Jump to content
Can't remember your login details? Read more... ×
Cybes

Progress and Discovery: Religion = Ignorance

Recommended Posts

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=124_1236732170 <-- Bandwidth Warning: this is a 38 minute lecture. You can download it for later viewing, fortunately.

 

This video is a lecture during the Beyond Belief series in 2006 where [Neil deGrasse] Tyson talks about Progress and Discovery AFTER God is removed from the equation.

 

Religion is ignorance. It also points out key discoveries to OUR life time in the middle-east during AD 800 - 1100 (A 300 year period of discovery which brought us advances in engineering, medicine, mathematics and much more until religion crushed the philosophy.)

 

 

In case you're wondering who the heck Neil deGrasse Tyson is, this is him:

Posted Image

You will probable have seen him if you've watched any sort of astronomical or cosmological 'science' show in the last decade.

 

In this talk, it's apparent that his brain goes quite a bit faster than his mouth.

 

If he ever ran for World Leader, I would vote for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, anyone who believes that religion and science are mutually exclusive, which is what the phrase 'Religion is ignorance' suggests, would not be getting my vote...

 

Oh, and I haven't heard of the dude before, but I tend to read my cosmological stuff, not watch it on commercial tellie...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, anyone who believes that religion and science are mutually exclusive, which is what the phrase 'Religion is ignorance' suggests, would not be getting my vote...

 

Oh, and I haven't heard of the dude before, but I tend to read my cosmological stuff, not watch it on commercial tellie...

Um, he's one of the most prolific writers of the last 15 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Mac Dude has only been reading stuff by Templeton prize winners. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion as an institution is dependant upon authoritarianism. Authoritarianism is generally depenandant upon cultivating ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, anyone who believes that religion and science are mutually exclusive, which is what the phrase 'Religion is ignorance' suggests, would not be getting my vote...

 

Oh, and I haven't heard of the dude before, but I tend to read my cosmological stuff, not watch it on commercial tellie...

Um, he's one of the most prolific writers of the last 15 years.

 

Yep, 11 books over that period is prolific.

 

I tend to read stuff by Hawking, Davies and recently Susskind. But, still, never heard of this dude, so there you go :)

 

Religion as an institution is dependant upon authoritarianism. Authoritarianism is generally depenandant upon cultivating ignorance.

One could say the same about science - there are established institutions with established hierarchies, established authorities.

Edited by Mac Dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, anyone who believes that religion and science are mutually exclusive, which is what the phrase 'Religion is ignorance' suggests, would not be getting my vote...

 

Oh, and I haven't heard of the dude before, but I tend to read my cosmological stuff, not watch it on commercial tellie...

After watching the video, I would hazard a guess that believing in God is not the problem, as such - it just makes a great soundbite. The problem is when scientists run out of imagination and say "God did it" they stop looking for how "it" actually works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One could say the same about science - there are established institutions with established hierarchies, established authorities.

Well, you shouldn't.

 

Science is fundamentally founded in principles that deny authoritarianism.

 

I won't deny that people tend to botch it, however.

Edited by VannA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is when scientists run out of imagination and say "God did it" they stop looking for how "it" actually works.

I must have missed this as well - never heard a scientist do that...

 

I'm listening to it now - it looks like another ID bashing video.

 

It's a very valid position to take, but been done about ten thousand times before.

 

 

One could say the same about science - there are established institutions with established hierarchies, established authorities.

Well, you shouldn't.

 

Science is fundamentally founded in principles that deny authoritarianism.

 

I won't deny that people tend to botch it, however.

 

You seem to want to separate science from how people 'practice science'. You cannot deny that there are scientific institutions and that these institutions have authority structures within them. There have been plenty of cases where a scientist has come up against theses institutions because their theory disagrees with that of the science powers that be. Much in the same way religion got in the way of science in the past and does so currently, though to a lesser extent.

 

Back at the video, I've stopped at the 10 minute mark where he was discussing how the planets move without interference from God.

 

I can cope with that :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back at the video, I've stopped at the 10 minute mark where he was discussing how the planets move without interference from God.

 

I can cope with that :)

You really should keep going. The talk is 28 minutes long, and even if you cut out the speech stumbles, you couldn't really make it much less than 25.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" ...an entertainment complex in the middle of a sewage system".

:)

 

Interesting point on the further development ( or lack of ) for Islamic discoveries from AD 1000 .

 

Pity his talk was just before lunch, seemed he had lots more to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh whatever.

