Spirituality has to go

[Protector]

Here's a topic I've been thinking about for a while but didn't know how to word it right

 

So, 8 to 9 years of goofing around in spiritual circles and the conclusion I've reached is: it's useless.

• Philosophy: The ancient knowledge that is thought of as being valuable has long ago stopped being special and is common knowledge. It has been expressed so much through art that the special lessons can be easily be found in children's cartoons and movies. Old is not better.
• Masters: It's hard for individual people to have more information than the whole collective of the Internet. In the old tradition it was expected to trust the teacher until the training is complete. In the information age it is encouraged to ask what are the facts and what is the truth that these facts present. Authority must be questioned.
• Reality: There exists an idea that reality is a coin with a material side and the immaterial side. Some people feel like the immaterial or spiritual side is more interesting and important. Like it gives life meaning and is necessary. That side is only an illusion, the spiritual side exists only out of ignorance of the material world. So far the answer to every mystery has never been magic and it's not expected to be magic.

There is a force that when expressed through a multitude of people, is called Religion, but when it's expressed through an individual, it's called Spirituality.

Religion survives through the power of authority and doesn't like to be questioned. Simple spirituality survives through individual's reasoning and ignorance. Spirituality is not as destructive as religion and any negative or harmful effects are purely dependent on the person's reasoning. Spirituality might have minimal effects and I think the worst thing it can do is accept ignorance. But then, we had a guy around here who convinced himself that women are evil and the only way he can survive the evil society is by living in a cave...

 

You might be wondering why I'm making this thread instead of letting you guys do whatever. I actually felt guilty that I would let you guys go on without considering this possibility. You probably already thought about it before, but you know, reminder!

 

Lots of people want other people to be more enlightened so we could live in a more enlightened age. I actually think we're already there. Positive and negative are both parts of a human experience but the negative is more noticeable.

Some people desperately want supernatural to be real, they wont be happy until that becomes a part of that world, but I disagree. Lots of spiritual movement is useless, especially the supernatural beliefs.

 

 

I also predict a question: "How are you sure the science is right and we don't just have answers that science haven't considered, yet?"

Some people are so sure about their belief in ghosts and such that they've convinced themselves that there must be a scientific conspiracy to keep away the truth. That. Is. Crazy. But mostly improbable.

Lets say that you've learned of a super awesome horse stance that has super awesome effects. If it has a magical explanation then this is your chance to find out what is actually happening when you do the horse stance instead of accepting authority of a master.

There is no authority in science, it is your journey to find the truth and the truth doesn't have an agenda. If you don't trust an astrophysicist then learn astrophysics.

The ones who have an agenda are spiritual teachers who use tricks to get your money, they are the ones who benefit from the so-called scientific conspiracy.

 

I predict another one: "I have firsthand experience of the supernatural and that's evidence enough for me, so sad that you wouldn't understand"

OK, but I don't think that spirituality and magic powers are related even through they are often grouped into one category, even by me up there.

Sadly, your one time experience doesn't mean anything if you can't explain it. You might have more then one and each one of them different, but I still can explain most of them with this example.

I saw a demon summoning ritual that has a high probability of killing the summoner. Obviously not in person, or I would actually be dead. It has the same principle as many practices have for making the practice believable or real.

Here's how it goes: You need to be an apprentice under a magician for say, 40 years. It takes you thousands of dollars to get the materials. You need to meditate for 3 months. You need to memorize incantations for as long as it takes you. When you do the ritual alone, you will actually see it.

The thing is, the whole process of collecting materials and the wizard training over the years has been meditation. Meditation, in the most basic terms, is a way to hack your brain. Each step is a way for you to tell yourself that the whole experience will be real and that builds up stress. At the very end, when the demon is supposed to show up, you have enough stress to stop your own heart.

That's a very negative practice but a good master will use meditation to make you feel more powerful and you could actually do it yourself, but I don't think many of you own caves in China.

You basically can convince yourself of anything as long as you have enough chi. Chi is the energy that powers intention, but people give it too much credit at times.

 

 

[dust]

 

• Philosophy: The ancient knowledge that is thought of as being valuable has long ago stopped being special and is common knowledge. It has been expressed so much through art that the special lessons can be easily be found in children's cartoons and movies. Old is not better.

 

Examples?

