Warning: Illegal string offset 'html' in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php on line 909

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 114

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 127

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 136

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 137

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/hsn/public_html/forum/cache/skin_cache/cacheid_1/skin_topic.php:909) in /home/hsn/public_html/forum/admin/sources/classes/output/formats/html/htmlOutput.php on line 141
Life, The Universe and Everything - HSN forum - Page 6

Jump to content


Life, The Universe and Everything


126 replies to this topic

#101 maria

    Top of the Class

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 460 posts
  • Location:Western Isles
  • Gender:Female

Posted 25 May 2006 - 11:40 AM

I'm a Catholic, I do believe in God and that he created Earth. I do understand that many strongly believe in the scientific side of things, and fair enough, if thats what you think, but its not really for me!

As has been mentioned before, alot of people think that the 'life after death' thought is a comfort blanket in a sense, yet I do believe in it, I do believe that we go to a better place, maybe its just that ever since I was little I was told thats what happened, all my family and alot of the people I know believe in that, and I still do believe in that.

However, I do see what others are saying, and I understand what they are saying and everything, though its not that I dont believe it, its simply that I dont want to believe it. smile.gif
Whoever said money can't buy happiness simply didn't know where to go shopping.
When you feel like giving up...just remember why you held on for so long.

#102 ermd

    Fully Fledged Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,585 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 25 May 2006 - 11:48 AM

QUOTE(eyecandy @ May 25 2006, 12:24 PM) View Post

1 thing i can say for sure is, the Quran has Never been changed.


Now, if that isn't blind faith! You just admitted "I cant really debate on something that i don't know that much depth on" and then state that! Also, as for "i don't believe things i read on the net", what about your "numerical findings"? Pasted straight in here from a website, no?


QUOTE(eyecandy @ May 25 2006, 12:24 PM) View Post

Im not forcing any to believe it, just something i found interesting and made me think. But, if all that was a 'hoax' then whats not to say the link u sent me is also a 'hoax'?


Well, it provides references to every single occurence of the words in question in the Qu'ran. That's pretty solid evidence to me. blink.gif

#103 Dave

    Ruler (but not owner) of hsn

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,252 posts
  • Location:kilmarnock(ok kilmaurs)
  • Interests:programming, exercising, brass band, using this board
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 11:52 AM

QUOTE(eyecandy @ May 25 2006, 11:21 AM) View Post

[
QUOTE(Dave @ May 24 2006, 10:49 PM) View Post

now now keep the head

There is nothing wrong with what george, steve, myself or anyone who isnt religous has said. However what i find is anyone who does go to church and truelly believes in all this react violently to any questioning of there beliefs. This i cannot understand because surely if you truelly believe than it wont be shaken by us non believers and it must be strong enough for you to ignore opinions of others and not feel you have silence all negative opinions

and watch your language swearing isnt big and it isnt clever



huh.gif ... so does that just count for all the christians then? coz im not violent... and my beliefs are Definitely not being questioned by members off a forum, my faith's a bit stronger than that. wink.gif




of course that applies to christians as much as any other religion the christian extreamism is noted through the protests in india and from the pope over the film the da vinci code

If i am not here i am somewhere else



#104 krazykooki

    Good Effort

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 85 posts
  • Location:Penicuik near Edinburgh

Posted 25 May 2006 - 11:58 AM

id like to make one point and that is that neither science or religion can be conclusively proven

stop talking about scientific fact - there is no such thing

what appears to have been proven could be shown to be wrong in 10, 20 or 100 years time look at mediaeval times scientists thought the world was flat now we say where the fcuk did they get that from

difference between science an religion is that science is based on empirical evidence religion is based on faith

some people need this empirical eveidence to believe something others dont but everyone has a right to believe what they believe without being ridiculed by others who dont even have the decency to respect others beliefs
if you want to give your opinion fine do it but there is no need for the total disrespect and ridicluing of others that has gone on



#105 ermd

    Fully Fledged Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,585 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 25 May 2006 - 12:07 PM

I agree with what you say, to a certain degree. Unless an expirement is performed an infinite number of times, we can never know it will produce the expected results every time. In theory, everything is theory. HOWEVER. When a theory can be backed up with empirical evidence, it holds far greater weight than something which is not!

