If knowledge is power
And if power corrupts
Then it means knowledge corrupts.
So what are you thoughts on this?
Printable View
If knowledge is power
And if power corrupts
Then it means knowledge corrupts.
So what are you thoughts on this?
everyone gets brainwashed and become "dumb"?
The saying goes "Absolute power currupts absolutly." So therefor one would have to have 'absolute' knowledge to become corrupt absolutly.
Well, knowledge can corrupt. Easy example: if you know the cheat of a game, will you use it ? If so, you have been corrupted by the knowledge. No Knowledge, no cheat, no corruption.
according to christianity, yes, knowledge is what corrupts. (ie satan making them eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil)
I don't think having knowledge is corrupting you, its enlightening you. lack of knowledge ie ignorance is more dangerous in most situations i'd say.
but the flip side is that 'ignorance is bliss'. the more you know about some things, then the more it can depress you. you'd be better of not knowing some things.
"according to christianity, yes, knowledge is what corrupts"
....... well it MUST be true then.
Well acording to Mormonism, "O that great and cunning plan of the evil one! Oh the vainness and the frailties and the foolishness of men! When they are loearned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsels of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves. Wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness, and it profiteth them not".
And of course, my personal favorite saying like that:
Girls = time x money
Money = sqroot(evil)
Time = Money
Girls = sqroot(evil)(sqroot(evil))
Girls = EVIL! EVIL!
i posted this EXACT same thing a little while ago...
sheesh.
>>>>"according to christianity, yes, knowledge is what corrupts"
>>....... well it MUST be true then.
Clyde, He was simply stating a fact. No reason to poke fun at it.
"I don't think having knowledge is corrupting you, its enlightening you. lack of knowledge ie ignorance is more dangerous in most situations i'd say.
but the flip side is that 'ignorance is bliss'. the more you know about some things, then the more it can depress you. you'd be better of not knowing some things."
I have to agree, knowledge IS wonderful, but IF used incorrectly it can lead to depression and misunderstood ideas about what's truly real and important in life.
It seems that the more we discover through an answered question, the more questions pop up to replace it! We find oursleves trapped in the land of confusion and distorted truth.
I know of a fellow who, as a friend said of him, he's really smart, but he lacks wisdom. He knows so many things about medicine, philosphy, ect, but he chose not to go to college, he dosn't want to get a job ,so he lives on welfare; and he spends his time playing video games and wasting his life away. Get this, he's only 21!
Probably didn't have much corrolation with the discussion, but I thought it was interesting.
ARGHHHH!!! I had a wonderful post written out and I deleted it quite by accident! Couldn't remember all of what I had said so it came out shorter and not quite what I wanted.
"No reason to poke fun at it."
There's always reason to poke fun at it.
According to the bible knowledge does not corrupt. Your garden of eden example is false. It was not the knowledge gained that corrupted Adam and Eve, it was the act of disobeying the one commandment at the time. Knowledge does not corrupt anyone, the person who uses that knowledge wrongfully is the one corrupt. for example Guns are not bad it is the person who uses the gun wrongfully that is.
There are many types of power and not all of them are corrupting.
>>There's always reason to poke fun at it.
LMAO! Short, simple, to the point, and highly accurate. :D
Nvoigt has the most convincing argument so far. Stevey also has a point about 'ignorance is bliss'. Without the knowledge we are happier, though far more likely to make mistakes; Possibly fatal ones. personally I'll take my chances with knowledge. I can think of nothing I'd rather not know about.
I would say that knowledge is not ALWAYS power and power does not ALWAYS corrupt, so therefore knowledge CAN corrupt but doesn't necessarily do it all instances.Quote:
Originally posted by Sentaku senshi
If knowledge is power
And if power corrupts
Then it means knowledge corrupts.
So what are you thoughts on this?
"No reason to poke fun at it."
There's always reason to poke fun at it."
Iv'e noticed, through many an observation, that you always choose anything having to do with God, Christianity, or the bible and wrench, grind, and tear at it no matter how inoccent or vauge of a comment it was. You leave the people's comments and ideas with your own comment that seriously underminds any respect they had had for you. Or maybe that's what you want.....
Why is this?
Are you a bigot?
Did you have some sort of bad experiance in the past that led you to resent Christians and God?
Lets add some steam to this thread
I respect him more for taking a stand agains the religious BS.Quote:
Originally posted by compjinx
You leave the people's comments and ideas with your own comment that seriously underminds any respect they had had for you. Or maybe that's what you want.....
