Religion: A lowest COMMON denominator?

[HydrogenBond]

Some theoretical physics is becoming almost like religion and faith. The math is getting so complicated that only a tiny handful of people can work through it. The rest of the masses have to take their word for it with faith that it is true or expresses reality.

 

Religion is a field of knowledge that does indeed cater to the lowest common demoninator. I do not say this as an insult, but as evidence to its practical utility. What good is having knowledge that only a handful of people can know and share. The lowest common denominator of religion is addresses how we all the same instead of how we all differ. It addresses a historical based common demoninator within humanity.

 

Science is also trying to become a lowest common demoninator. But that takes education so everyone can understand. But at the same time, science is running away from the masses and from other sciences because of specialization. Specialization is not based on integration but on differentiation. Religion learned differentiation from science and has broken up into upteen pieces, with each piece retaining ties to the lowest common denominator. Science can learn from religion by organizing itself so the lowest common demoninator can participate.

[Southtown]

What are you saying?Why would I take your word for it(or anybody elses)? Who are they?

I'm saying that "the religions are too discordant and subjective to be considered a lowest common denominator of beliefs." And "they" refers to the sciences which are indeed confined to peer-review, which I liken to be more of a common denominator concept that the religions.

 

Please note... my thought applies to the concept of religion itself, and to the god concept, not to any one particular religion nor any one concept of god.

Well, I understand where you're coming from. And in a way, I would have to agree. Because if humans were created, then the God story would get passed down, changing a little from generation to generation. This is kinda what I think happened: from creationism to paganism to spiritualism. The situation is further confused by those who work towards molding one or more religion to suit their own preferences, rather than honestly looking at history to see what a religion's true origin is, and subsequently its true meaning. I find that kind of dishonesty nauseating.

 

But if mankind wasn't created, it would seem that each religion would develop seperately among different primative societies. Then I would call it an overwhelming coincidence, especially considering most of them have a version of Noah's flood. Kinda like most societies have mythical dragons in their culture. How could these have developed in multiple instances unless there actually were dinosaur-looking creatures in those days?

[Edella]

What are you saying?Why would I take your word for it(or anybody elses)? Who are they?

Southtown,

reading my post again it seems just rude.I apologize.

...the sciences which are indeed confined to peer-review, which I liken to be more of a common denominator concept than the religions

I think I'm starting to understand your point.I assumed you meant peer-review was a bad thing...My bad.

[HydrogenBond]

Peer review in science does occur. This also occurred in the Catholic Church since the beginning. Change was very slow and took a lot of negociating before things were alterred. For example, although debated for almost 2000 years, the Assumption of the Virgin, Mary, was not accepted by the Church until 1954. With the break-up of the church the peer review process means if one hits an obstacle, start a new church. This may be the confusion seen by science within religion.

 

Peer review in science does not always mean reality or progression. The best example of this are connected to statistical studies. Today something is good for you tomorrow it is not, then it switches back. The only criterion that sciences uses with such studies is to follow beaurcratic rules. Logical understanding is not considered as important as using the black box.

[Freddy]

Peer review in science does occur. This also occurred in the Catholic Church since the beginning. Change was very slow and took a lot of negociating before things were alterred. For example, although debated for almost 2000 years, the Assumption of the Virgin, Mary, was not accepted by the Church until 1954. With the break-up of the church the peer review process means if one hits an obstacle, start a new church. This may be the confusion seen by science within religion.

 

Peer review in science does not always mean reality or progression. The best example of this are connected to statistical studies. Today something is good for you tomorrow it is not, then it switches back. The only criterion that sciences uses with such studies is to follow beaurcratic rules. Logical understanding is not considered as important as using the black box.

 

I bet Joan of Arc, Galleo, Capernicus, and all who died or were tortured and imprisoned during the Inquision would be happy to know the Church had a system of peer review right from the start.

[Southtown]

Southtown,

reading my post again it seems just rude.I apologize.

I think I'm starting to understand your point.I assumed you meant peer-review was a bad thing...My bad.