QUOTE(krazykooki @ May 25 2006, 12:58 PM) View Post

what appears to have been proven could be shown to be wrong in 10, 20 or 100 years time look at mediaeval times scientists thought the world was flat now we say where the fcuk did they get that from

Hahaha. It was the religious leaders who told everyone the world was flat. At this point I really want to LOLOLOL.

QUOTE(krazykooki @ May 25 2006, 12:58 PM) View Post

some people need this empirical eveidence to believe something others dont but everyone has a right to believe what they believe without being ridiculed by others

Actually, they don't. It was one of the points debated over the "religious hatred" bill in the Lords. And the conclusion was that we DO have the right to ridicule someone if they "choose" to believe something. Though once again, I agree partially. It is much better to discuss this in a civil manner.


#106 Dave

    Ruler (but not owner) of hsn

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,252 posts
  • Location:kilmarnock(ok kilmaurs)
  • Interests:programming, exercising, brass band, using this board
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 12:07 PM

i dont really sign up for that idea though. However of course some of the things we know about now could be wrong. However when einstein came along with his special realativity there was talk that all classical physics could be wrong and how bad this would be. However, it turns out using classical realativity and special realitivity for the slower more everyday velocities returns the same answers.

The reason we know science is correct is when we apply theories and facts to new products and inventions and they work. What i am saying is that medi-evil science tended to be wrong because there wasnt the same understanding of the world because people didnt tend to roam about and talk and explore.

If i am not here i am somewhere else



#107 ad absurdum

    Top of the Class

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Cambridge
  • Interests:Muzak.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 12:41 PM

QUOTE(ermdeviation)
In the past all that religion was doing was "making people behave themselves" though. You can't compare religion's actions in our society directly to religion's actions in, say, 13th-century Britain, because the historical and social contexts themselves are so different.

Religion (and its lasting legacy in our legal system) is, in my opinon, a negative aspect of our society. For example, in the field of genetics and cloning, archaic moral standpoints hold back scientists who could be advancing our knowledge and ability to treat disease.
I've debated the effect of religion on soceity a few times with people. I've found that most people think that religion has a negative effect on society, but I really don't. I think that religion has helped to define society and this is obvious as different types of society have developed under the influence of different religions. I'm assuming that you are generally happy with the state of society today over the last 100 years, and I think that it would be unfair to commend religion for helping this society to develop but at the same time criticise it for hindering further progress and creating hostility and conflict.

I believe that religion should not be as wide a societal issue as it is today. Religion should be a moral set of values for people to follow. This would still help people to behave morally and society would still develop in such a way that people realise it is wrong to kill people, but if religion had taken a grip of the person instead of society then I don't think there would be as much conflict in the world today.

QUOTE(ermdeviation)
As we both know, institutionalised religion itself has been an instigator of mass killings and genocide though.


To a certain extent yes. However, I do believe that human nature is the true instigator, if religion did not exist then conflict would still arise from ideological, territorial and political hostility. Hunting and killing is a property intrinsic to human nature and I think that this cannot be denied.

QUOTE(ermdeviation)
Most religious people are brought up in religious families - they are taken to worship, made to follow their religion's set of rules by their family and peers. It is belief from the top.
But people still reject religion. My friend was brought up in a protestant family and he now hates religion. From an opposite viewpoint, I was not brought up in a religious way whatsoever but I chose to believe. I think that you are certainly correct in saying that parents, and perhaps society in general, try to influence people to follow religion, but ultimately a person can choose to reject it.

QUOTE(ermdeviation)
You already told us you were a Catholic...I don't think you can legitimately say that you are "neutral".
Sorry, I didn't make myself very clear, I meant that I was trying to be neutral. As much as I would try to assess the effects of religion on society from a neutral standpoint, you're right, I probably am biased to look for the positive effects it would have.

QUOTE(ermdeviation)
My contempt for institutionalised religion would equally be levied against ANY dogmatic system of belief - nationalism, fascism, imperialism, Soviet state-capitalism (especially the cult of personality built up around the leaders - little different to religion).
Out of interest, do you feel that there is a place for religion in a communistic society?