 

 

 

• Masters: It's hard for individual people to have more information than the whole collective of the Internet. In the old tradition it was expected to trust the teacher until the training is complete. In the information age it is encouraged to ask what are the facts and what is the truth that these facts present. Authority must be questioned.

 

I agree -- authority must be questioned. However, teachers will always be necessary -- in any arena.

 

 

 

• Reality: There exists an idea that reality is a coin with a material side and the immaterial side. Some people feel like the immaterial or spiritual side is more interesting and important. Like it gives life meaning and is necessary. That side is only an illusion, the spiritual side exists only out of ignorance of the material world. So far the answer to every mystery has never been magic and it's not expected to be magic.

 

Spirituality is not the same thing as belief in spirits. Not for everyone.

 

"Zen does not confuse spirituality with thinking about God while one is peeling potatoes. Zen spirituality is just to peel the potatoes."

- Alan Watts

 

Religion is obedience.

Science is what one can prove.

Spirituality is simply the belief that there is something wonderful going on.

 

One can follow science fully and still be spiritual.

 

Science is no less dangerous than religion. They are both nothing more than human constructs designed to make life easier, or easier to understand. Mankind is at just as much risk of putting too much faith into hypotheses and technology as we are in prayer and holy books. Anything involving people is inherently dangerous.

 

I say all this not to try and convert you back to spirituality (whatever that might mean). If your "spiritual quest" hasn't been fulfilling, find something else to do, by all means. But don't group all philosophies and beliefs that don't fit 100% with modern scientific thought as nonsense that "has to go".

Edited October 9, 2014 by dustybeijing

[Protector]

Science is no less dangerous than religion. They are both nothing more than human constructs designed to make life easier, or easier to understand. Mankind is at just as much risk of putting too much faith into hypotheses and technology as we are in prayer and holy books. Anything involving people is inherently dangerous.

 

I say all this not to try and convert you back to spirituality (whatever that might mean). If your "spiritual quest" hasn't been fulfilling, find something else to do, by all means. But don't group all philosophies and beliefs that don't fit 100% with modern scientific thought as nonsense that "has to go".

 

Actually, I think that at this point I transcended spirituality through materialism. Yin turned Yang here.

 

 

Let's take the Bible as the example. The whole book is obsolete and not just as a religious book. It's a collection of older books and stories put together to make something new. Even from across different religions.

If the laws from it were used in modern age, people would go insane. That's one part of it, but the stories are almost anecdotal and have been retold better through movies and other books made by Christians. They think they are glorifying the word of god by making movies and stories with the same values, but the movies with the said values are better then the bible itself.

C.S. Lewis made a better series through the Chronicles of Narnia. Superman is better Jesus then the one from the stories. The Bible is oozing through the western culture so much that there's no need to read the real book to learn the positive lessons it's trying to teach. http://www.filmsite.org/top100spiritual.html

And obviously by not reading the bible, nothing negative will be learned *cough*commentary*cough*

 

 

Science and spirituality are not on the same levels. Science is the pursuit of truth while spirituality a pit stop to look at the scenery. It's an illusion and a belief that the life can be more wonderful from turning away from reality and looking inwards.

But we don't live our lives internally, we live from inside out and outside in. Our beliefs shape our reality and how we see life. We walk on Earth and are seen by other creatures. If our mental health is bad, we look and feel bad.

Buddhism proves that with enough control, we can live happily without material attachments, but we are heavily influenced by the material. Without a healthy body, our minds suffer.

Food is a material input we need, but another material input we need is good information. Spirituality is a struggle to find new information from looking inwards to find it, but there is a limit to how far that can take you. Looking only inwards to see whats outside will create a wrong perspective about the world, and when faced with truth, it will shatter.

That's how Science works, it will find the truth then challenge the tradition, religion, and belief. If philosophies and beliefs don't fit with reality, they they actually are "nonsense". No matter how smart important and influential Aristotle was, his version of physics was wrong.

It's time to face reality, not spirituality.

 

[idiot_stimpy]

Hi,

 

For me its about lessening my own suffering and the suffering of those around me.

 

I have definitely become more in control of my own desires, thoughts, emotions and actions. Instead of being led by unconscious desires, thoughts, emotions and actions, I have more conscious choice to carry them out or not. Of course I still have work to do in this regard.

 

By having a choice you're able to free yourself from bad decisions that would ultimately lead to further suffering.

