view the world as a positive place, and not one to be feared.
Enough said. Every thought anyone in mankind has ever had is religious as it has it’s basis in one religion or another, including science. I simply don’t like those who try to take away happiness from others when, ultimately, which religion you BELIEVE, be it science, or anything else, is simply random nonsense in the idea ultimately we are rational. We aren’t, and it’s impossible to know any “truth.”
Under that umbrella, I state now and clearly, as a person who believes Science is the best bet, that the use of it to harm others like Dawkins and his minions do, is simply another arrogant religion, and it appears is the way Dawkins makes his living. Off of hate for his fellow man.