nature vs nurture
Posted in the Atheism Forum
Since: Nov 11
#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 thats 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 youre going to hell for rejecting it) and even if you dont beleive in god, isnt 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 wont act as if God is real and demand the civil rights as guaranteed in secular democratic society, well, well GodBlock your civil rights until you beleive in hell because well be bringing it to you right here on earth dont 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 dont 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 its 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 wouldnt be any universe to talk about.
And why Pascals 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
Add your comments below
|"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12)||26 min||One way or another||46,407|
|Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09)||3 hr||It aint necessari...||22,195|
|Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09)||9 hr||u196533dm||257,356|
|Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11)||9 hr||Bob of Quantum-Faith||10,929|
|Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14)||10 hr||Truffles5450||21,690|
|.com | Not buying into nonsense rhetoric about ... (Mar '16)||12 hr||hpcaban||49|
|Proof of God Within & Beyond Science is Released||12 hr||hpcaban||1|
Find what you want!
Search Atheism Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC