gobrewers14 (u/gobrewers14)

gobrewers14 commented on New NASA Director Swears Oath on Carl Sagan’s ‘Pale Blue Dot’ Instead of Bible independent.co.uk/space/n... · Posted by u/BerislavLopac

Grustaf · 2 years ago

For a positivist, you’re not very strong on logic.

I didn’t say anything about the god having to exist, that is not part of it. The point is that the person believes he is talking to a being, rather than relying on a law of (super)nature.

The rock has no will, it is not the rock that decides you grant you luck, it’s an inevitable consequence of your action.

The god, real or not, is a being with a will, he presumably hears you and may decide to help or harm you.

Similarly, praying is different from casting spells. Not because they have different effects but how they are thought to work. It doesn’t matter if you or I believe praying works, the point is that prayer is talking to a sentient god. Magic spells is not. Both may be delusional, but surely you must be able to tell them apart? You learn this stuff in middle school.

gobrewers14 · 2 years ago

> For a positivist, you’re not very strong on logic.

When the ad hominems start I know I'm on the right track

> The rock has no will / The god, real or not, is a being with a will.

How do you know god is a being with a will? This is the fallacy of special pleading. You are defining god and giving it characteristics that precisely allows you to say it is different than something with no will.

> It doesn’t matter if you or I believe praying works, the point is that prayer is talking to a sentient god. Magic spells is not.

And both are superstition.

> You learn this stuff in middle school.

I went to a school that taught math & science.

gobrewers14 commented on New NASA Director Swears Oath on Carl Sagan’s ‘Pale Blue Dot’ Instead of Bible independent.co.uk/space/n... · Posted by u/BerislavLopac

Grustaf · 2 years ago

I’m not dictating what the word means, I’m just informing you since you don’t seem aware.

Things don’t become superstitions just because you don’t believe in them.

Just like there are well defined differences between myths, fairy tales, sagas etc.

gobrewers14 · 2 years ago

>> Sure, you can use superstition as a slur for things you don’t believe in.

> I’m not dictating what the word means

That is precisely what you are doing by trying to insinuate that I am using a "slur". You do not have the authority to conjure a belief system out of thin air, assert that it is true without evidence, and start dictating to people the manner in which they are allowed to speak about it.

gobrewers14 commented on New NASA Director Swears Oath on Carl Sagan’s ‘Pale Blue Dot’ Instead of Bible independent.co.uk/space/n... · Posted by u/BerislavLopac

Grustaf · 2 years ago

I didn’t make this up. It might seem like the same concept to you, but I assure you that any serious scholar, atheist or not, knows the difference.

It really has nothing to do with what you personally believe or not.

In your example the difference is that the rock effect is automatic, like gravity, but the god is a sentient being that has a will.

Why is it so hard to accept that people call these different things? You can still despise people who believe in both.

gobrewers14 · 2 years ago

> In your example the difference is that the rock effect is automatic, like gravity, but the god is a sentient being that has a will.

There is no difference. This is the fallacy of special pleading. You're saying that the example with god is different because you defined god to be different from the thing you don't want it to be the same as. You are presupposing gods existence. There is no evidence such an entity exists and is therefore superstition.

gobrewers14 commented on New NASA Director Swears Oath on Carl Sagan’s ‘Pale Blue Dot’ Instead of Bible independent.co.uk/space/n... · Posted by u/BerislavLopac

Grustaf · 2 years ago

Sure, you can use superstition as a slur for things you don’t believe in.

But if you want to use the word in its scientific meaning, then Christianity, or Islam or whatever religion, is not a superstition.

gobrewers14 · 2 years ago

You're not the gatekeeper of words. Christianity and Islam are both superstitions.

gobrewers14 commented on New NASA Director Swears Oath on Carl Sagan’s ‘Pale Blue Dot’ Instead of Bible independent.co.uk/space/n... · Posted by u/BerislavLopac

hajile · 2 years ago

This definition confuses cause and effect.

A person believes something that results in superstition.

This definition states that superstition creates itself rather than being the result of external factors.

As a finer point, laws of nature could themselves be superstition. Godel's incompleteness theorem proves that we cannot prove all the laws in the universe. As such, we assert a truth that we know we cannot prove then act as though it must be true.

Even if you accept that as incidental, we know conclusively that recent discoveries (eg, James Webb showing unexpected galaxy sizes) show that much of our current "laws of nature" are definitely in conflict with reality making scientists superstitious in practice as well.

Finally, it is of no little interest to me that so many theoretical physicists are "simulationists" where they believe the universe is a simulation where the creators can exert complete control, but they still hold the belief that these creators are not actually gods (even though that is unprovable and for us would amount to a distinction without a difference).

Perhaps humans are simply hardwired for religion.

gobrewers14 · 2 years ago

> A person believes something that results in superstition. This definition states that superstition creates itself.

This is nonsense. Nothing is "created" when someone says something superstitious. There is no cause and effect. Supernatural entities/realms either exits or they do not. And there is zero evidence they do. Whether or not they actually do doesn't matter, it is rational to not believe in them until someone presents evidence for their existence.

> Godel's incompleteness theorem proves that we cannot prove all the laws in the universe

His theorem says no such thing. It simply makes a statement about the trade-off between the consistency of axiomatic systems and the provability of truth statements. I could easily just argue the universe is a system with inconsistent axioms where every law can be proved.

> we know conclusively that recent discoveries (eg, James Webb showing unexpected galaxy sizes) show that much of our current "laws of nature" are definitely in conflict with reality

This is called science. We collect evidence. We develop approximations of reality that best conform to this evidence. We collect new evidence. We refine our approximations.

> so many theoretical physicists are "simulationists" where they believe the universe is a simulation where the creators can exert complete control

I don't care what "so many theoretical physicists" believe. I care what they publish in peer-reviewed literature.

> Perhaps humans are simply hardwired for religion.

Perhaps humans are hardwired to make spears and kill each other or hunt and gather. That doesn't mean we should be doing that in 2023.

gobrewers14 commented on New NASA Director Swears Oath on Carl Sagan’s ‘Pale Blue Dot’ Instead of Bible independent.co.uk/space/n... · Posted by u/BerislavLopac

Grustaf · 2 years ago

Yes, superstitions relate to supernatural things. Religion does too, in a way. That doesn’t mean it’s the same thing. Language is a lot more complex than that.

And sure, you might derogatorily refer to someone’s religion as a superstition, just like I might call someone a “pagan” even if he’s strictly speaking just a heretic.

But in reality these are all precise terms with different meanings.

To be a bit more precise, superstitions deal with more or less automatic things like receiving luck by touching some rock. If you swear to God, that is not some automatic process that will bring you luck, its a divine being with a will that presumably would be angry if you break your oath. Do you see the difference?

gobrewers14 · 2 years ago

I touch (swear an oath and break it to) a rock (a god) and I receive luck (anger).

Both are superstitions. The rock example is actually less superstitious because rocks actually exist. There is zero evidence gods exist.

gobrewers14 commented on New NASA Director Swears Oath on Carl Sagan’s ‘Pale Blue Dot’ Instead of Bible independent.co.uk/space/n... · Posted by u/BerislavLopac

Grustaf · 2 years ago

No, that’s not what the word means. Religion and superstition are different concepts. This is a linguistic fact, regardless of your personal beliefs.

gobrewers14 · 2 years ago

> Religion and superstition are different concepts.

Please point to the part in my original response where I said religion and superstition are the same concept.

I said believing in a god is superstition. Which it is.

Superstition (n): A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance.

gobrewers14 commented on New NASA Director Swears Oath on Carl Sagan’s ‘Pale Blue Dot’ Instead of Bible independent.co.uk/space/n... · Posted by u/BerislavLopac

leeroyjenkins11 · 2 years ago

No, they wanted a federal government without a state religion. Like the church of England. The founders saw it necessary that people have a religious based moral system. The same system and values that they based the government on.

The premise all men are created equal relies on religion to be true. Inalienable rights is a judao Christian idea. Try arriving there with reason. Otherwise the will to power is exploitation of man by man.

The French revolution was based on reason and had a Reign of Terror with a bloody guillotine.

gobrewers14 · 2 years ago

>The founders saw it necessary that people have a religious based moral system. The same system and values that they based the government on.

In the system of government they created women were not able to participate in the body politic and slavery was legal. The suppression of women in society and slavery are both endorsed in the bible. Being superstitious has nothing to do with morality or ethics.

> The premise all men are created equal relies on religion to be true. Inalienable rights is a judao Christian idea.

This is demonstrably false. Christianity had 17 centuries before the French Revolution to setup a system of government based on these ideas but instead was aligned with Monarchy and Feudalism. Equality and inalienable rights are Enlightenment ideas.

gobrewers14 commented on New NASA Director Swears Oath on Carl Sagan’s ‘Pale Blue Dot’ Instead of Bible independent.co.uk/space/n... · Posted by u/BerislavLopac

Grustaf · 2 years ago

Well, not if the words are aimed at your God.

In Christianity and many other religions it’s a very real thing to promise God you will do something, it’s not superstition.

gobrewers14 · 2 years ago

Believing that there is a god to promise something to is the definition of superstition.

gobrewers14 commented on An unorthodox scholar uses technology to expose Biblical forgeries smithsonianmag.com/histor... · Posted by u/drdee

npteljes · 3 years ago

>Isn't the whole bible a collection of fictional stories / articles?

It isn't, according to my Catholic upbringing. It's the word of God, which he dictated through the people who originally wrote it. There are supposedly 1.345 billion Catholics. So, I think there are many people who care.

gobrewers14 · 3 years ago

The Catholic Church declaring that a collection of fictional stories are the word of god and 1.345 billion people believing that does not make the collection of stories not fictional. You're appealing to authority and the populace.