Welcome to UK420

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.


troy

science vs religion

1,145 posts in this topic

I haven't but will take a look :yep:

 

There's a few of Jordan Peterson vs Sam Harris debating science vs religion that are worth a look on the tube. 

 

I know many here don't like Peterson :pitchfork: but don't be put off as Sam really puts up a good argument and the discourse is extremely erudite, if nothing else it's worth it for that alone :yinyang:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Dodgee said:

I haven't but will take a look :yep:

 

There's a few of Jordan Peterson vs Sam Harris debating science vs religion that are worth a look on the tube. 

 

I know many here don't like Peterson :pitchfork: but don't be put off as Sam really puts up a good argument and the discourse is extremely erudite, if nothing else it's worth it for that alone :yinyang:

 

 

i didn't think i liked harris either lol but that video changed my mind with pinker and is a cracker, both seem to shine in their own way.

 

i'll give peterson another go but i'm not promising anything lol:)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, Dodgee said:

There's a few of Jordan Peterson vs Sam Harris debating science vs religion that are worth a look on the tube. 

 

 

i was quite impressed with harris in the first debate, peterson seems out of his depth and rather annoying , butting in when not needed too. he also went on a lot about muslims and the koran way too much for me, i know he mentions the bible also but it seemed to me it was a bit of a chance to bash muslims, which i've seen peterson do before and i lost interest after that. i know they were talking about extremism, and muslims are the current bogey men, but there are many thousands of years of history to pick from and didn't need to be quite so specific in picking a group i reckon, shame.

 

the pinker v harris one was much more my cup of tea and will definitely have a look at that death lecture and more of his stuff, he seems much more thoughtful about what he wants to say, peterson just waffles on without saying much imho.

 

also someone else to look out for on the topic of death is sheldon soloman if you haven't already seen him

 

 

 

"i don't understand peterson" lollol not aimed at you mate, i had to say it but i'm not getting into it with the next poster

Edited by ratdog
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

I agree I definitely think harris took the upper hand and came off much better than peterson in the debate.

 

 

I think peterson would be better off sticking to what he's qualified to talk about (psychology) he can be quite insightful in those kind of discussion's.

 

Its when he gets into the whole "culture wars" discourse he starts to fall on his face and comes out with some tripe imo.

 

I'll check out that sheldon solomon guy, the name rings a bell but I can't place it at the moment, I think I may have come across him before though

 

:yinyang:

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, Dodgee said:

 

I know many here don't like Peterson :pitchfork:

 

Most of people (IME) who dont like JP dont understand much of what he says. He is extremely misrepresented and you get vocal people on both sides, He makes some ridiculously good arguments that are difficult to refute and it causes controversy

 

I have listened to a fair bit of him, not really a massive fan but not a hater either. My biggest issue with JP is his right wing apologist style and the way he seems unknowingly to repeat propaganda stats. Like 50M died as a result of the Gulags (30-50M is the commonly repeated number but if you look into it the numbers seem to be lies. I say seem as you cant work it out. I am not holocaust denier or anything like that I just dont a-ppreciatre bullshit and using 50M when it might of been less than 1M is ridiculous. I am not playing anything down, what happened was terrible but it would be nice to be able to know the truth

 

 

Sam Harris in that death talk is pure Zen buddhist lol, he mentioned Lao Tzu, living in the moment, suffering and all sorts of what is eastern philosophy, he even says its ancient knowledge and gets onto DMT at the end! I am sure he meant organised religion when he said religion. He is not a stupid man, he knows more than I do for sure so I think he was being very smart with his words because he knows the audience. Whats hes saying is he isnt an atheist really, its a stepping stone hes moving to the thirtd verse of this!

 



 There was a young man who said “Damn,
For it certainly seems that I am,
   A creature that moves
   In determinate grooves,
I’m not even a bus – I’m a tram.”

But then the young man he said “Hey,
For I can’t help but feel I could stray,
   I’m willing to bet
   There’s no path which is set,
I feel free and creative this way.”

Today the young man can’t say how,
But it’s clearly one movement, or Tao,
   The truth he’s revealed
   Is a unified field,
So he plays with the way it is now.