Just have a hard time with narrow minded peopleQuote:
Originally posted by compjinx
Did you have some sort of bad experiance in the past that led you to resent Christians and God?
"Well, knowledge can corrupt. Easy example: if you know the cheat of a game, will you use it ? If so, you have been corrupted by the knowledge. No Knowledge, no cheat, no corruption."
But, if you knew how to kill a person would you do it? It's not the knowledge that corrupts persay, but the evilness inside a person who CHOOSES to put that knowledge to use. We have free will, we have the knolwedge to do good or evil, it all depends on which one we pick that determains our outcome.
Paul said this of the war inside us: " I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me." (Romans 7:15-17)
Lots of "I do," but it makes sence when read over a few times.
There are things we all struggle with every day, to invite that freind over when I know I should, but I don't want to. Do I sneak that pecon pie even though it took my wife forever to bake it?
My paster said it this way, it is like two dogs fighting, ( I invision two large pit bulls at eachother's throats, tearing flesh and ripping fur) and the one we feed is the one that wins(Here I picture mself throwing one of the dogs steak whenever I choose to do a good thing, or an evil thing). The fight is the spirit against the flesh, the good against the evil...which one will win in the end?
Reading the news the last month it sems like there is alot of young people having bad experience with the christian leadersQuote:
Originally posted by compjinx
Did you have some sort of bad experiance in the past that led you to resent Christians and God?
>>Reading the news the last month it sems like there is alot of
>> young people having bad experience with the christian leaders
What do you mean? give an example.
>>Reading the news the last month it sems like there is alot of young people having bad experience with the christian leaders
LMAO! Accute.
>>What do you mean? give an example.
I believe he's refering to the incredible number of church representatives who are pedophiles. So many guys coming out of the woodwork to speak out about how they were sexually abused by their pastors/priests/whatever when they were younger. Heck, even in my own home town it happens. Its everywhere.
Myself i've not been buggered by that type. My own past "bad" experiences involve the aformentioned narrow mindedness and lack of logical process. So many of these people refuse to even think about what they're saying. It disturbs me as an intelligent being to see potential go to waste. If you dont reason, you're not much different than a starfish (mechanical responses, no brain).
>>Iv'e noticed, through many an observation, that you always choose anything having to do with God, Christianity, or the bible
I find it refreshing. Hes tackling the issues that have been deemed 'politically incorrect' by some. I dont see it so much as targetting religion, but as targetting illogical thought processes. You'll notice that wherever theres people spouting off without knowing what they're talking about, you'll find Clyde there to point it out. I think some people are just annoyed because religion fits that 'flawed' category and they dont like it pointed out.
But i've now helped this stray off topic.
"Why is this?
Are you a bigot?
Did you have some sort of bad experiance in the past that led you to resent Christians and God?"
If i answered your questions whilst you would get answers, I would hijack the thread.
Suffice to say that i have had no "bad experiences" with Christians or any other religion, other than the news.
>>>Without the knowledge we are happier
What knowledge? Can I buy some?
No, you have to train to become a London taxi driver.
"According to the bible knowledge does not corrupt. Your garden of eden example is false. It was not the knowledge gained that corrupted Adam and Eve, it was the act of disobeying the one commandment at the time. Knowledge does not corrupt anyone, the person who uses that knowledge wrongfully is the one corrupt. for example Guns are not bad it is the person who uses the gun wrongfully that is."
"I had not known coveting except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." Rom. 7:7.
That is, as soon as someone gains knowledge of right and wrong, they want to do wrong.
Anyway, I was speaking in a general sense, even trying to excercise my sense of humor.
Anyway, this doesn't mean that knowledge is bad, because we've already been corrupted. The Bible even commands us "Study to show yourself approved by man".
Clyde, this doesn't mean that religion advocates ignorance, it is just a description of an event.
"Clyde, this doesn't mean that religion advocates ignorance, it is just a description of an event"
But, uh, religion does advocate ignorance...
http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/toc.html
This is an accurate, comprehensive, systematic description of all christian doctrine. You will not find any thing in here advocating ignorance.
While I'm not aware of anyone advocating ignorance, it seems possible to me that certain peopple may have said this, but that doesn't that they were accurate representatives of their religion.
And Clyde, if you can't find anything you better not use the excuse you didn't have time to look through everything, considering the length of your posts.
This thread is not the place, if you want to debate religion start another one.
EDIT: ROFL that site is funny.
Obviously you have not been through 4 or more years of theology or any classes related to the field. You are judging the entire field of theology from a select few 'church goers' who prob don't care too much about theology but who are just everyday Christians. They go to church on Sunday and then go to work through the week.Quote:
But, uh, religion does advocate ignorance...
