Another day, another article on whether religion and evolution can coexist. I have never really understood the position of religious scientists who claim that there is no conflict and it is perfectly possible to accept both the theory of evolution and the existence of a supernatural. If you really understand the concept of evolution there can't be any place for an external force who either directed the process or interfered with the process as it went along. Evolution moves forward by the process of random mutation and mixing of genes through reproduction in conjunction with natural selection. How can you believe in this process, but also believe that man was created in god's image so that there was always some directionality to the evolution of humans and a known endpoint? Did god somehow tweak the environment in such a way that there was only one way that evolution could go? Or did he directly interfere with the process? If he was constantly adjusting, why did he stop about 150,000 years ago and then only start to interact with humans 6,000 years ago? It makes less sense the more I think about it!
I've dabbled a bit in genetic algorithms and Artificial Life, so I can sympathise with his job!
Saturday, 13 December 2008
Monday, 8 December 2008
Another facepalm moment
It's a pity that intelligence and education isn't a barrier to reproduction. I think some people are definitely holding this evolution business back...
Religious 'shun nanotechnology'
Are they really that concerned about the
Maybe they are worried about the competition and that some creatures will be worshipping the Great Creator Craig Venter in a few million years.
Religious 'shun nanotechnology'
Are they really that concerned about the
potential to create life at a nano scale without divine intervention
Maybe they are worried about the competition and that some creatures will be worshipping the Great Creator Craig Venter in a few million years.
Sunday, 7 December 2008
Morality
I get really fed up with religious people telling us that the reasons for the ills in today's society are due to our rejection of religion. See today's moan by Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor for example.
The UK is certainly less religious than it used to be, say 50 years ago, and our society is probably worse now than it was then. The problems in the US are a lot worse when you look at measures such as murder, teen pregnancies and drug addiction. Is the US less religious than it used to be? I don't know.
It's interesting that there are studies like those of Gregory Paul that show there is a correlation between sociological problems and religiousness and there is also the work of Phil Zuckerman who has shown that the most stable, balanced, safe, societies are the most secular, non-religious ones such as the Scandinavian countries.
Here's my take on this issue. Societies that have historically had their morality imposed on them from religious authorities have never been forced to think for themselves. It's the equivalent of a parent telling a child to do something 'because I say so'. Once that religious authority loses its influence, then there could well be a loss of moral direction, in the same way as a child might misbehave once a parent loses control.
In a society where morality isn't imposed and could be said to be somewhat subjective, you have to consider for yourself what the consequences of your actions are and take full responsibility for your actions. This internally generated morality will always stay with you.
The UK is certainly less religious than it used to be, say 50 years ago, and our society is probably worse now than it was then. The problems in the US are a lot worse when you look at measures such as murder, teen pregnancies and drug addiction. Is the US less religious than it used to be? I don't know.
It's interesting that there are studies like those of Gregory Paul that show there is a correlation between sociological problems and religiousness and there is also the work of Phil Zuckerman who has shown that the most stable, balanced, safe, societies are the most secular, non-religious ones such as the Scandinavian countries.
Here's my take on this issue. Societies that have historically had their morality imposed on them from religious authorities have never been forced to think for themselves. It's the equivalent of a parent telling a child to do something 'because I say so'. Once that religious authority loses its influence, then there could well be a loss of moral direction, in the same way as a child might misbehave once a parent loses control.
In a society where morality isn't imposed and could be said to be somewhat subjective, you have to consider for yourself what the consequences of your actions are and take full responsibility for your actions. This internally generated morality will always stay with you.
Sunday, 30 November 2008
The Age of Reason
I don't know how I've gone this long without reading it, but I've finally started to read The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine. It's very interesting so far and an easy read. It's written from a deist point of view and is as scathing of organized religion as anything from the atheists of today such as Dawkins and Hitchens. I wonder if the deists of the 18th century who became the founding fathers of America would be atheists today when it's not so much of a terrible sin to denounce completely denounce god and religion.
