/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3216476]

A university professor challenged his students with this question. Did God create everything that exists?

A student bravely replied yes, he did!"

"God created everything?" The professor asked.

"Yes, sir," the student replied.

The professor answered, "If God created everything, then God created evil since evil exists, and according to the principal that our works define who we are then God is evil."

The student became quiet before such an answer.

The professor was quite pleased with himself and boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the Christian faith was a myth.

Another student raised his hand and said, "Can I ask you a question professor?" "Of course", replied the professor. The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"

"What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?" The students snickered at the young man's question.

The young man replied, "In fact sir, cold does not exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat. Everybody and every object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (- 460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat; all matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have too little heat.

The student continued. "Professor, does darkness exist?"

The professor responded, "Of course it does".

[Anonymous No.3216480]

The student replied, "Once again you are wrong sir, darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in reality the absence of light. Light we can study, but not darkness. In fact we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wavelengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."

Finally the young man asked the professor. "Sir, does evil exist?"

Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course as I have already said. We see it every day. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. "These manifestations are nothing else but evil."

To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

The professor sat down. P.S., the young student's name was Albert Einstein

[Anonymous No.3216483]

> The professor sat down. P.S., the young student's name was Albert Einstein

[Anonymous No.3216484]

And this convinced you that a magical zombie wants to be your friend?

[Anonymous No.3216485]

lmfao

[Anonymous No.3216487]

>>3216480
>>3216476

So tl;dr God created darkness, coldness, and evil

Good to know OP, Ill thank him the next time I'm in Alaska thinking up a diabolical plan.

[Anonymous No.3216489]

>P.S., the young student's name was Albert Einstein

[Anonymous No.3216490]

What a thoughtful post. I'm converting to theism.

[Anonymous No.3216491]

>>3216480
>The professor sat down. P.S., the young student's name was Albert Einstein

[Anonymous No.3216493]

>>3216484
A good troll can argue about anything regardless of his own beliefs (if he's even decided on his beliefs).

Einstein confirmed for supreme troll

[Anonymous No.3216504]

>The professor sat down. P.S., the young student's name was Albert Einstein

[Anonymous No.3216510]

> P.S., the FILL IN THE TROLL was Albert Einstein


is now a meme

[amarandiv No.3216536]

there is no good or evil, for wat we see as evil is good for ATLEAST ONE person. ( who did ..whatever..)


to give an example if someone kills ure dog u see it an an evil thing.

but surely whoever did it had a verry good reason for doing it and did it because it benefitted him.

[scuse my grammar OR dont fkin' bother]

[Anonymous No.3216539]

What about aids, op?
Aids didn't just "magically come from nothing" as your picture states. According to you, something had to have created aids. And guess what? You're saying god created aids. And I can tell you that aids is not an absence of god.

>>3216510
>/b/

[Anonymous No.3216547]

>>>Navy SEALs are always taught

>>>1) Keep your priorities in order and

>>>2) Know when to act without hesitation.

>>>A Navy SEAL was attending some college

>>>courses between assignments. He had completed missions in >>>Iraq and Afghanistan. One of the courses

>>>had a professor who was an avowed atheist and a member >>>of >>>the ACLU. One day he shocked the

>>>class when he came in, looked to the

>>>ceiling, and flatly stated, "God, if

>>>you are real, then I want you to knock me off this >>>platform. I'll give you exactly

>>>15 minutes."

>>>The lecture room fell silent.

>>>You could hear a pin drop. Ten minutes

>>>went by and the professor

>>>proclaimed, "Here I am God. I'm

>>>still waiting."

>>>It got down to the last couple of

>>>minutes when the SEAL got out of his

>>>chair, went up to the professor,

>>>and cold-cocked him; knocking him off

>>>the platform. The professor was out cold. The SEAL went >>>back to

>>>his seat and sat there, silently.

>>>The other students were shocked and stunned and sat there >>>looking on in

>>>silence.

>>>The professor eventually came to,

>>>noticeably shaken, looked at the SEAL and asked,

>>>"What the hell is the

>>>matter with you? Why did you do that?"

>>>The SEAL calmly replied, "God was too

>>>busy today protecting America's soldiers

>>>who are protecting your

>>>right to say stupid shit and act

>>>like an asshole. So He sent me."

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3216551]

>>3216476
This is what we call a strawman. No atheist thinks that this is a formal logical argument, merely a form of persuasion which may sometimes work. As I don't base my beliefs on this strawman, I see no need for further reply.

[opisachristfaggot No.3216555]

Holy shit! This really changed my mind about cold.
P.S> the students name was "FUCK THIS THREAD"

[Anonymous No.3216560]

OP, you're arguing that a god exists. Whether or not there is a god, you can prove that say, the Christian god does not exist. How? Because the Christian god claims the earth is 4000 years old. That is not true. If an all knowing god gets such a basic fact wrong about his own universe, then surely he does not exist.

>Theism
>The belief that an all powerful magical being came out of nothing

[Anonymous No.3216574]

>>3216560
I don't believe that. Very few Christians throughout history have taken Genesis literally

[Anonymous No.3216576]

>>3216547
>again that doesn't say anything about the existance of god, just that americas soldiers use violence against free speech.

[Anonymous No.3216581]

>>3216551

>No atheist thinks that this is a formal logical argument

So you know what every atheist in the world thinks?

[Anonymous No.3216583]

I'll bite out of boredom. Saying that "X is because a lack of Y" only works when it's actually true. Finding a few things that fit the formula doesn't mean you can plug any suppositions in have those also be true.

[Anonymous No.3216586]

>>3216574
but the genesis is one of the only proofs we have of the god of the christians! Every thing this supposed god has said is completely inaccurate!

[Anonymous No.3216589]

>P.S. That student was Jesus.

[Anonymous No.3216591]

>>3216480
>Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God

I was with you right up until you said this.

Evil is not absence of anything. Good and evil and simply value judgements inscribed by humans.

[Anonymous No.3216592]

>>3216551
It's a cute story though. I can't stand preachers of religion or lack-thereof.

[Anonymous No.3216593]

>>3216574
>Very few Christians throughout history have taken Genesis literally

[Anonymous No.3216596]

>>3216576

His violence was an act of free speech.
a form of art if you will.

The soldier was saying that God acts through those individuals with the courage to stand up for God

[Anonymous No.3216597]

>Albert Einstein was a pantheist
>He never went to university

[Anonymous No.3216599]

>>3216536
That isn't a practical belief.

