• In total there are 28 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 28 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am

The six signs of "Scientism"

Engage in discussions encompassing themes like cosmology, human evolution, genetic engineering, earth science, climate change, artificial intelligence, psychology, and beyond in this forum.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
youkrst

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
One with Books
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:30 am
13
Has thanked: 2280 times
Been thanked: 727 times

Re: The six signs of "Scientism"

Unread post

ant wrote:the Purpose that Belief in something greater than ourselves has given us. That is the radical difference between Man and Ape.
have you just said the radical difference between man and ape is that man has the purpose that belief in something greater than himself has given him?

if you, ant, want to believe in (and deify) something greater than yourself, knock yourself out, go for it brother!

long may you run!

but i will need something a little more specific before i can even get my brain to engage with it.
User avatar
johnson1010
Tenured Professor
Posts: 3564
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
15
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1280 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: The six signs of "Scientism"

Unread post

Turn natural selection into a code of conduct and you get disaster.
Right. Because natural selection is a process of nature. Not a conduct. It’s like saying let’s make conservation of angular momentum our way of life.
But if asked where we get our morality from, if not from science or religion, the new atheists start to stammer
N N N N No we w w we don’t!

Haha! I always get a kick out of this perception that secular people are just trembling in fear of THE BIG QUESTIONs that religious people have. Here, let me fix this for you.

Morality comes from our surrounding society. We learn how to treat each other, from each other. We teach others how to treat us, and they teach us how to treat them. We don’t get our morality from the holy books for the most part. Or more accurately, we take our beliefs of how we should treat other people to our religion, and accept those parts of our religion which are in agreement with our understanding of right and wrong, and reject those elements which disagree.

It’s been a while since I’ve seen anybody get stoned for working on Saturday, for instance. Why is that? Because everybody, including super religious people, recognize that killing a man for working on the Sabbath is psychotic. The holy book says we should do it, but we don’t do it. Because our internal deliberation of morality is BETTER than the book.

Fine, but where did our collective morality, which is passed to each generation through society, come from? Evolution. Natural selection. Because humans can accomplish much more working together than by themselves. A simple recognition of this fact is all you need to build all of morality from natural selection.

It is interesting that you use the term “explain away”. What exactly do you mean by that? It seems to imply that once something is understood it is then no longer a part of reality. This reminds me of our conversations about meaning, in which I explained how meaning was both subjective and objective. Which is to say that intelligence is what gives things meaning, and because intelligent entities value something real world objective steps are taken to preserve those things which means statistically they are safeguarded where things not seen as valuable are not preserved.
You keep saying things like “only” a human cares about that. Explaining things does not rob them of their meaning, Ant. It enhances them.
It is deeply ungratifying to see love as simply a biological drive to continue the species when reduced to animalism. Or why the raping and murder of children is morally abhorrent universally.
Which is exactly why we need a mechanism to remove our biases to get to the truth. It does not matter, at all, if you feel gratified. The truth is the truth regardless of how you feel about it. We can’t ignore a valuable fact because it makes us feel bad. It is easy to imagine any number of arguments of why natural selection in a population of social animals would lead toward abhorrence of raping and murdering children. Have you bothered to try to think this through?
There is a deep intellectual shallowness here. The new atheists (present company excluded) who look to science as the only source of knowledge fit this description to the last letter:

Quote:
‘On the surface, he’s profound, but deep down, he’s superficial.’
You’ve tossed this “shallow understanding” stuff around several times, Ant, and never, never, have you come through with anything to back up that claim. Certainly not any “deeper” understanding which I have asked for every I see you make that statement.

It seems to me your criteria for what qualifies as “deep” is to assume something is ultimately a mystical mystery that leads to a god. Is that what you mean by “deep”, ant? Because you’ve failed to provide us with anything which suggests you know what you are talking about.
If belief in God is and has been nothing more than a delusion it certainly is the most important thought mankind has ever entertained.
Resoundingly no.
What if we were to erase from our history belief in God from the mind of Man? How much art, poetry, literary works, GOOD deeds (yes, there's always a flip side). What would be left to treasure? What would the atheist have for us? What magnificent works does he have for us?
This is how myopic you are Ant.

Gee, what is there in the world that we could value, if not an imaginary god? Well if we can’t pretend we have an invisible god looking out for us, we might as well stop writing literature, creating artwork, being nice to each other, composing poetry, and appreciating being alive!

Really man, what they hell are you talking about?

Superficial debates about the mechanics of nature are useless without the ability to transcend our animal natures with the Purpose that Belief in something greater than ourselves has given us. That is the radical difference between Man and Ape.


Again, this claim of superficiality. Life on this planet is completely meaningless, according to Ant, unless you believe we are not like other animals. HAHA!

We CAN’T have meaning in our lives… unless we are the pets of an invisible cosmic monster.

Once again, what meaning are you talking about, Ant? You never answer. You do keep insisting that it’s the ONLY meaning there is to be had in life, but apparently all we are going to get is that believing is itself the meaning in life. This unknowable vague yet secretly specific and ultimate meaning is what I find ungratifying.

That’s all it takes to transform your life from “merely” loving your family because you are a human with a family, to “meaningfully” loving your family because you are a human with belief in magic and a family.

Adding meaning to life is as easy as refusing to allow that the world is understandable. All you have to do is imagine something out there that can see through walls, watch you while you pee, and has a special plan, which he keeps super-secret, with a special place just for you!

TA-DAH! Your life just went from so much clatter of random atomic collisions to part of a majestic march toward magical, mysterious, meaning!

Image
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro

Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?

Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?

Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
User avatar
LanDroid

2A - MOD & BRONZE
Comandante Literario Supreme
Posts: 2800
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 9:51 am
21
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Has thanked: 195 times
Been thanked: 1166 times
United States of America

Re: The six signs of "Scientism"

Unread post

Ant said If belief in God is and has been nothing more than a delusion it certainly is the most important thought mankind has ever entertained.
Obviously it is possible for a thought to be both important and delusional. Consider the annual Time Magazine "Person of the Year" edition. Every time conservatives don't like the person on the cover, they crow about how Time put Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin on that cover. How can that be? => But what are the criteria for this selection?
Person of the Year (formerly Man of the Year) is an annual issue of the United States newsmagazine Time that features and profiles a person, group, idea or object that "for better or for worse, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year
This has been explained every year since 1927, but is still deliberately misunderstood. It would be extremely difficult to argue against the point that during WWII, those two had the most influence in certain years. Hitler and Stalin: Important but Delusional. Not to stretch the comparison to belief in God too far, but also consider one of the two was an ally critical to victory over Nazi Germany.
User avatar
DWill

1H - GOLD CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6966
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
16
Location: Luray, Virginia
Has thanked: 2262 times
Been thanked: 2470 times

Re: The six signs of "Scientism"

Unread post

It's amusing to read the thread title as "The Six Warning Signs of Scientism." I think the list is pretty good, actually, though I haven't read the article. It's a good idea to bring to bring your mind in once in a while for rebalancing, so such a list can serve a purpose.

Don't know if any of you had a chance to see "The Master," with Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joachim Phoenix. It's a look at the origins of a religion that strikingly resembles Scientology. Good flick, though puzzling at the end. L. Ron Hubbard had the sense to realize that a viable modern religion could borrow from the credibility of science, thus both the name of his cult and the technical flavor of the means to advance toward perfection. The scientific jargon almost obscures the wackiness.
User avatar
geo

2C - MOD & GOLD
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
15
Location: NC
Has thanked: 2198 times
Been thanked: 2200 times
United States of America

Re: The six signs of "Scientism"

Unread post

DWill wrote:It's amusing to read the thread title as "The Six Warning Signs of Scientism." I think the list is pretty good, actually, though I haven't read the article. It's a good idea to bring to bring your mind in once in a while for rebalancing, so such a list can serve a purpose.

Don't know if any of you had a chance to see "The Master," with Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joachim Phoenix. It's a look at the origins of a religion that strikingly resembles Scientology. Good flick, though puzzling at the end. L. Ron Hubbard had the sense to realize that a viable modern religion could borrow from the credibility of science, thus both the name of his cult and the technical flavor of the means to advance toward perfection. The scientific jargon almost obscures the wackiness.
Haven't seen the movie, but it looks good. A science fiction writer like L. Ron Hubbard probably well understands the importance of sounding "scientish." Let's say you have to have your characters zipping around at faster than the speed of light, so you make up a hyper warp propulsion drive and it make it sound credible enough. Dan Simmons came up with the "Hawking Drive" but he never had to explain to explain how it works. The characters just make passing references to the technology just as we might mention driving somewhere without explaining how a combustion engine actually works.

I think I would enjoy The Master for the psychological elements.
-Geo
Question everything
User avatar
geo

2C - MOD & GOLD
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
15
Location: NC
Has thanked: 2198 times
Been thanked: 2200 times
United States of America

Re: The six signs of "Scientism"

Unread post

I put the 10 red flags for pseudo science on a new thread. I didn't want to divert this thread when so many questions remain unanswered. 8)
-Geo
Question everything
User avatar
johnson1010
Tenured Professor
Posts: 3564
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
15
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1280 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: The six signs of "Scientism"

Unread post

Seriously Ant.

Today is the day you tell us about this "deeper" understanding you are always yapping about.

Pile on the wisdom.
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro

Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?

Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?

Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
Post Reply

Return to “Science & Technology”