Judging a field or area of knowledge as ignorant before you know anything about it is..well...ignorant. Just as there are people who are content to turn on a computer, use it, play it, and then turn it off - there are also people who are content to learn just enough about theology to apply it to their everyday lives and then leave it at that.
But there are also those who study theology day in and day out, who research ancient literature/texts and use hermenuetics to translate, differentiate and substantiate different texts. It is not an easy field and the classes that I took were equivalent in difficulty to advanced calculus. To be a good theologian you must have an excellent knowledge of hermenuetics; ancient languages, customs, literature, cultures, events, people, governments, etc.,etc. Personally for me, I chose to stop at the 4-year mark. But I had many professors who were walking cerebellums who forgot more about these things than I've ever known. Some of my professors helped in writing some of the newer translations (like we need another one) of the Bible and were really just geniuses when it came to this stuff.
But you are prob not gonna find this in your average everyday local church member. In fact, I find that most church members are extremely ignorant about their faith and their beliefs which is a very sad thing. Because of this ignorance they often make very poor decisions based purely on emotion and not logic. They often judge and tend to 'write-off' other people when this is clearly not in accordance with what they believe and hold true. Ignorance is a huge problem in the church and it is becoming a larger problem. It just seems that no matter what the topic today, people are unwilling to learn and really investigate or critically think through anything. This is where most people's perception of the church comes from and sadly it is not a true representation of what it is all about. Incidentally, the Catholic denomination is not the sum total of the church. Most judge the church based on this denomination but rarely go any deeper. Religion is a huge field with millions of different facets, just like computer science. It is very sad that the most-prominenet people in the field have obviously forgotten all about leadership and tend to think that they are above the system. This casts a very bad light on the whole thing but remember that there are very hard working, very knowledeable, very logical, and very moral ministers, theologians, and church historians out there.
Just as you don't want people to judge you based on others or even based on your own mistakes, please don't judge an entire church or area of knowledge such as theology based upon very bad mistakes and bad examples. This would be the equivalent of judging the whole of computer science as evil because of the growing problem of computer hackers.
So yes most church members are very ignorant and I don't mean this in a demeaning way - it's just that they lack the proper education and knowledge about religion. I would blame this on their local church since it is their job to teach this. Sadly most of these resort to either extremely boring services, or services and classes based purely on emotion with absolutely no biblical or hermeneutical backing. Every field has its bad examples and it is impossible to weed them all out. Just dont get into the practice of writing something off because of them. Do you totally quit programming computers because some programmers are just downright ignorant about code? Of course not. So why do the same about any field of knowledge, especially if you know nothing about it yourself?
It seems that most of us here absolutely love knowledge which is awesome in my book. I do have a four year degree in the field of religion but also am pursuing a masters in comp sci. So trust me when I say that the field of religion is not about ignorance nor does it advocate it.
woohoo, another religious thread. Oh joy. :rolleyes: The webmaster should add a button to the bottom of each thread which automatically brands it with a scarlet R :)
*sigh* The thing that bothers me most is that the religous community on this board is represented time and time again by total religous morons...the type of people get brainwashed and only spout what's been regurgitated in their brains. My favorite example was "NOT_BLINDED"...don't remember if it was old board or new board, but that guy was hilarious :)
I don't know about everyone else, but I constantly challenge almost every facet of my religion..I may say I'm catholic, but to me it means nothing more to me than the fact that I go to a catholic church to worship.
>>But, uh, religion does advocate ignorance...
True enough, but in nowhere near all cases.
>>Heck, even in my own home town it happens. Its everywhere.
3 time here...my brother got confirmed by one, I got confirmed by the other, along with my brother (the infamous Bishop O'Connel, no less - the one who basically exploded this onto the scene), and a rabbi from the place right across from my church.....yeesh. My parents seem to have formulated that the catholic hierarchy is all gay, so they hush all this up. A lot of what they're saying makes sense...the fact that priests can't marry just sort've promotes homosexual priests...
You know, I tried, I really did, i tried not to let this thread sway off topic, I asked people to start a new thread but nooooooooo........
"Obviously you have not been through 4 or more years of theology or any classes related to the field"
No, but my flat mate has, and guess what he thinks? Oh wait this is UN-BIASED theology though, as in study of all religions, the texts, the history, etc. obviously that doesn't count, what was i thinking!
"It is not an easy field and the classes that I took were equivalent in difficulty to advanced calculus"
ROFL, yahuh.