Edited October 10, 2014 by idiot_stimpy

[C T]

Buddhism proves that with enough control, we can live happily without material attachments, but we are heavily influenced by the material. Without a healthy body, our minds suffer.

Actually one can live happily regardless. Letting go of attachments and neglecting one's health are not synonymous.

People with exceptionally healthy bodies can still suffer mentally, and vice versa. Buddhism is about finding balance, achieving results that do not bring harm to self and others, and not control as implied.

[Silent Answers]

I didn't read the whole thread, but you've got some valid points. In fact, it's all true to an extant... But the key is balance. Don't be entirely sucked in to the spiritual side - those people often go bonkers. And the super materialists who can't see what's really in front of them and take everything at face value, are just as bad.

 

Find a harmony between the 2... That's what makes Taoism right for me.

[katsura]

I take an analytical view of spiritual phenomena and I prize repeatability, but I don't feel any inclination to reconcile my experiences with a materialist paradigm. Qi is also a lot easier to type than "bio electricity."

[dust]

Let's take the Bible as the example. The whole book is obsolete and not just as a religious book. It's a collection of older books and stories put together to make something new. Even from across different religions.

 

Why are we talking about the Bible? It's a religious book, a book of obedience. One can find spirituality in it, but no more than in a book about the anatomy of insects or the life of Abraham Lincoln...

 

Again, you're confusing religion and spirituality. They are not the same.

 

 

Science and spirituality are not on the same levels. Science is the pursuit of truth while spirituality a pit stop to look at the scenery. It's an illusion and a belief that the life can be more wonderful from turning away from reality and looking inwards.

 

Of course they're not on the same levels. Different things rarely are...!

 

Science is a system of experimentation and prediction designed to find out more about existence. What is stuff made of, how does it work etc.

 

Spirituality is anything in which people find wonder, guidance, comfort, happiness. Perhaps for you, science is the mode by which you learn about the wonder of the universe and your place in it. Scientific knowledge has helped me greatly. But it's not the only good thing in the world.

 

Calling science "the pursuit of truth" doesn't make it any less potentially dangerous. Science has never yet found an ultimate truth, and if it did, would that make humans any less shitty?

 

Are you so sure that the more we know about physics and chemistry and biology and maths, and the more we're able to use that knowledge to do new things, the happier we will all be? Because I don't see science making anyone happier. Science doesn't tell us how to treat each other, or how to treat ourselves. Scientists are not immune from being arseholes.

 

 

But we don't live our lives internally, we live from inside out and outside in. Our beliefs shape our reality and how we see life. We walk on Earth and are seen by other creatures. If our mental health is bad, we look and feel bad.

 

Who says spirituality has to be entirely internal? There's a time for self-reflection but that's not all of it.

 

 

Food is a material input we need, but another material input we need is good information.

 

Agreed

 

 

Spirituality is a struggle to find new information from looking inwards to find it,

 

No, it's not.

 

 

but there is a limit to how far that can take you. Looking only inwards to see whats outside will create a wrong perspective about the world, and when faced with truth, it will shatter.

That's how Science works, it will find the truth then challenge the tradition, religion, and belief. If philosophies and beliefs don't fit with reality, they they actually are "nonsense". No matter how smart important and influential Aristotle was, his version of physics was wrong.

 

Yes, and all versions since have been wrong. Nobody now agrees on a single scientific model of things.

 

And science doesn't challenge the ideas of Daoism, Buddhism, or many other -isms. I live my life without a single unfounded belief (edit: well, that's not really possible, is it? but as far as I can...), and find use for the teachings of Laozi and Zen tradition.

 

As I just said, science doesn't provide any help on how to make life better. Technology gives tools for making certain things easier, which is nice, but easier =/= better.

 

 

It's time to face reality, not spirituality.

 

They are not mutually exclusive.

Edited October 18, 2014 by dustybeijing

[Bearded Dragon]

Some good points. Real spiritual training isn't spiritual. All we can do is let go of stuff such that we can eventually see ourselves reflected in a still mind. It's really quite ordinary.

[beyonder]

 

 

• Philosophy: The ancient knowledge that is thought of as being valuable has long ago stopped being special and is common knowledge.

