|
Religiosity poll
|
|
|
|
|
| Salvo | Date: Saturday, 30.11.2013, 14:58 | Message # 1 |
 Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Italy
Messages: 1400
Status: Offline
| ("updated" version of the old poll)
I had a discussion with my friends about this, and I decided to start this poll, just to get an idea 
Definitions:
- theism - having a belief in a deity/god that does or has intervened in the universe
- deism - having a belief in a deity/god that created the universe but has not intervened in it
- atheism - lacking a belief in a deity/god
- religion - a framework of tenets and traditions related to supernatural and/or spiritual beliefs
- supernatural - elements of existence beyond those that are known to exist in nature (e.g. souls, reincarnation, afterlife, incorporeal consciousness, ghosts, extraterrestrial visitations)
Examples of...
...theistic religions - Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Sikhism
...atheistic religions - Buddhism, Scientology, Raëlism, many aboriginal religions
The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition.
CPU: Intel Core i7 4770 GPU: ASUS Radeon R9 270 RAM: 8 GBs
(still don't know why everyone is doing this...)
Edited by Salvo - Saturday, 30.11.2013, 15:00 |
| |
| |
| Kimb | Date: Tuesday, 05.05.2015, 23:36 | Message # 46 |
 Astronaut
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 66
Status: Offline
| Quote HarbingerDawn (  ) Many are, but some aren't. There are many cases in religion where testable predictions are made, and can thus be falsified. In the case of the Abrahamic god, you can look at the characteristics that god is supposed to posses, as described in the Bible/Koran. One thing you should expect to see is miracles of varying magnitudes occurring with relative frequency, frequently enough that at least one, and likely many, should have been confirmed scientifically at some point in history. The fact that this hasn't happened is sufficient evidence to say that that god, as described in those texts, almost certainly does not exist. The world we live in is simply inconsistent with the supposed behavior and personality of that god. Likewise, many people claim to believe in a more nebulously defined god, but one which possesses the attributes of being omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent. These characteristics are also incompatible with the world we live in. If such a being existed, there would be no suffering. So we can also rule out the existence of an all-powerful all-knowing merciful god. There are many more detailed claims that can be disproved as well, such as the Koran stating that salt water and fresh water do not mix, the Bible stating that Pi equals 3, or Noah's Flood, to name a few.
True, many items described above ARE contradicted by science (Noah's Flood, creation of world in six days, etc.)
Things like that are what keep me from being a straight-up theist. But on the other hand this still does not prove whether there is or isn't a God (or Gods); I believe that such MAY exist, in SOME manner, and not necessarily be involved in Earthly affairs.
However one chooses to define the above terms, MY stance of religiosity (the main point of this poll) is I JUST AIN'T SURE EITHER WAY .... and don't believe that anyone can truly know.
Edited by Kimb - Tuesday, 05.05.2015, 23:52 |
| |
| |
| Antonaccio | Date: Wednesday, 06.05.2015, 15:42 | Message # 47 |
|
Space Tourist
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 24
Status: Offline
| Hi guys! Hope this doesn't deviate from the topic at hand but I feel the need to share it within this discussion. I was studying Linguistics when my professor gave us an interesting article on a group of people in the Amazon. They're called the Piraha tribe. I'll let you guys do the research to avoid bias articles or factual inconsistencies. Non the less they are incredibly interesting.
Personally i'm an atheist with no form of supernatural belief (If it exists in the natural world then it isn't supernatural). I view any form of "god" to be completely irrelevant in my studies due to the overarching fact that there lies no "true" evidence for or against the existence of a god. Like mathematics, integers such as -1 and +1 will cancel when added together. There is no higher integer (evidence for either side) in this argument that throws of the cancellation. This line of logic so far does very well at balancing the argument of: For or Against. I have no gripes in what others believe so long as it doesn't get in the way of people trying to do science, otherwise its just an annoyance.
Kudos on keeping such a tame forum discussion on this topic guys! 
|
| |
| |
| Bambusman | Date: Wednesday, 06.05.2015, 16:15 | Message # 48 |
 Pioneer
Group: SE team
Germany
Messages: 408
Status: Offline
| every person can believe in what he wants to believe
and i think this thread should be closed to avoid conflicts.