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah @Davey Jones you had to laugh at some points coz he's talking at an atheist convention and LOADS of what he was saying was based in the tao teachings :yep:

 

He's a big advocate of mindfulness and has been meditating for way longer than it's been popular in the west from what I can gather :yinyang:

 

E2+ he says in that video he's never tried dmt but I'm sure since then I've seen him talk about his ayahuasca experience so I think he's had a go since like 

 

And I agree on JP too, I'm not a massive fan but neither am I hater and I find much of what he says (in his area of expertise) to be very insightful and often educational, his book 12 rules for life is worth the time it takes to read imo :smokin:

Edited by Dodgee
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

He is good at debates for sure

 

 

Atheism is really stupid when you think about it. To assume you can see and detect everything. To assume evolution is over and theres no more senses or advancements of consciousness. To have the laws but not the lawmaker. Theres more wrong with atheism than is wriong with organised religion IMO. Atheism is way way farther off

 

In that talk Harris mentions locality of consciousness and he says you need a god reason to doubt it. I have had experiences that proved beyond a doubt that its not local. Things that are physically impossible, it didnt just happen to me either. Psi is more real than most people can handle! Things have been proven beyond a doubt scientifically. Even Carl Sagan himself said it needed investigating. Theres loads of phenomena science cant explain and all the have is ohh its impossible so its not true but theres concrete evidence

 

Need an open mind to discuss these things not many know times changed, near death experiences for example theres something like 12M recorded and its talked about a lot

 

 

Twins communicating with each other instantly across the world is a story everyone belives. We all know thats most likely true, as individuals but once people group up it becomes cool to laugh instead of discuss. Very few people have an open mind really its a shame

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Anyone who doesn't believe in psychic abilities should watch this,

 

 

 

I found it quite compelling myself :yinyang:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

I will watch  this now

 

I have 100% had experiences that happened more than once with another person. Its ridiculous to repeat what happened as I know how it sounds but what are you supposed to do when it happens to you and theres no doubt about it? Pretend it didnt happen?

 

Psi experiences with psychedelics has been known about since the very early days. The laugh is when some atheist science guy comes along with his concrete assumption that theres no evidence, absolutely raring to go lol I love it really, there is like 50 years worth os SCIENTIFIC evidence that they said was impossible so didnt even read it lol and keep saying its impossible lol does this sound like science to you? Very difficult thing to have a sensible convo about

 

 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

I posted the wrong video sorry mate, right guy but wrong video so the content might well be the same, this is the video I originally meant though

 

 

Cheers :yinyang:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Something that's always intrigued me is Mathematics, said to be the universal language, understood not just by humans but animals too, and its laws/rules are evident throughout nature.. 

 

Even scientists/mathematicians can't seem to decide if maths is discovered or invented, like is it a human construct we have built up around and to explain the fundamental laws of nature/physics/the universe, or is it deeper than that, already part of the fabric of the universe long before humans even existed? 

 

IF maths is indeed a fundamental building block of the universe, like say electrons/protons/neutrons/quarks etc then does that imply some sort of inventor/creator to it all?? 

 

IF it is THE fundamental building block on which all matter/experience is buikt then that also brings up the topic of simulation theory, is everything we know and experience nothing more than a running code.. Albeit a huge and massively complex one?? 

 

Sorry, early morning musings/ramble! lol

 

 

 

@ratdog

 

I watched that video with Harris and pinker after last night and I really liked that pinker guy, here's a shorter video of his for anyone interested, I found his optimistic outlook extremely refreshing after all the recent negativity, 

 

 

A nice refreshing change I thought :yinyang:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Dodgee said:

A nice refreshing change I thought

 

 

yes, he is a bit of a tonic, and very laid back and easy to listen too. glad you liked it mate

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Dodgee said:

Something that's always intrigued me is Mathematics, said to be the universal language, understood not just by humans but animals too, and its laws/rules are evident throughout nature.. 

 

Even scientists/mathematicians can't seem to decide if maths is discovered or invented, like is it a human construct we have built up around and to explain the fundamental laws of nature/physics/the universe, or is it deeper than that, already part of the fabric of the universe long before humans even existed? 

 

IF maths is indeed a fundamental building block of the universe, like say electrons/protons/neutrons/quarks etc then does that imply some sort of inventor/creator to it all?? 

 

IF it is THE fundamental building block on which all matter/experience is buikt then that also brings up the topic of simulation theory, is everything we know and experience nothing more than a running code.. Albeit a huge and massively complex one?? 

 

Sorry, early morning musings/ramble! lol

 


I think the link between energy and trying to explain it cannot be separated. If everything is energy, things that are made of that stuff and are intelligent enough to recognise and question it, are going to stumble upon the fact that energy is everywhere.

They're going to want to see where it comes from? Because its ordinary to see the origin of something when you're billions of years into its development. They're going to see how much it can be split up. We will find that energy has a limit. It can only be so small or so big, it can only occupy that part of "space" at any given moment. So to simply quantify this, you can say something or nothing, or 1, or 1 or zero. The concept of nothing would have came afterwards, to point out absence, considering there is only everything.

the difference between energy and mathamatics is, you can't just keep adding more energy, where as you can keep adding numbers, you can make up concepts also because alot of it is imaginary. Our brain is some extremely unusual bunch of cells, nerves, receptors that actually interprets reality into some "image" or "sound" or "smell" and it does this based around how important those things are, to the organism. The brain is capable of extreme feats of imagination that nothing in the reality we can see or sense is able to contend against except other humans with brains. Our brain discovered how energy works but it also invented tricks to simplify it, like imagining that 1 billion is really just 1 and we can do all these kinds of tricks to quickly work out massive numbers rather than actually counting up to a billion. The brain is capable of concepts like nothing or infinity, which are not real. This is what makes us able to percieve what is real because we can make totally unrealistic things up in our head, its the reason why we're so smart. We play spot the difference with our memory and reality.