 

 

Nonsense. If you really think so, you have a poor grasp of ancient (western) philosophy. What has trickled down to the masses, is heavily influenced by christian (scholastic) propaganda. Terms like "cynicism", "scepticism", "epicureanism" and "stoicism" certainly aren't referring to the thoughts of the ancients, when spoken in general discourse.

It has been expressed so much through art that the special lessons can be easily be found in children's cartoons and movies.

I'd love to see a childrens cartoon on Sextus Empiricus' "Outlines of Pyrrhonism". Or one about Diogenes of Sinope. I've seen Cicero make appearances in some shows, but those never focussed on his philosophy.

Old is not better.

 

 

Indeed, stating that something is "better" just because it's old is called an argumentum ad antiquitatem. It's opposite, claiming that something is "better" just because it's new is called an argumentum ad novitatem. In other words, judging things based on temporal qualities is a futile excercise. This also makes the entire notion of "progress" fallacious. Things wax and wane, that's how it's always been, and how it always will be.

Edited October 10, 2014 by beyonder

[Protector]

Somehow I knew if I mention Buddhism, I'd mess up hehe

I was mostly thinking about monks and meditation there

 

Why are we talking about the Bible? It's a religious book, a book of obedience. One can find spirituality in it, but no more than in a book about the anatomy of insects or the life of Abraham Lincoln...

 

The Bible was a very important part of the spiritual development of the western world. It's not pretty, but that's what happened. Also, it's so popular that it's a perfect example for the case. I could've used TTC but it would have used a lot more specific examples and a lot more writing.

 

Again, you're confusing religion and spirituality. They are not the same.

 

A religion is a form of spirituality. Look at what happened to Buddhism(Buddhism again). Instead of studying dharma, religious Buddhists just bow in front of an altar and clap their hands.

 

Of course they're not on the same levels. Different things rarely are...!

 

Science is a system of experimentation and prediction designed to find out more about existence. What is stuff made of, how does it work etc.

 

Spirituality is anything in which people find wonder, guidance, comfort, happiness. Perhaps for you, science is the mode by which you learn about the wonder of the universe and your place in it. Scientific knowledge has helped me greatly. But it's not the only good thing in the world.

 

Calling science "the pursuit of truth" doesn't make it any less potentially dangerous. Science has never yet found an ultimate truth, and if it did, would that make humans any less shitty?

 

Are you so sure that the more we know about physics and chemistry and biology and maths, and the more we're able to use that knowledge to do new things, the happier we will all be? Because I don't see science making anyone happier. Science doesn't tell us how to treat each other, or how to treat ourselves. Scientists are not immune from being arseholes.

 

"Wouldn't make humanity any less shitty" eh? For someone who doesn't seem to want to be influenced by biblical thinking, you make a comment on humanity's sinful nature. hehehe

Science is responsible for our technology, medicine, and our current well being. Our technology levels are perfectly balanced throughout the Earth. You can see how poorer countries fare-out out there and how we live. We have a luxury of being able to live longer, eat better, and learn anything. We can even go into space.

We still have war, we still have poverty around the globe, and we are not all happy. But I believe that "science and progress will lead to all men's happiness" It's a job of intellectuals and these doing science, I think everyone should be a scientist

 

Who says spirituality has to be entirely internal? There's a time for self-reflection but that's not all of it.

 

 

 

Agreed

 

 

 

No, it's not.

 

Yes, and all versions since have been wrong. Nobody now agrees on a single scientific model of things.

 

And science doesn't challenge the ideas of Daoism, Buddhism, or many other -isms. I live my life without a single unfounded belief, and find use for the teachings of Laozi and Zen tradition.

 

As I just said, science doesn't provide any help on how to make life better. Technology gives tools for making certain things easier, which is nice, but easier =/= better.

 

 

 

They are not mutually exclusive.

 

Again

 

 

Let me bridge the gap between scientific advancements and how "they make life better"

Also, how old spiritual philosophy is obsolete

btw beyounder, that is why we have imdb http://www.imdb.com/list/ls000000906/

 

 

Ancient knowledge that is thought of as being valuable has stopped being special. It is common knowledge in the modern world thanks to the way we learn things. We learn through stories, and stories are a human experience. Stories were told, they were written, now they are absorbed through movies and series. That's where the knowledge is, in the experiences of real and imaginary people.