I bet you are a sociopath.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216605]

>>3216574
You are correct, sir.

>P.S. That student's name was Sark.

[Anonymous No.3216606]

I really liked the perspective that cold and darkness don't exist and therefor evil does not exist, but that last line made me cringe hard.

[Anonymous No.3216607]

>>3216599
neither is determinism but that doesn't stop people.

[Anonymous No.3216609]

Evil is not absence of anything. Good and evil and simply value judgements inscribed by humans.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216610]

>>3216593
>Thinks Christianity is 30 years old.
>full retard etc.

[Anonymous No.3216612]

>>3216593
> throughout history
> posts one modern survey from a single countr
> smiles smug pwned the christian smile

[Anonymous No.3216616]

>>3216596
>God acts through those individuals with the courage to stand up for God
>His violence was an act of free speech.
>a form of art if you will.

twintowers.jpg

Performance art.

[Anonymous No.3216628]

>>3216616
The only difference is that the god of the Muslims, Allah, does not exist. the Christian god would not support 9/1//.

[Anonymous No.3216635]

What is good?

The absence of evil.

derpity derp,

[Anonymous No.3216649]

What a thoughtful post. I'm converting back to Erisianism and throwing away all my hotdog buns.

[Anonymous No.3216655]

If God created everything, who created God?

Christians: -273
Atheists: <span class="math">\displaystyle \pi[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.3216666]

>>3216596
He also implied that God likes to spend all of his time helping people kill other people.

[Anonymous No.3216668]

If god created evil the very idea of evil exists because of god.


Without god there is no evil. There is simply nothing. If he created matter then he allowed evil to happen. He has ABSOLUTE power, you can't say that someone killing a classroom full of children is just the lack of god. He could have CHOSEN to make it so the "default" or lack of good is to simply do nothing at all. But he CHOSE to make the "default" or zero point to be incredibly evil.


God created evil.


But.
Who created god?

[Anonymous No.3216674]

>>3216668
>>3216668

I mean if god created everything then the very idea of evil exists because of god

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216678]

>>3216609
That's the materialist view. That is not the theistic view.

[Anonymous No.3216681]

It is obvious the story is just made up by a theist...

What kind of retarded professor would actually fall for that TWICE?
I could maybe believe that the professor was backed into a corner the first time, but the second time... I don't think so.

Furthermore, I have seen this story about 5 times in the past few years.
That alone tells us that:
1) even if this story were true, theists finally found a situation that makes them look good so they keep telling the same story over and over.. but all that really shows us is how few and far between situations like this really are.
2) The only story they can come up with is a fake one

[Ludwig !9CUY39dDYo No.3216685]

Ignoring the fact that both the pro-christian posts are obvious trolls taken from pictures from a stupid ass website, while at the same time ignoring the fact that anyone who has never seen these copypasta trolls is obviously new here, I would just like to say:

Seriously, /sci/? I mean, come on.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216686]

>>3216668
God by definition is uncreate. Why have no atheist fags ever learned this?

[Anonymous No.3216688]

>>3216666


If he did that would be his will.

Just because YOU question God doesn't make your opinions valid.

God's all powerful his actions are not yours to judge.

[Anonymous No.3216690]

>>3216678
>>3216678


Does he or does he not have the power to stop satan?

Hmm... He created EVERYTHING, including satan, satan is fucking up his creation and yet he doesn't do anything to stop it? He can. But he won't stop it? Are you sure satan is the truly evil one?

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3216692]

>>3216686
>God by definition is uncreate. Why have no atheist fags ever learned this
We understand this. We just think it's an asspull and that there is no interfering god.

[Anonymous No.3216699]

>>3216688

That's right. Don't ask questions, now get down on your knees, and do what you're told.

Be sure to train your children to be slaves as well.

[Anonymous No.3216702]

>implying the problem of evil is a serious question for serious consideration by serious theologians or philosophers

Have you people even read the bible? Nowhere does the character of God have a problem with visiting evil on anyone, for any reason.

I mean, I understand that most people are too moral to believe in a god just as written, so they have to invent one that more in line with modern ethics, but still, the problem of evil is fairly cheap.

[Anonymous No.3216704]

>>3216690
He does. Read the Bible. It says that Satan and his followers will eventually be thrown into the lake of fire forever.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216709]

>>3216692
Then why do you play stupid and say, "who created god"?

[Anonymous No.3216711]

>>3216699

Train them to do what?

Serve God out of love?

Make sure to teach your children to walk in ignorance.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3216715]

>>3216709
First, that wasn't me. Second, he did it to demonstrate the asspull. You demand there be a cause of the universe, but you drop this demand for god, /for no reason/. This is textbook special pleading. Textbook.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading

[Anonymous No.3216719]

>>3216704


>eventually


Well there's your problem right there.


He could do it now. He can go back in time and make it so satan and anything that could be interpreted as evil not exist or happen. Yet he doesn't. There's no way around it. God created and IS evil.

[Anonymous No.3216724]

>>3216709

The trait of 'uncreated' is just as easily applied to existence itself as it is to the creator.

Arguments based on what is defined as requiring creating and not requiring creating are silly.

[Anonymous No.3216727]

>>3216699

You are on your knees compared to god

Whether you do as your told is up to you if you're DELUSIONAL enough to believe you're more powerful than god.

[Anonymous No.3216728]

>>3216719
God didn't create evil, but his stupid, misbehaving creations did.

[Anonymous No.3216733]

>>3216727

Might does not make right.

[Anonymous No.3216743]

>>3216733


prove this statement.

Who are you to define right and wrong?

You do think you're god right?

[Anonymous No.3216750]

> The professor sat down. P.S., the young student's name was Albert Einstein

[Anonymous No.3216764]

>>3216743

Good question. Who is anyone to define right and wrong?

Do we go with the thing that has the most power to force their subjective view of right and wrong on everyone?

Or do we go with the consensus of the most who agree on what their subjective views of right and wrong are?


The foundation of modern ethics leans more towards the latter, and we are unambiguously better people for it.