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Wednesday, 06.05.2015, 17:30 | Message # 49 |
 Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| Quote Bambusman ( ) and i think this thread should be closed to avoid conflicts.
This thread is and has been moderated, but we do not close threads as a prophylactic measure against the possibility of conflict. This is a valid thread topic, and it is expected that participants discuss it amiably and in accord with the forum rules of conduct. Debate is actually encouraged here, as a means toward healthy exchange of ideas. So far we've had four fairly productive pages and a lot of good quality posts.
If anyone feels that they can't participate in this thread without getting heated, then simply don't participate. If you feel that someone's postings are distasteful and breaking forum conduct, then report them. If the discussion needs moderator intervention, again, report it.
|
| |
| |
| SoundtrackComposer05 | Date: Wednesday, 06.05.2015, 20:57 | Message # 50 |
 Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 3
Status: Offline
| I find the debate on the beginning of the universe to be rather interesting. Please correct me if there are flaws in my logic, but, isn't the "beginning of time" a paradox? If time did not exist at one point, how long did it not exist for? Obviously if time did not exist there would be no duration for it to not exist in, therefore it has always existed, which brings me to my next point. Nothingness is a concept, an idea, commonly defined as the absence of existence. However, for there to be an absence of something, there must be something for there to be an absence of in the first place, which is circular logic. My question is, does the universe exist simply because of an existence paradox, or is there something I am severely overlooking?
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Thursday, 07.05.2015, 04:15 | Message # 51 |
|
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| This is basically a question of singularity states, for which there is no clear definition of time because there is no way to measure separation between events. This applies to black hole singularities as well as to the Big Bang (though these two singularity states have a very different form. The black hole is infinitely dense at a point, whereas the Big Bang is infinitely dense at every point.)
The Big Bang appears as the creation of time and space (and all matter along with it) from singularity, and so this is often described as "everything coming from nothing". But we also have to remember that we don't actually have any physics for singularity states. We can describe conditions extremely close to them, but not at them. The real nature of singularities probably does not involve infinite quantities, but we need a better theory to describe them. So the most intellectually honest answer to "what happened before the Big Bang" is "we don't know". It may very well be that it is not "nothing" at all.
|
| |
| |
| midtskogen | Date: Thursday, 07.05.2015, 05:08 | Message # 52 |
 Star Engineer
Group: Users
Norway
Messages: 1674
Status: Offline
| Evidence seems to suggest that there is not only space and time, and we only experience a subspace of a bigger universe. So what we see as a singularity could just be some kind of higher dimensional confluence and the universe was at no point "nothing".
Imagine that the directly observable universe is defined by two points, a one dimensional universe. We observe that the universe is getting bigger and seems to have begun in a singularity. But if these two points exist in a sphere and from time to time happen to pass through each other, then the universe doesn't ever go through a "nothing" state. The intersection of these points might even be an insignificant event in this universe, and perhaps not a coincidence at all but easily described by some simple higher dimensional physical laws.
So what we see as the Big Bang might just be a hint for us to learn the nature of a higher dimensional "bulk" which had no singularity.
I don't know if we have physical evidence for any of this, but it's easy to describe such ideas mathematically.
NIL DIFFICILE VOLENTI
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Thursday, 07.05.2015, 05:23 | Message # 53 |
|
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| I think that's the essence of String or Brane theory, which remain way beyond my own understanding at this time.  I'm not sure about physical evidence for them, but they do have mathematical appeal.
|
| |
| |
| midtskogen | Date: Thursday, 07.05.2015, 06:34 | Message # 54 |
|
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Norway
Messages: 1674
Status: Offline
| Such ideas have to be more than philosophical ramble, and I think the places to look for observational evidence are where our physical laws break down, where we have to use ad hoc explanations, constants or explanations, and things postulated to exist but fail detection, and so on. For instance, perhaps dark matter is nothing physical at all in our directly observable universe, but something outside just interacting with it? And we also must consider what we don't see. Like, we don't see objects, at least not on the human scale, pop into existence and disappear again, so we can know about things that a "bulk" isn't or doesn't do.
If something gets hard to describe, it might be a good idea to look at the problem again from a higher dimensional vantage point. The assumptions about a bulk might be fewer than the ad hocs needed otherwise.