 

Everyone wants to blame someone else I guess but the fact of the matter is that authority hates change, especially change that would threaten their power base. If the 'authority' at the time is 'religious' then it will fight against anything that could undermine them, so in the case of our early days of scientific discovery I can well see how scientific truth would oppose some of the more whacky religious beliefs. If the authority is based on irreligion then they will rally against any RELIGIOUS truth in the exact same way. Problem these days is that money is king and I often wonder what inventions were killed off or suppressed by big business in order to protect their power base? I was talking to an inventor today, seems like a smart guy but I didn't really understand the maths, he has a couple of things he wants to patent and keep the revenue and recognition here in Australia but can't afford the thousands of dollars in legal BS, could NOT afford to fight a court case if someone pinched his idea during the patent process etc. Tried to get a grant but got screwed around to much by the bureaucrazies and gubmunt lackies etc...

 

So while it may be true that religious AUTHORITY may have stifled technological advancement at certain points in our history it's euqally true that pretty much all authority id guilty of doing the same thing. IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So while it may be true that religious AUTHORITY may have stifled technological advancement at certain points in our history it's euqally true that pretty much all authority id guilty of doing the same thing. IMO.

:) I agree, because man is corrupt / biased / prejudiced, etc. regardless .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh whatever.

 

<rant>

 

So while it may be true that religious AUTHORITY may have stifled technological advancement at certain points in our history it's euqally true that pretty much all authority id guilty of doing the same thing. IMO.

... Did you even watch the vid, D, or just go off because of the title? Sure, "love of money is the root of all evil", and the fact that's made it into religious texts since the year dot tells us that's not exactly a new discovery either - but what does that have to do with what he's saying?

 

As I said earlier, the point, when you listen to his example of the finest minds in history at a certain point and saying "This bit here? God did that." is that those brilliant minds effectively stop trying to figure out how "God did that" and just turn on dummy mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, anyone who believes that religion and science are mutually exclusive, which is what the phrase 'Religion is ignorance' suggests, would not be getting my vote...

what came first, humans or dinosaurs?

 

 

Not that all relegions are founded on the principle that God made the earth (and man) in 7 days...but science and judeo-christian religions are mutually exclusive -unless you pick and choose your bible passages/definitions i.e. if you define a "day" to last hundreds of thousands of years of if you start selectivly defining parts of the bible as metaphores

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, anyone who believes that religion and science are mutually exclusive, which is what the phrase 'Religion is ignorance' suggests, would not be getting my vote...

what came first, humans or dinosaurs?

 

 

Not that all relegions are founded on the principle that God made the earth (and man) in 7 days...but science and judeo-christian religions are mutually exclusive -unless you pick and choose your bible passages/definitions i.e. if you define a "day" to last hundreds of thousands of years of if you start selectivly defining parts of the bible as metaphores

 

Dude you realise the bible is a 'selection' of stories written by different authors? Science and judeo-christian religions aren't mutually exclusive if you are talking about the mainstream. Do you know what's taught in a mainstream judeo-christian school in their science class?

Edited by Mac Dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh whatever.

 

<rant>

 

So while it may be true that religious AUTHORITY may have stifled technological advancement at certain points in our history it's euqally true that pretty much all authority id guilty of doing the same thing. IMO.

... Did you even watch the vid, D, or just go off because of the title? Sure, "love of money is the root of all evil", and the fact that's made it into religious texts since the year dot tells us that's not exactly a new discovery either - but what does that have to do with what he's saying?

 

As I said earlier, the point, when you listen to his example of the finest minds in history at a certain point and saying "This bit here? God did that." is that those brilliant minds effectively stop trying to figure out how "God did that" and just turn on dummy mode.

 

That rationale only works if your underlying assumption is that humans can discover and/or comprehend everything, an assumption that to me seems quite arrogant and ludicrous. Sure there's plenty of things was can and have discovered but as with all other things, when you take your 'science' or your 'religion' as far as you can possibly take it there will always be questions to which 'God' is the correct answer. So what seems futile and ridiculous to me is people who just can't deal with that answer and have to them invent something else that preserves their view of reality. Remember all of these 'authorities' are made up of individuals who simply think the same way, rightly or wrongly and IMO no one can call themselves a true scientist if they arbitrarily rule out certain possibilities because their a-priori philosophical convictions. Besides, I wasn't 'going off', I was just saying....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, anyone who believes that religion and science are mutually exclusive, which is what the phrase 'Religion is ignorance' suggests, would not be getting my vote...

what came first, humans or dinosaurs?