I understand. Not a problem. =)

[ughaibu]

A site about religion as a memetic "mind virus": http://www.christianitymeme.org/

[InfiniteNow]

A site about religion as a memetic "mind virus": http://www.christianitymeme.org/

Interesting. Too bad it's been limited to Christianity. Also, I sense a negative tone when reading that it's a "virus." Anyway, thanks for the link. :hihi:

[ughaibu]

In any case, one still has the problem of explaining the evolution of memetic mind viruses.

[Southtown]

In any case, one still has the problem of explaining the evolution of memetic mind viruses.

Ya, they're mutated by gossip errors.

[ughaibu]

What I meant is that memeticists seem to have neglected to explain the role of negative memes in the general evolution of the organism. Applying evolutionary theories to the behaviour of ideas is fine but the ideas can not be meaningfully considered as independent of the organism.

[DarkColoredLight]

Time doesn't permit me to read through this thread, but from what I've read I'd like to share a story.

 

Book of Dark Colored Light; Chapter One, Verse One through Twenty.

 

The other week I turned 19.

A buddy and I went to the casino.

We played some table games for a while, but I got bored.

I decided to go play some texas hold um.

I know the game, I just didn't know how to win.

I knew no one at the table knew I knew the game.

So I used that to my advantage.

I asked question.

My simple questions had them assuming I didn't know the answers.

My nervousness had them assuming I was scared.

So I sat there with my pocket twos.

Head to head, after the others folded, with a 50some year old "man."

The flop came, and there was a much needed thrid two in the bunch.

Then the turn. Nothing I need, hopefully nothing my opponent needed.

The river comes, possible straight, but I didn't think he had it from his previous bets.

No possible full house or flush.

So I was going to get beat with higher trips, or win.

I checked out of turn, they thankfully corrected me. B)

He bet.

I'm all in, with no hesitation.

Scared him out of it. I win. I grab my freind and we leave.

 

I'll never know what he had, but I know what I got. Besides my money back+$20, for exactly one hand of poker. What I got was a feeling, if it were a drug, I was high. High on texas hold um, high on life. What ever it was, it felt great. I was addicted. Knew I was addicted, hence why I haven't been back since.

 

I'm not saying go into a casino and hustle some guy for 20 bucks. Because that's not what I'm doing. But, I could see a scenario where that could be felt as god's presence.

[ughaibu]

I think that the evolutionary significance, of both religion and negative memes generally, can be explained if one considers the prime driving factor of evolution, not as survival of the fittest, but as self balancing of ecosystems. This description makes sense to me, as evolution is not a matter of individual species but of the interaction of various species that rely on each other for food. It also explains the emergence in mice, under conditions of overcrowding, of various perversions that function as population controls. Similar population regulating perversions are also well known among humans, war being the most intrusive example. Religion is brought into consideration for inclusion in this catagory, by the fact that it attempts to remove the fear of death, one of the fundamental survival mechanisms.

[Southtown]

So you're saying that not only physical characteristics are subject to natural selection, but also the ideas within the mind?

[DarkColoredLight]

So you're saying that not only physical characteristics are subject to natural selection, but also the ideas within the mind?

 

 

He's saying that Religion was created to explain nature.

 

So the lowest COMMON denominator is perception. Perception of nature. Science is just trying to prove what nature does, and decode the reasons why.

[C1ay]

I believe that religion is a direct result of our evolution as a species.

I hope not. I would hope that evolution is more successful than that at weeding out such weak notions.

 

Religion is man's invention to answer those questions that he doesn't have answers for. Why are we here? Where did we come from? Where did it all begin? Why? Religion is a sign of giving up in the search for truth by just assigning an answer, i.e. "God did it". Man should have more faith in himself than looking for Gods to answer the questions he hasn't found answers for yet.

[DarkColoredLight]

I would hope not also, for that would spit in the face of the three wiseMEN, that talked amongst themselves (Men), then TOLD people(Men) what to believe. With no justifications other than hell.

 

 

 

I see abslolute horror in defing the justified(Religion) by justifing the undefined(Science).

Contradiction? or Perfect Sense?

 

Here ends the readings of DarkColoredLight; Chaper Scieligion, Verses Horrible through Wiseman.