Why organised religion?

Originally posted by tomtom232
Maybe it didn't come from nothing but it was always here.

A black hole looks like nothing but it spits out Quasars.

ummm, what?

Originally posted by sumydid
rwingett... please tell me I didn't see that avatar.

😴

Why? Are you among the 1%?

Originally posted by googlefudge
I wasn't putting it on a pedestal, but what has it being man-made got to do with anything?

When put in terms of giving, you are placing it on a pedestal: as though science is somehow bestowing on us some form of its generosity. The fact that it is a man-derived, man-dependent discipline automatically disqualifies it from the wholly objective truth category.

Originally posted by rwingett
That's how I roll, Holmes. You don't like it, then don't respond to my posts. I certainly won't miss you.

That's telling him. 😉

Originally posted by googlefudge
Science doesn't claim everything came form nothing, religion does.

God is something. 😀

Originally posted by Melanerpes
This seems to sum up what could be considered "The Problem" (that most people have a very hard time putting into words) that grips the world today.

I believe that both the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street movements reflect this. Despite coming from opposite sides of the political spectrum, both movements seem to be saying that "materialistic consum ...[text shortened]... lly isn't taxing the rich and passing some "jobs bill". Something much deeper is wrong.

It's a lack of faith in God.

Originally posted by whodey
Compulsary love? I suppose it depends on how you quantify love. For example, how was Christ showing love when he used a whip against the money changers? When Christ was asked about loving your neighbor the example he gave was the Good Samaritan. Interestingly, the Good Samaritan SHOULD have been a natural enemy of the man he helped simply due to his race ...[text shortened]... same things they did to deserve it. It would be akin to punishing your child when he needs it.

Love was shown when He suffered and then died on the cross for us.
He gave His life to save ours. That's Love.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
I don't think Rwingett is blaming science.

Science has achieved wondrous technologies and will continue to do so. But we humans still have to make the decisions about what we do with these technologies. Science can't make those decisions for us.

But The Problem is more than just finding a way to make the economy "grow faster". Even before the cras issues that do need to be addressed, but none of this will really deal with The Problem.

Oh, but I am blaming science. Science has undermined traditional value systems, but as it is descriptive rather than being prescriptive, it is incapable of replacing them with anything comparable. The resulting void has been filled with by a materialistic consumerism wherein the reliance on science's technologies is seen as the proper pursuit, and savior, of mankind. Technological determinism, therefore, has become the de facto religion of a secular age.

Science does not intend this to happen. No scientists advocate this happening. Indeed, most may even deny that it has, or is, happening. But it is my contention that cultural materialism is the unintended (and probably inevitable) side effect of scientific materialism.

All the assembled acolytes of technology on this forum would no doubt contend that their vast storehouse of accumulated knowledge has made them so much wiser and sagacious than the religious bumpkins, but I'm afraid they're merely flattering themselves. If they were given the option of running things according to their credo, the resulting technocratic nightmare would rival the worst theocracies in the scope and scale of its horrors. Our science may make us "smarter", for what that's worth to anyone, but it does not make for a better society. There have been many tradeoffs over the centuries and I think people have lost a great deal more along the way than they realize.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Science doesn't claim everything came form nothing

Excellent! Then we agree, science doesn't have a clue how it all began. And that's ok. Science should stick to what it's supposed to be doing, and that is observing facts and drawing conclusions from them.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Heh, then you need to read more of Rwingett's posts.
None of the problems we face at the moment are insoluble, the problem is getting the
necessary will behind viable solutions and enacting them.

I think this is a major part of what I'm calling The Problem. We've become unable to even discuss any the various big challenges we're facing.

Perhaps this is reflected in the growing tendency among many on both sides to turn political parties and ideologies into religions?

Originally posted by rwingett
The resulting void has been filled with by a materialistic consumerism wherein the reliance on science's technologies is seen as the proper pursuit, and savior, of mankind. Technological determinism, therefore, has become the de facto religion of a secular age.

This also seems to be a major part of The Problem. Technological determinism cannot be the savior of mankind -- and people, deep down, know it.

As science gives us ever more powerful tools, it gives us ever more power to do great good -- but it also gives us ever more power to do great evil. The 20th century showed the horrors that are possible with 20th century technology -- what might we do with 21st century technology?

Originally posted by Melanerpes
This also seems to be a major part of The Problem. Technological determinism cannot be the savior of mankind -- and people, deep down, know it.

As science gives us ever more powerful tools, it gives us ever more power to do great good -- but it also gives us ever more power to do great evil. The 20th century showed the horrors that are possible with 20th century technology -- what might we do with 21st century technology?

We can only hope that for once we can learn from the mistakes of history and not repeat them.

Originally posted by googlefudge
ummm, what?

Shut the hell up man and get off my back. Nobody likes you.

What do you believe is wrong with what I stated? That black holes look like nothing? My use of the word spits? That black holes emit quasars?

What are you whatting?

Originally posted by tomtom232
Shut the hell up man and get off my back. Nobody likes you.

What do you believe is wrong with what I stated? That black holes look like nothing? My use of the word spits? That black holes emit quasars?

What are you whatting?

I like him.

Originally posted by tomtom232
Shut the hell up man and get off my back. Nobody likes you.

What do you believe is wrong with what I stated? That black holes look like nothing? My use of the word spits? That black holes emit quasars?

What are you whatting?

Nobody likes you.

How did you come to that conclusion?