TTC tries to convey wu wei while Forrest Gump lives it. Everyone else would be over-thinking things while to Forrest, they just happen.

We have ancient stories, we have modern stories, and we have predictions of what might happen. Right now we live lives that are completely different from the ones we could have lived just a century ago. Lives on other parts of the globe are different from the ones on this side, and we can learn about them. We can keep changing and we can keep on being the same all at once. The future will be different and it will be wonderful because it's different and because we will live it.

 

 

3 hour movie, gonna watch it again

 

There's a learned Buddhism and Taoism. There is a natural form of spirituality inside us that comes from experiencing that likes Taoism and Buddhism because it agrees with them, but it knew about them before meeting them and it's better. We just want to live and experience, science will give us new experiences.

[i am]

I read a good quote and I'll have to look up who said it, but it was something like "the bulk of the world's knowledge is an imaginary construct".

 

Science is also working under a limited framework, stuck within the confines of humanity's ability to reason, and come up with descriptions of the known world. If we can't experience it or measure it, science has a hard time touching it. Which leaves a lot of stuff outside the realm of science's ability to explain. But I think physicists especially are getting more and more comfortable with the idea that there are things we just can't explain and don't know, and the fact that at an atomic level, things don't behave according the laws of physics we deal with in every day life. There's a whole different set of "rules".

[dust]

"Wouldn't make humanity any less shitty" eh? For someone who doesn't seem to want to be influenced by biblical thinking, you make a comment on humanity's sinful nature. hehehe

 

It's not about "sin", it's about how people treat each other. How people act. You do accept the idea that people being nice to each other is better than people being nasty?

 

 

Science is responsible for our technology, medicine, and our current well being.

 

Technology makes lives easier, but that doesn't make happiness any more plentiful. There are people with 2 iPads and a Ferrari who are miserable and people living in the forest with nothing but a hut and a spear who are quite content. How can you possibly believe that science is responsible for happiness?

 

Cars, planes, guns, television, the internet, nuclear energy, nuclear bombs... all of these things can be useful. They can all also be harmful.

 

Real well-being is down to the person, not the gadgets that he can buy.

 

 

Our technology levels are perfectly balanced throughout the Earth.

 

Are you kidding?

 

 

We have a luxury of being able to live longer, eat better, and learn anything. We can even go into space.

 

Longevity is nice, but not when it comes at the expense of other things. Right now, the fact that we're all living longer isn't actually benefiting mankind as a whole.

 

We eat better in the West. You know why? Because other people eat worse. As long as people are people, there will be those who have and those who don't. Someone always wants more. We feel great about our society because we have more than poor farmers in other countries, forgetting that it's those farmers who enable us to live like we do.

 

Science is not going to change the way people are (until it does -- genetic modification -- and that's a different discussion, I think).

 

I'm not sure why everyone's so excited about being able to "go into space". It seems to me that we're already in space, living on a planet in the middle of a solar system, so.. we know what that's like. And our home is a pretty wonderful place. I have no desire to leave it.

 

 

We still have war, we still have poverty around the globe, and we are not all happy. But I believe that "science and progress will lead to all men's happiness" It's a job of intellectuals and these doing science, I think everyone should be a scientist

 

Yes we still have war, and poverty, and we're not happy. You think the scientifically advanced countries are the ones without war, without poverty, and with total happiness? Some of the most wonderful and happy people I've ever met have been poor and unscientific. Some of the biggest douchebags I've ever met have been science-minded.

 

Intellectualism does not lead to happiness. That's as much of an established "fact" as religion not leading to it.

 

 

TTC tries to convey wu wei while Forrest Gump lives it. Everyone else would be over-thinking things while to Forrest, they just happen.

 

So your point is that the DDJ is unnecessary because of Tom Hanks? OK, let's say that's true. Everything one can get out of the DDJ is similarly available in Forrest Gump and other movies. That just means that Laozi thought has found a new vessel. It doesn't make Daoist thought any less valid. If it's the same idea, it's the same idea. Your point is irrelevant.

[Brian]

I quoted George Box's "all models are wrong, but some are useful" quote in another thread recently so let me use a different version here:

Remember that all models are wrong; the practical question is how wrong do they have to be to not be useful.

Any scientist who loses touch with this important concept runs the very serious risk of becoming a Scientist.

 

Here are a few more to consider:

There remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion.