QUOTE(krazykooki)
id like to make one point and that is that neither science or religion can be conclusively proven

stop talking about scientific fact - there is no such thing

what appears to have been proven could be shown to be wrong in 10, 20 or 100 years time look at mediaeval times scientists thought the world was flat now we say where the fcuk did they get that from
This is what I was trying to get at earlier when I said that its best to think of science as an interpretation. I've never been very good at expressing things though sad.gif
HMFC - Founded 1874, beefing the Cabbage since 1875

#108 eyecandy

    Good Effort

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Location:Glasgow
  • Interests:jus tha usual... singin, dancin, shoppin, chillaxin ;) and spendin my wonderful daddy's wonderful money :D
  • Gender:Female

Posted 25 May 2006 - 01:01 PM

If u guys put this much effort in2 believing im sure ud find all ur answers!

im not saying i have all the answers, but then thats what Faith is. not having all the answers and still having the courage to believe.

Neway, was interesting seein ur views...

But as it says in my Qu'ran, To you your faith and to me mine.

smile.gif take care u lot x


#109 ermd

    Fully Fledged Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,585 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 25 May 2006 - 01:31 PM

QUOTE(ad absurdum @ May 25 2006, 01:41 PM) View Post

I've debated the effect of religion on soceity a few times with people. I've found that most people think that religion has a negative effect on society, but I really don't. I think that religion has helped to define society and this is obvious as different types of society have developed under the influence of different religions. I'm assuming that you are generally happy with the state of society today over the last 100 years, and I think that it would be unfair to commend religion for helping this society to develop but at the same time criticise it for hindering further progress and creating hostility and conflict.

As a Marxist, I would hardly say I was happy with the state of society. In terms of the degree to which institutionalised religion directly influences our society, I see progress. The direct influence of the Church in the UK is much less than it ever has been.

QUOTE(ad absurdum @ May 25 2006, 01:41 PM) View Post

I believe that religion should not be as wide a societal issue as it is today. Religion should be a moral set of values for people to follow. This would still help people to behave morally and society would still develop in such a way that people realise it is wrong to kill people, but if religion had taken a grip of the person instead of society then I don't think there would be as much conflict in the world today.

One person's morals can be very much different from another person's. It is the application of religion as a system of belief from above which has created the "universal morals" which we think of today.

QUOTE(ad absurdum @ May 25 2006, 01:41 PM) View Post

To a certain extent yes. However, I do believe that human nature is the true instigator, if religion did not exist then conflict would still arise from ideological, territorial and political hostility. Hunting and killing is a property intrinsic to human nature and I think that this cannot be denied.

I disagree. "Human nature" does not specify conflict - conflict is caused, as you say, by various conditions within a society - I don't think that necessarily means every society would experience conflict.

QUOTE(ad absurdum @ May 25 2006, 01:41 PM) View Post

Out of interest, do you feel that there is a place for religion in a communistic society?

An individual must have the freedom to think and believe as they wish. So in that sense, yes.

In a practical sense though, I'm not sure. I think that if a socialist revolution were to take place, it would indicate that a majority of a population subscribed to Marxism and logically that they would have rejected metaphysical beliefs in favour of materialist ones.

Religion is most predominant in societies where class antagonisms are at their greatest, and with a successful implementation of Marxist political economy these should (theoretically) disappear - logically leading to a waning of religion.

I've had better and more coherant thoughts on Marxism and religion before...I should've written them down at the time!

#110 ad absurdum

    Top of the Class

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 390 posts
  • Location:Cambridge
  • Interests:Muzak.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 02:49 PM

QUOTE
As a Marxist, I would hardly say I was happy with the state of society. In terms of the degree to which institutionalised religion directly influences our society, I see progress. The direct influence of the Church in the UK is much less than it ever has been.
Right, but wouldn't your discontent with society stem from the repression of the proletariat and the power of the bourgeosie? Persoally I think that christiany imposes a belief that everyone should be loved and the state of a capital based society is due to the influence of human nature rather than religious ideologies.

And yes, I agree that religion is less important in the UK today. This is a good thing in my opinion, but I also think that people need to retain religious values in order to keep a sense of moral decency (and they are already failing in this in my opinion)

QUOTE(ermdeviation)
One person's morals can be very much different from another person's. It is the application of religion as a system of belief from above which has created the "universal morals" which we think of today.
Would you find it preferable if everyone had their own morals? I think that in order for a society (even an anarchistic one) to function some ground rules are needed (formally stated or implied by the collective morality of the society), and I see no reason why these should not be based on the morals instilled in a person by a religious belief, as long as religion does not engulf the society.

QUOTE(ermdeviation)
I disagree. "Human nature" does not specify conflict - conflict is caused, as you say, by various conditions within a society - I don't think that necessarily means every society would experience conflict.
You obviously have more faith in the human race than me tongue.gif

QUOTE(ermdeviation)
An individual must have the freedom to think and believe as they wish. So in that sense, yes.

In a practical sense though, I'm not sure. I think that if a socialist revolution were to take place, it would indicate that a majority of a population subscribed to Marxism and logically that they would have rejected metaphysical beliefs in favour of materialist ones.

Religion is most predominant in societies where class antagonisms are at their greatest, and with a successful implementation of Marxist political economy these should (theoretically) disappear - logically leading to a waning of religion.
Yeah, that makes sense. I don't think that religion (well Christianity at least) imposes a social hierarchy, but for some reason christianity always seems to coexist with right wing philosophies. Perhaps that's why the Spanish were so eager to burn the curches when they had their "revolution".

QUOTE(ermdeviation)
I've had better and more coherant thoughts on Marxism and religion before...I should've written them down at the time!
This is one of the very few decent discussions I've had on the internet, your thoughts are great. If they get any better I've got a feeling I might get pwned sometime soon tongue.gif
HMFC - Founded 1874, beefing the Cabbage since 1875

#111 dehny

    Child Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 727 posts
  • Location:leven
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 03:14 PM

QUOTE(eyecandy @ May 25 2006, 02:01 PM) View Post

If u guys put this much effort in2 believing im sure ud find all ur answers!

im not saying i have all the answers, but then thats what Faith is. not having all the answers and still having the courage to believe.

Neway, was interesting seein ur views...

But as it says in my Qu'ran, To you your faith and to me mine.

smile.gif take care u lot x



believing takes no effort, you simply submit (something the early Muslims often demanded), however find thing the truth takes effort, which is what a lot of people do try to find the truth through effort not submission.

Faith is believing in the absense of proof.

also says in the Qu'ran to enslave non-believers

x wink.gif
My profile

1. Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt,
Wenn es stets zu Schutz und Trutze
Brüderlich zusammenhält,
Von der Maas bis an die Memel,
Von der Etsch bis an den Belt -
Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt.

#112 dfx

    Fully Fledged Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,955 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 04:11 PM

QUOTE(dehny @ May 25 2006, 04:14 PM) View Post

(something the early Muslims often demanded),


Is that so? Enlighten me.

QUOTE(dehny @ May 25 2006, 04:14 PM) View Post

also says in the Qu'ran to enslave non-believers


Really? Have you read that yourself? Have you read it in its historical context? It also may say things like slay all the unbelievers HOWEVER at the time there were religious wars ongoing and naturally if today someone was to come and invade you and try to conquer over your land you would defend it to your best ability.

It really pisses me off when people quote from some brainwashed right wing propaganda.

#113 Vixus

    Top of the Class

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 260 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 04:39 PM

Religion was invented so that those of ye old times could cope with happenings around them. It is basically the 'evolutionary' stage before science, if you know what I mean. All early civilisations had a religion of some sort that helped them explain what we now know to deal with science. Some dealt with it in an advanced manner, such as the Egyptians and Mayans.

Anyway, the beginning(s) of life.
Then, as the Earth cooled down a little, cells were born when this cool new molecule (DNA) fell into a phospholipid membrane. Did you know that life as we know it depends on the fact that phospholipids arrange themselves into a dual-layered membrane? Coincidence! (AH Biologists, scream!)

These first cells probably didn't run on oxygen as they do now. Oxygen is a horrible, volatile substance, so who in their right mind would use it? Unfortunately, the atmosphere's composition changed and cells said: "Uh oh, better use oxygen." Then symbiotic relationships formed between mitochondria and cells. Chloroplasts climbed into another cell, that was the first plant cell.

There were perhaps many reigning species (as humans are now) on the way to us, but they were all wiped out by some disaster or the other, as we soon will be. We're due for an asteroid strike sometime. We're way overdue, on average. Evolution is interesting. Anyone who's studied cell biology should be amazed that all the things that happen to keep us alive happened at random.

Anyway, from what I can see, life is just a system to keep DNA going on and on. The DNA that you have in your bodies... has passed straight down from those first cells. It's just the few mutations along the way that make you look like you do now.

My opinions and ideas I stole. Go read The Science of Discworld by Terry P!

