Rpg Dreamers Forums: Science is religion, religion explains science - Rpg Dreamers Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox

Rubedo  : (28 July 2010 - 07:37 PM) I'll just go with "whatever comes first". Since VC's gonna be a steep learning curve and can't just headshot everything.
Flame  : (28 July 2010 - 03:55 PM) Nothing much HLOG... Drama has been pretty low. There was "The Great Merge" in which one moderator thought the forum would look better if every topic was merged into just one. Ultimatly we decided against the new look he gave us.
Ash Crimson  : (28 July 2010 - 01:42 PM) Thank you Chalryn, for that rather amusing link!
HLOG  : (28 July 2010 - 12:13 PM) Working the late shift makes me dumb. I'd forgotten I poked my head back here. So did I miss anything in the long void between my visits so many years ago?
Chalryn  : (28 July 2010 - 11:40 AM) Behold: Hard Gay Ramen!
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=5p_c5DqjaQk
Theferrell  : (28 July 2010 - 09:20 AM) Nanoo nu'un
Cel Merion  : (28 July 2010 - 08:50 AM) I am no longer Jack of Allterades! I shall lead my flock as the master of Nu'un!

Actual DQ9 text, I swear.
Ash Crimson  : (28 July 2010 - 06:47 AM) Look no further than Athrun's sig for the truth about VC.
Cel Merion  : (28 July 2010 - 06:11 AM) AC has been around longer so you could get it for cheap. Also, giant custom robots. ##### yeah.
Flame  : (28 July 2010 - 05:32 AM) Not Sure what AC4 is like... but VC is damn ##### awesome.
Noir  : (28 July 2010 - 03:45 AM) AC4, obviousluy. And then for Answer. Then wait for 5.
Rubedo  : (27 July 2010 - 10:51 PM) All this talk can get a man tempted. Vallkyrie Chronicles? Get it or Armored Core 4 first?
Resize Shouts Area

Page 1 of 1

Science is religion, religion explains science (long read) Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   BobTD 

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: 29-September 05
  • Location:WI
  • Country:United States

Posted 10 October 2005 - 09:07 AM

Ok, not really. But kind of putting my own ponderous thoughts onto a forum for some feedback, see what kind of religious beliefs others have compaired to mine.

Basically this is how I started thinking about the subject:



I was reminded of the 4 forces that act on atoms during a science video today in school. And I was struck again by the similarities to the four forces of nature and their similarities.

Certainly these forces are comparable. And its interesting to think how close to science the earliest human guess about elements is to some laws that define all atoms and the elements they compose. But that doesnt mean anything in the long run, and I quickly ran out of ways to compare the two subjects.

This led to my questioning the existence of many parallels. Such a similarity in science and religion? Im always reminded of the phrase "two sides of the same coin" when I come across such situations. Could religion help explain science? Is the answer to a lot of confusion that we simply havent added the two equations together?

Can a thought, or emotion be explained through sequence of physical matter?

Could thought and emotion be our only true claim to something deeper... Where

does our very world come from, or much less ourselves? If we where not created

by another force, what might we have created?

Why is our physical being never satisfied with what you can only touch? What

Else does it want to feel?



Crossing Lines Thoery

Lets pretend you belive in a two sided reality. One is a world of physical substance, the other a world os spiritual being:



This is how I have come to view the world.

Area B is the part of the spiritual world witch we posses, the part that has leaked into our world and why most humans believe they have a Soul. Thats the spiritual and mind part of our world. The ability for a thought to exist, and our ability to question our own existence is part of what makes us spiritual.

Lines 1. And 2. are death and rebirth. Its these forces that stress the lines between our physical world and our spiritual senses. These are the "outside force" that you could call god, or the overall essence of life.

The physical world is our physical reality. While the spiritual side is the "afterlife". If the after life is truly what connects our conscience being with higher spirituality then reincarnation seems highly likely. A cycle is more probable then a big black empty nothingness after death, because we have a mind and ability to think, we must be able to reason one question "where does it start". Its difficult to believe that the ability to question something so unanswerable comes from nothing and ends up turning back into nothing.

Finally a spiritual world must exist. This is where a parallel worlds theory become more of a hypothesis. But it stands to reason that if Area B is a part of the spiritual world, then area A must be a part of the physical word. If nothing is substantial in the spiritual world, then perhaps this is what causes the perception of mind. The ultimate mind over matter, physical objects only exits in your mind in the spiritual world.

But whose mind? Well, again you could only guess. But if we each have our own minds in this world, then the opposing situation is that we are all of the same mind in the next.

Interestingly, if a small tie between these worlds exists then spirituality might be able to alter our physical world. The irony of divine intervention actually being the human will breaching the line of separation between worlds..

This would mean that a single person in the physical world can not change the spiritual world other then changing the physical, under the mathematics that the opposite holds true for the spiritual.

This is where I explain Good and Evil.

If the human will is the embodiment of the spiritual world, and there is life after death, would there be true good and evil? Possible, the very act of harming another being would be harming yourself. But is that so powerful that we have formed a perception of good and evil? Is self destruction the enemy of reality?

Yes.

If you refer back to my original diagram of the 4 forces, you can see that there is something called the "strong" force. This is basically a magnet that is both + and -. If they are not attached then they repel each other, if they are attached they very strongly resist separation. If our reality is two worlds that share those characteristics, then all forces work in the direction of maintaining our current cycle.

The end of our sentient existence might actually remove the stress of these two worlds interacting, thus ending the effect of the strong force, unraveling the universe. When we are no longer able to perceive reality, it may no longer exist. Therfor Evil lives up to its name, and the opposite holds true to Good.


Thats my theory in a nutshell. I will be damned if I can prove it, but twice over if anyone can prove me wrong.

