Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Earthquake Damage]

You're assuming the current definition is correct.

The universe is basically the smallest possible closed set.  If we discover some new space or phenomenon, that new thing is necessarily part of the universe.  We don't know its extent (i.e. all its elements), but there is no interaction with external elements by definition.

[Sowelu]

There's a few different definitions of 'universe', depending on how far out-there the scientists you listen to are.  Yeah, they're sane, but a lot of them talk about hypotheses that are kind of, well, yeah.  We're tripping over terminology here.

[Earthquake Damage]

We're tripping over terminology here.

There is that.

[ECrownofFire]

There's a few different definitions of 'universe', depending on how far out-there the scientists you listen to are.  Yeah, they're sane, but a lot of them talk about hypotheses that are kind of, well, yeah.  We're tripping over terminology here.

I never said I actually listened to them, only that the hypotheses were out there. The universe is a strange concept in the first place. For example, how could something that includes EVERYTHING have a definite edge? Crazy stuff out there. But yes, terminology is important here.

Most of the theories I've heard involve alternate timelines (relating to quantum theories). This stuff is all completely beyond hypothetical though, so it really doesn't matter either way. It's even less useful than debating about religion

[LordNagash]

Hehehe, if everyone chose their worldview based on the law of averages, I guess we'd all be Hindu.

330,000 gods is a lot. 

Wikipedia claims 330 million on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hindu_deities (and 330 000 on the main article) all about religion matches the first number. Although it should be pointed out that Hinduism is monotheistic (and also has a trinity like pretty much every other religion)

Well, not exactly. 'Hindu' is actually a whole set of different beliefs under one term, what with the fact that not only are there a few different subsets that believe different things, anyone one person can believe whatever the hell they like because there's no such thing as heresy.

Also, even in sects where they believe there's some sort of supreme being they generally accept that there are other divine beings as well.

[Siquo]

Which is why I called it the most likely postion someone never learned of religion would take.

Actually, it's magic. You can see it in children, and in isolated "nature-religion" tribes. "Hey, I wiggled my hand once on a full moon and my aunt got a boy instead of a girl, that must be it!". Magic being: correlating causes and effects without scientific rigor. It's pretty cool to see what they (kids) come up with. Sometimes the correlation is "true" (the use of medicinal herbs), but more often it just isn't (the use of useless herbs as if they were medicinal).

Now if you combine that with our natural need to anthropomorphise animals, objects and events, it's easy to see where "gods" come from.

[Shades]

Sometimes the correlation is "true" (the use of medicinal herbs), but more often it just isn't (the use of useless herbs as if they were medicinal).

To be fair it's shocking what percentage of medicines, ones designed by science or inherited from folklore, don't perform any better than the placebo effect.

Now if you combine that with our natural need to anthropomorphise animals, objects and events, it's easy to see where "gods" come from.

Or if you wanted to come up with a really good way to control a population it's easy to see where "gods" come from.

[Siquo]

Or if you wanted to come up with a really good way to control a population it's easy to see where "gods" come from.

Look, give a man a hammer, and he'll use it to bash in his neighbours head.
Bibles, stone tablets, religion are the same. Not created for the purpose, but well suited for it nevertheless.

[Shades]

Look, give a man a hammer, and he'll use it to bash in his neighbours head.
Bibles, stone tablets, religion are the same. Not created for the purpose, but well suited for it nevertheless.

Hammers weren't created for this use but sure they can be abused. It's likely religion was, and it can also be abused to make a load of wealth too.

[Earthquake Damage]

folklaw

Again with the folklaw.  Colorful it may be, but the word you're looking for is folklore.

[Shades]

folklaw

Again with the folklaw.  Colorful it may be, but the word you're looking for is folklore.

Sorry, its still early (that is my excuse anyway and not the fact my spelling it atrocious, I'm surprised I didn't notice the firefox spelling thing pick it up)

[Phmcw]

My atheists belief are being seriously challenged.
Not by this thread but by the new devlog, who make me think that there is a god, he's toady, and he is doing it again.

[Bauglir]

Look, give a man a hammer, and he'll use it to bash in his neighbours head.
Bibles, stone tablets, religion are the same. Not created for the purpose, but well suited for it nevertheless.

Hammers weren't created for this use but sure they can be abused. It's likely religion was, and it can also be abused to make a load of wealth too.

I disagree, honestly. Of course, many religions probably were, and their codification into most of the large organizations they've become also was likely done for this reason, but I don't see any reason to assume the concept of religious belief was created for control. I suppose, how're you defining religion? Is it just a nice term for superstition or what?

[Leafsnail]

I think my argument is that "God's existence violates causality" is more acceptable than "The universe's existence violates causality", because I like to think as the universe as a thing whose origin would obey its own laws.

Yeah, I agree.  The turtle at the bottom of the stack has no reason to fall.

Now if you combine that with our natural need to anthropomorphise animals, objects and events, it's easy to see where "gods" come from.

I'd... probably agree.  With a monotheistic God, one who is an embodiment of everything, being the final step of that.

[fqllve]

Hammers weren't created for this use but sure they can be abused. It's likely religion was, and it can also be abused to make a load of wealth too.

Firstly, not all control is oppressive. For the most part social control is enforced through norms and exists only to smooth the process of social interaction. So when you say that religion was likely created for control I can't agree with that because it implies that it was created for oppression and power.

One of the goals of religion is social control, but that doesn't necessarily mean a tyranny.

Organized religion on the other hand, like the Roman Catholic Church, yeah, that was very likely created to exercise power, and has been used to those ends throughout history. Religion itself is much older than that though.