"But you are prob not gonna find this in your average everyday local church member"
This is all beside the point, i was not refering to a specific sect of a specific religion, I was refering to religion as a whole, and it's effect on man kind.
Religion teaches one not to question; here are the answers on a plate, don't think about them, shut up and believe. No? Don't believe me? What's the word.... oh yes, i found it "faith" there we go, the great cop out, the strongest force for ignorance in this world. It is why so many people don't believe in evolution, it is why so many people think the Earth is only 10,000 years old (LOL), it is also why people were so reluctant to accept Galileos conclusions about the Earths orbit, why so many people in religious cultures are so fantastically ignorant of science and the nature of the world around them. They REJECT knowledge, because it disagrees with their "faith", and their "faith" is due to religion.
Yup that five letter word has a lot to answer for, though i must say who-ever dreamed up the idea of duping people into believing the completely irrational, just by calling the "completely irrational" a new word and extoling this new word's virtues, was bloody genius.
"This casts a very bad light on the whole thing but remember that there are very hard working, very knowledeable, very logical, and very moral ministers, theologians, and church historians out there"
Logical!?? LOGICAL! *Has fit and dies*.
"So trust me when I say that the field of religion is not about ignorance nor does it advocate it"
Yes it is, and yes it does.
"The thing that bothers me most is that the religous community on this board is represented time and time again by total religous morons...the type of people get brainwashed and only spout what's been regurgitated in their brains."
There is hope for you.
Are you coming onto me?Quote:
Originally posted by Clyde
There is hope for you.
"Are you coming onto me?"
ROFL, hey buddy I have a girlfriend!
I was merely pointing out that there is hope for you; if I knew you in person i might be able to convince you (i'm a lot more convincing, and a much stronger debator, when debating vocally). Either way your statement seems to imply that you are not totally blinded by the religious mumbo-jumbo, hence there is hope that you will see religion for what it is.
I think this explains it..
http://crazy.codetroop.com/randimg/?noknow.jpg
i don't agree Clyde, that site isn't funny, its depressing.Quote:
Originally posted by Clyde
This thread is not the place, if you want to debate religion start another one.
EDIT: ROFL that site is funny.
..hehe, i had the appifany that religion is useless contemporarily a few years ago, and i haven't wasted my time with it since.
ROCK ON, CLYDE!!!
you and i, crusaders for freedom to think as we please without the weighted chains of religion to pull us into the ditch of ignorance.
fight the power!
well i'd not usually pull someone for their spelling but i must point out that your spelling of (i presume) epiphany, is truely an absolute gem !!!
>>epiphany
no way........i need proof!
"I think some people are just annoyed because religion fits that 'flawed' category and they dont like it pointed out. "
Christianity is not flawed, if anyone ever took the time to study it, they would understand why.
"Just have a hard time with narrow minded people"
like yourself?
Clyde, science supports a young earth, evolution demands an old earth.
physics says: "given enough time and things become less complex"
evolutions says: "given enough time things become more complex"
Hmmm, gee, how about that.
There is proof, according to science, that the earth cannot be 15 billion years old, in fact it can't be more than 40,000!
Bubba, you explained everything better than I ever couldv'e. I give you a nod of freindship and respect.
" *sigh* The thing that bothers me most is that the religous community on this board is represented time and time again by total religous morons...the type of people get brainwashed and only spout what's been regurgitated in their brains. My favorite example was "NOT_BLINDED"...don't remember if it was old board or new board, but that guy was hilarious"
Morons like Mike_K and Bubba? I think that they explained, pointed out, and have shown that Christians can be very wise and understanding people.
"I find it refreshing. Hes tackling the issues that have been deemed 'politically incorrect' by some. I dont see it so much as targetting religion, but as targetting illogical thought processes. You'll notice that wherever theres people spouting off without knowing what they're talking about, you'll find Clyde there to point it out. I think some people are just annoyed because religion fits that 'flawed' category and they dont like it pointed out."
Clyde IS tackling thought processes, but I wouldn't say illogical. Whenever there is a debate there HAS to be two sides, both sides adamatly believe that they're correct and that is how it is sopposed to be. Who's side is logical and true? Why both sides say theirs is of course!
>>Christianity is not flawed, if anyone ever took the time to study it, they would understand
Well, I've studied it. I've read four different bibles cover to cover over the course of my life. How about yourself? I think I have the right to say I know what I'm talking about.
>>Clyde, science supports a young earth, evolution demands an old earth.
Oooh boy. Here we go. *steps back*
>>There is proof, according to science, that the earth cannot be 15 billion years old, in fact it can't be more than 40,000!
Its these kind of outright lies that make me wonder about those "logical thought processes". Where, oh where, do you find this crap? www.PropagandaForTheGullible.com?
>>like yourself?
No sir. I remain fully open to any and all valid data. I seek to find the truth regardless of what that is.
>>Who's side is logical and true?
Well, when one side has extreme probability, and one side has the next closest thing to none... I just cant understand why you would chose the vastly improbable over the highly probable. I really dont understand that.
Then I'd have to say; Ken, your OK by me. ;) Although I wonder how you arrived at the conclusions you have regarding the universe, I respect the fact that you have actually thought about it. I cant respect blind faith. You are right that so many people just spout out what their pastor said without actually thinking about what it means. Intelligence and relgion are _not_ mutually exclusive. I vastly prefer to discuss this matter with someone who has actually thought about it rather than just some church-goer who has nothing to say that I havent heard 1 million times.Quote:
*sigh* The thing that bothers me most is that the religous community on this board is represented time and time again by total religous morons...the type of people get brainwashed and only spout what's been regurgitated in their brains.
[...]
I don't know about everyone else, but I constantly challenge almost every facet of my religion..
"Well, I've studied it. I've read four different bibles cover to cover over the course of my life. How about yourself? I think I have the right to say I know what I'm talking about."
Four bibles? I guess your not talking King James or NIV eh?
Just because youv'e read the bible (and I'm asuming this is the Holy bible) dosn't mean that you know everything about it. Did you study it? The proof? Do a bible study? Talk to other Christians who are knowledgable?
You can't just sit down and begin reading the bible, it's not a Tom Clany novel, it is a book that needs study. Treat it like an algebra book, you can't just open it and start reading, it has to be researhced, thought out, the bible is a deep, deep book, like reading Plato.
"Well, when one side has extreme probability, and one side has the next closest thing to none... I just cant understand why you would chose the vastly improbable over the highly probable. I really don't understand that."
I see, through my own research, that Christianity has far more proof supporting it than any other belief in the world. That is why I believe in the probable, it is probable, and the more I study, the more I understand and find proof verafying that fact.
>>Four bibles? I guess your not talking King James or NIV eh?
King James was one. I dont recall the names of the others off hand. I'm not sure I have the others anymore.
>>Did you study it?
Yes.
>>The proof?
Well, I've seen exactly zero proof to date.
>>Do a bible study?
Yes.
>>Talk to other Christians who are knowledgable?
Yes. Many many many times. And not with a close minded approach either. But i've yet to recieve one single piece of logic supporting the theory. Every argument stems from the fact that first, you have to believe the bible. Its all highly circular. What I have seen is people who really want to believe and who refuse to be conviced otherwise.
I've noticed through study in some cases (I'm being very specific and not generalising in any way) that it is impossible to logically disprove religion. I have however been succesful on more than one occasion of removing the insecurities that certain people had that had caused them to use religion as a crutch (again; I'm not stating that this is always the case). With the insecurities gone, they stopped blindly following what their church told them, and through asking them questions, I was able to get them thinking about what they were believing unquestioningly. I never told them what to think, merely asked them why they thought what they did. When they realised that they had no concrete reasons... I [very] strongly disagree with the "follow me" religious attitude. I cant accept it and I never will. Everyone has their own interpretations of 1000 different bibles. I myself can (and have) pulled many different possible meanings from the same verse. Wheres the order in that?
Now to clarify: I might get carried away in some of these threads but as a human being I respect your right to believe what you will. However, as someone who sees a mathematically structured and ordered universe around me, I find it difficult just let people ignore it. So to sum up; I can respect your right to believe it and I wouldnt change that, but that doesnt stop me from saying you're wrong and pointing out why.
I normally do not participate in these discussions but I was taken aback by a field of study being called ignorant when I and thousands of others have studied the topic of theology till our eyes fell out - much like studying math till your head explodes for computer science.
No, religion is not science and it will never be. I cannot, could not, and will not attempt to prove nor disprove anything relating to a belief in God. But I can point out some serious flaws in critical thinking and that is what I attempted to do. I'm not spouting off some words that my professor's drilled into my brain, quite the contrary many of my professor's challenged me to think, to take sides that were 100% contrary to what I personally held true, and to critically think through areas of my faith. Cookie cutter answers were not accepted and frankly they were some of the hardest classes I've ever had to take because you could not just memorize something and throw it up on the test. Yes, some classes you could but not in theology. It required you to think and think hard - which is why most of my fellow classmates despised these classes. But I love to think, research, and think some more - which is why I love computer programming as well. It was hard for me to understand the people that did not want to think or even study the very thing they would be teaching and preaching in the future. But I cannot be responsible for them. All I can do is my level best to never teach something that I know nothing about - in any subject.