I don't rule out that science will be able to explain what has to be "before" Big Bang, or outside the observable universe, or on the other side of the event horizon of black holes, things which feel like metaphysics now. We just need to think of a universe with more dimensions.
NIL DIFFICILE VOLENTI
|
| |
| |
| DiscovererOfWorlds | Date: Wednesday, 24.06.2015, 07:26 | Message # 55 |
 Space Pilot
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 120
Status: Offline
| I believe in God, not only because the Bible is very clear and predicts the future with carefully but there is evidence that he exists, by respecting all beliefs and all your wish that we see some of them: the human brain is a system that works extremely complex so let us move to think, to dream, to feel emotions, you can be aware and is the most complex thing in the universe, how can such a complex thing has evolved from one cell by random mutations? such as fruit trees are to be eaten and transport their seeds which will then be expelled away by growing a new tree how is it that such a complex structure could have evolved by chance? or maybe God put his hand allowing all working properly? all devices work perfectly human in harmony with each other as it is possible that a brain has evolved from one cell by random mutations? the universe is a very complex structure, the planets follow orbits very specific and has staggering proportions, we all agree that Spaceengineer created the universe of space engine, because then not there must be a creator for the real universe ? because a plane by forze be created and a bird not? our country is in a favorable position Galactic, with an atmosphere, a magnetic field, a moon which stabilizes the axial tilt, the right position of the sun, a Jupiter good as possible that this is all due to chance ? obviously these are my considerations in respect of all and I do not mean to discredit any belief.
the universe is made to be explored, but no one will ever visit it all
Edited by DiscovererOfWorlds - Wednesday, 24.06.2015, 07:28 |
| |
| |
| DoctorOfSpace | Date: Wednesday, 24.06.2015, 08:06 | Message # 56 |
 Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
| This post is in no way meant to start an argument.
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) not only because the Bible is very clear and predicts the future
Where does the bible accurately predict the future?
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) but there is evidence that he exists
Where?
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) how can such a complex thing has evolved from one cell by random mutations?
Time.
There is such a vast amount of time from the beginning of life on Earth to modern times that it is more than enough time for random mutation and natural selection to lead to humans. Small changes stretched over vast periods of time can lead to things that seemingly have design but in reality are produced through chance interactions, random mutation, and natural selection. Humans aren't even the most genetically complex creatures.
Our genomic structure pales in comparison to an amoeba
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polychaos_dubium
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) such as fruit trees are to be eaten and transport their seeds which will then be expelled away by growing a new tree how is it that such a complex structure could have evolved by chance?
Again, time. There was probably some sort of mutation on seed bearing plants/trees in the past that gave their seeds some sort of sugary coating or pulpy material that attracted animals to eat it. Over the course of hundreds to thousands of generations Trees/plants that had larger fruits were selectively chosen by animals and those traits tended to be more beneficial.
In fact you can even see how horrible natural selection is for evolving such things, most natural fruit and vegetables are much smaller and harder to eat than our selectively bred fruits and vegetables.
Here is an example of a peach, watermelon, and corn
"God" didn't do a very good job here if you ask me, seems like we did.
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) maybe God put his hand allowing all working properly?
Speculative at best, there is no evidence for that claim.
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) all devices work perfectly human in harmony with each other as it is possible that a brain has evolved from one cell by random mutations?
They don't work perfectly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mental_disorders
And thats just mental disorders, if you want to get into other diseases and disorders that support the notion of random mutations there are entire libraries of information on faults with the human body.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_congenital_disorders
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) we all agree that Spaceengineer created the universe of space engine, because then not there must be a creator for the real universe ?
That is because it can be definitively proven that SpaceEngine was programmed. There is no definitive evidence that the universe was created, programmed, set into motion, or orchestrated by any intelligent being, in fact all the evidence thus far points to the contrary.
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) our country is in a favorable position Galactic, with an atmosphere, a magnetic field, a moon which stabilizes the axial tilt, the right position of the sun, a Jupiter good as possible that this is all due to chance ?
If such things were not like that we wouldn't find ourselves in those places to begin with and so we find ourselves in a position where life was allowed to flourish. Basically life cannot evolve, where life cannot evolve.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle
Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Wednesday, 24.06.2015, 09:29 | Message # 57 |
|
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| It's cool to believe in God, but if you do then do so for the right reasons.