[Anonymous No.3216773]

>this thread

[opisachristfaggot No.3216774]

"If God is so great, why aint he RICH?"
Time Cube impose 4 corners on Earth sphere.
Earth sphere is Cubic with rounded corners.
Earth exists as2 opposite Cube hemispheres.
Humans must establish 4 corner Earth Cube.
All humans exist between2 opposite sexes.
Impossible for a human singularity to exist.
2 opposite sex Cubes equate to crap shoot.
Religion and academia preach singularity.
Human word animals are singularity stupid.
Evil singularity dooms Opposite Creation.
YOU can't handle Cubic Time, Cubic Life
or Cubic Truth - for insideof Time Cube
equates the most magnificient symmetry
of opposites existing within the universe -
for every corner has an equal opposite corner,
every 2 corners has an equal opposite 2
corners, every tri-corner has an equal
opposite tri-corner and every 4 corners has
an equal opposite 4 corners. No human or
god can utter such powerful ineffable
opposite Cubic Truth. God is singularity.
Evil singularity dooms Opposite Creation.

[Anonymous No.3216779]

>>3216480
the problem with the evil part is simply capering god to the opposite of evil when the professes proved god in him self was evil. the logic of how absence of god is evil is false since at least on person who does not believe in god " or atheist" is not evil meaning he has no love from god yet no evil. he is also say that anyone who is evil is not a creature of gods since god can only love and not exist as evil.

[Anonymous No.3216781]

obvious troll is obvious

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216794]

>>3216764
Both are wrong. Every man, if he is truly a man, must rationally for himself decide what is right and wrong.

[Anonymous No.3216800]

What if God was a force of 'good', but had an equal in magnitude yet opposite force of 'bad'.
I shall explain what good and bad mean another day, but atheists are right in saying God does not exist, because we aren't yet able to define God all too well. Thus, God [under the current definition of being divine- whatever that means] does not exist.

[Anonymous No.3216802]

>>3216655
Talk about ignorance. Your stating that every Atheist that ever existed was and has been always right, or have never been wrong.

Secondly, The answer to "who created God?" can be answered using the scientific explanation of matter being in existence. As in "Always been there". If it works for your view of science, why not god?

>>3216704
This should sent up flags in everyone's brains, as this sounds like a "ruse" to keep people from defecting or converting from a religion. If he (God) is all powerful, omnipotent, etc. etc. Why can't he just erase his mistakes? oops, I said "mistake" with "god".

I like to think of God (if he is one) as a Creater (think humans create technology) who got excited, failed to predict outcome, and said "oops".

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216803]

>>3216715
>, but you drop this demand for god, /for no reason/.
Lol, it's not for no reason. It's the whole reason God is postulated in the first place. That's what you faggots don't get. God is the idea that there is an infinite source of the universe. That implies immutable and eternal. You don't have to subscribe to it, but don't be retarded about it.

[Anonymous No.3216805]

>>3216794

And on what does he base this? On the authority of someone powerful? Or on the state of the conversation in society?

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216808]

>>3216724
Uncreated is not just as easily applied to the universe itself, as the universe itself is constantly changing.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3216810]

>>3216803
Nope. You are the retard. Why must it be god? Why can't it be the universe itself?

Or why can't it be a flying spaghetti monster? You have no argument.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3216812]

>>3216808
You just asserted that the universe cannot be eternal, but god can. This is a baseless assertion.

[Anonymous No.3216816]

>>3216779
Lets say life was a mathematical question like x^4.
I say the answer is 4, you say its -5. If both our answers are wrong then is my answer better than yours.

[Anonymous No.3216819]

>>3216803

So you call the ultimate source of the universe 'god'.

What traits can be known about this 'ultimate source of the universe', which differs from 'ultimate source of the universe' alone, that warrants calling it god? A loaded term, at the very least.

[LSP No.3216820]

>>3216476

cool story bro (:
also...i think it is totally retarded for a teacher to challenge someones religion...its like, totes none of your business. Teach your class and shut the fuck up.

im an athiest because no matter what...inside there is always this doubt that god doesnt exist. it'd be nice to truely beleive otherwise and stuff. but i just don't sadly. Im a nihilist and thus find it all very depressing....so then i was like fuck that emo shit imma just be happy and go eat a sandwich and watch tv.

moral of the story:
>>dont be a douche, be a bro
>>just be happy damn it

[Anonymous No.3216846]

>>3216802

New around here?

[Anonymous No.3216855]

http://www.snopes.com/religion/einstein.asp

[Anonymous No.3216867]

>>3216855
Everything said there is wrong. Try again.

[Anonymous No.3216873]

>>3216547
My grandma believes these types of stories are actual, documented events.

She needs to be banned from the Internet.

[Anonymous No.3216881]

>>3216593
>evolution is rising

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216889]

>>3216810
Are you fucking brain damaged?

[Anonymous No.3216892]

If everything needs a creator, and God created everything.
Then who created God?

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216893]

>>3216812
Look around. The universe is not immutable.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3216895]

>>3216889
That's not an argument that supports your claim that god can be eternal, but the universe cannot. It is also not a claim that the first cause cannot be a flying spaghetti monster.

[Anonymous No.3216894]

>>3216892
God, which is why hes god.

[Anonymous No.3216899]

>>3216895
The universe is gods eternal dream. Whats your point. A spaghetti monster is a concept he created so it cant be god.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3216900]

>>3216893
I fail to see any reason why eternal things must be immutable.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3216902]

>>3216895
You can call God a spaghetti monster if you want, but you need to justify the properties you assign to him.

[Anonymous No.3216903]

>>3216894
So he created himself. Kinda like a big bang scenario then?

[TheCatch No.3216906]

It's turtles all the way down, kid!

[Anonymous No.3216914]

It is not as asspull to suggest that God does not need to have been created by something, if in a scientific paradigm the universe can be the same way. Both theists and atheists are talking about the same divine quality here. The difference of opinion lies in whether or not it is meaningful to collect all divine qualities and powers into one "place" or not.

[Anonymous No.3216916]

>>3216903
Nothing similar. Consciousness wills itself into existence. Nothing material can do that or at least has a precedent to believe its possible.

[Anonymous No.3216921]

Hey /sci/, I want to share an amazing experience I once had with you guys. The following is a true story that happened just a few years ago at USC.

There was a professor of philosophy who was a deeply committed atheist. His primary goal for one required class was to spend the entire semester attempting to prove that God couldn’t exist. His students were always afraid to argue with him because of his impeccable logic. For twenty years, he had taught this class and no one had ever had the courage to go against him. Sure, some had argued in class at times, but no one had ever really gone against him because of his reputation. At the end of every semester on the last day, he would say to his class of 300 students, "If there is anyone here who still believes in Jesus, stand up!" In twenty years, no one had ever stood up. They knew what he was going to do next. He would say, "Because anyone who believes in God is a fool. If God existed, he could stop this piece of chalk from hitting the ground and breaking. Such a simple task to prove that He is God, and yet He can’t do it." And every year, he would drop the chalk onto the tile floor of the classroom and it would shatter into a hundred pieces. All of the students would do nothing but stop and stare. Most of the students thought that God couldn’t exist. Certainly, a number of Christians had slipped through, but for 20 years, they had been too afraid to stand up.

