Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

What religion do you follow?

Judaism
- 0 (0%)
Christianity
- 17 (23.3%)
Islam
- 1 (1.4%)
Hinduism
- 0 (0%)
Taoism
- 0 (0%)
Buddhism
- 0 (0%)
Scientology
- 2 (2.7%)
Other (please tell)
- 7 (9.6%)
Athiest
- 35 (47.9%)
Undecided
- 1 (1.4%)
Agnostic
- 10 (13.7%)

Total Members Voted: 70


Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 44

Author Topic: Religion discussion.  (Read 73125 times)

Teneb

  • Bay Watcher
  • (they/them) Penguin rebellion
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #390 on: June 28, 2017, 07:45:12 pm »

A point that hasn't been brought up yet: Let's assume that souls exist, as do afterlives. When you are cloned, is the soul split? Is it cloned? Is the clone soulless? Do they get a new soul instead? If the original is flash-destroyed at the same time the new one is fabricated, is the soul transferred? Is the afterlife flooded with various instances of the same person?

I find the last option very amusing.
Logged
Monstrous Manual: D&D in DF
Quote from: Tack
What if “slammed in the ass by dead philosophers” is actually the thing which will progress our culture to the next step?

Grim Portent

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #391 on: June 28, 2017, 07:49:11 pm »

'Welcome to heaven Steve Stevenson 194! Your orientation tour will be handled by Steve Stevenson 37, he'll show you your lodgings, you'll be staying with Steve Stevenson 189 through 193. The rest of the street is populated entirely by other Steve Stevensons, so I'm sure you'll feel right at home in not time.'

EDIT: Also possible: All Picard performances of classic plays. Othello, but everyone is Picard, Romeo and Juliett, but everyone is Picard, so on and so forth. It would be both glorious and terrifying.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 07:50:59 pm by Grim Portent »
Logged
There once was a dwarf in a cave,
who many would consider brave.
With a head like a block
he went out for a sock,
his ass I won't bother to save.

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #392 on: June 28, 2017, 07:55:19 pm »

If souls==exist, then the existence of "transporter clone riker" indicates that the afterlife is overflowing with duplicates of the same person.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Thomas_Riker

Terrible thought:
An entire street populated by young wesley crusher clones, all being whiny bitches, with dangerous science experiments.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 07:57:06 pm by wierd »
Logged

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #393 on: June 29, 2017, 05:36:10 am »

AIUI (based on now decades-old technical manuals, once read, thus perhaps superseded by canon), Trek-style transporters rip apart the subject's constituent atoms (down to the electronic level, at least), project the matter stream through subspace either to another transporter-pad (which can do shared work on getting the stream reconstructed, so can work at longer distances) or such that the matter 'falls out of subspace' in the configuration it was first in, while ensuring local atmosphere (and any other insubstantial matter) is displaced in the process.  "Beaming up" from a non-pad location requires the impetus to push the matter into subspace and back towards the receiving/fetching pad to be projected from the latter (handwavium applies!) and thus why special beacons are sometimes required to be placed around the person(s) to be retrieved in order to aid the process (provide a short-range triangulation backup, maybe act as partial relays of energy and/or matter-signals).

The process may involve a stasis-field (on beaming in/out, the subject is often frozen in pose, you'll notice, as their phasing there/away process becomes apparent), but it's very much a case - usually - of "one out, one in" as far as the universe is concerned, in that order, and a finite, positive, non-zero passage of timr between the two (sometimes quite lengthy...  see /Relics/ for an extreme). If there's a non-physical/non-material/spiritual soul, then it  maybe de-keys from the body upon the dissassembling and re-keys upon the body reassembled. Vague stories of having experienced something whilst in the stream are maybe either psychosis or something in the echo-universe through which the spirit permeates whilst disembodied. But I think Lt Berkely is right to fear the process (even though almost always free of fatal problems, the Heisenburg Compensators serve to collimate and bind the stream together to prevent messiness upon reconstitution).

(By reading, interpreting and processing the stream, with unimaginably powerful (probably Quantum) stream-sensors/manipulators, it is clearly possible to identify unauthorised weapon power-packs and de-charge them, and it was often possible to even to go from being seated at the remote location to standing up on the pad...  Obviously a desirable  feature to perfect so that one doesn't fall over all the time, in various circumstances.  And the process must be powerful enough/expert enough to have spontaneously created the result seen in /Rascals/... Which included hair 'restoration' for the duration, even.)

Thomas Riker's circumstances are yet another exception.  My best guess that, as a "quantum clone", any spirit that sits in the dimensionless universe alongside our physical bodies, relatching onto the beamed-in body as soon as it can, probably splits in the instant of two receptive bodies being available. As a presumably blank spirit (or maybe median mix of two parent ones) latches onto a new child, unless 'matters are arranged' via reincarnation. Or else a variant upon the one electron theory.  And then we're talking of the latched-to material brain having supremacy of nature over the spiritualistic component, to such a degree that the existence of the latter might not even be detectable any more...  As it likely is.


