6 ms·
I think you're talking past me in order to avoid an argument :) "Higher consciousness" does not refer to one of your smarter friends or coworkers. Unless you'
by nate_meurer 10y ago
I think you're talking past me in order to avoid an argument :)
"Higher consciousness" does not refer to one of your smarter friends or coworkers. Unless you're a Scientologist, I presume you don't view other humans as deities/gods of any kind.
> The idea that humans are the very apex and there is no further progress / evolution to be had is very much the required position of a theist
Nonsense. There is no conflict with evolution in a deliberately created world. It's no different from any other complex mechanism. Folks who say otherwise, religious or not, are manufacturing conflict.
Anyway, I'm not sure why you brought evolution into this. It has nothing to do with any of my arguments. By "apex" I'm referring to humanity's place as the highest most powerful consciousness. Again, a hierarchy in the sense that does not admit your smarter friends to a higher level than you.
> the history of this religion (and of course it's not unique in this regard) being plagued by logical incongruities & inconsistencies, ...
Yes, quite, completely agree, and the sordid history of religion has nothing to do with my nagging suspicion that you and I are not the highest representative type of consciousness in the universe.
I mean, damn man, look at yourself. Your passions, your force of will, your sense of humor. The sense of self, whatever it is, that makes you think there's a "you", which separates you from the apes that just look like us, and which compels you to discuss philosophy on Hacker News. You think that shit is accidental? Your brain and body, which provide the seat for consciousness and the machinery to navigate your environment -- those things don't demand an explanation beyond, "it just happened"? The existence of a mechanism that allows those things to have evolved from a primordial soup of small organic molecules... doesn't that make you the least bit suspicious that there is a higher intelligent creative force at work?
Or are you able to just say, "hey, it's just the multiverse, it was bound to happen"? Serious question. I'm not just being snarky.
- Jedd 10y agoWell I apologise if you think I'm being intentionally obtuse -- I'm not one to try to avoid an argument, especially about religion. You originally said: > Atheism is a faith that elevates Me to the status of God ... That's what I railed against. It assumes that once you've determined there's probably no gods, that you then have a gap that needs filling. I don't expect any atheists think that way. Interesting reference to scientology and humans as deities - given, again, the TFA was all about the presence of Jesus in human form, plus the confusion and splintering within the church that the rather clumsy construct of the trinity caused. I mentioned evolution because you suggested that atheists think that we (humans) are the apex. Once you understand evolution you realise there's no direction, and certainly no stable state, let alone ultimate apex. Humans have been on the planet for such a tiny amount of time, and there's nothing to suggest that we're the best thing that the evolutionary process can generate. Yes, as you say, we're the most powerful consciousness on this planet right now -- but that's like those towns that have signs attesting that they have "the longest single span bridge ... crossing an east-west river ... that has a w in its name ... in the southern hemisphere ... built before 1857". That is, it's such an exuberantly qualified assertion that, while true, it's more distracting than useful. We may well not be the most powerful consciousness in the universe, and we're almost certainly not going to be the most powerful consciousness ever to have lived once everything wraps up. And no, as above, I don't think 'it was bound to happen', as that implies an intent to achieve the current state of the universe. It did happen, and that's a sufficiently fascinating situation to keep us busy. As to your last question -- I think saying 'it just happened' is to give up on some potentially very interesting lines of enquiry. But I don't think it's necessary to invoke a 'higher intelligent creative force' to address any questions around the process. In any case, you then have to contend with the problem I mentioned in my last reply -- if you do think a higher intelligent creative force is necessary to explain whatever gaps remain today, how do you confidently pick the right one from the myriad religions available?. Wikipedia suggests there's around 4,200 religions. Also without trying to sound snarky, most religious people can't satisfactorily address this one. AFAICT most people inherit their religious beliefs from their parents, and that doesn't set off as many alarm bells for them as I would expect. EDIT: Forgot to address this bit: > Nonsense. There is no conflict with evolution in a deliberately created world. It's no different from any other complex mechanism. Folks who say otherwise, religious or not, are manufacturing conflict. My understanding is that there is a conflict, at least with some religious people / religions. First, the obvious one -- evolution denies the Adam & Eve myth, which then precludes original sin, which then renders the salvation story somewhat irrelevant. Second, in Christian scripture it's asserted that humans (well, man) was made in the image of the deity. So, if we either voluntarily architect ourselves or evolve naturally into something different, several possible implications ensue, including: we were evidently not made as good as we could/should have been, which suggests the image was not optimum, and/or the deity will be upset that we aren't happy with the image we were made in.
