News:

Nitpicky? Hell yes.

Main Menu

How will atheism...

Started by Tank, July 26, 2018, 10:50:03 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

No one

Tank:
The initial aim should be to separate mythology from politics and give evidence based research a bigger voice in decision making.

You have high hopes. People aren't that smart.

Tank

Quote from: No one on July 29, 2018, 09:56:49 AM
Tank:
The initial aim should be to separate mythology from politics and give evidence based research a bigger voice in decision making.

You have high hopes. People aren't that smart.
I do have high opinions of humanity and I'm often disappointed.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Dave

Quote from: Tank on July 29, 2018, 10:34:07 AM
Quote from: No one on July 29, 2018, 09:56:49 AM
Tank:
The initial aim should be to separate mythology from politics and give evidence based research a bigger voice in decision making.

You have high hopes. People aren't that smart.
I do have high opinions of humanity and I'm often disappointed.

As a mob (with all that label implies), and especially a religious mob, humanity can be horrendous. As a noisy, couldn't-care-ess neighbour humans can be very anoying.

Yet, so often, in big charity drives and charity runs etc, we prove that we can express a sort of unified empathy even in large numbers. Also I have heard of so many individual acts involving from bravery to simple friendliness towards a stranger that, on the whole, I don't mind being a member of the race.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

chimp3

What will replace religion? As what? A source of inspiration, community, morality? How about science, art, literature, music, dance, philosophy, reason, debate, law, film, cuisine, forums, salons, wine, sports, block parties, holidays, tea with Mom, the eventual collision with the Andromeda galaxy. Just about anything can replace religion.
I doubt it!

Bluenose

Quote from: chimp3 on July 30, 2018, 01:30:08 AM
What will replace religion? As what? A source of inspiration, community, morality? How about science, art, literature, music, dance, philosophy, reason, debate, law, film, cuisine, forums, salons, wine, sports, block parties, holidays, tea with Mom, the eventual collision with the Andromeda galaxy. Just about anything can replace religion.

Actually, this makes sense.  I found in my own life that when I rejected religion for the BS it undoubtedly is, that science provided a much better explanation for the world around me.  Sure, sometimes the science answer is "we don't know yet", but how is that a bad thing?  It means there is more to find out, what a great opportunity!  At no time have I had to lose my sense of wonder at the world, the universe or the myriad interrelated intricacies of nature.  On the contrary, my sense of the numinous is all the greater the more I understand how things really work.  From my current perspective, the religious viewpoint seems really rather childish.
+++ Divide by cucumber error: please reinstall universe and reboot.  +++

GNU Terry Pratchett


Dave

Quote from: Bluenose on July 30, 2018, 04:58:49 AM
Quote from: chimp3 on July 30, 2018, 01:30:08 AM
What will replace religion? As what? A source of inspiration, community, morality? How about science, art, literature, music, dance, philosophy, reason, debate, law, film, cuisine, forums, salons, wine, sports, block parties, holidays, tea with Mom, the eventual collision with the Andromeda galaxy. Just about anything can replace religion.

Actually, this makes sense.  I found in my own life that when I rejected religion for the BS it undoubtedly is, that science provided a much better explanation for the world around me.  Sure, sometimes the science answer is "we don't know yet", but how is that a bad thing?  It means there is more to find out, what a great opportunity!  At no time have I had to lose my sense of wonder at the world, the universe or the myriad interrelated intricacies of nature.  On the contrary, my sense of the numinous is all the greater the more I understand how things really work.  From my current perspective, the religious viewpoint seems really rather childish.

Hmm, not so sure about this. It may depend on how many people are "inherrently" attracted towards science etc anyway. Bluenose, were you previously attracted towards science before your enlightenment, then did science appear to offer explanations your "religious subconscious" was blocking or was it a sudden, blinding revelation tgat science exidted?

There have geen many attempts (still are) to fet kids (especially girls) interested in science in the UK and I often wonder if this attracts kids who woukd not otherwise consider it as a career path, or even an approach to life. Trying not to use the "S" word perhaps fewer get the deep down, maybe more than merely emotional, feedback from the arts and science than belief in the supernatural appears to provide for billions of people.

For the arts and sciences to get near the "popularity" of religion, to affect the way people behave in daily life (ignoring, for the moment, that most of the overtly religious nations are also the most violent) is a big ask. The (gotta use it) "spritual" values are not quite the same IMHO. I can still feel that same inner boost reading about the famous 1911 Solvay Conference* that I did the first time about 40 years ago. But then I am a bit of a geek. There aren't many geeks per million peeps out there!

