nature vs nurture

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#1 Feb 14, 2012

And understanding the how of science, you gain understanding of the importance of science to understand the complexity of the world – and complexity is entirely reducible – because that’s what a scientific theory actually does.

By providing a simple and elegant explanation – that is the reduction of complexity – which complexity is the patterns and masses of data that we have observed through generations and countless hours of painstaking detailed drilled down documented, tested and with predictable outcomes and probabilities.

Evolution is that species change over time. The means of change and the processes that cause change are part of the complexity that is understood from this simple declarative sentence.

Now, religion on the other hand.

Religion is problematic because religious thinking is declarative sentences and nothing else. No understanding of hyperbole, parody/irony/statire, subjective or conditional clauses and no understanding probabiliy or possibility.

Just black and white, either or, zero sum – God did it (and you’re going to hell for rejecting it) and even if you don’t beleive in god, isn’t it better for you if you act as if you do (or suffer heretic, pagan, witch, infidel, and godlessly immoral queers and atheists) and if you really won’t act as if God is real and demand the civil rights as guaranteed in secular democratic society, well, we’ll GodBlock your civil rights until you beleive in hell because we’ll be bringing it to you right here on earth – don’t tell me not to judge lest I be judged, I got judges and politicians all ready to fix your little red sin wagon.

You know, I don’t even know if televangelists can even think that clearly – but I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Religion ss about the Supernatural – and it is a very simple premise. God did it. Because he did. So obey and be rewarded or disobey and suffer.

So it’s no wonder to me that when religious people think that the God Premise is complex because they claim the whole of the universe – which they call “Creation”– as proof of their God did It or else, there wouldn’t be any universe to talk about.

And why Pascal’s Wager – is so compelling – and that Pascal was a mathematician who was critical to understanding Random Chance – Pascal came up with his wager – at the end of his days – in poverty and more than a little – shall a say – not at his peak mental powers -

So – that Pascal was a naturalist mathematician who advanced a mathematical understanding of the universe – and should be admired for that – but Pascal, at the time of coming up with his little meagre wager which was mostly wish fulfillment and insanity

should be considered a little bit like Elvis Presley: in 1977.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#2 Feb 14, 2012

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 26 min One way or another 46,407
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 hr It aint necessari... 22,195
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 9 hr u196533dm 257,356
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 9 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 10,929
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 10 hr Truffles5450 21,690
News .com | Not buying into nonsense rhetoric about ... (Mar '16) 12 hr hpcaban 49
News Proof of God Within & Beyond Science is Released 12 hr hpcaban 1
More from around the web