Artificial Selection—The Way of Religion

How humans are a shadow of their former selves through artificial selection.

The difference between the theory of evolution and the theory of god, the formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.

Like the artificial evolution induced in the Russian fox experiment (breeding for temperament only) created a completely different animal in just a few short years, breeding for belief through temperament (and because of belief) has had the same effect on humans.

Now a shadow of our former selves through unnatural selection, the general population has resolved to belief over substance, faith over fact, essentially giving-up on the quest for a firmer reality, acquiescing to the dogma at the threat of exclusion.

The natural man was no enemy to god—the natural man was god, but through domestication built on one trait, we have become subjects to ourselves. Genetically altered, weak and submissive, we now get what we were bred to be—prisoners with belief in a nothing…and smug about it.

Author: jim-

One minute info blogs breaking the faith trap.

158 thoughts on “Artificial Selection—The Way of Religion”

  1. Jim, This was intended to go with your latest blog post, but you left no space for a comment on it. This is from the FFRF web site and their daily quotes. This one is from Gora. OK, his actual name is; Goparaju Ramachantra Rao
    The greatest contribution of atheism is the provision of a firm basis for ethical conduct. Atheism explains that morality is a social obligation but not a passport to heaven and salvation. The theistic belief in divine retribution sidetracked moral behavior. Believers were more prone to please the god of their imagination by prayer and ritual than to conform to rules of moral conduct.”
    Any who, I think it fits your blog quite well.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’m not sure what happened, but WordPress had a glitch. Even though my setting are right (even rebooted and republished and reloaded the app) it still wouldn’t allow comments for this post. I can’t even send a message to the help desk. Weird. Comments are pretty much the whole blog. Thanks Walter for that. I agree.

      Like

      1. Jim,
        No problem sir. Giggle does that to me every so often. Well not so often of late as I have not posted much in the last 12 months.
        Computer glitch? Reminds me of the post high school/pre USMC days when we were at the local community college awaiting the draft. Back then the computer took up an entire room and we didn’t have any screen, not even an old black&white CRT. The saying then was something like this; “To err is human. To really screw up takes a computer.”

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Hi:-) This theory has some serious holes in it. Like bite marks easily received from those aggressive foxes also part of the study. The wild, untamed and aggressive foxes were also bred with each other in the experiment. Resulting in seriously aggressive foxes. Now how is that for law and order? In fact, taming animals make them not dangerous or frightened of people. Demonstrating that opposite of submissive is domination. Submissive is defined as being ready to conform to the authority or will of others; meekly obedient or passive. Now, world domination sound like its opposite. Something threatening our entire existence with the single push of a button.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Oooooooohhhhhhhhh! TWILIGHT ZONE MUSIC!!!
    This discussion is getting mighty weird. I am not so sure anyone is listening to the others. A rift seems to be building, like Repugs and Dems, rich and poor, or dare I say it, theists and atheists. Such an innocent start, Jim, it appears to be ballooning out of all proportion. I think I will take my leave before it becomes irreparable…

    Liked by 3 people

            1. Get your mind out of the gutter, Jim. So what if I’m a little past your age preference, shit happens. A girl 15 years my junior once told me she thought I was cute, but I was too old for her. Next thing I know she is bumping sheets with a guy 5 years older than me. So careful, lol.

              Liked by 2 people

        1. Well, I hope that the bots are enjoying themselves. It’s funny though, with all that “recognition” technology they can’t find criminals and bodies continually disappear without trace. Sherlock Holmes did better.

          Liked by 2 people

      1. You Stated — “It will be interesting to see what happens as the relatively “better off” middle class disappears and the world splits between the ultra rich and the hopeless poor ”

        My Response — I’ve had the same thought.

        You Stated — “There is little doubt in my mind that the prosperity gospel is on its way out: ”

        My Response — I agree. The people without money are starting to wake up a bit. Strange timing on your statement since I just saw Benny Hinn publically announce (during his service) that the prosperity gospel was evil.

        You Stated — “I reiterate that I don’t see traditional, official religion as the big bugaboo threatening to destroy mankind”

        My Response — I agree. I see the bugaboo being more than religion, politics, etc.

        Most likely it’s going to be our lack of response to injustice. Example: Given the number of missing and abused children I see our lack of response to protect them as a sign we are imploding slowly. Meanwhile, we go out of our way to protect the rich and the corporations.

        You Stated — “collective evil necessarily must be addressed and sourced”

        My Response — Agreed! It’s insidious and sick. It’s like a percentage of the human race are monsters walking around in human clothing. They live in every camp so you can’t escape them.

        Liked by 2 people

          1. You Stated — “I’ve learned a lot, lot, more from life in the real world than I did within the education system.”

            My Response — Same here.

            You Stated — I’ve always thought that “education”… should, at most, take about 4 years of any child’s life. Teach reading, writing, and basic arithmetic.

            My Response — I think that early education should have no time association. Some learn faster than others and should be released sooner rather than wait for a fixed date.

            We should create a basic system of teaching young minds Common languages (at least (2) spoken and written). We should also provide full practical math skills like those you stated, “basic arithmetic”, but also basic financial skills related to interest and credit. Also, basic computer skills and basic philosophy to expose them to alternative ways to process information.

            After that, we should have trade schools that teach practical skills for self-sustained viability. To many graduating students with degrees, no one wants to see.

            You Stated — “I am still shocked at how much of the history I was taught in grade school was nothing more than fake news”

            My Response — Agreed!! History should stay in the library and anyone who wants to learn it can go on their own time.

            For myself I thurst for Technolgy, Philosophy, and Bible History.

            Liked by 2 people

      1. At the post. I will try to explain.

        The wrongthink you are heading toward is this. You are saying that genetics and selective breeding(from natural or artificial pressures) influence human behavior.

        Another thing that will come up if you proceed in this is questioning the humanistic values that are commonly held by atheists. Most atheists see the “natural man” exactly the same way Christians do. Inferior, meant to be replaced by the civilized and domesticated. That was the norm, and still seems to be for most. Steven Pinker’s “criminal tribes” concept comes to mind.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. You Stated — ” Most atheists see the “natural man” exactly the same way Christians do. Inferior, meant to be replaced by the civilized and domesticated. ”

          My Response — As a Christian, I disagree. I also know many atheists that don’t share that view so I don’t believe it has anything to do with atheism or Christianity.

          With that said: Both atheists and Christians in modern society rely heavily on civilized and domesticated people within the population to support working and social standards within society to keep the peace.

          Example: Walk your dog and pick up its poop (a practice I heavily disagree with and find ridiculous but without it, the park would be a poop wasteland).

          So please comply, look into the camera when shopping, pay your taxes and don’t park in the handicap spaces Oo

          Liked by 2 people

        2. The idea (which is all this is) that man have changed physically do to a forced behavior trait isn’t really that far fetched. I am one of them, of course that has contemplated some super race or gods building the great megaliths, but it was mere humans. I suspect if one showed up with our ancient abilities that he could easily be construed as a god. Who were we really before our physical natures declined because of some domestication process. I’m open to being wrong as usual, just ideas that have some strong scientific examples to back them up.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. You Stated — “the quest for a firmer reality”

    My Response — At best you will have to settle for “a nonsensical reality”

    We are individually hardheaded and lacking in compassion for one another, while at the same time thinking we have a better understanding than the person standing next to us.

    You Stated — “we now get what we were bred to be—prisoners”

    My Response — If anything, our breeding was for minimum wages, fast food, cell phone hypnosis and watching TV. The only thing mankind is a prisoner of is the couch and dead-end jobs. So little time is spent in the belief of anything that I’m not really sure it can be claimed.

    Just a thought

    Liked by 2 people

    1. While much of what you wrote may be true, the premise of Jim’s post is that we have a tendency to value our personal beliefs over reality; so arguing that people use technology to escape reality constitutes a red herring for the purposes of this discussion.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. You Stated — “the premise of Jim’s post is that we have a tendency to value our personal beliefs over reality; so arguing that people use technology to escape reality constitutes a red herring for the purposes of this discussion.”

        My Response — I understand your perspective on my comment but I don’t believe you understand my comment itself.

        I was challenging his premise at its core by saying that “our personal beliefs” (in religion) have no real value because society doesn’t follow religious doctrine they only follow community through religious practice and bias.

        I was actually agreeing with Jim but stating that “our personal beliefs” are rooted in technology… which we heavily value and spend most of our time pursuing.

        Liked by 1 person

          1. You Asked — “Could you rephrase what you mean by “our personal beliefs are rooted in technology”?”

            My Answer — Sure

            Rephrase — We believe convenience is the most important thing on earth and we use technology to make it happen no matter what the cost to our health or the environment. We don’t value anything on earth over convenience and self-satisfaction.

            Liked by 3 people

            1. Ok. Thanks for the clarification.

              However, I think that you are conflating beliefs (assumptions we hold to be true) with values (things we hold to be important). The two may be interrelated, but they’re not the same thing.

              And I hold a more optimistic opinion of humanity. There’s no denying that we gravitate towards convenience, comfort and self-satisfaction, but saying it’s to the complete exclusion of all other values — like personal autonomy, sense of purpose, loyalty, honesty, respect, recognition, fair play, companionship, order, consistency, etc. — seems a bit of a stretch.

              Liked by 1 person

            2. You Stated — “..you are conflating beliefs (assumptions we hold to be true) with values (things we hold to be important)”

              Because I Said — “We believe convenience is the most important thing on earth and we use technology to make it happen no matter what the cost to our health or the environment.”

              My Response — Interesting way of interpreting what I said but not true in this case.

              Example — A man cheating on his wife with her sister (common) does not value the sister, wife or the act of cheating, he simply believes he will get away with…. I mean come on shes right there (no effort needed) Oo

              Example — People using carbon credits while polluting the environment believe they have a right to pollute because they pay for trees to be planted. They don’t value the earth they simply have a belief.

              Example — A person eating countless hamburgers on the couch while watching TV for hours doesn’t think that food is important lol they just don’t believe it’s as bad as people say and it’s so fast and easy to get (no work required)

              They believe religion should be in school but they don’t read bible (because it doesn’t have any value to them) They simply believe someone else should work to promote their belief (not them, to hard).

              You Stated — “I hold a more optimistic opinion of humanity.”

              My Response — I love humanity, they made wine and pizza but the good that we do has nothing to do with our character flaws. We are dedicated to convenience and we will cut down every tree on earth to get it.

              If you don’t believe me then look at Paris, where they now have public urinals for men to piss in front of children so the men don’t have to walk to far Oo.

              https://realitydecoded.blog/2018/08/29/paris-installs-exposed-urinals-in-tourist-locations-for-men/

              Like

            3. I sense you’re equivocating because saying “I believe Jesus rose from the dead” is not the same thing as saying “I believe (i.e. think) I’ll take a nap after lunch” or “I believe in (i.e. value) taking long, hot showers”. 🙂

              So let’s review youre examples by reducing them to their essential elements.

              In the first case, the man values the thrill of having an illicit sexual encounter with his wife’s sister over fulfilling his vows of fidelity to his wife and assumes (believes) he can get away with it. So there is no conflict here unless he insists he values fidelity, in which case his true values don’t align with his stated values.

              In the second case, the person assumes (believes) that good behavior compensates for bad, and (presumably) values maintianing states of equilibrium. Whether or not that person values the environment is irrelevant.

              In the third case, the person simply values the convenience and taste of junk food over long-term health and willfully disregards the health warnings based on the assumption (belief) s/he’ll escape the dire consequences of following an unhealthy diet.

              In your fourth case, the person probably both believes in and values the perceived benefits of religious instruction but lacks the competence to do it and assigns it to a third party.

              And I fail to see the problem in your last example. We routinely eat, drink, play, laugh, cry, dance and sing in front of others every day, so why are these particular bodily functions considered taboo?

              Like

            4. You Stated — “I sense you’re equivocating…”

              e·quiv·o·cate
              verb
              use ambiguous language so as to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself.

              Because of examples I gave to support my opinion. I find that to be an interesting response so let’s recap to see where, “as you put it”, I am being ambiguous to conceal the truth or not commit.

              Jim made a comment that I disagreed with when he said the following:

              Jim Stated — “The difference between the theory of evolution and the theory of god…”, “…the general population has resolved to belief over substance, faith over fact, essentially giving-up on the quest for a firmer reality…”

              My Response To Jim was — “At best you will have to settle for “a nonsensical reality” So little time is spent in the belief of anything that I’m not really sure it can be claimed.”

              So this is where my statement seperates an asumption from a reality and explains why I don’t agree with Jim.

              Let’s, as you say, “reduce them to their essential elements”.

              belief over substance
              faith over fact

              Belief in what? Faith in what? Jim’s comment would have us believe it’s faith in God or belief in religion that is at odds with substance and fact. Again, what fact and what substance?

              In this context fact would be our observable reality because Jim started the conversation with this statement — “a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence”

              Also in context “substance” would be the natual man that he refrenced. A free thinking entity that progressed through history unshackled by any thoughts of higher beings or a culture trained to acquiesce to religious dogma.

              But my challenge to Jim is that his premise is wrong because the belief and faith he refrences are clearly, “By my observation”, in technology.

              People spend most of their time in technology not religious dogma. When they need help or solutions they first seek technology or modern science to solve it, not God. Even spare time is dominated by TV not church or bible. I see no evidence that the belief Jim’s refers to is anything other than technology.

              You yourself stated — “the premise of Jim’s post is that we have a tendency to value our personal beliefs over reality”

              Personal Belief = Technology can solve all our problems and bring us happiness no matter had bad our habits or policies.

              Reality = We are destroying the world.

              The examples I gave were to show how people confuse assertions (What They Say They Believe) with reality (What We See They Believe Via Observation).

              As for the examples I gave let’s just recap the first one to understand my perspective better.

              Assertion — Marriage is #1
              Observation — Orgasim is #1
              Reality — Wife and family come second

              To equate my examples to Jim’s comment it would be like a preacher saying how much he loves people and God every sunday but then locking the doors to keep the furniture safe while people drown in a flood. (That happened by the way)

              You Stated — “And I fail to see the problem in your last example.”, “so why are these particular bodily functions considered taboo?”

              Because — I shared a link to my post about men in Paris installing open urinals where children walk around out of convience to men.

              My Response — I don’t have kids, I was just echoing the response of mothers taliking about how they don’t want young children watching men piss in public, while stepping in and smelling urine as it runs down the side walk. (Which could be seen in the photos).

              My Response — I don’t see any attempt on my part to conceal the truth and I’m commited to having a full discussion with anyone who wants it.

              Like

            5. What I mean by equivocating is this: you’ve gone off on a tangent and committed a logical fallacy because the context of Jim’s post was outlined within the opening sentences of the very first paragraph. That is:

              The difference between the theory of evolution and the theory of god, the formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.

              To reiterate: saying “I believe in God” (an expression of confidence in the existence of a supernatural entity for which there is no empirical evidence) is poles apart from saying “I accept the theory of evolution (for which there is a vast body of evidence) and completely unrelated to saying “I believe convenience is the most important thing on earth” (an expression of a personal opinion or preference).

              And the reason we place grater confidence in technology than religion is because technology is more reliable than religion. Nonetheless, many people instinctively reach for their God blankie when the chips are down and they find themselves facing life-or-death situations or problems for which there is no viable technological solution at hand.

              Liked by 1 person

            6. Let’s Review

              Jim’s definition of Theory = A comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.

              My Thoughts — I have no disagreement here

              Jim’s thoughts on “induced artificial evolution” = “breeding for belief through temperament (and because of belief) has had the same effect on humans.”

              My Thoughts — Interesting and most likely true, but in what?

              What Jim believes is the outcome = “the general population has resolved to belief over substance, faith over fact, essentially giving-up on the quest for a firmer reality”

              What you are missing is my opinion of this statement. To put it plainly… I am saying that “YES” we have a possible case of “induced artificial evolution” but not because of the weaker force of “Religion”, but rather of the stronger force “Technology”

              I am saying he is right but that the belief is in technology. I’m not the only person thinking this. You may have seen the new TV show “american gods” where they go over this in more detail.

              Jim stated, “The natural man… through domestication built on one trait, we have become subjects to ourselves.” He thinks this is because of religion and that is where I doubled down stating that we have been domesticated through convenience over time with a yearly need to have even more convenience.

              This is what the entire movie Wall-E was all about. The destruction of earth in the pursuit of convenience while embedding ourselves into technology because we believe it can solve all our problems.

              You Stated — “And the reason we place grater confidence in technology than religion is because technology is more reliable than religion.”

              My Response — To compare the two is a waste of time and at best nonsensical. They have no connecting value. But to be clear technology is more powerful than it is reliable.

              an ocean full of mercury
              homes full of radiation
              air full of pollutants

              To reference another american movie “Serenity” where the religious faction was science. They created a world without sin that nearly destroyed mankind. All because they thougt technology could fix man.

              I talk to a lot of Theist and Atheist and what I find the most troubling from the two camps is their disconnection with the impact of technology over their enthrallment with religion.

              Both sides should stop now and just take a moment to listen to Elon Musk and Sam Harris talk about the scarier monster in the room… AI combined with robotics.

              Like

            7. Excuse me but, the technology came AFTER the 1000+ years of forced conversions. But in a way the advent of steel and gunpowder created a wide berth for religion to do its thing, but long before modern conveniences

              Liked by 1 person

            8. You Stated — “Excuse me but, the technology came AFTER the 1000+ years of forced conversions. ”

              My Response — Of course I’m talking about where we are now in relation to the unnatural mental evolution you referred to.

              If we were to go way back I could argue that there was a time of pure religious belief but it fell quickly to the rise of science. To the demise of any country that didn’t keep up.

              We are in a world of Science and Technology. The same way we seek it for all the answers it can then also be blamed for all the woes.

              Liked by 1 person

  5. You Stated — “the general population has resolved to belief over substance”

    My Response — Isn’t the opposite true? The general population has resolved to substance over belief. Science and technology are the dominating past times of the human race. More people play video games than go to church. More people spend time watching TV than praying. There is no evidence that religion can even remotely compete with entertainment (Sports, TV, Music, Games, ect).

    From my review of history on modern culture, mankind spends most of its time working and playing.

    Where this gets strange: They do however feel the need to fight and kill over what they believe, regardless of the fact that they are not well-read on the topic they subscribe to.

    Religion is more of an excuse than it is a reality of a belief.

    Just a thought

    Liked by 2 people

      1. But it has always been like this. In his essay on atheism, Percy Shelley in 1825(I think) wrote the god hypothesis is in need of proof. Proof has not been provided so the leap can’t be made

        Liked by 1 person

    1. Having your natural strengths forced out of you by others belief and persuasions, for a thousand years at the tip of a sword. From the time we are very little we are to conform, badgered until we’re good little boys and girls. We even put our mystical talents on the back burner, hiding them from our peers until we’ve forgotten how to use those sinful witcheries that are now considered primitive nonsense, but worked just fine for millennia until religion reared its ugliness. Is that enough, or must I rant on? Hehe

      Liked by 2 people

      1. yes. i would call that more like cultural indoctrination. selection would be more like “you can’t have children if you’re not a Christian”. or… whatever religion you happen to be born in.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. That’s not really what the evidence says. Like the Russian fox experiment, they discarded all the non compliant animals (made coats out of them, and similar to forced conversions or death) and bred solely on temperament and literally changed the physical nature of the animal—even the way it speaks.

          Liked by 1 person

            1. The more educated are having less children… I think that is a valid point though you will also find that the more educated are having less religion (!) but underlying that is a question, more of economics than higher understanding. It will be interesting to see what happens as the relatively “better off” middle class disappears and the world splits between the ultra rich and the hopeless poor who will find themselves relying on children in lieu of pensions and other disappeared social benefits for basic survival. Will religion reassert itself again, using its very simplistic gospel of eternal salvation in heaven by and by for obedience, or eternity in hell for disobedience? Very likely: where else will the marginalized find hope if they have no future in this life?

              There is little doubt in my mind that the prosperity gospel is on its way out: it’s hard to maintain the lie that God wants you to be rich when the opposite is happening all around but that particular heresy constitutes only a small aspect of organized, official religion.

              (Sorry, went off the topic a bit but it formed a complete thought in my mind. Also, I reiterate that I don’t see traditional, official religion as the big bugaboo threatening to destroy mankind and this world as some do. I try to keep an open mind, and giving credit where due, it was my Catholic and Mennonite teachings – not examples! – supported by subsequent inspiration from other, non-Earth “Teachers” that gave me the idea to practice life from the perspective of compassion. I did NOT get that from secular teachings or examples either. There are a couple of other forces that are equally, if not more so, responsible for man’s enslavement to destructive patterns. The insidious and growing power of the security State and the rapacious, predatory, capitalistic financial system.)

              When I discuss the really big problems innate to this world, collective evil necessarily must be addressed and sourced. To attack one aspect of an evil trinity of forces destroying this world and letting two go scot-free is terribly counter-productive. If you have three children who continually misbehave and disobey and you always punish the same one, leaving the other two to carry on with their anti-social behaviours, is not going to get you the results you may be hoping for. Just sayin’!

              Liked by 5 people

            2. i don’t thing religion will ever be in the place of authority as it once was. that’s because there is an undeniable wave of awakening happening. people are more aware of themselves (look at all the self-help books) of the natural world (first time in history we actually protect species by law) and yes, you said it, the whole corrupt system. the more we look to ourselves for answers, the more we realize our power. on many different levels, not only material.
              but i agree with you, religion by itself is not our biggest issue. a person can be indoctrinated into any sort of detrimental ‘belief’; whether racist, sexist, social or moral.

              it is ignorance in general, and the lack of true understanding of what we are and where we come from that creates all our problems. and that begins with self-introspection and knowledge, not ‘institutional leadership’ bs. yes, compassion for all living things.
              have an awesome day!

              Liked by 3 people

            3. As we see with feral children, it can be undone rather quickly. Seeing at night, enhanced sense of smell and surviving quite well in the wild, even growing body hair until they are captured, institutionalized and baptized to save their sorry souls.

              Liked by 1 person

            4. personally, i find blindly trusting science as dangerous as blindly believing in some god. and just another religion. after all, it changes all the time. what ‘truth’ does it give you?

              Liked by 3 people

            5. Voltaire was right about that. Anyone that can get you to believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
              You about ready for summer Mak?

              Liked by 2 people

            6. No, it actually doesn’t. Well, not all of us, anyway. For those it does not make crazy we can live pretty much anywhere in the world, and survive despite the weather. But that is a whole nother discussion.

              Liked by 3 people

            7. It does drive them nuts. It’d also dark when I drive to work and dark when I get home. Ever hear of SAD? Seasonal Affect Disorder is a form of clinical depression. I know people that have moved because of it.

              Liked by 1 person

            8. That’s, like, sad, Jim. Rawgod is right, it’s attitude, not weather. People are becoming increasingly wimpy. They should really stop watching TV and unsub from the weather channel. I’m heading out now, into the dark and I’ll be driving back in the dark but in-between, according to the brilliant stars above, it’s going to be a wonderfully sunny day, so what’s not to like?

              Liked by 2 people

            9. No sunlight. Short days. It’s probably a white American depression thing for the privileged. Like anorexia, it’s mostly upper middle class white girls. Sorry, feeling sick and grouchy today. Haha 🤮

              Liked by 1 person

        2. You Stated — “I would call that more like cultural indoctrination. selection would be more like “you can’t have children if you’re not a Christian”

          My Response — I would disagree, Jim has a valid point. His use of “artificial selection” fits within societal pressure to program young minds. We know from Neuroplasticity that minds can be changed through repetitive actions and teachings. In this way, you can weed out people from procreation simply by making them minorities within society (isolation and lack of willing mates). Making the next generation even easier to program and maintain.

          Liked by 2 people

  6. Yes, the definition of the word “theory” in science is very different from the colloquial usage. The scientific method can be summarized thusly:

    1) A hypothesis is proposed to trigger scientific research into poorly understood phenomena.
    2) Evidence is collected and analyzed, and a working hypothesis emerges if the idea has merit.
    3) The working hypothesis is exhaustively tested and is distributed for peer review if warranted.
    4) If verified by peer review, the working hypothesis is accepted as an established scientific theory.

    Notice that the assertion of truth does not occur until this process is completed. It’s the opposite of theism which asserts some truth at the very beginning and then attempts to find evidence in support through the practices of religion. Therefore, belief in god(s) does not qualify as a “theory” in any sense of the word because it presumes knowledge before the fact.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. You Stated — “Notice that the assertion of truth does not occur until this process is completed”

      My Response — Unless you are in school then 1 through 4 are indeed asserted as truth in the beginning.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. Not incorrect, the books provided for class in school are presumed to be correct by the student attending — thus — 1 through 4 do not apply to that student. They take the class, learn the material and move on to the next class.

          Maybe if we had a better education system you would have a better argument.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. What the hell are you talking about? Public school science books are approved by state education boards which adhere to the above described peer review process (except occasionally in conservative states where religious fundamentalism is politically relevant). Scientific content must be presented accordingly as hypotheses, working hypotheses, or as accepted theory. Students play no role in this process, and rightly so.

            Yes, we should have a better education system; and, apparently, you have learned little from the one we do have.

            Like

            1. You have to love it when people tell you that you’re wrong while at the same time adding exceptions.

              Science once taught that blacks were primitive humans in school (but now it doesn’t)

              Science once taught that being gay was a mental disease in school (but now it doesn’t)

              You are wrong and I can prove it all day long with endless examples.

              But I like your direct insult about my education at the end lol. I learned to forgive those who insult me (but not in school Oo)

              Liked by 2 people

            2. Your argument is typical of authoritarians, anarchists, and uneducated people. Exceptions disprove general truths, nothing can be objectively known, and only subjective opinions matter. You have also exposed your personal agenda as anti-science and that you’ll simply dismiss contradictory evidence and facts. So be it. Not that it would matter to you, but here are some highly respected quotes on the dangers of such thinking:

              “Authoritarianism begins when we can no longer tell the difference between the true and the appealing. At the same time, the cynic who decides that there is no truth at all is the citizen who welcomes the tyrant.” – Historian Timothy Snyder

              “The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction ( i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false ( i.e ., the standards of thought) no longer exist.” – philosopher and political theorist Hannah Arendt

              “Monsters exist, but they are too few in number to be truly dangerous. More dangerous are the common men, the functionaries ready to believe and to act without asking questions.” – Auschwitz survivor Primo Levi

              Liked by 1 person

            3. You Stated — “Public school science books are approved by state education boards which adhere to the above described peer review process”

              I Disagreed which led to this comment by me — “Science once taught that blacks were primitive humans in school (but now it doesn’t)”,”Science once taught that being gay was a mental disease in school (but now it doesn’t)”

              Your Response — “Your argument is typical of authoritarians, anarchists, and uneducated people.”

              Your Previous Responses — “Go back to school…”,”..we should have a better education system; and, apparently, you have learned little from the one we do have.”

              My Response — People with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) are characterized by the personality traits of persistent grandiosity, an excessive need for admiration, and a personal disdain and lack of empathy for other people. (They want to be right and liked)

              Narcissist often resort to verbal abuse as a tactic to intimidate others when they don’t have a good argument that can defend itself.

              Just Saying

              Your argument, Robert, is not convincing and school books are still often wrong, misleading, lacking and absent of the scientific process.

              You Stated — “You have also exposed your personal agenda as anti-science and that you’ll simply dismiss contradictory evidence and facts.”

              My Response — I dismiss bad arguments but there is no need to dismiss science and if someone did it would be nonsensical since every facet of society is dependent on scientific discovery.

              As for having an “Agenda” that to is irrelevant since what I believe has no effect on what is true or false. You are either correct or you are wrong (on your own).

              As for me I’m a computer engineer, I study quantum mechanics in my spare time and I’m also becoming a programmer. I wonder what my perceived agenda is now Oo

              You want to be right but I want to be convinced and since you like quotes try this one:

              “Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.”Marcus Aurelius”

              Like

            4. Well, I was a highly successful computer programmer/consultant and independent contractor for decades before retiring. You have a lot to learn.

              Marcus Aurelius, a Roman Emperor? Good grief! That supports my point about authoritarianism.

              I’ll waste no more time with you.

              Like

            5. You Stated — “You have a lot to learn.”,”I’ll waste no more time with you.”

              My Response — Let’s test that theory and see how honest it is. I’ll provide the last word.

              In the future, if you decide to waste more time on me, try to keep it on topic and off of me personally since it doesn’t prove the truth you are trying to convince me of.

              Also try not to degrade others by inferring they are uneducated simply because they don’t agree with you, (It’s just good manners). Leave a tiny bit of space for the possibility you may be wrong.

              Liked by 1 person

            6. I’ve learned a lot, lot, more from life in the real world than I did within the education system. I’ve always thought that “education” should be named “teaching” and should, at most, take about 4 years of any child’s life. Teach reading, writing and basic arithmetic. Then leave it to the individual to choose to continue, or return to living. Most of the rest taught in public ed is blatant brainwashing as it is forced upon pupils. I am still shocked at how much of the history I was taught in grade school was nothing more than fake news, most of it to do with war or economic superiority, written by the current winners. The education system is coming apart at the seams today because it is as trustworthy as the politics that maintain it. My opinion, of course, based on my observations.

              Liked by 2 people

      1. @Lander7

        I get your point that often students are just memorizing facts out of a textbook rather than getting robust opportunities to critically think about scientific discoveries and engage deeply in the process (which is what I am pretty sure your point was, but correct me if I am misunderstanding), but I am not really sure what this has to do with what Robert originally wrote.

        He was just talking about the scientific method and the definition of theory in terms of science. I am not really sure how pointing out students don’t get the opportunity to engage the full scientific method challenged the point of what the method is, how it works, and how it produces theories.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. You Stated — “I get your point that often students are just memorizing facts out of a textbook rather than getting robust opportunities to critically think about scientific discoveries and engage deeply in the process (which is what I am pretty sure your point was…”

          My Response — Part of it was, correct.

          You Stated — “but correct me if I am misunderstanding… but I am not really sure what this has to do with what Robert originally wrote. He was just talking about the scientific method”

          My Response — He had a two part post where he talked about two distinct subject matters.

          The first being the scientific method and how truth does not occur until this process is completed (which is incorrect) I proved this with what I posted, where text books were deployed to schools describing blacks as sub human and LGB as mentally diseased individuals. They went through the so called “scientific method”, a method made by humans steeped in bias concluding truths that do indeed attempt to find evidence to support preconceived prejudice and bias. With that said, the scientific method is still the best tool we have to date for understanding the world we live in.

          The second being this statement he made, ”

          He Stated — “It’s the opposite of theism which asserts some truth at the very beginning and then attempts to find evidence in support through the practices of religion.”

          My Response To You — I was addressing his flawed logic from top to bottom. He was correct on his statement of religion but the contrast he tried to place on it with the scientific method was nonsensical.

          Like

          1. I don’t disagree there are times science has come to incorrect conclusions in so far as human prejudices interfere with the interpretation of data (this is a problem that far exceeds science), but if we are talking about the method in the abstract it has a self-correcting mechanism over time.

            So if science comes to an incorrect or untenable conclusion on something then over time it will usually be corrected by other scientists following the method.

            Liked by 2 people

            1. You stated — “So if science comes to an incorrect or untenable conclusion on something then over time it will usually be corrected by other scientists following the method. “

              My Response — Not true. Science isn’t driven by perfection it’s driven by money. Research seeks solutions that produce profits not research for the sake of good science and meaningful solutions.

              The science that produced books about blacks being subhuman used the scientific method repeatedly over a number of years but was only ostracized from the education system when people pushed back based on philosophical grounds. I just recently listened to Sam Harris defending the scientific process describing blacks as being less intelligent. This in the age of Neil Degrassi Tyson Oo

              The current treatments for cancer in the US alone are bordering on cruel and inhuman while better less costly solutions are ignored due to bad scientific practices in the states. And we know the science is bad due to greed but that’s my point, it’s not self correcting, it’s driven by profit.

              Science is man made and driven by our flaws and shortcomings, trying to put science on a pedestal will only result in its inevitable abuse os society the same way religion, royalty and politics have done.

              Liked by 1 person

        1. Oh exactly. I was thinking that is really the way of Christianity too. Get in because it offers a neat prize at the end. You’re all bastard stepchildren adopted in. See, god o my has one son—and if it weren’t for him being the nice guy there’d be no hope for you dirty little boys and girls. Haha.

          Like

          1. But isn’t the opposite true?

            The example I gave, “Some people adopt for government cash allowances”

            But your response — “I was thinking that is really the way of Christianity too. Get in because it offers a neat prize at the end.”

            Nuance: They adopt to get the prize for themselves but in Christianity the person who was adopted get’s the “Prize” 😉

            Like

  7. I don’t know. (oops, did I just say that?)
    Even the new agers seem to want there to be something kind-a, sort-of a god-like entity. The total shutdown of intellectual curiosity and complete surrender to the factual existence of a deity for which so many become tightly wrapped in, and armored by, a religion is interesting and seems to support your premise.
    I still feel shocked when I watch a discussion between a believer and an atheist and the believer (indeed, a ‘true’ one) is totally flummoxed by how an otherwise normal person could conclude there is no god, especially theirs. It’s so obviously true to them.
    Yet, I admit that I am equally baffled by those believers. Brain washing (or artificial selection) at its best.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. In all of these discussions on belief or faith, God or no God, what I conclude is that it’s not believing in God, or a god, or some gods (or Powers as I know them to be) that is a problem but the assumption, despite all evidence to the contrary, that “God” is good. If I accept that man was made in God’s image, which to me is as accurate as thinking that man was once a frog or toad or other creepy crawly, then I can know God’s character by observing man. If believers emulated a good God, this world would be a very different place. God or no God would make no difference if people who believe in such lived compassionate, kind, generous and humble lives. Sadly, the only conclusion these people allow me to make is that their God is evil to the core.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. No matter what they do, those believers BELIEVE they are good. Therefore it stands to their reason their god is also good. They are not able to believe anything else.
        But that’s no sweat off my nose. I know there is no god, or devil, or superbeing of any kind. Their belief affects my cosmos not at all. There is no bad or good. There is only life…

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Well then, rawgod, enjoy the cleanness, simplicity and beauty of your life. Mine is peopled with all the “good” and “evil” entities man’s thoughts and books are filled with, including the spirits of the dead. I can’t deny their place in the greater scheme of things, nor would I want to. If they disappeared from my world suddenly, it’d be, for me, like walking downtown a metropolis and suddenly realize no one else lives there – it’s completely empty and my footsteps will be the only ones ever heard there until I too, pass on.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Not sure, S’T, that I understood a thing you just said in relaton to the comments that came before. So therefore I must think that I did not understand what you said in your first comment. I am not about to defend my statement, I said what I believe. If you want to think my life is simple, clean, and “beautiful, ” how am I to respond? Good and evil come not from gods, but from what people want to believe their gods should be…
            Except, there are no gods…

            Liked by 2 people

            1. I was being a bit flighty, sorry. But in my imagination I couldn’t help comparing what it would be like to travel in your described (non-earth) world versus mine. Your etheric world seems devoid of life complexities. Just Life (what I call Spirit). Mine is, “as below, so above.” The nightmare of Earth is but a micro of the universal experience. We are neither alone, nor exceptional (in good or evil). You have to take the red pill to see which reality is real. In your case, you don’t need it – all taken care of and you can have that “peace that surpasses all understanding.” I’ve a long, long way to go to achieve that, friend and in my chosen purpose, no short-cuts allowed.

              Liked by 1 person

            2. Life can be as complex or as simple as we make it. But complex and simple are relative words. They mean different things to different people, but also different things to the same person depending on the state of their lives. We each go our own way. Hopefully we still arrive at a similar place. It is possible.

              Liked by 2 people

            3. I’m curious about this, I hear it so often, “hopefully we arrive in a similar place.” Ok, why? Why should we, or must we, arrive in a similar place? That is one statement that has baffled me. Sure, as a Christian there was the belief that as believers we would all end up in heaven. But even there, Jesus said, “In my Father’s house are many mansions…” I have some serious plans regarding my future and I do not expect to meet anyone there from this life. It’s possible, of course, but observation tells me the chances are about nil. Besides, no one in their current right mind would want to end up where I am going, or have to do what I am going to do. Still, that doesn’t answer the question: why should we want to arrive at a similar place? The cosmos is a very big place. Infinity presents infinite possibilities. Unlike the religious heaven, eternity for the self empowered and seekers is not a static place. Can you shed some light on my curiosity, rg?

              Liked by 2 people

            4. Place, in this instance, is not geographical, but a level of consciousness. Consciousness is an awareness of life, of life’s possibilities, and responsibilities. We (meaning living beings) do not have to live on the same world, or even in the same universe. But as our spirits learn about life, as far as I can tell, we move away from the individual and towards awareness of the connections between all living things. And we are all connected because at some level yet to be realized we are all one, we are all life. Life is.
              But that cannot be here, not on the world we know as Earth, or the dimension we call the third dimension. Here we believe the illusion that we are separate entities, each with our own goals, each with our own ways to accomplish them.
              The goal of life, in my understanding, is first to find the connections that have been lost, and then to close the gaps and become one living being. This is visible to any who want to see it, or are willing to let themselves see it.
              So “similar place” means spiritual level, or something like that. Our individual experiences and understandings are all unique to each of us, yet at some point we become significant to each other.
              I feel like I am starting to talk in circles, because there are only so many ways I can try to express my consciousness in English. Consciousness is far beyond English. Yet it is all I have right now. But I try… And I will continue to try until the end of this incarnation. To do less would not be me…

              Liked by 1 person

            5. The funny thing is this interconnectedness is unstoppable. The universe is a happening of multitudal experiences and you are one with it whether one realizes it or not. Those that sit on the sidelines are every bit as involved in this happening as those that are trying to change it with their false sense of ego, each one a nerve ending perceiving it’s realm of observation, just like a nerve ending of a skin cell perceives touch, or heat or anything else.

              Liked by 2 people

            6. What is going on in that head of yours, Jim? I cannot imagine the person you were two years ago saying such a thing, or was I misreading you all this time. Wonderful comment. Beautiful understanding. Very insightful. I love you, man.

