Scientific and Techno progress not what it seems

[Lawdog]

Heaven or Hell
Read the CNN article and post your comments:

"It's not necessarily even that that these technologies will fall into the hands of evil people, but that scientists working in an academic bubble, without ethical scrutiny and pursuing research for its own merits may accidentally create something truly appalling, something that might escape beyond the safety of a lab. Or be picked up and used as a weapon by somebody else with genuinely wicked intention."

This is right: Man the Atheist is naturally nihilistic and death-oriented. Only religion can give him a proper life-ethic.

Perhaps this is how the apocalypse will unfold. whatever the case, the human race and the earth cannot sustain the mad rush of our current western society. If people do not slow down from the madness on their own, then God sees to it that they do anyway.

 

[charles cure]

you're right, we should never have left the stone age because iron has fallen into the wrong hands and people made guns out of it. maybe god can save us and send us back to our wood and stone tools.

 

[KennyJC]

This is right: Man the Atheist is naturally nihilistic and death-oriented. Only religion can give him a proper life-ethic.

Who would you say would be more likely to push the button that ends the world? An atheist? Or a fanatical religious person of any particular faith who believes God want's you to do it? That person may even believe that by pushing the button and bringing on the 'apocalypse', he is paving the way for Jesus' return.

So in essence an atheist would only push the button if they are a bad person. A theist who could actually be a good person, would push it for religious reasons.

 

[Lawdog]

you're right, we should never have left the stone age because iron has fallen into the wrong hands and people made guns out of it. maybe god can save us and send us back to our wood and stone tools.

So you disagree with CNN??? Wow thats progress!

 

[Lawdog]

Who would you say would be more likely to push the button that ends the world? An atheist? Or a fanatical religious person of any particular faith who believes God want's you to do it? That person may even believe that by pushing the button and bringing on the 'apocalypse', he is paving the way for Jesus' return.

So in essence an atheist would only push the button if they are a bad person. A theist who could actually be a good person, would push it for religious reasons.

a fanatical religious person of course, but only because there are more of them. Atheists who are fanatical nihilists, like so many on this site, are of the same mould as religious fanatics, to the extent that they consider all religious people fanatiacal!!! After all, it takes more faith to be an atheist, and why not wipe out all those genetically imperfect humans after all, no law of fictional deity can stop him.

 

[Oli]

On the other hand maybe (just maybe) it's just a sensationalist piece to gain some air time. Apocalypse is always more interesting than "nothing to see here".
How long would most people sit and watch a series of scientists talking about how everything's going to fine?

 

[charles cure]

So you disagree with CNN??? Wow thats progress!

i have a tendency to disagree with fear-mongering idiots who create irrational what-if scenarios out of thin air to get ratings. that goes for fox news and cnn or any other media outlet whenever they do it.

 

[Lawdog]

So did you read the article? Do you really think that its so far-fetched?

 

[KennyJC]

a fanatical religious person of course, but atheists who are fanatical nihilists, like so many on this site, are of the same mould. After all, it takes more faith to be an atheist, and why not wipe out all those genetically imperfect humans after all, no law of fictional deity can stop him.

But Lawdog, you are what I would call a fanatical religious person. You are one of the most fundamental theists who visit this forum.

If you were alone in a room with this button, I would sincerely worry.

I would not be as concerned if an atheist (especially one from this forum) was in the same position. Why would I not be as concerned? Atheist's know this is their one shot at life, they are not so careless to end it.

 

[spidergoat]

Yes, science is a double-edged sword, but I'm more interested in Lawpuppie's characterization of Atheism as death-oriented, and religion as life oriented. In my view, religions like Chritistianity are extremely death oriented. I have often heard their line of reasoning that even if their is a slight possibility of Hell being true, shouldn't you hedge your bets and believe in God, since the prospect of eternal torture is so bad? They view the body and material things as secondary to the heavenly realm, they push sexuality into narrowly regulated parameters, they are focused on the end times. Their man in the white house is an apocolyptic evangelical, who has framed his battle with a few terrorists as a war between good and evil, with nuclear weapons increasingly fair game.

