Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion.

[andydes]

The basic premise of scientific discovery is that no theory can be definitely proved, only disproved. That is you find the theory that best suits the evidence and re-evaluate it when you come across something that doesn’t fit the current model.

Hence, Newtonian physics had to give way to quantum physics and relativity. And one day a unified theory will hopefully tie these two together (as currently they don’t and different situations are modelled by different theories. Perhaps this will include forces we are not currently aware of or even an intelligence behind the universe.

The theory of evolution (a working theory) doesn’t discount a higher power, but it provides an explanation of how life could exist without one. Something previously impossible. Similarly, theoretical physics will probably never discount a higher power but it may one day provide a similar explanation of how the universe could have formed without one. And on that day, I’m sure there’ll be more than enough people still believing in God or a higher power.

It’s possible that ancient cultures were more open to the non-physical world. But I find it more likely that they weren’t in possession of as many facts. They like us, were trying to find the answers, and at the time to have a God or Gods was quite simply the only reasonable explanation. Now, I no longer believe that’s the case.

I find it sad that so many people think we’ve somehow moved backwards in our understanding despite the work of countless great minds gradually adding to the knowledge of our species. I know bad things have come of it as well, but we have the potential to really make something out of our existence. I’m a humanist after all, and I have to believe in something, even if it’s not supernatural. I had more hope at the end of the cold war, mind you (with David Hasslehoff playing atop the Berlin wall).

[djadonis206]

That's interesting

the only thing about that is most if not all the philosophy and math books I've studied in school have all these old ass men from the 1800's who theories and formulas we still use to today

like before television, color televison for that matter...


I believe it's easy to say / believe - philosophers, mathmeticians, scholars etc thought about and theories the same stuff they do now

trying to disprove / prove god etc


I wouldn't say anythings changed personally - I mean have they ever figured out which came first? The Chicken or The Egg?

[djadonis206]

And just because we don’t understand it, doesn’t mean we should just start making things up to fill in the gaps

I don't understand music, especially the program Ableton i use - I have no clue of the ins and outs of the program but I still use it

I have faith that everytime I turn the program on it'll work

I have faith it'll do what I want it to when i want it to - soemtimes it does, sometimes it doesn't

I have a forum (a group) of people I can call on when I need help

I bought the program somewhat ignorant about what it does and how it works

we do it all time, so what's the big deal about having faith in a higher power


sure Robert Henke or the programmers at ableton can explain how it works but so can priests and religous scholars - there's just as many nah sayers who say Ableton can't do this and can't do that that some other program can do (actually it makes more sense to use another program)


faith - if you have it great if you don't that's your business right?

[simplesatisfaction]

The theory of evolution (a working theory) doesn’t discount a higher power, but it provides an explanation of how life could exist without one.

Does it really though? By explaining how we may have evolved over many years of mutations from single-cell organisms doesn’t show at all how life could exist without a higher power (it only shows that the religious explanation of how we came to exist may not be accurate). There has to be some explanation for why that law exists in the first place. It could very well be that a higher power is guiding it along (or guiding something deeper that results in that law of nature).

To say that life exists because of random occurrences that happened to result in a law that guides biological development seems more far-fetched than the possibility of a higher power that is guiding our physical laws.

Maybe everything we see and observe in a physical sense is simply an illusion. To me, the more important question to ask is what is beyond the physical world that may explain the underlying reasons why things exist in the first place.

[simplesatisfaction]

I find it sad that so many people think we’ve somehow moved backwards in our understanding despite the work of countless great minds gradually adding to the knowledge of our species.

I don't think we have moved backward at all in our understanding of the physical world that surrounds us (we have obviously made huge progress). But I do think that our focus on trying to explain the physical world has clouded our ability and efforts to think beyond it.

I think that it may be within our abilities to discover other areas of existence that are beyond the physical world (and not just make things up about it – as some people feel religion does). And it’s possible that we may find that there is some truth in what different religions have to say about it (it could be that the only way they knew how to explain it at the time was in terms that seem unbelievable to us now because we now have a better - although still limited - understanding of our physical world).

[simplesatisfaction]

This discussion is good inspiration for writing a song - I guess that's where the appropriateness of it in an Ableton forum comes in.

[mauve]

This argument reminds me of "you stupid, no, you stupid......" with each party thinking that they are more enlightened than the other (on a global level).
Like in Guliver's Travels two nations fought over which end the boiled egg should be cracked and eaten from.

[pilcrow]

when will this thread die?
its a non stop bitchfest!!!
no one is accomplishing anything...

My favorite kind of post: Complaining about the length of a thread while simultaneously lengthening it yourself.

We need a name for this kind of post. Self-negating? Imploding? Mobius-post?

[shtreimel]

This post, and other's like it, only prove that human's yearn to communicate. And since music making has lost so much value within the past 5-10 years, we music makers resort to a music bb to be heard. We spend more time and energy debating and arguing than creating music. And depending on how you feel about music making, this is either very sad, or simply a sublimated form of communication...albeit with a facelss audience and no melody/beats.

[eyeknow]

edit n forget it.......

snickers RULES!

[eyeknow]

mmmmm, snikers.....

[Machinesworking]

This post, and other's like it, only prove that human's yearn to communicate. And since music making has lost so much value within the past 5-10 years, we music makers resort to a music bb to be heard. We spend more time and energy debating and arguing than creating music. And depending on how you feel about music making, this is either very sad, or simply a sublimated form of communication...albeit with a facelss audience and no melody/beats.

Dunno... I've always been interested in the tools I use to make electronic music, and I relate better to musicians than non artist types.
My music is made for a limited audience, and hasn't lost any value because of competition etc. If I was trying to write house or what not maybe I would agree.....

[eyeknow]

I debate snickers..............

debates are for debaters.......snickers are for eating!

[BoimB son of BoB]

Consider that we, as humans, are very limited. To pretend to have even the capacity to understand everything that exists is stupid. Too many times, scientists limit their thinking to the physical world that we can experience and measure with tools we create. But that does not rule out the possibility of a non-physical world that may be all around us at all times. Just because we can’t see it or measure it, doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

just for the record quantum physics clearly describes the limitations to what extend we can measure things. it's called: the heisenberg principle... it's a fundamental law in physics actually. there are eleven dimensions not three etc etc...

i simply don't see why all these things you sum up make the possibility of there being a god more likely. you are just saying: science has a hell of a lot still left to do, and very likely we will not even be able to comprehend every phenomenon.

that doesn't mean there isn't ascientific explanation for it all that actually would make sense, even if our human intellect can't comprehend certain steps because of our limitations.

if you want to believe in magic, fine, but cause we haven't seen magic yet and because scientific method actually makes SENSE out of the magic, i stick with that, to try and comprehend EVERYTHING there is.

[BoimB son of BoB]

and as to the topic: what's the meaning of it all, and why are these laws there in the first place:

that's a vey good question. i always wonder myself!

have you ever thought about the possibility that even when evolution may not be enough to actually get were we are now, the guiding force you talk about may just be a pure physical law/rule itself (see Stuart Kauffman) :

http://www.amazon.com/Investigations-St ... 019512104X

don't you see, there is just no need to ,a priori, call for 'higher (mystical) forces! that is narrow minded because that restricts ous, a priory, at finding out IMO. you get lazy by thinking like that, it is the easy way out, and 100% the most unsuccesfull at actually getting it explained in the first place.

this thread has actually risen to another level! this is the god discussion i was hoping for in stead of biblical nonsense and stuff. thank too simplesatisfaction!