The alternative replicate-to-transport method is to duplicate a traveller to their new location then destroy the original. If there's a single soul, there, then the duplication might by dually-latched by the intangible soul, for the time both bodies exist, before the old one is vaporised.  And then imagine being the consciousness within the source body.  Do you see the scan process happening (as both you and the destination duplicate will later remember you see happening) and then wait while conformation that "you" have arrived bounces back, to turn the copier-booth into a disintegrator-booth/whatever.  New-you won't remember that part, but when you're experiencing the wait (or the new-you currently awaiting completion of transport to a newer-you's location) you are going to be wondering whether the attempt has failed (try again later) or you're about to meet your own personal doom in a few short moments...  (Maybe minutes of this uncertainty, for transplanatary transport without the benefit of supralight communication methods.)  That's just consciousness. The questions about the soul remain, but likely match up with the Thomas Riker example in the immediate term (quantum matching, followed by differentiation/mitosis of the spiritual 'thing', then whatever happens upon death).


Or so I would say. With absolutely no grounds to base any of these assumptions on, or even that there's any reason to start making these types of assumptions in the first place.  ;)
Logged

Dunamisdeos

  • Bay Watcher
  • Duggin was the hero we needed.
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #394 on: June 30, 2017, 01:00:28 pm »

If souls==exist, then the existence of "transporter clone riker" indicates that the afterlife is overflowing with duplicates of the same person.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Thomas_Riker

Terrible thought:
An entire street populated by young wesley crusher clones, all being whiny bitches, with dangerous science experiments.
CNN News Ticker:

On 5th street, a team of 16 Wesleys have given a common post office box sentience. It demands asylum and human flesh.

Officials are concerned that the combined glare from the Wesleys' ski suits will blind commercial aircraft. More at 11.

Wesleys demand millions in gold from major world nations while threatening harmless science project if demands aren't met. World Nations immediately capitulate.
Logged
FACT I: Post note art is best art.
FACT II: Dunamisdeos is a forum-certified wordsmith.
FACT III: "All life begins with Post-it notes and ends with Post-it notes. This is the truth! This is my belief!...At least for now."
FACT IV: SPEECHO THE TRUSTWORM IS YOUR FRIEND or BEHOLD: THE FRUIT ENGINE 3.0

ChairmanPoo

  • Bay Watcher
  • Send in the clowns
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #395 on: June 30, 2017, 01:35:54 pm »

Shoo! Get your "science" out of the religion thread!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Logged
Everyone sucks at everything. Until they don't. Not sucking is a product of time invested.

Teneb

  • Bay Watcher
  • (they/them) Penguin rebellion
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #396 on: June 30, 2017, 01:43:32 pm »

Shoo! Get your "science" out of the religion thread!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I find it weird that people still think that religion is inherently against science even outside areas dominated by fundamentalists. Most early scientists were priests, ffs.
Logged
Monstrous Manual: D&D in DF
Quote from: Tack
What if “slammed in the ass by dead philosophers” is actually the thing which will progress our culture to the next step?

Dunamisdeos

  • Bay Watcher
  • Duggin was the hero we needed.
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #397 on: June 30, 2017, 02:26:48 pm »

Shoo! Get your "science" out of the religion thread!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I find it weird that people still think that religion is inherently against science even outside areas dominated by fundamentalists. Most early scientists were priests, ffs.

It's a problem on both sides, sadly. I'm on the religion side of things, and the stigma that they are inherently against each other is such that as soon as I mention science they get immediately defensive. Luckily this is not a majority (I go to a multi-thousand person church) where I am, but it's way too prevalent.
Logged
FACT I: Post note art is best art.
FACT II: Dunamisdeos is a forum-certified wordsmith.
FACT III: "All life begins with Post-it notes and ends with Post-it notes. This is the truth! This is my belief!...At least for now."
FACT IV: SPEECHO THE TRUSTWORM IS YOUR FRIEND or BEHOLD: THE FRUIT ENGINE 3.0

ChairmanPoo

  • Bay Watcher
  • Send in the clowns
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #398 on: June 30, 2017, 02:35:59 pm »

Shoo! Get your "science" out of the religion thread!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I find it weird that people still think that religion is inherently against science even outside areas dominated by fundamentalists. Most early scientists were priests, ffs.

It's a problem on both sides, sadly. I'm on the religion side of things, and the stigma that they are inherently against each other is such that as soon as I mention science they get immediately defensive. Luckily this is not a majority (I go to a multi-thousand person church) where I am, but it's way too prevalent.
*burns Teneb and Dunamisdeos*
Heretics!
Logged
Everyone sucks at everything. Until they don't. Not sucking is a product of time invested.

Telgin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Professional Programmer
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #399 on: June 30, 2017, 03:06:44 pm »

Shoo! Get your "science" out of the religion thread!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I find it weird that people still think that religion is inherently against science even outside areas dominated by fundamentalists. Most early scientists were priests, ffs.

The squeaky wheels get the grease.  Or, err, the attention in this case, anyway.  The fundamentalists are the ones that shout about it, so they're the ones that generate the reputation.

And, of course, I can personally attest that there are enough loud anti-science fundamentalists around that it won't be changing any time soon.
Logged
Through pain, I find wisdom.