[Anonymous No.3216926]

>>3216921
Well, a few years ago there was a freshman who happened to enroll. He was a Christian, and had heard the stories about his professor. He was required to take the class for his major, and he was afraid. But for three months that semester, he prayed every morning that he would have the courage to stand up no matter what the professor said, or what the class thought. Nothing they said could ever shatter his faith...he hoped.

Finally, the day came. The professor said, " If there is anyone here who still believes in God, stand up!" The professor and the class of 300 people looked at him, shocked, as he stood up at the back of the classroom. The professor shouted, "You FOOL!!! If God existed, he would keep this piece of chalk from breaking when it hit the ground!" He proceeded to drop the chalk, but as he did, it slipped out of his fingers, off his shirt cuff, onto the pleat of his pants, down his leg, and off his shoe. As it hit the ground, it simply rolled away unbroken. The professor’s jaw dropped as he stared at the chalk. He looked up at the young man, and then ran out of the lecture hall. The young man who had stood, proceeded to walk to the front of the room and shared his faith in Jesus for the next half hour. 300 students stayed and listened as he told of God’s love for them and of His power through Jesus. P.S., that piece of chalk's name was Albert Einstein.

[Anonymous No.3216928]

>>3216902
So what properties do you assign to it?

Ultimate cause of the universe. Check.

Male. Check.

Anything else?

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3216936]

>>3216902
No no. It's a /Flying/ Spaghetti Monster. It has to fly because otherwise how could it do the things it does.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InsaneTrollLogic

[Anonymous No.3216938]

>>3216928
>God
>Male

BWAHAHAHA, lmfao. it god were a male then the entire universe would be at war by now

[Anonymous No.3216943]

>>3216938
Everything struggles to exist. The universe is always at war.

[Anonymous No.3216945]

>>3216936
Stop replying to the damned troll. Jesus fucking christ could he be any more obvious?

[Anonymous No.3216949]

>>3216921
>not greentext
>didn't happen
Too gay/didnt read

[Anonymous No.3216953]

>>3216945
How can he be trolling when he's correct?

[Anonymous No.3216957]

>>3216928
exist
>check
the only property needed

[Anonymous No.3216962]

>>3216943
Well I believe God is a female.

It was we who were given the right to reproduce, not Man. Man must provide for the Female. He must sacrifice all for the Female so she may reproduce. That is why She, in all her wisdom, created Man to work and labour and Woman to live in luxury. The world is a corrupt place where Female has oppressed by Man.

[Anonymous No.3216963]

>>3216945
>implying the line between sincere apologists and trolls isn't razor thin and constantly moving

[Anonymous No.3216967]

>>3216957

So god exists. Does it do anything else?

[Anonymous No.3216968]

A university professor who was a devout atheist challenged his class to prove that God existed.
He was a mathematics professor, but had somehow gotten away with preaching atheism in every one of his classes for the past 60 years.
He stood at the front in his 9am lecture, he had a box with him.
"This box is filled with crucifixes! I demand that every one of you students come forward and urinate on one! If you refuse you will fail!".
He demonstrated, taking out a crucifix and urinating on it in front of the class.
Then he was struck by light fixture that had fallen from the ceiling and died.
True story

[Anonymous No.3216972]

>>3216963
You're on /sci/. Given the culture here, it's more likely to be a troll. There are certainly people that would make arguments just like his in real life, but when you're on /sci/, it's unlikely. Ignore it.

[Anonymous No.3216977]

>>3216967
No it doesnt. 'Its' existence is everything.

[Anonymous No.3216980]

>>3216968
>P.S., that crucifixes name was Richard Dawkins

[Anonymous No.3216988]

>>3216962
So wrong. So bias and illogical. So feminine like.

[Anonymous No.3216994]

A university professor who was a devout atheist was giving a lecture.

One of the students was using a two thousand year old textbook on a different subject and could not understand why the lecture did not match up with the book.

[Anonymous No.3216998]

>>3216988
I would not expect a Man to understand. You were not made with intellectualism in mind. That is why countries led by Men are always at war. And why Women have, on average, a higher IQ.

[Anonymous No.3217000]

>>3216977
So then god is simply the universe?

Why call it god, what traits does it have that distinguish it from the universe we all observe?

[Anonymous No.3217004]

>>3216998
>Doesnt understand the importance of war
Typical female perspective.
This is why god cant be a woman.

[Anonymous No.3217007]

IVE ACTUALLY HEARD A PASTOR READ THIS CHAIN EMAIL IN THE MIDDLE OF CHURCH.

Holy fuck I thought he must have come up with it on his own.

[Anonymous No.3217010]

>>3217000
There is more to God - the spiritual and personal aspect - than the physical universe.

[Anonymous No.3217015]

This is a true story /sci/. It happened at my University a few years ago.

One day, a young Christian enrolled in a biology class. His family wanted to make sure it was suitable for their beliefs, so they tagged along to his first lecture. It's a father, mother, daughter, the male student and their dog. The father says to the Professor, "We have a really amazing religion. "

The Professor says, "Sorry, I don't approve of religion in my lectures. It prevents me from carrying out my unethical experiments"

The mother says, "Sir, if you just see our religion, we know you would want to join us."

The Professor says, "OK. OK. I'll take a look."

The father begins by taking off his shirt. The mother does the same with hers. Then the son does the same with his shirt. The daughter, not to be outdone, takes off her shirt. At last, all four family members stand before the agent, bare chested. Spelled out, in red paint and with two letters to each body, is the following:

[Anonymous No.3217016]

>>3217000
He has a conscious. But more importantly, it says the instead of an objective reality, the universe is gods subjective reality.
Basically like saying the universe is something akin to a dream.

[Anonymous No.3217019]

>>3217010

And the source for thinking the universe is/has a personal agency?

Observations which could only be explained by the action of such an agency would be a good start.

[Anonymous No.3217020]

>>3216476

you constantly make this so hard...

[Anonymous No.3217023]

>>3217010
shhh, don't disturb the irrational hatred of atheists.

You wouldn't like it when they're angry.