Did all of my colleagues think through the issues? No. Are there some out there that just spout off second hand knowledge? Yes. But we see this happening in all kinds of occupations. Some people just get by in college and some really take that time to think through the issues and study hard.
The big problem is that no amount of mental assent can bring you one step closer to answering the question of the existence of God. And this is where the infamous faith word comes into play. It is about faith, but there are many many areas of religion that can be studied very closely. The interpretation of texts, languages, and historical events can all be studied. Heremeneutics not only applies to religious texts but also applies to any text and truly is the science of interpreting written literature. However, this science did not help my grade in English literature during my college days. :)
So I'm not debating about faith here, that is the reader's choice. I'm just pointing out some very important logical fallacies. Usually the one's who claim to be the most open-minded end up being actually the most close-minded people. This is because they are open-minded about a very select few things and absolutely will not tolerate anything else. Yes some believers fall in this category but so do many non-believers. If you think very hard about yourself and others, we are all close-minded about one issue or another. It is very hard for humans to accept multiple answers to questions because it is too hard for us to grasp them all. So we reach out to what is familiar and what sets right with us - what we can accept. The same holds true for computer science. I can look up one topic in programming and find about 100 different answers and approaches to the same problem all claiming that they have the right way. I haven't directly stated my position in this debate because it is not relative. The position that I take is to always critically think through things and question every thing because I feel this is the road to understanding the world around us. It's not good to simply write off things at first glance. That is what I would term close-mindedness. Writing something off w/o fully understanding why you are writing it off.
Anyways, I've been through many of these debates with all kinds of different people with different beliefs. In the end, really, it is simply a personal choice. But you cannot write people off in any field or write off any field of study simply because of personal ignorance, resulting from either lack of study due to personal choice or lack of interest.
Also remember that all of us here are programmers and most of us are extremely logical people. Let's keep this debate centered around the topic at hand and not get into personal attacks. The moment you dive into personal attacks you have turned a debate into a personal vendetta against someone. Good debates do not get personal. So if we cannot debate w/o getting personal it may well be best if we do not post at all and save our posts for issues like arrays in C or something similar that is not so volatile for all of us.
This is my last post on this topic but to get it back on track I would say that knowledge does not corrupt. It is how the knowledge is used that can corrupt. The use of knowledge is a field I would call wisdom. So a lack of wisdom, or a knowledge of how to properly use your knowledge, corrupts. But knowledge in and of itself does not corrupt. For instance, just because most of us know how to write computer viruses does not mean that we will. We know that is not a proper application of our knowledge and so we do not pursue it. We have the wisdom to realize that our talents and knowledge can be used to better our world instead of being used to wreak havoc on it.
"Clyde, science supports a young earth, evolution demands an old earth.
.... NO, it does not.
"physics says: "given enough time and things become less complex"
evolutions says: "given enough time things become more complex"
Hmmm, gee, how about that. "
You have NO idea what you are talking about. Please do not argue from ignorance.
The problem with ALL religions is simple and universal.
They are all mans interpretation of the reason we are here. The scriptures (ie bible ect) were written by men, not god.
Humans are flawed. Even with the best intentions they do horrible things. ie Australias stolen generation done by well meaning Christians to 'fauna'.
Flawed humans could not possible explain the thoughts of a god powerful enough to create the universe.
We are not special enough to be that divine creation only concieted enough to think so.
(I was a strict Methodist but I saw the light in Nepal when I meet the 'Crazy baba of Singapore', now I beleive in myself. Jesus was a brave and insightful man well ahead of his time, but just a man)
"I normally do not participate in these discussions but I was taken aback by a field of study being called ignorant when I and thousands of others have studied the topic of theology till our eyes fell out - much like studying math till your head explodes for computer science"
Studying religion in an objective sense is not ignorant, i was refering to religion as whole, and what it does.
"So I'm not debating about faith here, that is the reader's choice."
Faith is a joke.
"I'm just pointing out some very important logical fallacies."
Where?
" It is very hard for humans to accept multiple answers to questions because it is too hard for us to grasp them all"
Well indeed, thats why the "here are the answers on a plate, shut and believe" (Religion) seems to do so well.