By contrast, scientists (or secular humanists) want to use their method of gaining knowledge to make the world better in this life.

It may very well be a technology revealed by science that is the death of us all, but most probably it will be short sighted religious people focused on the afterlife that fail to fully recognize the danger of their use of technology. Also, science is not technology. Science is the study of how things work, and the technology that evolves from this knowledge may be entirely out of their hands.

 

[wsionynw]

Heaven or Hell
Read the CNN article and post your comments:


This is right: Man the Atheist is naturally nihilistic and death-oriented. Only religion can give him a proper life-ethic.

Perhaps this is how the apocalypse will unfold. whatever the case, the human race and the earth cannot sustain the mad rush of our current western society. If people do not slow down from the madness on their own, then God sees to it that they do anyway.

Lawdog what are you banging on about now? Since when is it accepted that atheists are nihilistic and death-orientated?
Religion and proper life ethic do not sit well together, unless you consider sexism, oppression, homophobia, fear and hate 'proper' life ethics.
If by 'death-orientated' you mean we accept that when we die we do not magically transport to an afterlife that resembles some religious make believe, then you're right. Is a Muslim suicide bomber death-orientated?
Explain your connection between atheism and nihilism???
Moving on to the issue of scientific discovery and technological development, I agree we should be careful, any sane person would agree with that, atheist or otherwise. Are you suggesting that mad atheist scientists are creating weapons of mass destruction with no regard for the well being of our planet and all living things?

 

[Communist Hamster]

Lawdog, your avatar dog seems to be having an epileptic fit.

 

[Cris]

Lawdog,

In the article he laid out his fear that nanotechnology, genetics and cybernetics were leading us towards a point where the human race would become obsolete. A point where these technologies would have a life beyond their masters will -- they would be able to self-replicate and self-develop without human interference.

This I feel is quite inevitable, unavoidable, highly desirable, and something we need to positively welcome. But why would he express fear? Apprehension of change would be typical but fear should not be the emotion on this. But the other major error is the view that somehow humans as we are now will remain this way. That isn’t going to happen. The genetics, the nanotechnology, the brain enhancements, and other technologies will be focused at changing our very nature and form. It is not that we will be masters and that technology will overpower us, it is that we will gradually merge with the technology until there is no discernable difference.

As for scientists working in academic isolation, perhaps some of that occurs, but most of the coming changes will be from technologists like me who are pushing for these changes to occur.

This is right: Man the Atheist is naturally nihilistic and death-oriented. Only religion can give him a proper life-ethic.

Total gibberish. It is the religionist that hopes for death since they believe their eternal future lies in a heavenly paradise; the biggest con-trick in the history of mankind. The atheist suffers no such delusions and to him life is extremely precious and valuable.

Perhaps this is how the apocalypse will unfold. whatever the case, the human race and the earth cannot sustain the mad rush of our current western society. If people do not slow down from the madness on their own, then God sees to it that they do anyway.

More gibberish. The apocalypse if it were to occur would be some typical religionist thinking it is about time to save everyone by sending them to heaven early by pushing the button. Technology in the hands of the religionists must be carefully avoided, and Iran having nuclear weapons is something we must prevent at any cost. But it is not a mad rush for many of us; the progress seems painfully slow and laborious, made slower by the ignorance and interference from religionists, one of my primary issues with them. The main issue is that you need to keep up or become extinct. This will be the survival of the fittest, and the religionists are not the fittest at this point, since they are tied to ancient superstitious ignorance and lethal indoctrination.

 

[baumgarten]

Lawdog, I do not believe that either scientists or atheists are naturally nihilistic or otherwise without conscience; and frankly, reading the quotes of the scientists in the article you reference, I cannot fathom how you could have reasonably come to that conclusion. The whole premise of the article is that a number of scientists are warning against evil uses of technology, just as physicists in the 20th century (and some today) warned of the threat of nuclear weapons. This seems to contradict your point.

