So, after absorbing many comparative religion debates (specifically those whose central question is some variation of whether or not religion is necessary in modern society and/or whether God exists), I've detected a subtext from certain debaters (who shall not be named since I'm exaggerating their characteristics) regarding their worldviews.
You've got your pro-religious debaters arguing that God's existence is an empirical, indisputable fact, and that religion is a Very Good Thing required to keep order in society, past, present or future.
Subtext - Man is inherently evil or dangerous, and must be kept under control with rules lest he and his savage brethren destroy the world with their chaotic disposition.
Then you've got your anti-religious debaters arguing that God is either a fabricated comfort figure or a pretense for madmen, and that religion itself is simply a societal control mechanism and, by definition, a Very Bad Thing.
Subtext - Man is inherently good, and must be freed from the shackles of rules lest it chafe his manly goodness and destroy his delicate flower heart.
Any truth in this? Or am I just jumping at shadows?
physics theory becoming more like the ramblings of some unknown sufi sect-think light cone beings, super strings, dark matter etc- without much actual physical evidence to begin with, physics the 'mother' of all sciences does not have a cohesive testable theory in place for the question of where did it all come from, that's what I mainly meant by all knowledge beginning with fiat. not that it practically matters..
There is a lot in physics that is unresolved—but this is (mostly) because it is untestable.
The stuff that is testable has been proven beyond a doubt. We know that relativity is true, and GPS systems actually rely on this knowledge. Quantum mechanics, though admittedly pretty strange, has been thoroughly tested and is responsible for making the machine you are using right now work. This is why it does matter, practically—when physics works, it makes useful technologies work.
Relativity and QM work for their domains—the very large and the very small. But there's stuff even larger, and even smaller, that still needs testing, and we're not really sure how to connect these domains. But our knowledge is improving every day. Certainly you'd agree we know more today about physics than we did 50 years ago, yes?
what's your take on morals btw, I mean don't they have too many fiats for you to believe in
Um. I've been writing about my "take" on morals for pretty much this whole thread! Do you have any specific questions?
naturally we know more, but I don't think some questions can be answered. add to that, quantum and relativity haven't been combined yet.
I meant the whole idea of morals to begin with. do you think they are at all necessary in our day and age-post enlightenment-, what afterwords?
I'd say no matter how advanced, humans will not stop using religion/morals, humanism being the most obvious example.
I meant the whole idea of morals to begin with. do you think they are at all necessary in our day and age-post enlightenment-, what afterwords, in a post-humanist sense?
I think I ought to define what I mean when I say "moral"—maybe this is different from what you mean.
I understand morals as just codes of behavior that aren't inborn or instinctual. In other words, you have to learn them from culture/parents—though they can certainly be based on instincts.
So really, I have trouble understanding your question. As long as there is behavior, I think there will be codes or rules (morals) governing that behavior in some way.
There was just an article in Science about how ants figure out single-file marching across a narrow bridge. It turns out that different species of ants have different genetic programming that determines whether or not they wait or try to go first, but the end result is basically orderly.
Now, this isn't morals (because I've defined morals as learned, not instinctual), but I think morals basically work the same way. As long as there are bridges to cross, streets to cross, ways of communicating, acting, moving, etc.—in short, behaving—it's always going to be more useful and advantageous to have some sort of rules (morals) governing that behavior than pure anarchy.
I'd say no matter how advanced, humans will not stop using religion/morals, humanism being the most obvious example.
There is certainly some truth in it! Although you are certainly exaggerating as you acknowledge.
It's very interesting that according to those positions it is the theists who believe man is 'inherently evil or dangerous' while the atheists think him 'inherently' good! There's obviously something wrong somewhere, and I think that is simply because the first position is intellectually incoherent. God, as theists perceive him, simply cannot be reconciled to that view of humanity. Most perceive humanity as inherently good, I think, whatever their religious views, or lack of them
Personally, of course, I would argue that neither offer solutions as they both totally miss the real problem. But that's a topic for another thread.
Thanksgiving and praise are due to Allah alone, we seek aid from Him alone; and we beseech forgiveness of our sins from Him only; and consign ourselves to the protection of Allah against the evils of our souls and against all offences. Truly, whomsoever Allah guides on the straight path (and He puts him only on the straight path who sincerely desires to walk along that way), no one can lead him astray. And whomsoever God deflects (and He deflects only him who yearns to be defelcted), no one can put him on the straight path. And I bear witness that there is no deity except Allah and I testify that Muhammad is the bondman of Allah and His Messenger.
3:102 O ye who believe! Fear Allah as He should be feared, and die not except in a state of Islam.
4:1 O mankind! reverence your Guardian-Lord, who created you from a single person, created, of like nature, His mate, and from them twain scattered (like seeds) countless men and women;- reverence Allah, through whom ye demand your mutual (rights), and (reverence) the wombs (That bore you): for Allah ever watches over you.
33:70-71 O ye who believe! Fear Allah, and (always) say a word directed to the Right.That He may make your conduct whole and sound and forgive you your sins: He that obeys Allah and His Messenger, has already attained the highest achievement. Amma ba'du Prophet(sw) said, "Verily the most truthful communication is the Book of Allah, the best guidance is from Muhammad, and the worst of all things are innovations; every innovation is heresy, every heresy is error, and every error leads to hell
Human beings are told to wear jilbab, cover their aurat, being given news about Allahu Ta'ala, being Hudud after they are being reported by the society as doing big sins which must be punish by Hududullah in Al Qur'an. Their willingness to accept Hududullah will erase their sins and will lead them to Jannatul Ma'wa khaalidina fiiha.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Quote
Do you have any specific questions?
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks