Media Leave "South Park" Creators Out to Dry

[Archangel M]

Why study something that we apparently have no clear conception of?

 

[Archangel M]

That's down to emotions, I think. It makes me feel good. That should be a good enough reason. I have had experiences that I choose to believe have something to do with my personal interaction with my Savior. Real? No way to say. But they work for me and that's pretty much all I need. Now, it's no basis for convincing anyone else that my experiences are real; but I don't try to.

Same thing with the idea of something like "love". Some people seem content to live their lives in a world of chemical reactions, electrical impulses and hormonal influences. I prefer to look at (and live) life in a different way.

 

[Empty Hands]

Why study something that we apparently have no clear conception of?

Because with study of the world around us we can be fairly certain we will find the answers eventually. Not so with God. Unless you count dying, I guess, but that's an experimental protocol I don't plan on signing up for anytime soon.

 

[Empty Hands]

Same thing with the idea of something like "love". Some people seem content to live their lives in a world of chemical reactions, electrical impulses and hormonal influences. I prefer to look at (and live) life in a different way.

So you think people who see love as a biochemical reaction don't feel the emotion?

Emotions are real and powerful. They are meaningful. They are also biochemistry, which we can increasingly map. Some people are born without the ability to love (Reactive Attachment Disorder), so of course it is biological in basis.

That doesn't make it unreal.

Do you really think you love your spouse or kids more because you believe in God?

 

[blindsage]

Could you elaborate? I don't see the similarity, at least with the religions I can think of.

The fundamental belief of many religions is that there is something outside the bounds of the our universe's laws and outside our ability to conceive of. If you can scientifically postulate basically the same thing, it's not much different from what many religions believe.

 

[Big Don]

So yeah...South Park is a pretty funny show IMO. I really like it because they offend EVERYONE. Even their initial disclaimer says "this show should not be watched by anyone". I love it.

opcorn:

How dare you try to reroute the discussion to the original topic?!

 

[Ken Morgan]

Because with study of the world around us we can be fairly certain we will find the answers eventually. Not so with God. Unless you count dying, I guess, but that's an experimental protocol I don't plan on signing up for anytime soon.

Agreed
We've had superstition for tens of thousands of years, we've only had real science for maybe 100? 150? years....
give us, humankind, time and we will unravel most of the secrets of the universe.

 

[Sukerkin]

Aye. After all the whole point of reason and intelligence is to recognise what you don't know and pursue a line of investigation that rectifies that.

But I have to reiterate Don's point above, in that this discussion, whilst very stimulating, is not really targeted closely to the OP. Given that one of the basic rules of the Study is that discourses cleave to the topic (reasonable perambulation being permissible) it might be a good idea to nudge things back on track.

 

[Ken Morgan]

Aye. After all the whole point of reason and intelligence is to recognise what you don't know and pursue a line of investigation that rectifies that.

But I have to reiterate Don's point above, in that this discussion, whilst very stimulating, is not really targeted closely to the OP. Given that one of the basic rules of the Study is that discourses cleave to the topic (reasonable perambulation being permissible) it might be a good idea to nudge things back on track.

K...
South Park is assume!!
Producers have no balls....but i understand why.

 

[Empty Hands]

The fundamental belief of many religions is that there is something outside the bounds of the our universe's laws and outside our ability to conceive of. If you can scientifically postulate basically the same thing, it's not much different from what many religions believe.

No, it seems very different to me. Religion postulates a specific being outside this universe who created this universe, and who intervenes in this universe on a regular basis. Science, at best, says there might be other universes or a multiverse-like medium beyond our universe. Those are radically different propositions.

 

[Empty Hands]

But I have to reiterate Don's point above, in that this discussion, whilst very stimulating, is not really targeted closely to the OP.

The OP was another in a long string of tiresome posts attempting to show how hypocritical the West is for bending over backwards for the nasty Muslims while persecuting the poor, downtrodden Christians. We turned mud into gold here.

 

[Sukerkin]

:lol:

I won't deny that some good discourse has come out of it, EH, I said as much above but, if people wish to take a conversation off at a tangent from the OP, in the Study it is recommened that a new thread on the tangent is started rather than wandering too far from the OP.

Time to do my Sympathetic Cop impression and iterate that I don't make the rules, it's just my job to help see that they are adhered to.

 

[blindsage]

No, it seems very different to me. Religion postulates a specific being outside this universe who created this universe, and who intervenes in this universe on a regular basis. Science, at best, says there might be other universes or a multiverse-like medium beyond our universe. Those are radically different propositions.

A specific being who exists outside of our physical laws and is incomprehensible. That very much fits into the original way you described it. That description implied we don't know and probably can't know, now you are changing it to we have a few good ideas, it seems, because you don't like the connection I made.

 

[Empty Hands]

A specific being who exists outside of our physical laws and is incomprehensible. That very much fits into the original way you described it.

I said nothing about a being. I also don't know what you mean about changing my ideas. I said there may be something "outside" our universe that is literally incomprehensible. An interuniversal medium perhaps. That is nothing like a Creator God.

 

[blindsage]

I said nothing about a being. I also don't know what you mean about changing my ideas. I said there may be something "outside" our universe that is literally incomprehensible. An interuniversal medium perhaps. That is nothing like a Creator God.

If it is literally incomprehensible, then how would you know?

 

[Empty Hands]

If it is literally incomprehensible, then how would you know?

It doesn't seem to me like that follows. If something is incomprehensible, then it must be all things which are incomprehensible? When we get right down to what religions propose, they do not propose "something is incomprehensible out there...we'll call it God" they propose a specific incomprehensible being which created this universe. Also, they propose a being which interferes in the workings of this universe. If that happened, that would be one means by which you might tell the difference between proposed incomprehensibilities.