"The position that I take is to always critically think through things and question every thing because I feel this is the road to understanding the world around us"
That process is correct, assuming you know how to reason. And if you do know reason and you follow your own advice, you do not end up believeing in irratonal ideas like..... God.
"Also remember that all of us here are programmers and most of us are extremely logical people"
No you are hopelessly wrong, let me tell you about "logic", people SUCK at it. Being good at computer science, means very little, being good at conventional doesn't necessarily mean much either; i'd say atleast 80% of my year have not got a clue.
Let me explain myself, there is no doubt that you need logic to program, BUT your application of that logic is within strict confines. You learn a set of rules, and you learn to apply them, as soon as you free from the context of programming those rules evaporate.
People are incredably poor at thinking outside confines, so many science students are just as bad, sure they can derive physical equations, and enterpret experimental data, but they never make the leap that the focus of their subject and the world around them are exactly the same. I know it's hard to believe, and somewhere in the back their head they most know it to be true, BUT they do not apply the reasoning they displayed in closed problems with the box is lifted.
Most science students they get through the exams using memorisation and specifically learning how to answer questions (by learning rules and how to apply them), 99% of the time they have not got a CLUE what is actually going on. They never realise that it is possible to grasp the concept, and even if they do (and believe me when I say people don't, i'm at one the top universities, the 250 people in my year got 29 points on average out of a normal max of 30, at A-Level, they all got the maximum grade possible at Chemistry, and they represent the cream of academia, and the vast majority do not have a clue.) very few make the additional leap that what they are studying and the world around them are exactly the same, the same principles apply.
So no, people are not logical.
"Anyways, I've been through many of these debates with all kinds of different people with different beliefs. In the end, really, it is simply a personal choice"
It's always a choice, but there are rational choices and irrational ones.
"Good debates do not get personal"
Attacking religion ........es people off, i know this because i 've done it so often, I went through phases we're I played as innocuous a role as possible, but I began to realise that
A: They always got ........ed off, if I pushed my points, no matter how unagressive the manner i take.
B: I got through more when I argued heatedly, I made more people think. My best friend at university, was a muslim when i met him, we argued for about two years, he HATED me with a passion for atleast year, now we're great friends and he is an atheist (for all the problems it causes him at home). I have had a huge impact on the people I know because I made them think. (I don't that kind of effect here, because message arguing is far less effective than verbal, AND the people i knew had some base knowledge to work with, like knowing that any religious text being "literally" true is a joke).
can you please expand on this. i'd like to see the scientific proof that the earth can't be more than 40,000 years old. thats very interesting.Quote:
Originally posted by compjinx
Clyde, science supports a young earth, evolution demands an old earth.
physics says: "given enough time and things become less complex"
evolutions says: "given enough time things become more complex"
Hmmm, gee, how about that.
There is proof, according to science, that the earth cannot be 15 billion years old, in fact it can't be more than 40,000!
>>Morons like Mike_K and Bubba? I think that they explained, pointed out, and have shown that Christians can be very wise and understanding people<<
No, I knew someone would take it as that, but let it be known I was referring to past instances.
>>No you are hopelessly wrong, let me tell you about "logic", people SUCK at it. Being good at computer science, means very little, being good at conventional doesn't necessarily mean much either; i'd say atleast 80% of my year have not got a clue.
Let me explain myself, there is no doubt that you need logic to program, BUT your application of that logic is within strict confines. You learn a set of rules, and you learn to apply them, as soon as you free from the context of programming those rules evaporate.<<
Eh, it's far too generalized to say "All people suck at logic" - sure it's hard to think outside of rules and laws set forth for you, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's impossible.
"Eh, it's far too generalized to say "All people suck at logic" - sure it's hard to think outside of rules and laws set forth for you, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's impossible"
It's not impossible, but the vast majority of people suck at logic, or rather they suck at being able to apply logic across the board, look how many people justify their beliefs with "faith", prime example.
But no it's not impossible.
"I see, through my own research, that Christianity has far more proof supporting it than any other belief in the world. That is why I believe in the probable, it is probable, and the more I study, the more I understand and find proof verafying that fact."
Your "own" research.......... riiiiight. You live in society which is predominantly christian, you probably have christian parents and you've learned christian theology, what a suprise you think Christianity is the "correct" religion, guess what tho, people who live in a predominantly mulsim society, who have muslim parents and who study mulsim theology guess what conclusion they come to.
Because these conclusions are NOT based on evidence, nor reasoning, they are due to social environment and enforced by ignorance and mal-reasoning.