A very great deal more truth can become known than can be proven.

Western civilization, it seems to me, stands by two great heritages. One is the scientific spirit of adventure — the adventure into the unknown, an unknown which must be recognized as being unknown in order to be explored; the demand that the unanswerable mysteries of the universe remain unanswered; the attitude that all is uncertain; to summarize it — the humility of the intellect. The other great heritage is Christian ethics — the basis of action on love, the brotherhood of all men, the value of the individual — the humility of the spirit.

 

These two heritages are logically, thoroughly consistent. But logic is not all; one needs one’s heart to follow an idea. If people are going back to religion, what are they going back to? Is the modern church a place to give comfort to a man who doubts God — more, one who disbelieves in God? Is the modern church a place to give comfort and encouragement to the value of such doubts? So far, have we not drawn strength and comfort to maintain the one or the other of these consistent heritages in a way which attacks the values of the other? Is this unavoidable? How can we draw inspiration to support these two pillars of western civilization so that they may stand together in full vigor, mutually unafraid? Is this not the central problem of our time?

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

The first pair speak to the unknowable -- this is REALLY important -- not the currently unknown but the fundamentally unknowable. The concept is pivotal in modern physics and grows stronger as we learn more.

 

The second pair speak to the relationship between science and religion. It is important to understand that neither of these men were traditionally religious -- on TTB, we would probably call it spirituality rather than religion -- but both acknowledged a strong and self-consistent relationship between the two. Einstein, as time progressed, became increasingly religious, as did Newton (and others).

 

 

Protector, I was a capital-S Scientist for a number of years and firmly believed scientific pursuit would eventually unveil all the secrets of the universe. Until I slowly started to really understand science...

 

The first, for me, started during my undergraduate studies. I gravitated towards those physics professors who preached the Gospel of Science but then I started noticing that there were other physics professors in the same department who didn't. As I listened more carefully, I realized that, contrary to my childhood beliefs, the former were actually the polemics while the latter were more open-minded. I realized, too, that many of the latter were angry all the time while the latter had a much more serene approach to life.

 

Over the years I was an undergrad and then into graduate school, I studied the usual topics -- things like classical physics (forces, properties of matter, nonrelativistic motion, gravitation, optics, electricity & magnetism, astromechanics, etc.) and modern physics (relativistic models of those same classical standards as well as quantum mechanics & quantum electrodynamics). Along the way, I learned a boatload of mathematics, statistics, number theory, quantitative error analysis and so forth. Shining through it all was an increasingly obvious truth -- while the tools of science are amazingly powerful, they cannot answer questions outside their scope, AND there are elements of "reality" which are intrinsically unknowable. Heisenberg is famous for stating it with regards to position & momentum but it has since been recognized in other areas, too. (Einstein, BTW, also said "reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.")

 

My point is just that one should not be too quick to write off the applicability or relevance of spirituality in this age of Science.

 

I'll leave you with two final thoughts:

 

The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.

A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it is not open.

 

One was Albert Einstein and the other was Frank Zappa.

[C T]

Science has never been known to help one die fearlessly. That is the domain, and will always irrefutably be the domain of spirit. Einstein was able to reach conclusions along that vein by virtue of his calling, not apart from that.

[Brian]

Oh! And as to the idea that that which we cannot explain is of no practical value (or however it was worded), I would propose that things like bicycles, mirrors and compasses are very useful but I doubt there are more than about three people on the forum who could do a passable job of explaining any one of them...

[bax44]

Forest gump and cloud atlas being used as examples of happiness or taoism or wu wei or what have you leaves a lot to be desired in my humble opinion. Just my 2 cents. Carry on.

Edited October 10, 2014 by bax44

[i am]

But just in case this thread goes too far towards the negative and ugly side of TTBs, I'd just like to say before that happens that I like the topic, and thanks Protector for bringing it up. I don't agree with everything you're saying, but I agree with a lot, and there are a lot of valid points, and it does take some courage to post this topic on this board and welcome the criticism that's sure to follow.

 

[Protector]

It's not about "sin", it's about how people treat each other. How people act. You do accept the idea that people being nice to each other is better than people being nasty?

 

People being nasty and "evil" comes from ignorance, I believe. Many religions demonize people, their own and others, and self centered outlook on life and disagreements cause clashes. Many many wars were terrible mistakes and most caused by religion. People are not evil, they are good.