Even in the first few pages, I've found some choice quotes on religion in general
and the Old Testament
The worst thing is that I probably won't have enough time to finish the book until Christmas.
Edit: It just struck me that Thomas Paine looked familiar
Even in the first few pages, I've found some choice quotes on religion in general
The un-natural anything is, the more is it capable of becoming the object of dismal admiration
and the Old Testament
It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my own part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel.
The worst thing is that I probably won't have enough time to finish the book until Christmas.
Edit: It just struck me that Thomas Paine looked familiar
Thursday, 27 November 2008
Catch them while they're young
I've been wondering whether it's easier to decide on your philosophy of life, a particular religion or lack of religion, when you are older or younger.
Like most people in the UK I was brought up in a culturally Christian household. The rest of the family believed in the religion they had been brought with, but didn't go to church and religion didn't really have any effect on our daily lives.
At the age of about 11-12, I decided to take myself off to the local Baptist church and Sunday school to find out what this religion business was all about. I began to realise that I couldn't take all the parables literally, as everyone seemed to, and the whole story started to make less and less sense.
Not long after my church experience, we were given a course in Comparative Religions in school. This finally convinced me that religion was a made-made phenomenon and that all the believers around me were just following the religion that they were brought up in.
So, by the age of 13 I was a devout atheist (although strictly I should say a strong agnostic - just to be logically consistent!). Maybe I was lucky as my parents hadn't forced religion on me, but I didn't ever feel that I had wasted any time or intellectual effort on believing. My 'belief' was just something that I went along with, like Santa or the tooth fairy and giving it up didn't worry me.
I can imagine that if I had truly believed what people had been telling me and I had run my life on that basis, that it would be very difficult to make such a change in philosophy later in life. I guess the longer you follow a particular way of thinking the harder it is to change. Also, you get comfortable with your way of thinking and you may not want to start thinking about it too deeply in case you realise you have been wasting your time.
I'm not saying that everyone ought to believe the same as me, but as most children are brought up in a society that is culturally religious, they should be given full sight of all the alternative viewpoints (through comparative religion or critical thinking courses) so they realise there is a choice and they don't have to believe everything they have been told.
Like most people in the UK I was brought up in a culturally Christian household. The rest of the family believed in the religion they had been brought with, but didn't go to church and religion didn't really have any effect on our daily lives.
At the age of about 11-12, I decided to take myself off to the local Baptist church and Sunday school to find out what this religion business was all about. I began to realise that I couldn't take all the parables literally, as everyone seemed to, and the whole story started to make less and less sense.
Not long after my church experience, we were given a course in Comparative Religions in school. This finally convinced me that religion was a made-made phenomenon and that all the believers around me were just following the religion that they were brought up in.
So, by the age of 13 I was a devout atheist (although strictly I should say a strong agnostic - just to be logically consistent!). Maybe I was lucky as my parents hadn't forced religion on me, but I didn't ever feel that I had wasted any time or intellectual effort on believing. My 'belief' was just something that I went along with, like Santa or the tooth fairy and giving it up didn't worry me.
I can imagine that if I had truly believed what people had been telling me and I had run my life on that basis, that it would be very difficult to make such a change in philosophy later in life. I guess the longer you follow a particular way of thinking the harder it is to change. Also, you get comfortable with your way of thinking and you may not want to start thinking about it too deeply in case you realise you have been wasting your time.
I'm not saying that everyone ought to believe the same as me, but as most children are brought up in a society that is culturally religious, they should be given full sight of all the alternative viewpoints (through comparative religion or critical thinking courses) so they realise there is a choice and they don't have to believe everything they have been told.
Friday, 21 November 2008
Thursday, 20 November 2008
Machines Like Us 2
A few months ago I found an interesting site called Machines Like Us. It covers a whole range of subjects that I'm interested in - Atheism, Science, Technology, Robotics and Artificial Life/Artificial Intelligence. It looks like they have now started to keep the site up to date, so I'm going to keep a closer eye on it.
By the way, still no news on this front...
By the way, still no news on this front...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)