Crazy Religious Fruitcakes

[Buck Turgidson]

“Here’s my reason for joy: the cross,” Dolan said, who went on to argue that the reason for happiness is the fact that even after Jesus was crucified, he rose three days later.

“ ‘He who laughs last, laughs best…’ and we believers have never stopped smiling since that Resurrection of Jesus from the dead,” Dolan said. “So, Good Friday did not have the last word…Easter did! That’s why I can laugh.”


WTF

[Arsenal 10]

Isn't anyone who believes in any religion a fruit cake?

[Fake from State Jarm]

Isn't anyone who believes in any religion a fruit cake?

every popular worldview is a religion in hindsight, but as long as it's modern it's considered the reality and everything prior a superstition.

[Arsenal 10]

Isn't anyone who believes in any religion a fruit cake?

every tonicular worldview is a religion in hindsight, but as long as it's modern it's considered the reality and everything prior a superstition.

I prefer to think of reality as a bit less depressing. I reckon that humans are making progress into discovering the "truth" about how the world works. I don't think that 1,000 years from now, scientific understanding will be looked back on as superstition, it will be looked back on as the base on which knowledge started.

[Buck Turgidson]

Isn't anyone who believes in any religion a fruit cake?

every tonicular worldview is a religion in hindsight, but as long as it's modern it's considered the reality and everything prior a superstition.

I prefer to think of reality as a bit less depressing. I reckon that humans are making progress into discovering the "truth" about how the world works. I don't think that 1,000 years from now, scientific understanding will be looked back on as superstition, it will be looked back on as the base on which knowledge started.

Science is just theory, and proofs are only fact if you believe in the theory that reproducing a result makes the point...

[Fake from State Jarm]

Isn't anyone who believes in any religion a fruit cake?

every tonicular worldview is a religion in hindsight, but as long as it's modern it's considered the reality and everything prior a superstition.

I prefer to think of reality as a bit less depressing. I reckon that humans are making progress into discovering the "truth" about how the world works. I don't think that 1,000 years from now, scientific understanding will be looked back on as superstition, it will be looked back on as the base on which knowledge started.

sure, but modern science is based on observations made by people in medieval and renaissance times who were deeply religious. look at the cynicism with which we view religion now; it's highly likely that as cultures change and the baton of dominance passes on to the next new human civilization, what we hold sacred will likewise be dismissed by the latest intellectual elite, in spite of our contributions. This is not to say it will be completely forgotten or that everyone will misunderstand it, but it's likely the majority will not accurately remember or understand us, just as we have lost touch with our ancestors and perceive them through whatever bias is psychologically convenient.
I do believe we are making progress, and it's likely we'll have other renaissance periods, but realistically, in just 100 years time, many of our modern attitudes about transcendent truths will be considered immature. This includes existential questions like the origin of life and the universe, the concept of physical laws, and the idea that conscious reasoning and scientific experimentation leads to all truth.

[Arsenal 10]

sure, but modern science is based on observations made by people in medieval and renaissance times who were deeply religious.

Heh, I didn't mean to say that religious people could not contribute. I definitely do not think that. Just that their fruit cakes.

look at the cynicism with which we view religion now; it's highly likely that as cultures change and the baton of dominance passes on to the next new human civilization, what we hold sacred will likewise be dismissed by the latest intellectual elite, in spite of our contributions. This is not to say it will be completely forgotten or that everyone will misunderstand it, but it's likely the majority will not accurately remember or understand us, just as we have lost touch with our ancestors and perceive them through whatever bias is psychologically convenient.
I do believe we are making progress, and it's likely we'll have other renaissance periods, but realistically, in just 100 years time, many of our modern attitudes about transcendent truths will be considered immature. This includes existential questions like the origin of life and the universe, the concept of physical laws, and the idea that conscious reasoning and scientific experimentation leads to all truth.

Science isn't a way of life in the same way religion is. It would be something different, however, to say that the understandings of how the world worked have changed. I try not to be cynical of people who believe in God (though I cannot understand the view), but I am cynical of people who adopt organised religions to express their views. Religions come and go, but the thought of God has remained. I think of science as a new type of "God" (a new way of understanding) as opposed to a religion which may or may not be in fashion. Our scientific methods may change, but I think we are making progress in the fact that we are now looking for answers. I don't think that this new way of thinking will die as easily as you suggest.

[Buck Turgidson]

We can't help but personalize things we don't understand - that's why God will always be around.  But God didn't harness the atom, man did.  All God did was invent it.