 

[scorpius]

This is right: Man the Atheist is naturally nihilistic and death-oriented. Only religion can give him a proper life-ethic.

you need an ENEMA cause your so FULL OF IT bud,
ATHEIST is the one who cares about LIVING because WE KNOW this life is all we have,(and you religious morrons too btw},so we would be stupid to throw it away in some stupid apocalypse.but then you fucks have the LOGICAL REASONING gene deleted by some freak of nature so its useless to talk to you idiots like to a normal inteligent folk..

 

[Giambattista]

you're right, we should never have left the stone age because iron has fallen into the wrong hands and people made guns out of it. maybe god can save us and send us back to our wood and stone tools.

Now THAT was funny! :m:

 

[Giambattista]

i have a tendency to disagree with fear-mongering idiots who create irrational what-if scenarios out of thin air to get ratings. that goes for fox news and cnn or any other media outlet whenever they do it.

How bout fear-mongering remote-viewers???

 

[Giambattista]

Yes, science is a double-edged sword, but I'm more interested in Lawpuppie's characterization of Atheism as death-oriented, and religion as life oriented. In my view, religions like Chritistianity are extremely death oriented.

You are quite right.

It depends though on which sect and which interpretation they hold to.

The Bible, it is safe to say, flip-flops on the issue of the meaning of life, as well as afterlife.

I would say more, but I'm not prepared to at this time. Thank you. Good evening.

 

[Lawdog]

This I feel is quite inevitable, unavoidable, highly desirable, and something we need to positively welcome. But why would he express fear? Apprehension of change would be typical but fear should not be the emotion on this. But the other major error is the view that somehow humans as we are now will remain this way. That isn’t going to happen. The genetics, the nanotechnology, the brain enhancements, and other technologies will be focused at changing our very nature and form. It is not that we will be masters and that technology will overpower us, it is that we will gradually merge with the technology until there is no discernable difference.

I really cant see how you can think that humans will change, or that somehow we are evolving and have evolved. my study of history indicates that Man has always been in a similar condition up until the modern era when false philosophies distorted his understanding of his place in the universe. Otherwise, Man has always been as intelligent as he is now, never less so, although now he has more techno at his disposal. Man wishes to be his own god. I do not think that tech will over power Man, but Man can ruin his civilization with it.

As for scientists working in academic isolation, perhaps some of that occurs, but most of the coming changes will be from technologists like me who are pushing for these changes to occur.

What is your final vision? Utopia?

Total gibberish. It is the religionist that hopes for death since they believe their eternal future lies in a heavenly paradise; the biggest con-trick in the history of mankind. The atheist suffers no such delusions and to him life is extremely precious and valuable.

Some religionists do hope for death. Worshippers of the true God know that He is the God of Life. The problem is this: its totally absurd not to believe in God. Even those of us who are believers can never be sure if we will end up in Hell. We are hoping to please God. The fact of God's existance should be taken for granted, it should be the starting point of discussion, what to do about it, etc. People that dont believe in God are like they who say absurd things like: "I dont exist"

More gibberish. The apocalypse if it were to occur would be some typical religionist thinking it is about time to save everyone by sending them to heaven early by pushing the button. Technology in the hands of the religionists must be carefully avoided, and Iran having nuclear weapons is something we must prevent at any cost. But it is not a mad rush for many of us; the progress seems painfully slow and laborious, made slower by the ignorance and interference from religionists, one of my primary issues with them. The main issue is that you need to keep up or become extinct. This will be the survival of the fittest, and the religionists are not the fittest at this point, since they are tied to ancient superstitious ignorance and lethal indoctrination.

You like to lump together all "religionists." Its sort of like lumping together all car salesmen, both used, new, and stolen vehical salesmen.

 

[Lawdog]

To the atheists who claim not to be nihilistic, please explain the principles of your morality, in other words, why you would not press the button?