I’m so tired of so called scientists, rationals, elites, atheists, christians, and all kinds of other people making silly statements about knowledge. Today it seems that people accept “story telling” as a reasonable explanation of something.
Let me give you this example. Your whole life you have lived on an island that someone else built for you. It has a nice little house with a red front door. A silver telescope is mounted to your front porch and when you look through it you can see another island that someone else is living on. What types of things can you infer correctly, or at least reasonably, about that island?
The following is a test of your reasoning system. If you really were being asked to reason, then it would follow that things would change upon the conclusion of this article, but since this is just a test…wait no it’s not a test, this is the real thing, better buckle up cowperson (see I can be PC) things are going to get bumpy!
There are presently many, many wonderful and compelling (for those who want to listen) arguments against Abortion. My goal is simply to give a small, but powerful one here.
Unfortunately I do not believe there is a simple answer to the question of how one should philosophically vote in the presidential election. Therefore I do believe we should have patience with those with whom we disagree on how one should cast their vote. Since no non-voter will want to read this article, as there is no reason to read this if you do not vote, I will not attempt to argue anyone into why they should vote. Rather, my hope is to provide the voter with some things to think about, things I have wrestled with myself, as we attempt to think through what really are the issues and really what is at stake. Before I begin let me also point out that I think there is a difference in how one should vote between the primary’s and the election itself, and I will explain that more further in, but lets just state that I am speaking about the election in this article unless otherwise stated.
Americans are very pragmatic. Because American’s created pragmatism as a philosophy, it has really taken over much of American, and even Christian thinking. A simple definition of this philosophy (forgive me as I am not a PhD in Philosophy), is “the view on how to use things to achieve the success you want; something is true when it works for your ends.” In other words anything, say Religion for example, is only worth pursuing if it can be a tool to your success in what you endeavor. If Religion makes you happy, and fills your life with meaning, then it is worth pursuing, according to the Pragmatic. There is no ultimate transcendent truth in Pragmatism, the truth, or value of something is simply based on its perceived success. Thus great evil could be done in its name, say, the murder of millions of Jews if the perceived effect is the bettering of a country’s economy and standing in the world! (I’m not saying that Hitler was a pragmatic per-say, but there is a sense in which Pragmatism can simply be called: The ends justify the means, and surely Hitler had some of that in him).
Certainly there are very smart people who are Atheists who have a track record of being very good thinkers. Yet, many atheists complain that they rarely, if ever, meet Christians whom they consider rational and good thinkers. Why is this the case? Is it true that Christians really are irrational and only Atheists are rational? Or as the Atheist would want you to believe: only rational people believe in Atheism because it is the rational view, and ergo only irrational people believe otherwise, and Christianity is otherwise, and thus it is full of irrational people. Nice when you can create logic that supports you, but bummer when it bumps into reality.
Contrary to popular belief, Atheism isn’t a more rational belief than Christianity, and although many Christians don’t disagree with the Atheist’s claim that most Christians are irrational, they too are mistaken. Atheists are just as irrational as Christians. You heard me correctly, but did you really? Notice I am speaking about people, not views, I didn’t say Atheism is just as irrational as Christianity, I said the person who believes Atheism is just as irrational as the person who believes in Christianity. Listen carefully (or should I say read carefully): every person on this planet is irrational, it is a human trait due to our fallen nature.
When everyone in the room is told they should expect the High Chieftain of Xerplosia, and a man dressed in stunning robes walks in, they all will immediately assume he is the man. Will any doubt he is and if they do will they be allowed to voice the opinion? Such group-think, brain-washing, I fear, has affected our scientific community as a whole. Watching “No Intelligence Allowed” is a real entry-level eye opener to how this works in Science currently. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1091617/
When Scientists cannot get jobs if they believe anything other then evolution, if they even attempt to suggest a different interpretation of the evidence they lose their jobs, then how can one say anything different than the conclusions are fixed?
Evolution is Dead and unfortunately the doctors refuse to call the smoldering and stinking corpse.
Of course when I talk about Evolution I am speaking of the incarnation of it that assumes a Godless, a purposeless, and a orderless universe. The confusion arrises when one decides upon the term Evolution, like many other terms such as Gay, Rights, Social Justice, Free Speech, Free Will etc., it is very loaded with a plethora of meanings. Evolution on the one hand is used to speak of the adaptation of things like plants or animals or even our cells, but on the other hand it is used to speak about a common origin of all things in a singularity like a first protein or cell which then mutated (evolved) into more complex mechanisms and eventually life from which all living things find their origin.
As one can see such a term as Evolution can bring to the listeners mind a broad selection of possible meanings. Depending, of course, on the listeners own background and biases he or she will immediately think of a certain definition of Evolution, a definition which may or may not be the same as the speaker intended. This, as we all know, is the problem with many speakers and listeners: they are both entirely on different pages and thus do not communicate nor hear what is intended. Certainly this possibility arrises for us in this blog as I write it. That is why I am being careful to define my terms and hope that you hear my terms and not your own experience or bias.
Many people believe in Santa, most of them are under the age of 10. They believe in Santa because their parents told them Santa is real. This cycle has continued for generations, the parent teaches the child, the child their children and so on. So, why would I dare tread on such holy ground? The reason I dare is because I believe the issue, although small, when compounded becomes quite large.
As I see it the issue resolves around a few different planets of thought. Is it ok to lie to someone to increase their happiness? Everyone is doing it and turning out ok, why can’t I? What is the Christian parent’s number one job towards their children? And is culture neutral and its traditions harmless?
As many of you know the New Atheists (as they are called) not only believe that God doesn’t exist, they believe that religion is evil and ought to be extinguished. They love to especially attack Christianity, because it is so bold as to blatantly tell its opponents that they are wrong. There are many things I can say on the subject, but I would like to address just one small flaw in their thinking.
Many of them, such as Sam Harris, have a distorted logic in how they argue against the existence of God. I will simplify their arguments here for times sake and just point out one of the huge flaws of it. See if you can spot the flaw before I demonstrate it. Remember they are assuming God exists for the sake of their arguments.
Have you ever thought about beauty? I mean really sat down and thought about what it is, where it comes from, and why it matters? I never really did until recently, so you are let of the hook, but now let us reason together.
You most likely have heard it said: “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”, a sentiment that I ultimately reject. Now I do not rule out people’s preferences, but what it ultimately boils down to is, the intrinsic beauty of something, is not dependent on what people feel or think about it.
I am writing this blog in response to a challenge I received in regards to some of the things I believe. I think some of my challengers responses are valid and deserve response. Perhaps some of you have heard similar things from people you know, so I hope that this post will answer some questions, create others, and over all help us all get closer to the truth (if it exists) of reality and religion. I will sum up his points here, ask some questions that need responses, and give my thoughts on the matter.
His points: Continue reading