Any questions?

This post has been edited by BobTD: 10 October 2005 - 09:14 AM

user posted image
0

#2 User is offline   Monty 

  • Inconceivable!
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,566
  • Joined: 14-March 03
  • Location:Glens Falls
  • Country:United States

Posted 10 October 2005 - 10:06 AM

First off great topic. Please do not mind if I just answer your questions before I get into this debate more:

Can a thought, or emotion be explained through sequence of physical matter?

This is probably not something we could explain with current technology, but Doctors can find psycosis or concussions via catscans. So, thought could potentially be able to be explained through a sequence of physical matter.

Could thought and emotion be our only true claim to something deeper... Where

does our very world come from, or much less ourselves? If we where not created

by another force, what might we have created?

My creation took place inside my mothers womb where my father's and mother's DNA mixed forming a group of chromosomes to make me. Then my experience throughout life formed the person I am today. I think our choices are the direct effect from our past experiences. Sort of like the blind leading the blind.


Why is our physical being never satisfied with what you can only touch? What

Else does it want to feel?

Our physical being wants to be satisfied. This is also a product of experience. Take sex for instance. Person A and B. Person A likes sex and likes to be satiated by sex. So, they either seek out one partner to satisfy that want or they seek many. Depending on the level of satiation needed. Person B has never had sex and might crave sexual attention, but does not want to have full on sexual intercourse. Mainly because they have never had it before, but could be for a variety of different experience that have occured through out that person's life.

Neither of these people are wrong, they just have different wants and these wants were brought on by past experiences.

Monty
0

#3 User is offline   BobTD 

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: 29-September 05
  • Location:WI
  • Country:United States

Posted 10 October 2005 - 11:35 AM

Well, whey do so many people need to seek out religion if sex can satisfy your most base needs. The ability to think and reason play more into this then you admitt.
user posted image
0

#4 User is offline   Monty 

  • Inconceivable!
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,566
  • Joined: 14-March 03
  • Location:Glens Falls
  • Country:United States

Posted 10 October 2005 - 11:57 AM

Sex was just an example of (A) want. Not multiple wants and needs that humans have. Some people have adversions and needs to religion based on experience. Just as a person would have adversion and nees to sex based on experience.

Monty
0

#5 User is offline   BobTD 

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: 29-September 05
  • Location:WI
  • Country:United States

Posted 10 October 2005 - 12:08 PM

Of course, but I dont see how that is opposed to my theory at all.

Needs are a survival tool in order to ensure survival, so the universe doesnt explode. =P

(yes, have sex or it wil explode... eventually)
user posted image
0

#6 User is offline   Groove 

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 469
  • Joined: 11-June 04
  • Location:Edinburgh, Scotland
  • Country:United Kingdom

Posted 11 October 2005 - 03:25 PM

OK, could you please clarify your original diagram a little for me? Are you listing the four forces that act on atoms as motion, bonding, attraction and change? And how do the tags electromagnetic, strong, gravity and weak relate to them at all? Also what is the point in the middle that the four staight arrows lead to?

I'm trying to come to grips with the rest of your theory but an answer to this would be a big help.
0

#7 User is offline   BobTD 

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 169
  • Joined: 29-September 05
  • Location:WI
  • Country:United States

Posted 13 October 2005 - 05:03 AM

Actually the four forces that act on atoms are electromagnetic, strong, gravity and weak. Or at least the official tags in the "exploring physical science" book that was lying around at school. (I was board, figures I would find something interesting in that when I was supposed to be watching a movie)

The diagram really is not related to my theory past it was the process of contemplating how to put it together that sparked the line of thinking that lead to my theory.

Everything up there past the first diagram I thought up out of pure boarded. Everything there is part of original thinking, and I have no knowledge of any similarity it has to any other subject. I dont even know anything about scientology.

So if anything is a little hard to understand its just because it retains to foggy sate of mind it was born from. Sorry about that. But at least I dont have any sources this way to back me up, its open to debate and fairly simple for anyone with creative thinking to challenge to find where I get lazy in the theory.
user posted image
0

#8 User is offline   Noyps2 

  • Beast'n!
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,075
  • Joined: 31-August 03
  • Location:miami
  • Country:United States

Posted 13 October 2005 - 06:46 AM

QUOTE
My creation took place inside my mothers womb where my father's and mother's DNA mixed forming a group of chromosomes to make me. Then my experience throughout life formed the person I am today. I think our choices are the direct effect from our past experiences. Sort of like the blind leading the blind.


I think BobTD meant creationism on this one in general, not overall. As in yeah we came from our parents beacuse there parents had them and so on all the way back to a certain point where something created us as people.

But I agree with you Monty that our own experience's form the people that we are.

QUOTE
Its difficult to believe that the ability to question something so unanswerable comes from nothing and ends up turning back into nothing.


That was a really great line.

I believe there is something that goes down when you die. Heaven or something like it you know? I just dont believe that someone can just die and thats it. Everything they lived there whole life for, all the memories spawning over years of time, all the experinces, everything, gone. Complety and utterly done and over with and all thats left of ur life is blackness. Exuse me, nothing is left of ur life. Its just, done.
I dont believe that.

The fact that we can think about this, and consider this with human thought, I dont really think it has much of a way to PROVE that there is something when u die. But I just really freaking liked the line.

This post has been edited by Noyps2: 13 October 2005 - 06:49 AM

0

#9 User is offline   shaitan 

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 127
  • Joined: 22-November 04
  • Location:Shayol Ghul
  • Country:United States

Posted 04 November 2005 - 04:11 AM

Ach, I am too lazy to reply to this...
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1


Fast Reply

  

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users