[Anonymous No.3217025]

>>3217015
L-E-T-S F-U-C-K

Meanwhile, the dog strolls to the end of the line, rolls onto his back and exposes his testicles. Written across each testicle, in red paint, is the following:

"LETS FUCK!!" repeats the Professor, confused. "What the hell does that mean?"

The family proceeds to show them. Slowly. Faster. Harder. Softer. On their backs. On their stomachs. To the accompaniment of a metronome. Free form. Old form. Using jelly. Now jam. On swings. On a Barker lounge. While watching television. Now listening to Christian radio. While doing their taxes. While eating a light, nutritious snack. When they're finished, the dog barks with joy and wags his tail. All four family members raise their hands high and then, in unison, perform a deep Shakespearean bow, imaginary applause washing over them all.

For the longest time, the Professor just sits in silence. Finally, he manages, "That's a hell of a religion. Sleeping with young man is a core part of your beliefs, right?"

And the father says, "Yes."

>P.S., the name of that act was the Albert Einstein

[Anonymous No.3217026]

>>3217019
You answered your own question. The reason to believe in personal agency is the observation of events best explained by personal agency.

[LSP No.3217030]

>>3216962

female here,
1st off, thats fucking insane
2nd off its not like women can just reproduce with out men
>>nice try femitroll

if "god" exists, i think it'd be energy. if energy cant be destroyed or created....then all this universe shit was caused by energy. also i honestly think if god existed he wouldn't fucking care if you prayed...if he has a plan hes not gonna go change it just cuz you asked

they should just make another board for religion
>>religion
>>4chan
....psh, okay

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3217031]

>>3217020
That's not what atheism means, boss. Open a dictionary.

[Anonymous No.3217037]

>>3217030
>If God exists, he must be energy
>Trying to quantify Her.

And you call ME crazy?

[Anonymous No.3217038]

>>3217026

I agree that is the only good reason.

I was also asking for an example.

[Anonymous No.3217040]

the flying spagetti monsters more likely to exist than God, ive seen spagetti, its fucking delish, i dont know what the christian god tastes like, probs like aids milk /:

[Anonymous No.3217041]

>>3217030
>attention whore here
ftfy

[Anonymous No.3217045]

>>3216903

Christian status:

Not told [ ]
Told [ ]
Fucking told [ ]
Knights of the TOLD republic [X]

[Anonymous No.3217048]

Atheism: agreeing with most religious people about most other religious people

[Anonymous No.3217050]

>>3217038
Surely you have seen plenty of anecdotes on this very issue before?

[Anonymous No.3217051]

>>3217045
didnt read following post.

[Anonymous No.3217064]

>>3217050

Countless anecdotes. I file them next to 'real life crrepy events' threads on /x/, alien visitations, and conspiracy theories.

But I am always curious as to why people believe these things, and to know whether they had a personal experience, or they are just taking someones word on it.

[Anonymous No.3217067]

The crusades? Too much god in man?

[Anonymous No.3217073]

>>3217067
religion=/=belief in god

[Anonymous No.3217079]

>>3217064
Most strong believers tend to have personal experiences. From personal experience with these people, I know they aren't liars, and it's really hard to debunk some of their stories (one friend claimed to have seen a demon independently from another friend, and both described it precisely the same without aiding one another). Yet at the same time, I don't fucking believe them. They say, "Well if you're so smart, then how do you explain it." And if I start with the premise that they aren't lying and their memories weren't exaggerated or altered (they apparently both drew this image on paper and revealed it to one another, and it was VERY close), then I can't. And they think that it instantly means that they are right and I'm going to believe their religion.

[Anonymous No.3217086]

>>3217073
>democracy, an idea that lets people make the world a better place
>religion, an idea that kills all your hopes and dreams.

Apparently, atheists denounce religion as doing on the killing, until someone brings up a subject where they refuse to admit that individuals are the ones making the choices.

[Anonymous No.3217090]

>>3217064
I generally don't like to take other people's word for things, only tending to do so when what they're saying seems a logical extrapolation from what I've figured out for myself. Much the same as we tend to believe our professors about advanced scientific concepts that we haven't personally tested but which "line up" with what we have tested.

I've had personal experiences in this realm. I generally don't like to discuss them, but without them I would find the theoretical reasoning uncompelling.

[Anonymous No.3217092]

>>3217073
Never was implied, bhuddism for example. The crusades were however, a war in the name of god for the benefit of religion.

[Anonymous No.3217105]

>>3217079

I also take people at their word when they claim a personal experience. And if they were able to demonstrate this experience to anyone disinterested in spirituality, or even come to some kind of consensus among themselves, I would consider them myself. Though in the absence of having such a personal experience myself, I don't see myself changing my mind.

I have less respect for people who hold to second (or third, or fourth, or nth) hand accounts of people who had personal experiences.

[Anonymous No.3217116]

>>3217086

Of course it's individuals doing the killing. Some individuals invented religion, some other individuals are in charge of them, and a whole load of individuals are of the opinion that the first two sets of individuals know better than they do what actions are approved of by god.

No different from any ideology that promotes absolute authority.

[Anonymous No.3217115]

>>3217105
This. If their experience was genuine, then they have prove among themselves, but when they act asthough I'm an idiot for not accepting their experiences as proof they get very annoying.

[sdm !!42M0wSt2dkX No.3217118]

Lol, yes, "The absence of heat", cold, does exist. I think he even mentioned it.

What a fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.3217122]

>The professor sat down. P.S., the young student's name was Albert Einstein

[Anonymous No.3217123]

>>3216938

>> if god were a male then the entire universe would be at war by now...

and your point is?

>implying there is no universal tension.

[Anonymous No.3217124]

>>3217086
>democracy
an idea that has resulted in poverty and inequality among peers and robs one for anothers satisfaction bringing forth the uglier side of humanity.
>religion
an idea that gives people hope and provides common ground across different cultures

[Anonymous No.3217135]

>>3217115
>>3217105
As a believer, I agree with you both.

Having said that, I would have to say to >>3217105 that from my own experience it seems as if the mindset we hold *strongly* affects whether or not we have these experiences. This unfortunately means that I don't know how to rule out confirmation bias from either perspective (having been in them both), but there you have it.

[Anonymous No.3217136]

>>3217092
So you are arguing over the followers of a religion or the belief in god. Youre changing subjects a little too fast to be coherent.

[Anonymous No.3217140]

The cold-heat analogy to evil-good is bunk to begin with.

Suffering is the result of the collision of the impersonal laws of nature with human interests; or the incompatible interests of two humans.

Evil is when such suffering could have been prevented by human action, but was not, or when such suffering was caused by direct human action.

[Anonymous No.3217144]

>>3217105
Hasnt found that the belief in god is the most mathematically and philosophically sound

[Anonymous No.3217153]

>>3217140
evil is subjective.

[Anonymous No.3217174]

What really pissed me off about this thread is if I had posted it I would have been banned.

[Anonymous No.3217179]

>>3216480
> Evil is the absence of God.

And you know what? God is just an abbreviated version of the word "good".

GOOD ------> GOD

[Anonymous No.3217183]

>>3217025
>>3217025
>>3217025
ulollololo

[Anonymous No.3217185]

>The professor sat down. P.S., the young student's name was Albert Einstein

[Anonymous No.3217187]

>>3216926

uh huh.

[Anonymous No.3217189]

>>3217135

From my perspective, religion encourages confirmation bias, while science abhors it.

For example, a Hindi person will see Shiva, or Vishnu, while a Buddhist may experience nirvana.

An Indian scientist and a Chinese scientist will both get the same results when they try to perform experiments in atomic theory.


Religious claims diverge, scientific claims converge. To me, this seems like religion is making stuff up with no way to distinguish the right from the wrong, while science is honing in on an essential truth by discarding the incorrect and keeping the more correct.


I understand that the action of an uncooperative agency could look random, but then on what basis would any religious person make any claim about it and expect to be believed?

[Anonymous No.3217197]

>>3217189
Science is founded on consensual assumptions.
Wtfamireading

[Anonymous No.3217198]

>>3217153

That's what I said.

[Anonymous No.3217200]

>>3217198
No you said it was based on something subjective

[sage No.3217203]

>Atheist butthurt that Christfags think differntly than they.
>Christfags butthurt because Atheist think differently than they.

To Atheists: Science doesn't debunk the existence of God, merely that the creation myth was just that. To claim that science indeed disproves God is in itself unscientific, thus you've turned science into faith. You will not persuade Christfags to your way of thinking by calling them morons.Just because a man believes in something greater does not necessarily mean he's stupid. I would hardly call C.S. Lewis (Anglican), Sir Isaac Newton (Arian), Albert Einstein (Jew), or Buzz Aldrin (Catholic) stupid.

To Christfags: It's OK if Atheists disagree with you. Also, the Bible does NOT state that Earth is exactly 5,000 Terran years old and was created in exactly one week. Whose to say God didn't use the Big Bang as a catalyst and the Genesis account was indeed a ancient Jewish myth passed down from Moses; author of the book of Genesis and the other books of the Torah. You will not persuade an Atheist to your way of thinking by claiming he will burn in hell. It is written that it's not your call, it's His.

TL;DR: Y'all niggaz be mad, and postin' in a troll thread. Also here's Harrison Ford on this thread.

[Anonymous No.3217205]

>>3217197

A minimal set of assumptions. It's a method that is being constantly refined.

And the proof of the science pudding is in the eating. We know we understand the way the universe works better because we can do more with it. Technology, our ability to exploit the laws of nature, can do more now than it could before. So science works AND it converges.

[Anonymous No.3217213]

>>3217203

>has never read the bible

[Anonymous No.3217217]

>>3217189
>From anyones perspective, dogma encourage confirmation bias.

FTF RATIONAL PEOPLE

[Anonymous No.3217221]

>>3217205
>assumptions
Stopped reading there. Anything based on it cannot be held as fact.
Science is not exempt. If it cant be proven mathematically then its pointless.

[Anonymous No.3217231]

>>3217221
Even mathematics is based on axioms, which are assumed either self-evident or true by default. Everything else is a result of beliefs held true without proof.

[Anonymous No.3217232]

>>3217197

myth, magic, voices from the sky...

yeah, you guys have really quantified this god character

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3217240]

>>3217221
Enjoy your nihilism.

[Anonymous No.3217242]

>>3217189
Divergence and convergence are similar to the personal/impersonal problem. People's experiences with relationships diverge, but the relationships are still real. What science is honing in on is the base layer of reality; the mechanistic, solely objective aspect. "Religion" focuses on other aspects of reality; the social/interpersonal and intersubjective/objective-subjective bridge. These experiences will always be anecdotal, and never scientifically replicable, for the same reason that relationships are anecdotal and non-replicable. My girlfriend may be in love with me, but if you take the average over all possible relationships with men that she could be having, then she's not in love with anyone. To assume that the latter statement must be more true than the former because it is universally applicable is the confirmation bias inherent in a mindset that sees scientific reasoning as the one and only way to truth.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3217247]

>>3217203
>he Genesis account was indeed a ancient Jewish myth
dude, it is MUCH older than judaism

[Anonymous No.3217248]

>>3217240
Are you mad you cant prove anything. I dont mind you believe something is true but dont claim you can prove it true.

[Anonymous No.3217259]

and never, EVER tak\e the name of my lord in vain, you varmints...

[Anonymous No.3217260]

>>3217247
Don't be deceived.

Genesis is an abstraction of "GENE.SYS", colloquially, the GENE SYSTEM that is inherent in all humans.

Everyone has a theory, and everyone's theory is a different way of phrasing the same thing. Think about it. Analogous counterparts are not illogical.

The letter O looks like the number 0. Make O the center of the alphabet. Notice how L is equally to the [L]eft of O as much as R is equally to the [R]IGHT of O. Notice how I is equally to the left of O as much as U is equally to the right of O.

[Anonymous No.3217263]

>>3216547
>omnipotent
>timeless
>busy

girlslaughing.jpg

[Anonymous No.3217265]

>>3217231
Math isnt true by default. It holds all possibilities and truths. 2+2=4. Theres nothing to dispute.

[Anonymous No.3217270]

>>3217240
yfw cogito ergo sum

[Anonymous No.3217273]

>>3217242
surprised that such a fucking idiot knows so many 8+ letter words.

[Anonymous No.3217276]

>>3217265
Which is why there are geometries which accept the parallel postulate and geometries that don't?

Which is why there is ZF set theory which inhibits the Axiom of Choice, and other set theories, that don't?

Which is true without proof?

[Science !!V9NwDn3l+KQ No.3217278]

>>3217248
He's always mad at religion, finds it hard to believe that a system based on imaginary things could have produced such a jaded man as himself

[Anonymous No.3217282]

>>3217203
Doesnt understand that time is relative.
Its is very possible that its '5,000 Terran years old' from gods perspective

[Anonymous No.3217284]

Mormon here, I love being on the side of Christianity that understands that evil does in fact exist but God did not create it because things existed before God.