ChairmanPoo

  • Bay Watcher
  • Send in the clowns
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #400 on: July 05, 2017, 05:18:19 pm »

Shoo! Get your "science" out of the religion thread!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I find it weird that people still think that religion is inherently against science even outside areas dominated by fundamentalists. Most early scientists were priests, ffs.

The squeaky wheels get the grease.  Or, err, the attention in this case, anyway.  The fundamentalists are the ones that shout about it, so they're the ones that generate the reputation.

And, of course, I can personally attest that there are enough loud anti-science fundamentalists around that it won't be changing any time soon.

Crom laughs at your "science"! He laughs from his mountain!
Logged
Everyone sucks at everything. Until they don't. Not sucking is a product of time invested.

Cthulhu

  • Bay Watcher
  • A squid
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #401 on: July 06, 2017, 10:52:11 am »

A point that hasn't been brought up yet: Let's assume that souls exist, as do afterlives. When you are cloned, is the soul split? Is it cloned? Is the clone soulless? Do they get a new soul instead? If the original is flash-destroyed at the same time the new one is fabricated, is the soul transferred? Is the afterlife flooded with various instances of the same person?

I find the last option very amusing.

The soul/consciousness is an alien virus that's captured and redirected human activity towards producing environments better suited to Who or What originally infected us.  If modernity fills you with malaise it's because modernity wasn't made for you.  Humanity dysfunction will grow more acute as the project nears completion.

Hyperstitial meme-invasion aside, something that's been bugging me lately.  A phrase that gets bandied around a lot lately is "true [religion]."  You can put any religion there, but let's be honest, it's usually one or two specific religions.

To keep this perfectly neutral, let's invent a new religion called Examplism.  Examplism is a revealed religion with a divinely inspired text.  Like most such texts, it's heavily internally contradictory and you can draw basically any conclusions about anything you want if you're clever enough.  There are a hundred or more different sects and subsects of various size and political clout.  You believe in Examplo and through a process of learning and reading various sources, mainly the Examplible, you've come to an understanding that Examplo wants you to wear a pointed hat, never touch food with your bare hands, and put a statue of Examplo to bed in a little crib in your room every night.

To you, that's True Examplism.  If you didn't think it was accurate you wouldn't be doing it.

Another guy does the same and comes to some similar conclusions, but he also takes some commandments about fertility, and the prophet's polygamy, as instructions to marry as many women as possible.  To him, that's True Examplism.  It's also illegal in America.

Another guy is basically the same as that guy, but believes he can marry immediate family members.  Also True Examplism, to him at least.  Also illegal in America.

And finally there's the sect that believes above, and also takes some passages about warfare as direct instructions to kill or forcibly convert everyone on Earth. 

Which is True Examplism?  Assuming Examplo doesn't actually exist, does the term even mean anything?  Everyone says their version is True, and you've got lots of people who are not Examplists dismissing certain ones as "Not True Examplism" despite that term having literally no currency to someone who doesn't believe in Examplo.  None of them are True.

I guess this has bugged me because it's tied to some other things that bug me.  People would generally describe the last one as extremist, and maybe some of the others, but what does that term mean either?  As far as 4 is concerned he's doing the bare minimum required to him by his god.  So where's the extreme part?

I think the concept of "correct" religious thought coming from people who aren't subscribed to that religion really comes down to how much it jives with typical western culture.  Which is perfectly fine with me, I don't want number 4 living in my neighborhood.  It seems like a weird way to frame it though.  It also puts the idea of multiculturalism in a weird light.  You can believe anything you want as long as it's only superficially unique.  Different foods cool, weird public behaviors cool as long as they're not a disturbance, but that's about it.

I'm not trying to argue against multiculturalism there as much as I'm saying that no one in western society actually believes in multiculturalism, but more aculturalism with a performance of multiculturalism. 
Logged
Shoes...

Criptfeind

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #402 on: July 06, 2017, 11:36:08 am »

So you would say that isn't True Multiculturalism?
Logged

Urist McScoopbeard

  • Bay Watcher
  • Damnit Scoopz!
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #403 on: July 06, 2017, 03:07:38 pm »

I identify as an Extreme Examplist.
Logged
This conversation is getting disturbing fast, disturbingly erotic.

Descan

  • Bay Watcher
  • [HEADING INTENSIFIES]
    • View Profile
Re: Religion discussion.
« Reply #404 on: July 06, 2017, 03:52:50 pm »

The closest you can get to an objective meaning of what a "true [religion]" means would be either the academic consensus, or the laymen consensus.

That is, either what the majority of people who study the religion believe to be the core of the religion. Or what the majority of people who profess belief in that religion believe to be the core of the religion.

Anything else, without having the [guy wot they believe is Super Special] come down from on high (or come up from below, or inways from sidestep) and tell everyone what the True Belief is, is just too subjective to that specific person.
Logged
Quote from: SalmonGod
Your innocent viking escapades for canadian social justice and immortality make my flagellum wiggle, too.
Quote from: Myroc
Descan confirmed for antichrist.
Quote from: LeoLeonardoIII
I wonder if any of us don't love Descan.
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 44