The reason why its impossible that reality could be simulated is because then this would all be a tiny amount of energy in an even greater amount of energy, yet the problem with that is, that detail comes from how small something is, the reality is all fundamentally built up from the smallest things, rather than the biggest. All energy would at some point be as close together as it can be and it being broken apart would create its maximum size. There would be no possible way for all energy to be simulated by less than all energy, it simply does not correlate to reality. You also cannot control the properties of energy, you can't make photons behave like up quarks. You can't make carbon act like iron. That's only possible in imagination or in something like a computer where everything is just 1 thing, being turned into interpretations of lots of other things.

Its also impossible for energy to be predicted by mathamatics or by anything because "prediction" is trying to determine what energy will do and how it will behave, yet in every new instance of time, the state of energy and its organisation is completely unique to the last moment and any other moment that has existed because its impossible for energy to return to its prior state due to the sheer enormity of pieces at play. Our physics is only looking at things piece by piece and to understand phenomenons like consciousness or gravity, you need to be able to see how quadrillions of pieces create emergent properties that cannot be found in any "singular" piece, no single piece is responsible and infact the overall pieces are, much like the entire universe itself. Or a person.

 

Edited by FunkyJazzJesus
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

I was hoping you would chip in on this conversation @FunkyJazzJesus :yep:

 

 

I like your perspective and insights on these kinds of topics :yinyang:

 

 

I heard a quote the other day (maybe in one of those videos above actually) but 1 cubic cm of our brain contains more connections than there are stars in our galaxy, that's incredible. More than incredible even, it really is beyond amazing what a brilliant thing the human mind is (I almost said brilliant machine then but I don't think it is just a machine, otherwise how would it give rise to consciousness right?) 

 

The human mind, so brilliant I'm not sure we will ever comprehend it completely! 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, Dodgee said:

I was hoping you would chip in on this conversation @FunkyJazzJesus :yep:

 

 

I like your perspective and insights on these kinds of topics :yinyang:

 

 

I heard a quote the other day (maybe in one of those videos above actually) but 1 cubic cm of our brain contains more connections than there are stars in our galaxy, that's incredible. More than incredible even, it really is beyond amazing what a brilliant thing the human mind is (I almost said brilliant machine then but I don't think it is just a machine, otherwise how would it give rise to consciousness right?) 

 

The human mind, so brilliant I'm not sure we will ever comprehend it completely! 


Well right now its the most advanced thing in this entire solar system and it will be for a long time, no matter what we realise about the very thing that lays above our eyes. It was the most advanced thing 30'000 years ago. And further.

It's so advanced that it does everything it does with the equivelent of 20 watts, so the natural way of the body has evolved already seems to be doing the most efficient things that are possible. Super computers take up entire warehouses and use hundreds of thousands of watts, our body has 7'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000'000 atoms moving around, every single atom has a gap between it and is interacting from afar, like radio sending out frequencies because all of those atoms, if they make up molecules like hormones, neurochemicals, blood, its all made of atoms and they're not touching, yet for some reason theres quite clearly very specific bunches within it. It's all rather amazing to consider our brain literally produces that out of what its sensing from light, it somehow divides up the differences in the light into "blood", "planets", "a dog shit" and it all just did this starting off as lifeless material.

Somehow and for some reason, atoms have created something that can turn atoms into stuff that does more than just the standard chemical and physical interactions. DNA and RNA can take atoms and eventually, produce eyeballs, nerves, skeletons, organs, flight, venom, trees, fruit, cells, all the living things, all made from atoms and we happen to be embodying the atomic energy that is the most intelligent thing of the current time on the planet it exists upon. If you happen to be the atoms of a mouse or a slug or a cocao tree, "you'll" actually be that thing, if of course its able to feel that sensation but something definatly is those things. Aslong as DNA exists, life will exist, there is no escape and since dna came about from lifeless atoms, even if its destroyed it will just return or re-emerge.

We talk about our ancestors but we are them, we're the passing of the torch, zoroasters flame, dna lives on but the things it creates do not, they live on by constantly changing, nature doesn't give a fuck aslong as the "right" choices are made or the thing will be ended. This energy is what they were made of and its what we're made of, we come directly from them, all the way back to the beginning. All the way back to the dawn of life.

I think these kind of thoughts start to produce the sensation of "god" or what people seem to imagine and wonder when they look deep into realities soul.

Edited by FunkyJazzJesus
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now