"can you please expand on this. i'd like to see the scientific proof that the earth can't be more than 40,000 years old. thats very interesting"
It's "interesting"...... that's one word for it, personally i go with it's "BS".
*sigh* I TRIED turning this discussion away from that damned religous iceberg and towards the friendly seas of a logic discussion, but noooo, you all have to suck at life and bring it back around.
>>suck at life
Damnit, i just cant get the hang of this thing. Theres more rules than Microsoft has 'standards'.
>>religous iceberg
"Hard starboard!" *screeeeeeeeeech*
... Ah well... I'm away til Sunday (going surfing at Long Beach) so it looks like I'll be missing out on this one. Enjoy your iceberg, people. HINT: Find your lifeboat before the christmas rush.
Sorry Ken, i do suck at life. =(
On "knowledge is power, therefore knowledge is corruption."
Wrong. The "knowledge is power" phrase is a forwardthinking statement. A catchphrase if you will. Actually, it is the proper application of knowledge, allowing you to gain leverage, that is powerful. Power and powerful are not the same thing.
On "absolute power corrupts absolutely". True. Unequivocally. The closest visible example any of you have of this, is your own government.
People worry about terrorism, but the truth is, no one will abuse a people more than their own government. Chemical testing. Biological Testing. Nuclear Testing. Absurd Taxation. Torture. Political disenchantment. Public humiliation. Outright legalized theft. Imprisonment without recourse.
And in fact, in the United States, that is the main reason the forefathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution-- the right to bear arms. Not so that people could protect themselves from an invader-- that's what an army is for. No, it was placed in the Consititution as the 2nd most important right to allow the individual to protect the other Consitutional rights from being taken away by his own government. That is one of the rights the forefathers didn't have. They could not protect themselves from their own government-- and hence they were driven to find a new land.
As for the old "Evolution .v. Religion" argument--
I find it interesting that all evolutionists require that the physical laws of the universe already exist prior to any of their untold numbers of fantastic leaps of biology occuring, in direct confrontation to many laws, including the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
While on the other hand, the religious people recognize that the reason the physical laws are so balanced is that they were in fact designed to be that way. With forethought. As it is written, the proof is _in the creation_.
But don't take my word for it. Ask questions and try to determine the answers yourselves.
That might have been true at the constitution was written but I don't think it is right to claim that any american citizen can protect them self against the government/law. armed or not. The state can always repond with more force and violence then the citizen canQuote:
Originally posted by *
On "knowledge is power, therefore knowledge is corruption."
And in fact, in the United States, that is the main reason the forefathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution-- the right to bear arms. Not so that people could protect themselves from an invader-- that's what an army is for. No, it was placed in the Consititution as the 2nd most important right to allow the individual to protect the other Consitutional rights from being taken away by his own government. That is one of the rights the forefathers didn't have. They could not protect themselves from their own government-- and hence they were driven to find a new land.
If all the missspelled words and strange grammer didn't revel it, the last post was posted by me.
Edited to remove un-due aggression.
"As for the old "Evolution .v. Religion" argument-- "
There is no such thing as evolution vs. religion, because educated people religious or not recognise evolution.
"I find it interesting that all evolutionists require that the physical laws of the universe already exist prior to any of their untold numbers of fantastic leaps of biology occuring, in direct confrontation to many laws, including the 2nd law of thermodynamics."
This is simply false, the 2nd law of thermodynamics in no way contradicts evolution. The laws of physics did indeed exist prior to biology, but that is hardly relevant.
"While on the other hand, the religious people recognize that the reason the physical laws are so balanced is that they were in fact designed to be that way. With forethought. As it is written, the proof is _in the creation_. "
This is an example of false reasoning; if i kick ball in a field and it lands on a specific blade grass, just because the probability of it landing on that particular blade of grass is low, does not mean that the ball must have been guided there, since the ball must land on a piece of grass, we cannot be suprised when in fact it lands on a specific one. Likewise we would expect the universe to have properties so we should not be suprised that it has specific ones. It so happens that these properties allow self replicating system capable of mutation, AKA life.
Furthermore within quantum mechanics there is a theory, that there are multiple different universes each with a variation in initial conditions, if that is the case, not only is the above argument true, but one would consider the occurance of life to be an inevitability.
Even if the above were not true, there would still be several avenues of explanation that could be explored. Throwing ones hands up in the air and citing super-natural phenomenon, is a cop out, it always was and it always will be. Science has shown time and time again, that where people cite super-natural faff a real explanation can always be found.
"But don't take my word for it. Ask questions and try to determine the answers yourselves"
Questions are good, thats what science is about.