#114 John

    HSN Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,713 posts
  • Location:In a Peripheral Estate in Glasgow
  • Interests:First the boring stuff:<br /><br />2004 Results:<br /><br />Highers:<br /><br />Computing A<br />Craft and Design A<br />Physics A<br />Administration A<br />English A<br />Maths A<br />Modern Studies A<br />French A<br /><br />2005 Results:<br /><br />Advanced Highers:<br />Computing A<br />Physics A<br />Maths A<br />Modern Studies A<br />English A<br /><br />2006 Results:<br /><br />Advanced Highers(All Crashed):<br />Chemistry A<br />Biology A<br />Business Managemnt A<br /><br />Aren't I marvellous?
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 06:03 PM

I have one more thing to say

and it is this:

IF YOU CAN NOT ACCEPT OTHER PEOPLE VIEWS THEN DON'T EXPRESS YOURS AND EXPECT PEOPLE TO FIND WHAT YOU SAY THE ONE AND ONLY WAY THAT THEY ARE. EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN UNIQUE VIEW ON THESE TOPICS AND IF YOU CANT RESPECT THEM, THEN DON'T POST IN THIS THREAD. IF YOU WANT TO POST IN THIS THREAD, DEBATE YOUR VIEWS DONT FORCE YOUR VIEWS ON PEOPLE

YOU ALL KNOW WHO I AM SPEAKING TO

[/u]

#115 dehny

    Child Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 727 posts
  • Location:leven
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 06:49 PM

QUOTE(dfx @ May 25 2006, 05:11 PM) View Post

QUOTE(dehny @ May 25 2006, 04:14 PM) View Post

(something the early Muslims often demanded),


Is that so? Enlighten me.

QUOTE(dehny @ May 25 2006, 04:14 PM) View Post

also says in the Qu'ran to enslave non-believers


Really? Have you read that yourself? Have you read it in its historical context? It also may say things like slay all the unbelievers HOWEVER at the time there were religious wars ongoing and naturally if today someone was to come and invade you and try to conquer over your land you would defend it to your best ability.

It really pisses me off when people quote from some brainwashed right wing propaganda.



go read what happened in the early medieval ages

i made no comment on context, merely on content. Just as Christianity tells us to stone people for wearing two different fibres
My profile

1. Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt,
Wenn es stets zu Schutz und Trutze
Brüderlich zusammenhält,
Von der Maas bis an die Memel,
Von der Etsch bis an den Belt -
Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt.

#116 YIC

    Fully Fledged Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,976 posts
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:My interests
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 06:53 PM

QUOTE(dehny @ May 25 2006, 04:14 PM) View Post

also says in the Qu'ran to enslave non-believers

x wink.gif


man, you can't put something like that in without having any evidence or justification. Let me guess, your next post will be a bunch of Quranic verses, taken out of context. These verses were revealed to suit things that were going on at the time it was revealed such as war, peace treaties, etc.

QUOTE(dehny @ May 25 2006, 07:49 PM) View Post

go read what happened in the early medieval ages



Give a link / source then....don't put across a viewpoint and expect us to find things to back up what you are saying.

#117 dehny

    Child Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 727 posts
  • Location:leven
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 07:25 PM

www.google.co.uk


i dnt really care if you want me to back up i am comfortable in my knowledge,
My profile

1. Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt,
Wenn es stets zu Schutz und Trutze
Brüderlich zusammenhält,
Von der Maas bis an die Memel,
Von der Etsch bis an den Belt -
Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt.

#118 dfx

    Fully Fledged Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,955 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 07:48 PM

Oh aye that oughta give credibility to your argument. Tbh I couldn't care less how well (mis)informed you are. But I ain't just gonna sit back and let you post crapshit like enslavement and wtf have you. Back up your claims and I'll take you up on it; don't back it up and I'll trash your baseless arguments to oblivion, infinity, blah blah blah yadda yadda etc.

#119 YIC

    Fully Fledged Genius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,976 posts
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:My interests
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2006 - 08:16 PM

QUOTE(dehny @ May 25 2006, 08:25 PM) View Post

www.google.co.uk


i dnt really care if you want me to back up i am comfortable in my knowledge,


why post bullshit then? Keep it to yourself.

#120 Vixus

    Top of the Class

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 260 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 May 2006 - 10:22 AM

Every religion has sparked a fight now and then. When I say that, I don't mean the entire religion as in everyone who follows it, but even if it's only a couple of followers, it happens. Try and name one that hasn't. It's just a fact of life and it can't be stopped. smile.gif





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users