 

 

Not that all relegions are founded on the principle that God made the earth (and man) in 7 days...but science and judeo-christian religions are mutually exclusive -unless you pick and choose your bible passages/definitions i.e. if you define a "day" to last hundreds of thousands of years of if you start selectivly defining parts of the bible as metaphores

 

Dude you realise the bible is a 'selection' of stories written by different authors? Science and judeo-christian religions aren't mutually exclusive if you are talking about the mainstream. Do you know what's taught in a mainstream judeo-christian school in their science class?

 

I am confused.

Does the judeo-christian orthodoxy claim Genisis as true or ... what?

 

And you didn't answer the question:

what came first, humans or dinosaurs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember all of these 'authorities' are made up of individuals who simply think the same way, rightly or wrongly and IMO no one can call themselves a true scientist if they arbitrarily rule out certain possibilities because their a-priori philosophical convictions. Besides, I wasn't 'going off', I was just saying....

What 'authorities' would those be? There is no titular 'Head of Science'.

 

I agree with you that " no one can call themselves a true scientist if they arbitrarily rule out certain possibilities because their a-priori philosophical convictions" - and that includes stopping looking for alternate explanations. One of the example figures given in the talk was Newton: the guy who invented calculus. After figuring out gravity, he realised that the solar system's (then known) 6 planets presented him with about a million times more complexity than he knew what to do with - he couldn't make a model that was stable. Being the brightest human ever, he concluded that nothing but divine intervention could keep us from crashing into the sun. A little later, someone far dimmer than he (though still a genius) nutted out 'perturbabtion theory', which made figuring out the n-body gravitational problems a relative snap. Newton could have done that math standing on his head after fasting for a week - but he didn't. He didn't, because he gave up thinking about it.

 

And ok. It read like 'going off' to me - probably because I don't understand where your point about central authorities comes from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My notion of 'authority' is basically 'what is the prevailing social power' at any given time, OK I know it's a little nebulous and didn't mean to imply that science was running the world, it is however being used and manipulate by those who do to some extent at least (AGW would be a case in point). I would say that 'money' is the biggest social power right now and in the west at least secular humanism is the biggest philosophical authority. Hope that makes sense.

 

As for Newton, I'm not sure what the big deal is, he gave up and said "God did it" but then someone else came along later with a viewpoint that Newton didn't have and gave us a more accurate answer, of course that answer didn't negate "God did it" as the ultimate cause of everything he just explained the mechanism that God put in place, presumably. That Newton gave up could also simply be a recognition of his own limitations, or maybe he was quite happy with "God did it" or "God started it" and that's fair enough to, in my experience it's only those who have dismissed 'God' as part of their belief structure that can't accept that as an answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find that people who blindly follow Scientists opinions because they know that those people are smarter... or simply more qualified.. to be ignorant. I also find the theory that the universe just exploded into life and started rushing outwards in all directions... developing it's own laws, forming galaxies that have functions and cycles. Planets and stars that are perfect (near perfect) sphere's. And just started to produce life all by 'chance'.... to be ignorance.

 

Plain and simply God belongs to no one. Religions that claim to worship God only let people down, and people who subscribe to the evolution theory do because religions can't provide them with answers, or they feel that doing so means they do not have to be held accountable by higher morale judgement.

 

But something we can all agree on I'm sure is that it's okay for people to believe either. Mainly because Religion and Evolution are both woks of man... and we all know man is totally, utterly, absolutely fallible. And we should all prepare for the fact that what we know now could be wrong, and being open to something new isn't wrong, and subscribing to either isn't wrong. But be sceptical. And most of all be tolerant.

 

And perhaps making threads with a title like this... could be construed as an attack of someone's belief system. Some people don't like religion pushed in their face, and vice versa.

 

I wish people would just leave both topics open without the need for pre-prejudicial crap in support of either. Lastly this is Atomic. And we should all be considerate, and chummy with our members who have come here to express their love for tech.

 

-SC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also find the theory that the universe just exploded into life and started rushing outwards in all directions... developing it's own laws, forming galaxies that have functions and cycles. Planets and stars that are perfect (near perfect) sphere's. And just started to produce life all by 'chance'.... to be ignorance.

You're not good at deriving complex outcomes from repetitive scaling interactions of relatively simple rulesets, then?

Edited by VannA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also find the theory that the universe just exploded into life and started rushing outwards in all directions... developing it's own laws, forming galaxies that have functions and cycles. Planets and stars that are perfect (near perfect) sphere's. And just started to produce life all by 'chance'.... to be ignorance.

You're not good at deriving complex outcomes from repetitive scaling interactions of relatively simple rulesets, then?

 

And you don't know exactly what has happened since the universe began. None of us do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×