              Liked by 2 people

            7. I am still an atheist as there is, but that does not define me or invalidate the evidence. The religious, the politicians, and the mommy’s and daddy’s try to convince us we’re not it, but mere lonely individuals plowing our way to a meaning-filled life, but the evidence, even philosophically point to us as it. We are all of it. It should be obvious but it’s not, and that makes it interesting.
              Imagining for a moment that this life is in between death (our most natural existence) and we have at our disposal for myriads of millions of eons, all the information in the universe. All skill, all knowledge at our disposal. We’ve had enough time to visit every grain of sand on every planet in the universe. What could an entity such as me do to relieve the eventual boredom of such an existence? Enter into a realm of not knowing. I am sure all the anxieties that preclude the wonder of death, when we burst through to our natural existence and break on through to the other side, bam! What a rush! The game would get us every time.
              I cannot not be. That is the laws of energy. There is only one thing left to do when this life is over…get in line again.
              It also solves the problem of evil, while entities would race to jump into the any situation this life might present, just for the thrill of not knowing, and the laughter of ending that tension every time we die. I love you too sir. It’s been quite a ride.

              Liked by 1 person

            8. Your concept is so much more detailed than mine about life and death . I’m just focused on pizza and wine at the moment but then again maybe being overly focused on the now is better.

              Not sure… only time will tell

              Like

            9. I think I understand, to a point, where you wish to “end up” in the greater (greatest?) scheme of things. I’ve come across this belief, or desire on the part of some entities, to arrive at this “Nirvana” or oneness, many times in my New Age wanderings. I can tell you, rg, that such a goal is the furthest thing from my own mind. I mean, what would be the point? Life chose to express in duality (or however many dimensions we may come to know) because as “just life” it was pointless and untenable. Life needs a point; needs to interact, needs friction. Thus the explosion when it all began, when “Life” decided to put something in motion it could never gain control over, only observe the results. We became the bits and pieces in the grand experiment, one I hope will never end.
              I am a living quest. I desire to encounter and interact with whatever is different, to observe it, study it, judge it, assimilate it for a time, or reject it, or challenge it to improve itself or improve myself in relation to it. Ultimate oneness, IMO, is ultimate entropy. Nothing happens; there isn’t even a there, there. All there can be is isness. I can’t even meet another to talk about things for that other is me, and there is nothing to talk about. To me that’s giving up on the kaleidoscope that life presents us with. I’ve always opposed the concept of ultimate oneness and I always will, or at least as long as there are worlds to visit and lives to live and the experiment with individual consciousness maintains itself.

              Liked by 2 people

            10. You forget everything I have ever said to you, S’T. It is impissible to say or even think in English what I would love to be able to comm unicate to you as seen from my spiritual viewpoint.
              There is no nirvana in my philosophy, just as there is no heaven or hell. Dimensions are as abundent as grains of sand. All I can do is point in a direction that we seem to be moving towards, but that is so distant physically and spiritually that no would in this dimension can “grok the fullness” of it.
              You keep trying to put limits on my vision, but there are none. By the time life becomes “one” again, which it surely must, it will not look like anything we can imagine were we to lives for billions of years. We do live for billions of years, we already have. What microbe or single-celled being existing for milliseconds in the primal soup of life could have imagined the complexities of life as we know it today. There is no way. And in the next however many billions of years how much more complex will life become? All I can see is a path heading in a general direction, if we continue along the path we have been on since life took form over 4 billion years ago on earth.
              This is not a vision I can even pretend to understand, let alone share with anyone else short of using a form of mind transference to let someone see directly into my mind without the use of even a thought-language, forget a verbal or written language.
              Ah, S’T, I know you have the ability to see things that most people cannot see, and understand more than most people can understand, I have seen the evidence. But you and I have a language barrier that we cannot seem to overcome. My French is rudimentary, so I cannot even try to use it. Your English is not as ingrained as mine, so we should not be using it. But when it is my only language, I am stymied.

              Liked by 2 people

            11. Actually, I think I understand now. Definitely, your vision, as explained “here” is a lot broader than mine. I’m not ready to even contemplate such an end (though I realize it isn’t an end as such). You’re right, I can’t go there, in your mind and you’d suffocate in mine. We’re on different levels of the construct is how I see it.

              Liked by 3 people

            12. I would certainly have trouble finding my way in anyone else’s mind, but I’m also guessing I could find enough landmarks to make my way to safety. It would be fun to try, though, just for the experience, if not for understanding.

              Liked by 2 people

            13. oneness is a ‘state of being’ that is there whether we experience it or not. you are right about many points, nothing happens in oneness. haha! it does sound like a dreadfully boring place to be in. don’t let that fool you. in our deep sleep, where there is no concept of ‘me’ but only peace and total, blissful rest, we are closest to this state. it’s the most rejuvenating sleep, and absolutely crucial for our health. cells are recharged, mind is balanced, healing happens. where is ‘you’ in deep sleep?

              Liked by 2 people

            14. I wouldn’t know, Monica, but residing permanently in “deep sleep”? Not me. Maybe I’m just not an old enough “soul” to appreciate that sort of rest. I need to know “the rest” first, and I hope that lasts for eternity. I am change, not permanence. I think that if the cosmos was to close on itself and I were the last individual left unabsorbed in the great oneness I would clone my own universe from my own cells and start it all over again.

              Liked by 3 people

            15. I like your page too. Like taking a grinding wheel to an exposed broken bone, I can count on you almost every day to torment me with your prose ⚔️hahaha.

              Liked by 1 person

      2. You Stated — “despite all evidence to the contrary, that “God” is good”

        My Response — Interesting thought but if I make an AI tomorrow and the AI goes off the rails it doesn’t make me a bad person.

        If a mother has a child that commits mass murder does that make the mother a bad person?

        You Stated — “then I can know God’s character by observing man”

        If I observer Bob, then I will know Bob’s character but it doesn’t accurately tell me Bob’s mother’s character.

        As a logical statement, God can be good because – God… All power dictates all logic

        As humans, we can perceive God as either good or bad but it doesn’t have any meaning if we have no power to enforce it.

        Ants can view me as good or bad but it doesn’t mean anything.

        Just a thought

        Liked by 1 person

          1. You Stated — “No, but it would make you incompetent and also liable.”

            My Response — The opposite is true. We recently saw the first AI-driven cars kill someone but the response from the makers was an eye-opener”

            “It’s important to emphasize it will never be perfect,” Musk said of the Autopilot feature on CBS. “Nothing in the real world is perfect. But I do think that long-term it can reduce accidents by a factor of ten. So there are ten fewer fatalities and tragedies and serious injuries, and that’s a really huge difference.”

            Elon Musk stated something no one had thought of, that the car did kill someone but it kills less than humans thus it’s better than what we had in place.