 

Technology makes lives easier, but that doesn't make happiness any more plentiful. There are people with 2 iPads and a Ferrari who are miserable and people living in the forest with nothing but a hut and a spear who are quite content. How can you possibly believe that science is responsible for happiness?

 

Cars, planes, guns, television, the internet, nuclear energy, nuclear bombs... all of these things can be useful. They can all also be harmful.

 

Real well-being is down to the person, not the gadgets that he can buy.

 

Science is not responsible for happiness, that is a misconception you came up with. Technology can take away things that make us unhappy, like disease. It can bring a person from the brink of death and continue life. It gives more opportunities and live lives we couldn't live before. We could all just live in a forest and be happy, but that will end sooner then if we lived in the space age.

 

Are you kidding?

 

Whoops, meant to put 'not' in there.

 

Longevity is nice, but not when it comes at the expense of other things. Right now, the fact that we're all living longer isn't actually benefiting mankind as a whole.

 

We eat better in the West. You know why? Because other people eat worse. As long as people are people, there will be those who have and those who don't. Someone always wants more. We feel great about our society because we have more than poor farmers in other countries, forgetting that it's those farmers who enable us to live like we do.

 

With technology, the people who don't have anything will disappear.

 

Science is not going to change the way people are (until it does -- genetic modification -- and that's a different discussion, I think).

 

That's called transhumanism, we're almost there. http://thetaobums.com/topic/36005-nature-good/ Thread about how much I want to be a robot

 

I'm not sure why everyone's so excited about being able to "go into space". It seems to me that we're already in space, living on a planet in the middle of a solar system, so.. we know what that's like. And our home is a pretty wonderful place. I have no desire to leave it.

 

Space has other worlds where we can live, with difficulty. It has resources that we need on Earth. If we take from space, we wouldn't need from Earth. Earth is cool, but too fragile, if we work on other planets more in the future, we could better preserve nature on Earth. Possibility of living on a spaceship is very exciting.

 

Yes we still have war, and poverty, and we're not happy. You think the scientifically advanced countries are the ones without war, without poverty, and with total happiness? Some of the most wonderful and happy people I've ever met have been poor and unscientific. Some of the biggest douchebags I've ever met have been science-minded.

 

Intellectualism does not lead to happiness. That's as much of an established "fact" as religion not leading to it.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LfcPxHseDw

 

Imagine all religious war gone thanks to atheism. Imagine need for resources gone thanks to space exploration.

 

So your point is that the DDJ is unnecessary because of Tom Hanks? OK, let's say that's true. Everything one can get out of the DDJ is similarly available in Forrest Gump and other movies. That just means that Laozi thought has found a new vessel. It doesn't make Daoist thought any less valid. If it's the same idea, it's the same idea. Your point is irrelevant.

 

No, it's the other way around.

The points of TTC stay, Taoism leaves, that's the point I'm making here. Laozi' thought has found a new vessel but since it's true, it doesn't belong to him. Gravity was always there, doesn't mean it stops working if you forget about Newton.

But the people who learn about someone like Laozi think of something more. Like, if they learn about Taoism, they will unlock something, but that something they already knew. The thought is important but the temples are useless.

It's funny how TTC became a religious book for some people thanks to shamans who needed something to hide behind. Good thing there are no Newtonians worshiping the moon or something

 

Gump and Atlas are not my examples of happiness either, thinking of different kinds of possible experiences here. My example of happiness would be Bladerunner. With more open possibilities, more people will have a shot for happiness, I think. Mine involves robots

 

Science should be used to destroy superstition, Brian. For example, there will always be a tiny chance that there's such thing as god but if we cut away things that are wrong, we might one day understand the real thing if it's there. Not understanding how everything works is fine, I'm an atheist but It would be curious to know how the real possible god would work and my ignorance of its existence doesn't stop it from working. But if these gosh-darn Mormons think they have a leg to stand on, they have a few problems

[C T]

Imagine all religious war gone thanks to atheism. Imagine need for resources gone thanks to space exploration.

Both those images make me think of new forms of wars. Sorry, but its a fact. Science will never eradicate human ignorance.