It seems like you're trying to justify your faith by submitting what you feel are examples of things we observe that could not be explained through natural processes. And if you go that route, I assure you that you're going to have a bad time. Everything you brought up can be understood fairly easily through the natural sciences, especially evolution and astrophysics. And nowhere* in the answers to your questions is the presence of a divine hand required or even implied.
If you learn and accept that, then it doesn't mean you have to stop believing in God. If you like, believe that God made the universe the way he wanted and let it unfold according to laws that we can understand.
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) how can such a complex thing has evolved from one cell by random mutations?
Quote how is it that such a complex structure could have evolved by chance?
You seem to understand the concept of mutations, and you have an appreciation of the complexity of biological systems that we observe today, but I'm not sure if you understand the intermediate processes that bridge them. Remember, the mutations are random, but evolution is not. The random mutations affect gene expression, and the effects it has can be beneficial or harmful. Often they have no meaningful effect at all, it just changes one instruction for producing a protein into a different one that produces the same protein. Nobody notices or cares. But once in while a mutation may happen to have an effect which increase the fitness of the organism and thus has a greater chance of being passed on to the following generations. That's natural selection, which is not random at all. Over time, this can lead toward changes at a larger scale -- not just gene expression, but traits, and the overall morphology of the organism. It also leads to speciation.
How did something as complex as the human brain develop? Easy. By over three billion years of these processes unfolding on planet Earth. We can trace back a huge amount of it, and if you are interested then you should seriously consider going into the study of evolutionary biology, geology, and molecular phylogeny.
Quote DiscovererOfWorlds ( ) the planets follow orbits very specific and has staggering proportions
Not really. Planetary orbits are not fixed, they are continuously affected by the other planets in the system. The formation and evolution of planetary systems is actually a fairly chaotic mess. It also happens purely by natural processes that we understand fairly well. It's just gravity and mechanics.
Quote our country is in a favorable position Galactic, with an atmosphere, a magnetic field, a moon which stabilizes the axial tilt, the right position of the sun, a Jupiter good as possible that this is all due to chance?
Why are you surprised that life exists in a place that is conducive for the existence of life?
Or do you mean you are surprised that a whole lot of criteria had to be satisfied in order for us to exist here, in which case... have you counted all the times and places that they weren't satisfied? It sounds like you're saying a whole lot of dice had to be thrown and land in a very specific way for us to exist. But have you counted all the throws?
I mean, you realize that our galaxy alone has on the order of a hundred billion stars, right? Stars are common. Planetary systems are common. Atmospheres are common. Magnetic fields are common. Water is common. The ingredients for life are common. Universal, even. So is the physics that describes how all these things form and evolve. I think that if I were some alien from another universe prospecting in this one, I'd come to the conclusion -- even before actually finding life -- that this universe is conducive for the existence of life. I would expect there to be places where it develops.
*If you want to get as close as science comes to finding evidence for the presence of a divine hand in the origin of the universe, then you might be interested in "fine tuning". Feel free to google it and ask any questions you might have about it in a new thread.
|
| |
| |
| isdebesl | Date: Wednesday, 24.06.2015, 12:28 | Message # 58 |
 Space Pilot
Group: Users
Indonesia
Messages: 87
Status: Offline
| I believe in God, I believe the Big Bang, I believe the evolution, and I believe Science
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Wednesday, 24.06.2015, 12:45 | Message # 59 |
|
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| Two of the four are substantiated by a great deal of evidence. One is a statement that you think the use of observation, logic, and critical testing is effective for producing models which possess predictive power. I.e. "the universe functions according to principles that we can hope to understand". And one is a choice based on belief in the purest sense of the term.
All are perfectly acceptable as I see it. No argument to be had.
|
| |
| |
| HarbingerDawn | Date: Wednesday, 24.06.2015, 15:23 | Message # 60 |
 Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
| Quote Watsisname ( ) All are perfectly acceptable as I see it. No argument to be had.
Given that belief informs action, it could be argued that having faith-based beliefs is inherently detrimental to society, and that such beliefs should be challenged unless the person holding them is a total recluse who does not and is not likely to interact with society at large in any way, including by voting, etc.
All forum users, please read this!
My SE mods and addons
Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
|
| |
| |
ENG
New site
Italy 
United States 
Germany 
Norway 
Pirate 
Indonesia 