- nate_meurer 10y agoI can agree with almost everything you say, and I have few good arguments for your points about the organized christian religion. The fact that people overwhelmingly inherit their beliefs should be a serious problem to any religious person, and I have no good rationalization for it. It's one of many things for which God owes me an explanation someday. > Yes, as you say, we're the most powerful consciousness on this planet right now That's not really what I'm driving at, for that misses the point that I've been trying to defend on behalf of nvahalik. What I'm saying is that by necessity you are the most powerful consciousness in your own life. Same would be true for me were I not a believer. Society may judge and punish deeds that disregard social norms. My friends and acquaintances may value me more or less, colored by their own human experience. My family may need me, for a time. But if I'm my own boss, then all these folks can go fuck themselves as soon as I become grumpy about their involvement in my life. They are, after all, hairless apes just like me, arisen from and destined to be dust just as I am. As an atheist, you are your own authority/judge/prescriptor/appraiser/lover/whateverer. You may generously entertain your fellow apes' performance of these roles if it suits you. But that choice belongs to you alone. You are your own beginning and end. You are Tom Cruise. My belief in a creator relieves me of that burden. I rest easy in the confidence that I was created by and live in the quiet presence of a force whose intelligence is transcendentally beyond mine, and yet not totally alien from me either, for I have been assured that, as you say, we are created in the image of God. Not physically; the hairless ape bodies are temporary vessels. But as I alluded to before, your passions, sense of humor, your love of soft furry animals -- these are things that your creator understands. Care was taken in your design and manufacture. It's obvious to me, anyway, that some serious fucking care was taken, one way or another, to give rise to you, a creature with a sense of self and desire to talk religion on the internet. > And no, as above, I don't think 'it was bound to happen', as that implies an intent to achieve the current state of the universe. Very well put. I personally feel that intent is overwhelming implied, if not brazenly avowed, by the preposterously complex and beautifully engineered results. If see more than three rocks stacked atop one another while hiking, I know with near certainty that an intelligent being (another hiker) built the structure to mark the trail. It boggles my mind that anyone can entertain lack of intent in the rise of The Whole Fucking Universe, with all of its stacked rocks, furry animals, and sentient self-aware beings. Original sin and the creation myth and all that... I don't know, and I don't care. I know some do care, but they're the minority, albeit the loudest minority. Here's a trick for when you meet one of them: ask them if they'd still have any use for Christ's mercy if the creation myth were not literally true. That ought to shut them up. As to why I chose the message of Jesus for my own faith... it probably helps that my family is nominally Christian. But I also really believe myself to have enough objectivity and an open enough mind to chose freely. I've shopped around, and the message of Christ is only one I've found that puts no burden on me whatsoever to earn my way. In fact, Jesus makes it quite plain that we can't earn anything by deeds, and that our only choice is take our salvation as a free gift. Obviously you have to believe in the giver, and once that really sinks in, it's impossible not to love the giver of such a gift with your whole heart, which ends up being the meat of Jesus' response when he was asked what we need to do to be redeemed. The rest of the new testament has a lot of good advice about how to live life, IMO. But there are plenty of believers who have no access to a bible, and a God of mercy and love takes them too. > I think saying 'it just happened' is to give up on some potentially very interesting lines of enquiry. But I don't think it's necessary to invoke a 'higher intelligent creative force' to address any questions around the process. I'm genuinely interested to know what alternatives you like. What you would invoke instead of a higher intelligent creative force?