Is God Rational?
- Thread starter Bowser
- Start date
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
I would suggest that inferior versions of "theism" tainted rational thinking. The Inquisition comes to mind.
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
That's why they are implacable..
Mathematical functions are implacable forces which determine specific results to specific physical interactions. [/quote]
And not Lysenko?
That's why they are implacable..
Mathematical functions are implacable forces which determine specific results to specific physical interactions.
My bad.
I'm not sure if implacable is the best word to describe mathematics (mathmaticians may or may not get placated, but maths itself?)
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Social elevation of knowledge was impeded by Theism for centuries.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...god-isnt-a-magician-with-a-magic-9822514.html
Finally!!!
Introductions often borrow colourful language.
Even if we just want to focus on european history, that is not entirely correct. Science was patronized by the catholic church until the political influence of protestantism caused them to rethink their values (there's something about losing a few countries that tends to disturb the mind of a political entity ... when an attack on religion becomes identical to an attack on the state, it doesnt take rocket science to work out a political response is forthcoming).
If you think the pope embracing contemporary science is new territory, you don't know the history of the catholic church. You don't get a 1700-2000 year old organization without some sort of malleablility.
The fact that the spanish inquisition is one of the things that comes to your mind (as opposed to Lysenko) can be arguably be demonstrated as an example of the far reaching implications of protestant propaganda in the whole cathic kafuffle
(Immortalized by monty python )
https://strangenotions.com/spanish-inquisition/
(Just something I pulled from google in 2 secs ....)
Last edited:
They achieved in about 2 years what the spanish inquisition couldn't achieve in more than 2 centuries. Now that's 20th century progress!
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Its difficult to understand what point you are trying to make. Its no surprise that she was murdered by christians because she was in the melting pot of east and west roman politics. Even today there are about half a dozen personalities laying claim to the title of bishop of alexandria, so you can understand that the status quo wasn't amicably resolved by all parties. History shows that if someone is seen (either rightly or wrongly) to be messing around with politics, they can meet grizzly ends. And, as communist regimes illustrate, in large numbers.
the problem with religion and most religious text is that it's a conglomeration of contradictory memes, traditions, ethics, cultures and ideals from differing sources touted to be the same or in alignment when it is not.
the piggybacking is obfuscation and a scenario for manipulation. after all, a lie or immorality mixed with the truth or ethical when it is believed that it all must be true or moral will allow the lie or immoral to pass.
that's how you get people cherry-picking to justify the unjustifiable in religious text and therefore their god (infallible) but its not all the same god/s/metaphor.
the old testament especially, interestingly enough, is rife with it more than the new testament but since you have those who are also fighting the good fight as well, it is all interspersed along with the paganistic and immoral practices that could be deemed demonic that are interpreted as ethical or rational.
in other words, it's dualistic and to pretend it's not is actually giving power to the dark because it's touted as only being the light. this dualism is contradictory and always will be.
this is also one of the reasons why the most evil people often have no problem with religion. in fact, many are attracted to it for this reason. they don't actually have to change their nature at all. religion is a mirror of nature but when it's interpreted as being better or different, that's when the snakes in the grass can really pull one over even more.
Last edited:
I think you would get the same confusion if you considered the Marvel Super Heroes in the comic books and movies
Discrepancies abound
More or less than those in the religious text? There's a scholarship grant waiting to be snapped up
But that's communism, not atheism.
And yet the only one differing is you.
There's a quantum leap from "nobody agrees with me" to "somebody agrees with me". Two people agreeing with me is not necessarily "better" than one. A hundred may be somewhat better than one but it is not a linear scale.
That's politics.
When a community builds up to statehood, people have a tendency to get killed for the sake of protecting it's interests.
A community that is too insignificant to approach statehood is not, therefore, defaulted the moral high ground.
On the contrary, I'm not shy about coming to a conclusion what is better. In that regard, I am certainly not alone.And yet the only one differing is you.
If you can't qualify the value (ie, make clear what added value it brings) of it, why describe it as quantum?
If 2 or 100 people agreeing with me brings no necessary advantage to the notion of reality, why bring it to the discussion?
But only with faith of how they think the universe should work.