[bax44]

Ya I agree religion has definitely caused a lot of wars but just bc you eliminate that doesn't mean humans won't find new things to fight about. Just like ct I was immediately thinking of how those things you mentioned could lead to different types of war. Maybe that says more about me who knows:)

[Protector]

Smart people will invent new ways to be stupid, look at cellphones

 

Cut off one head, two grow back. Still want to cut off that first head, though

[dust]

People being nasty and "evil" comes from ignorance, I believe. Many religions demonize people, their own and others, and self centered outlook on life and disagreements cause clashes. Many many wars were terrible mistakes and most caused by religion. People are not evil, they are good.

 

I don't believe in evil. There is only treating others well or not. Most people do not.

 

If mistakes are caused by religion, what is religion caused by? Birds? Rocks? Or humans?

Human ignorance, depravity, whatever. Not "evil", but something contrary to happiness. Religion is just a tool.

 

 

Science is not responsible for happiness, that is a misconception you came up with. Technology can take away things that make us unhappy, like disease. It can bring a person from the brink of death and continue life. It gives more opportunities and live lives we couldn't live before. We could all just live in a forest and be happy, but that will end sooner then if we lived in the space age.

 

So we'll all be happier the longer we live? If you could live for 1000 years, you'd be happier than if you only lived for 10?

 

For me, it's about quality, not quantity. Science has helped a lot so far in augmenting the quality of life for some people, but that's only a part of it.

 

Science has also helped people to massacre in the name of religion and cause global climate change. People are the cause, science the tool, the same as religion.

 

 

With technology, the people who don't have anything will disappear.

 

Wanna bet?

 

 

That's called transhumanism, we're almost there. http://thetaobums.com/topic/36005-nature-good/ Thread about how much I want to be a robot

 

Well...OK...have fun with that..!

 

 

Space has other worlds where we can live, with difficulty. It has resources that we need on Earth. If we take from space, we wouldn't need from Earth. Earth is cool, but too fragile, if we work on other planets more in the future, we could better preserve nature on Earth. Possibility of living on a spaceship is very exciting.

 

Do you not see that without scientific "advances" we wouldn't need to think about leaving Earth?

 

Do you not see the ridiculousness of the whole thing? That we've got to a point where we're using up our source and are planning to travel the universe looking for other things to use up?

 

And why would you want to live on a spaceship? I cannot for the life of me understand the lure...

 

 

Imagine all religious war gone thanks to atheism. Imagine need for resources gone thanks to space exploration.

 

Again, it is the very demand that science has put on the planet that has caused this supposed need to explore space.

 

 

The points of TTC stay, Taoism leaves, that's the point I'm making here. Laozi' thought has found a new vessel but since it's true, it doesn't belong to him. Gravity was always there, doesn't mean it stops working if you forget about Newton.

 

But the people who learn about someone like Laozi think of something more. Like, if they learn about Taoism, they will unlock something, but that something they already knew. The thought is important but the temples are useless.

It's funny how TTC became a religious book for some people thanks to shamans who needed something to hide behind. Good thing there are no Newtonians worshiping the moon or something

 

I don't really know what your point is. Laozi the man never existed, and the TTC doesn't belong to anyone. If the points of Taoism stay, that's all that's relevant. The teachings are still useful.

[dust]

Science is the pursuit of truth

 

it will find the truth then challenge the tradition, religion, and belief

 

Science is responsible for our technology, medicine, and our current well being

 

science and progress will lead to all men's happiness

 

everyone should be a scientist

 

science will give us new experiences

 

 

 

So just to sum up... science will create great technologies and medicines and find truth, leading ultimately to the happiness of all men. Right?

 

Have you watched the re-imagined Battlestar? That is almost precisely how I see the future. More technology, robots, forced exploration in search of a new home planet... and people better off without it all.

 

 

edit: Also, you are a robot, albeit a very complex organic one. For me, that's just fine.

Edited October 10, 2014 by dustybeijing

[doc benway]

When I feel I don't need something in my life, I can disrespect it and try to influence others to avoid it as well. This is projection and doesn't acknowledge the variety of needs and aptitudes among people. I don't think it is very skillful or considerate. An alternative approach is to recognize that others may have different needs and preferences while simply stating it's something that I don't need.

 

There are those who can live very fulfilling and meaningful lives with no need for science whatsoever. There are those whose lives are deeply enriched by spirituality and religion. Science has done far more harm than religion, IMO. That said, it also has great value and both have their place.