As man is God once was, as God is man may become.
-Brigham Young.

Basically God has a father just as we do, he learned just as we are how to do what he does, and just as he is now we can become one day. It's an endless chain of progression.

Does this diminish the power of God? Perhaps. But the general Christian concept of omnipotence is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of God.

[Anonymous No.3217287]

>>3217260
MIND = BLOWN

[Anonymous No.3217290]

>>3217203
>the Bible does NOT state that Earth is exactly 5,000 Terran years old and was created in exactly one week.

itactuallydoesandit'sreallyexplicitaboutthat.jpg

[Anonymous No.3217307]

>>3217276
You dont get it. Of course i could say the square root of x is + or - x. But its always plus or minus. Never plus and minus. It depends on the context of the equation.

[Anonymous No.3217312]

>>3217282
isn't like 1 day 7000 days in god's eyes?

[Anonymous No.3217316]

>>3217284

So, again, God created himself?

CHECKMATE CHRISTIANS

[Anonymous No.3217318]

>>3217260

>>"...Everyone has a theory, and everyone's theory is a different way of phrasing the same thing..."

so much fail in one sentence. /sil/ly

[Anonymous No.3217322]

>>3217290
No, in fact the 6000 year figure was only produced by calculating the lineages of the bible back to Adam, and you're obtuse if you don't get that the days told of for creation are perfect for metaphor.

[Anonymous No.3217326]

>>3217316
Just like you created your own consciousness. your point

[Anonymous No.3217335]

>>3217203
Sir, I have read the King James Bible.

It says all that shit about the age of the earth and the one week and shit.

Sorry.

[Anonymous No.3217341]

>>3217312

Most human beings master language by age 3. God still can't use words properly after thousands of years.

[Anonymous No.3217345]

>>3217326

Consciousness is simply electrical signals.

[sage No.3217351]

>>3217213

I have, and nowhere does it say that the days of creation are 24 hours long. Sure is says there was day and night, but even that is relative.

>>3217247

There were indeed creation myths before Moses wrote Genesis, but the one Moses was told came from the tales of his people who were the children of Israel.

The point I was trying to make is that both sides are behaving like children arguing about Ninja Turtles or Power Rangers. I demand a logical debate with sources, and citations, not this "Uh huh, nuh huh" Ad Hominem bullshit. I know it's a long shot for 4chan, but amuse me anons.

Sage because I know you won't.

[Anonymous No.3217355]

>>3217284
>it's turtles all the way down
Better than "God doesn't need a creator", but only by a little bit. It's all approximately the same level of crazy with all the other secs of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

[Anonymous No.3217360]

>>3217351
Anti-sage.

[Anonymous No.3217362]

>>3217312
>>3217322
>>3217290
Im just going to step in and say this.
Imagine you are dreaming. You see an old door. The door was created the moment you realized it but as far as the dreams time line its a few centuries old.

[Anonymous No.3217367]

>>3217318
So much of "you" in one "mind", actually.

[Anonymous No.3217370]

>>3217345
>Consciousness
implying the electrical signals arent are response to my consciousness.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3217372]

>>3217335
lol, the king james bible doesn't say anything about the age of the earth, liar.

[Anonymous No.3217375]

>>3217341
Well, it would help if we spoke His original language. How can he keep up with the continual advancement of FUD

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3217379]

>>3217345
You just want to believe your anal vibrator is conscious so you can say you're not a virgin.

[Anonymous No.3217382]

>>3217372
Actually, it does.

[Anonymous No.3217386]

>>3217345
Are you honestly going to try to argue this point. Dont make me break out the books on solipsism to show you how weak your argument is.

[Reaper No.3217392]

F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
C
C
C
C
C
<div class="math"> \newcommand{\t}[1]{\displaystyle{#1 \atop {#1~~#1}}} \t{\t{\t{\t{\t{\t{\t{\t{\t{\t{\triangle}}}}}}}}}}</div>

[Anonymous No.3217395]

>>3217379

I'm gay and definitely not a virgin.

[Anonymous No.3217396]

>>3217351
God created the earth way far out passed pluto, with a very slow rotation, then when he was finished, he placed it with a percision of +/- 10 feet in orbit.

>If only the bible had been more explicit.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3217399]

>>3217351
The one Moses wrote down was copied from a much more ancient written (why do people always make it sound like it was oral) myth. It is the same one you see echoed in the far east, africa, and even in the americas. Almost always there's a serpent. Almost always there's a flood.

[Anonymous No.3217412]

>>3217392

I love NoScript. <3

[Anonymous No.3217417]

>>3217412
Chrome here. He just failed. Nothing to do with that

[Anonymous No.3217433]

>>3217392

SO PRETTY.

[Anonymous No.3217447]

>>3217417

I'd say by the lack of responses that he did succeed.

[Anonymous No.3217456]

>>3217447
Succeed at what?

[Anonymous No.3217461]

>>3217447
>Hide post
>Move along

[Anonymous No.3217469]

>>3217396
You have to understand. The holy books are written for all people to understand and take away from of all ages and knowledge level.
Im sure if someone put the exact mathematical theorems used to yield the exact value of pi is wouldnt be able to follow it.

[Anonymous No.3217470]

>>3217392
>>3217447
Samefag detected!

[Anonymous No.3217486]

>>3217341
language is man made and not every concept exist in them. For instance there are some cultures that dont have a word of i or me possessive. God cant limit himself to your language nuisances because languages are forever changing. Do you want a new bible every year in each language.

[Anonymous No.3217487]

>>3217469
As opposed to government rules and regulations

>precision, how does it something or other!

[sage No.3217490]

>>3217396
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-Age_creationism

[Anonymous No.3217491]

>To this the student replied, "Good does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Good is simply the absence of Satan. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of Satan. Satan did not create good. Good is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Good is the result of what happens when man does not have Satan's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
Fix'd because Satan is better than God

[Anonymous No.3217501]

>>3216574
Except for many modern Christians (source: I'm Christian (I don't take Genesis literally))

>guranteed replies

[Anonymous No.3217502]

>>3217486
YES. I DEMAND A GOOGLE TRANSLATION OF EVERY SINGLE YEAR I HAVE EXISTED SO BY THE TIME I DIE I WONT HAVE TO ASK MY GRANDCHILDREN WHAT FANDANGLE MEANS!

[Anonymous No.3217507]

>>3217487
One government structure isnt better than another. Monarchy is the same as democracy. They all breed corruption because the people are not yet fit to guide themselves. A three year old has different responsibilities than a ten year old. As we progress changes must be made in the structure.

[Anonymous No.3217514]

>>3217502
>google translate.
enjoy missing out on the importance of what was said.

[Anonymous No.3217519]

>>3216597
No, he spoke of "God" often. Notably; "God does not play dice with the universe"
Also,he did go to a university, he just did not do well.

[Anonymous No.3217522]

atheists get destroyed in every argument, this is no surprise

[Anonymous No.3217533]

>>3217522
Because atheistist have no valid argument

[Anonymous No.3217565]

>>3217533

Because atheists are trying to argue about a floating spaghetti monster in the sky. Religion has 'faith' which denies any form of scientific inspection and its most credible source is a book of fairytales.

[Anonymous No.3217579]

>there are christians out there who were actually inspired by ops chain email and forwarded it to others

[Anonymous No.3217581]

>>3217565
They also try to compare religion to particle physics. Completely hilarious their 'rational' arguments are

[Anonymous No.3217583]

>>3217579
There are people out there that forward chain mail because they think they'll die if they don't.

[Anonymous No.3217634]

>>3217565
Do you believe in an objective reality?
Do you have proof of this objective reality?
>cogito ergo sum
Atheist are just arguing their flying spaghetti monster is better.

[Anonymous No.3217689]

87. Science and technology provide the most important examples of surrogate activities. Some scientists claim that they are motivated by "curiosity" or by a desire to benefit humanity. But it is easy to see that neither of these can be the principle motive of most scientists. As for "curiosity," that notion is simply absurd. Most scientists work on highly specialized problems that are not the object of any normal curiosity. For example, is an astronomer, a mathematician or an entomologist curious about the properties of isopropyltrimethylmethane? Of course not. Only a chemist is curious about such a thing, and he is curious about it only because chemistry is his surrogate activity. Is the chemist curious about the appropriate classification of a new species of beetle? No. That question is of interest only to the entomologist, and he is interested in it only because entomology is his surrogate activity. If the chemist and the entomologist had to exert themselves seriously to obtain the physical necessities, and if that effort exercised their abilities in an interesting way but in some nonscientific pursuit, then they couldn't giver a damn about isopropyltrimethylmethane or the classification of beetles. Suppose that lack of funds for postgraduate education had led the chemist to become an insurance broker instead of a chemist. In that case he would have been very interested in insurance matters but would have cared nothing about isopropyltrimethylmethane. In any case it is not normal to put into the satisfaction of mere curiosity the amount of time and effort that scientists put into their work. The "curiosity" explanation for the scientists' motive just doesn't stand up.

[Anonymous No.3217699]

88. The "benefit of humanity" explanation doesn't work any better. Some scientific work has no conceivable relation to the welfare of the human race - most of archaeology or comparative linguistics for example. Some other areas of science present obviously dangerous possibilities. Yet scientists in these areas are just as enthusiastic about their work as those who develop vaccines or study air pollution. Consider the case of Dr. Edward Teller, who had an obvious emotional involvement in promoting nuclear power plants. Did this involvement stem from a desire to benefit humanity? If so, then why didn't Dr. Teller get emotional about other "humanitarian" causes? If he was such a humanitarian then why did he help to develop the H-bomb? As with many other scientific achievements, it is very much open to question whether nuclear power plants actually do benefit humanity. Does the cheap electricity outweigh the accumulating waste and risk of accidents? Dr. Teller saw only one side of the question. Clearly his emotional involvement with nuclear power arose not from a desire to "benefit humanity" but from a personal fulfillment he got from his work and from seeing it put to practical use.

89. The same is true of scientists generally. With possible rare exceptions, their motive is neither curiosity nor a desire to benefit humanity but the need to go through the power process: to have a goal (a scientific problem to solve), to make an effort (research) and to attain the goal (solution of the problem.) Science is a surrogate activity because scientists work mainly for the fulfillment they get out of the work itself.

[Anonymous No.3217703]

90. Of course, it's not that simple. Other motives do play a role for many scientists. Money and status for example. Some scientists may be persons of the type who have an insatiable drive for status (see paragraph 79) and this may provide much of the motivation for their work. No doubt the majority of scientists, like the majority of the general population, are more or less susceptible to advertising and marketing techniques and need money to satisfy their craving for goods and services. Thus science is not a PURE surrogate activity. But it is in large part a surrogate activity.

>paragraph 79: 79. Some people may have some exceptional drive, in pursuing which they satisfy their need for the power process. For example, those who have an unusually strong drive for social status may spend their whole lives climbing the status ladder without ever getting bored with that game.

[Anonymous No.3217714]

91. Also, science and technology constitute a mass power movement, and many scientists gratify their need for power through identification with this mass movement (see paragraph 83).

>paragraph 83. Some people partly satisfy their need for power by identifying themselves with a powerful organization or mass movement. An individual lacking goals or power joins a movement or an organization, adopts its goals as his own, then works toward these goals. When some of the goals are attained, the individual, even though his personal efforts have played only an insignificant part in the attainment of the goals, feels (through his identification with the movement or organization) as if he had gone through the power process. This phenomenon was exploited by the fascists, nazis and communists. Our society uses it, too, though less crudely. Example: Manuel Noriega was an irritant to the U.S. (goal: punish Noriega). The U.S. invaded Panama (effort) and punished Noriega (attainment of goal). The U.S. went through the power process and many Americans, because of their identification with the U.S., experienced the power process vicariously. Hence the widespread public approval of the Panama invasion; it gave people a sense of power. [15] We see the same phenomenon in armies, corporations, political parties, humanitarian organizations, religious or ideological movements. In particular, leftist movements tend to attract people who are seeking to satisfy their need for power. But for most people identification with a large organization or a mass movement does not fully satisfy the need for power.

>paragraph 15: 15. (Paragraph 83) We are not expressing approval or disapproval of the Panama invasion. We only use it to illustrate a point.

[Anonymous No.3217717]

92. Thus science marches on blindly, without regard to the real welfare of the human race or to any other standard, obedient only to the psychological needs of the scientists and of the government officials and corporation executives who provide the funds for research.

[Science !!V9NwDn3l+KQ No.3217732]

>>3216476
ITT: Devolution to spam