18 Oct 11
Originally posted by googlefudgeWhen put in terms of giving, you are placing it on a pedestal: as though science is somehow bestowing on us some form of its generosity. The fact that it is a man-derived, man-dependent discipline automatically disqualifies it from the wholly objective truth category.
I wasn't putting it on a pedestal, but what has it being man-made got to do with anything?
18 Oct 11
Originally posted by MelanerpesIt's a lack of faith in God.
This seems to sum up what could be considered "The Problem" (that most people have a very hard time putting into words) that grips the world today.
I believe that both the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street movements reflect this. Despite coming from opposite sides of the political spectrum, both movements seem to be saying that "materialistic consum ...[text shortened]... lly isn't taxing the rich and passing some "jobs bill". Something much deeper is wrong.
18 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyLove was shown when He suffered and then died on the cross for us.
Compulsary love? I suppose it depends on how you quantify love. For example, how was Christ showing love when he used a whip against the money changers? When Christ was asked about loving your neighbor the example he gave was the Good Samaritan. Interestingly, the Good Samaritan SHOULD have been a natural enemy of the man he helped simply due to his race ...[text shortened]... same things they did to deserve it. It would be akin to punishing your child when he needs it.
He gave His life to save ours. That's Love.
18 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by MelanerpesOh, but I am blaming science. Science has undermined traditional value systems, but as it is descriptive rather than being prescriptive, it is incapable of replacing them with anything comparable. The resulting void has been filled with by a materialistic consumerism wherein the reliance on science's technologies is seen as the proper pursuit, and savior, of mankind. Technological determinism, therefore, has become the de facto religion of a secular age.
I don't think Rwingett is blaming science.
Science has achieved wondrous technologies and will continue to do so. But we humans still have to make the decisions about what we do with these technologies. Science can't make those decisions for us.
But The Problem is more than just finding a way to make the economy "grow faster". Even before the cras issues that do need to be addressed, but none of this will really deal with The Problem.
Science does not intend this to happen. No scientists advocate this happening. Indeed, most may even deny that it has, or is, happening. But it is my contention that cultural materialism is the unintended (and probably inevitable) side effect of scientific materialism.
All the assembled acolytes of technology on this forum would no doubt contend that their vast storehouse of accumulated knowledge has made them so much wiser and sagacious than the religious bumpkins, but I'm afraid they're merely flattering themselves. If they were given the option of running things according to their credo, the resulting technocratic nightmare would rival the worst theocracies in the scope and scale of its horrors. Our science may make us "smarter", for what that's worth to anyone, but it does not make for a better society. There have been many tradeoffs over the centuries and I think people have lost a great deal more along the way than they realize.
18 Oct 11
Originally posted by googlefudgeI think this is a major part of what I'm calling The Problem. We've become unable to even discuss any the various big challenges we're facing.
Heh, then you need to read more of Rwingett's posts.
None of the problems we face at the moment are insoluble, the problem is getting the
necessary will behind viable solutions and enacting them.
Perhaps this is reflected in the growing tendency among many on both sides to turn political parties and ideologies into religions?
18 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettThis also seems to be a major part of The Problem. Technological determinism cannot be the savior of mankind -- and people, deep down, know it.
The resulting void has been filled with by a materialistic consumerism wherein the reliance on science's technologies is seen as the proper pursuit, and savior, of mankind. Technological determinism, therefore, has become the de facto religion of a secular age.
As science gives us ever more powerful tools, it gives us ever more power to do great good -- but it also gives us ever more power to do great evil. The 20th century showed the horrors that are possible with 20th century technology -- what might we do with 21st century technology?
18 Oct 11
2 edits
Originally posted by MelanerpesWe can only hope that for once we can learn from the mistakes of history and not repeat them.
This also seems to be a major part of The Problem. Technological determinism cannot be the savior of mankind -- and people, deep down, know it.
As science gives us ever more powerful tools, it gives us ever more power to do great good -- but it also gives us ever more power to do great evil. The 20th century showed the horrors that are possible with 20th century technology -- what might we do with 21st century technology?
18 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by googlefudgeShut the hell up man and get off my back. Nobody likes you.
ummm, what?
What do you believe is wrong with what I stated? That black holes look like nothing? My use of the word spits? That black holes emit quasars?
What are you whatting?
18 Oct 11
Originally posted by tomtom232Nobody likes you.
Shut the hell up man and get off my back. Nobody likes you.
What do you believe is wrong with what I stated? That black holes look like nothing? My use of the word spits? That black holes emit quasars?
What are you whatting?
How did you come to that conclusion?