            That’s not incompetence, that’s an improvement.

            Liked by 2 people

            1. Of course he would say that. Who can say in the long run that it’s better to have less car accidents because of an AI has skirted nature and caused even more problems further problems down the road, which is what humans do? Darwin awards are necessary for human stability.

              Liked by 1 person

            2. Hmm… We can favor the saving of lives now but you are a bit disgusted by the loss of lives later.

              I see your point but not a clear way to avoid the reality of our situation. We must strive to reduce the loss of life but there will be a burden on the next generation which is unknown to us.

              We will have to do something new like learn from our mistakes Oo

              Spoiler…. that’s not going to happen (but it could if we wanted to as a collective)

              Liked by 1 person

            3. Sure. Every good thing leads to exponentially more bad. Let’s take vaccinations for instance. When the planet hits 20 billion, a mere hiccup could wipe out more people than had ever lived prior the 20th century. We now measure our success in sheer numbers, but is life better? And by that I mean life itself, propped up with a myriad of crutches and bandaids to boast a high survival rate while we are weak and sickly couch potatoes glued to the set.

              Liked by 2 people

            4. I’ve had that thought. We may be at a crossroad where we move to the next level or go fall back to a dark age.

              OR

              It could be a Wall-E thing. That would be a shame.

              Liked by 1 person

            5. Mankind abandoned earth because it had become a trash dump.

              Corporations created AI- Robots to clean the Earth while humans went into space to survive in “Space Malls”.

              The Robots fixed the earth and then went to find mankind and bring them back to a nice new clean planet.

              They find the human race on a huge space ship, which is carrying all of the humans who evacuated Earth 700 years earlier.

              The humans ride around this space resort on hovering chairs which give them a constant feed of TV and video chatting. They drink all of their meals through a straw out of laziness and/or bone loss, and are all so fat that they can barely move.

              Liked by 1 person

    2. You Stated — “the believer (indeed, a ‘true’ one) is totally flummoxed by how an otherwise normal person could conclude there is no god”

      My Response — Not true, I’m a believer ( a ‘true’ one Oo) and I’m not flummoxed by anything you believe or do not believe.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Then I suggest you watch the Atheist Experience. Callers say it all the time. 🙂 Maybe not true for you. But it is for many. I am glad that you understand why I no longer believe.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. You Stated — “Then I suggest you watch the Atheist Experience”

          My Response — I’ve watched over a hundred of them. One of my fav shows for awhile. It’s a different experience from let’s say “Anthony Magnabosco”.

          But I can understand why you believe what you believe 😉

          Liked by 2 people

            1. You Stated — “Or why I don’t believe what I don’t?”

              My Response — In your case possibly but in Bill’s case no. Bill’s position is a belief not a lack of being convinced. His statement takes a position of concluding that god does not exist.

              He posted — “person could conclude there is no god”.

              I was simply responding to that position.

              Had he said he was not convinced of a god then I would have responded more like your reply.

              Nuance

              Liked by 1 person

    1. Hahaha…No! I’m thinking man once had incredible ability to build and accomplish unbelievable things in our part—greatness. If we had that ability today, we would be a god in this generation.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Human primitivism is an impediment to the health and success of a modern society. There needs to be a collective understanding that we alone are the only motivator for a future with positive outcomes for life on Earth.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. You Stated — “Human primitivism is an impediment to the health and success of a modern society. ”

          prim·i·tiv·ism
          noun
          unsophisticated behavior that is unaffected by objective reasoning.

          Or as I like to call it — That thing I find at any of the sports games, local bars and on social media.

          My Response — The US is a modern society steeped in primitivism. It didn’t stop us from going to the moon, it didn’t stop us from making a microscope using quantum entanglement and it’s not stopping us from making AI.

          We are one of the most successful countries on earth, one of the most diverse and one of the most educated.

          What impediment?

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Lander, there is but a small few driving discovery. The rest are end users. “We” went to the moon on the innovation of a handful who dared to. “We” are steeped in beliefs (in which this type of belief is a fairly modern problem) while there are a few who drive human advances, most just want to find comfort, get laid, and be entertained.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. You Stated — “Lander, there is but a small few driving discovery. The rest are end users.”

              My Response — True

              You stated — “most just want to find comfort, get laid, and be entertained”

              My Response — I would say most just want to not have to think, get laid, and be entertained.

              Liked by 2 people

    1. Faith is just ideas you like and hope they are true. Especially after you’ve taken some time to word it right, then it becomes indisputably real. But real truth would be true to believer or non believer alike.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. You Stated — “But real truth would be true to believer or non believer alike”

        My Response — I’m curious about this statement.

        The slave believes slavery is wrong while the slave owner believes it’s right. Slavery from, my perspective, is wrong and it’s not true to the believer and non-believer alike. Does this invalidate your statement?

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Obviously we live in society and as individuals at the same time. A moral construct must first and foremost hinge on personal autonomy inside a framework designed to protect me from you and viceversa. The reality is there is very few truths at all, and the only “sin” in the universe is for you to impede my person. But, now we live in an age where laws are bandaids meant to regulate problems and overrun nature, while all we do is make things worse, kicking cans down the road.
          A truth is merely an observation that works for the moment. The world changes from day to day and so does truth. When we have issue is when somebody thinks they’ve cornered the market on it, package it and force a falsity, or something that is no longer useful ir true. Christianity is a great example of this. Way past it’s prime, but the founders found the golden goose to manipulate human psychology.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. You Stated — ” A moral construct… designed to protect me from you and viceversa.”

            My Response — A good thought but you can’t truly protect yourself from others, that kind of control is an illusion.

            You Stated — “The reality is there is very few truths”

            My Response — The reality you live is the only truth you have. Collectively we have over 7 billion truths out there.

            The challenge is making your truth someone else’s 😉

            You Stated — “the only “sin” in the universe is for you to impede my person”

            My Response — Power dictates sin. The more power the more possibility of sin or in modern terms “violation of the law”.

            Those in power make laws for those outside of power to follow. Thus an ever increasing possibility of sin (violation)

            Liked by 2 people

    1. You Stated — ” the elites using religion as a tool to coerce the masses”

      My Response — This statement seems overly focused.

      What does the elite not use to coerce the masses?

      In the absence of religion are you saying the elite would no longer have a tool to coerce the masses?

      Is there anything you could do where the masses would not act like sheep to be controlled?

      If the elite are us and we are the masses are we all just suffering from self-deception in which we are simply doing what we like to do anyway?

      What if you found out one day that most people are actually sadist and that’s why the world is really the way it is?

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s