For the arts to replace religion you have to increase the geek:peep ratio tremendously, almost nake arts and sciences some kind of "indoctrination" in education. The next thing, knowing human nature, would be the formation of political parties, the "Artists" and the "Scientists" to promote and fund those fields and maybe conflict, even wars, between the two factions! Let alone "sectarian" conflict between such as chemists vs physicists or classisists vs modernists.

In Veronica Roth's "Divergent" trilogy post apocalypse Chicago society divides into four factions, plus the "factionless", according to their natures: selfless/caring, scientific/candid, confident/aggressive, peaceful/amiable. But, in this case, the scientific faction, the "Erudites"make a bid for overall power, using the aggressives as their "weapons". Human nature wins again.

* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solvay_Conference
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

No one

Great thing about science, it doesn't care what you think.

Dave

Quote from: No one on July 30, 2018, 10:52:08 AM
Great thing about science, it doesn't care what you think.

I like that, No one!

Think I will rephrase it as, "The facts don't care what you think", for non-scientific applications.

Unfortunately we have to deal with what humans think and how they (mis)use science and facts to validate or legitimise their opinions, biases and prejudices.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Bluenose

I think the problem goes deeper than teaching science versus dogma.  I think the biggest problem is that our education system seems primarily concerned with teaching students what to think rather than how to think. Of course, how that is done has to be different for each age group and it is much harder than the current system which is largely set and forget.  Engaging students and helping them learn how to enquire into things, whether they be science, maths, history or the arts or any other field of learning/knowledge is not easy.  In fact it is damn hard.  All the more reason why we need to increase efforts to do this.
+++ Divide by cucumber error: please reinstall universe and reboot.  +++

GNU Terry Pratchett


Dave

Quote from: Bluenose on July 30, 2018, 11:52:57 AM
I think the problem goes deeper than teaching science versus dogma.  I think the biggest problem is that our education system seems primarily concerned with teaching students what to think rather than how to think. Of course, how that is done has to be different for each age group and it is much harder than the current system which is largely set and forget.  Engaging students and helping them learn how to enquire into things, whether they be science, maths, history or the arts or any other field of learning/knowledge is not easy.  In fact it is damn hard.  All the more reason why we need to increase efforts to do this.

A few schools here teach critical thinking but, mostly, the state school syllabus is stuffed with what the government think kids should learn. I was not entirely happy with the academy system but it does give schools a chance to explore other subjects. However, reasonably I suppose, the emphasis is on the basics for uni entry or vocational subjects. Then the unis have to spend a year bringing the less lucky students up to intellectual par. In my six months in uni (2005-6) it was fairly evident which students had come from grammar or private schools or "6th form colleges" and which from secondary modern/comprehensive state schools. The use of language, vocabulary etc was one clue, the approach to work and assignments another, a lot more mutual advice giving and support in the latter group - less confidence.

We need bashers and benders on the shop floor as much as thinkers in R&D, but all of them deserve to have the resources to reach their full potential, the basher or bender who can think on his or her feet is a valuable worker. I did my best to involve the people who would use them when I designed small tools  or test rigs for the shop floor. Always making sure they got credit for their ideas when talking to their supervisors or managers, "Yes, Freda had the good idea to . . ."
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Bluenose

Yep, basher and benders are required too.  I always remember a story my old man tells about a sailor on his squadron during his time at NAS Nowra.  Dad's aircraft suffered a bird strike and the job of making a repair was given to a particular sailor on the squadron.  This bloke would never have won a Rhodes Scholarship, but was a genius with his hands.  He slowly fashioned a patch for the complex curve at the wing root where the bird had struck that when fitted was indistinguishable from the original structure.  Normally a squadron repair would be temporary until the aircraft went in for major servicing, but this repair was never replaced, it didn't need it.
+++ Divide by cucumber error: please reinstall universe and reboot.  +++

GNU Terry Pratchett


chimp3

The writings of. Kurt Vonnegut provide better moral teachings and insight into humanity than any Bible.
I doubt it!

hermes2015

Quote from: chimp3 on July 31, 2018, 01:05:46 AM
The writings of. Kurt Vonnegut provide better moral teachings and insight into humanity than any Bible.

:thumbsup:
"Eventually everything connects - people, ideas, objects. The quality of the connections is the key to quality per se."
― Charles Eames

Dave

Quote from: chimp3 on July 31, 2018, 01:05:46 AM
The writings of. Kurt Vonnegut provide better moral teachings and insight into humanity than any Bible.

I'll add Robert Heinlein.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Tank

Quote from: Dave on July 31, 2018, 06:48:32 AM
Quote from: chimp3 on July 31, 2018, 01:05:46 AM
The writings of. Kurt Vonnegut provide better moral teachings and insight into humanity than any Bible.

I'll add Robert Heinlein.

He was a little bit right wing of Attila the Hun.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.