Synthetic Life and Religion.wmv

The manufacture of the first synthetic life is even more of a philosophical breakthrough than it is a technological one.

Craig Venter has proved the reductionism argument. That life is just a chemical process. It's a victory for the materialists. This synthesized bacterium, M. mycoides, is the only living organism that isn't descended from the first life. So no supernatural entity or 'woo' was needed to impart any mystical ether into it, just a laboratory, some genius, and a lot of hard work.

The possibilities, both positive and negative are immense, and there should be strict regulations accompanying these technological advancements. However, as religion hasn't got a clue, those regulations should be specified by people that actually understand the issues like scientists and bio-ethicists. Not priests, reverends, or pastors.

There is a level of ignorance below which people that so proudly display their stupidity under the guise of 'faith', shouldn't even be allowed a place at the table.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Doug Stewart
• the Godless Evangelist
• poem by Joyce Kilmer
• reverends
• pastors atheist faith

[caveatemp]

Venter's creation reminds me of a joke. The secular humanist discovers how to make a man. He asks God to have a man making competition and God agrees. God forms a man from the clay of the earth and says, "Ok, now your turn."

The secular humanist begins work with the clay and God interrupts, 

"Wait a minute, get your own clay!"

[godlessevangelist]

@caveatemp So god not only made man (in his image) but also made clay too? So there's basically NOTHING that god didn't do? And all of this based on zero, none, nada, nyecht, nothing, neicht, evidence.

You're ignorance, if not so dangerous, would be laughable. Tell me, have you ever heard of the scientific method?

[caveatemp]

@godlessevangelist You're so odd! You're arguing the premise of a joke?

You never did reply to me from your other video where you were clearly displaying 'dangerous ignorance' of simple logic, let alone the scientific method. And on top of it, you are caught in a self contradiction. You tried to engage me on the very same theistic argument that you call tedious here. You might make more sense to the world if you checked your arrogant pride some and dealt with the issues more.

[godlessevangelist]

@caveatemp Strange? You accuse me of not dealing with the issues and your whole blog entry had nothing of substance for debate. Just ad hominem attacks? Do you actually have anything intelligent to say? Or are you just going to tell me that Jesus loves me?

[Bill99Cass]

being pompus doesn't help There are no complete answers to anything so make up your own belief based on pure intention

[godlessevangelist]

@Bill99Cass Being pompus DOES help. Religion has had it's way since humanity began. Now it's time to point and laugh at the stupidity for the sake of our species.

Saying "there are no complete answers" is a cop out. If I were to say that the moon is made of green cheese, simply based on the fact that I like cheese, I'd be ridiculed. And rightly so. Saying that there are no complete answers and the moon "may" be made of green cheese is just ignorance. Just like magic man in the sky - IGNORANCE.

[caveatemp]

@Keovar If memes are "ideas or beliefs that are transmitted from one person or group of people to another" then certainly the Enlightenment worldview is a meme as well. It is "proselytic"- traveling horizontally through generations. It's fundamentalist form can be seen in the scientism of the "New Atheists" who maintain it is adversative to religion.

[Keovar]

@caveatemp

I could find a lot of references of that as a joke, and of Oprah endorsing quackery like his, but that's all.

I did get a chuckle out of it, though. :)

Incidentally, the "Oprah Choprah" joke is a decent example of a meme. If someone passes it on as true, you could call that a mutation of the meme. If enough people fail to check for news sources and pass it on anyway, the mutation could be said to be successful... and it would end up on Snopes.

[caveatemp]

@Keovar Then we can share a distaste for Deepak Chopra.

By the way, did you hear he's getting married to Oprah? She's gonna be Mrs. Oprah Chopra.

[Keovar]

@caveatemp

Thanks for pointing that out, I had it backwards as to which was the strict definition and which was the loose one. Jung's original is the term for those various instinctual responses that we inherit. So-called "New Age" drivel commonly steals the term to claim it as some sort of telepathic connection that they've obscured the original meaning of. It's like how Deepak Chopra steals and twists the jargon of quantum mechanics and astrophysics for his flaky spiritualism.

[caveatemp]

@Keovar" Probably none of my empirical concepts has met with so much misunderstanding as the idea of the collective unconscious. In what follows I shall try to give (1) a definition of the concept, (2) a description of what it means for psychology, (3) an explanation of the method of proof, and (4) an example."

CG Jung

[Keovar]

@caveatemp

The meme model doesn't say that ideas are shared by some psychic means. Various forms of regular language are quite sufficient. The 'universal unconscious' only makes sense if you take it in a very loose way to include instinctual reactions and the subconscious interpretation of subtle expressions and body language. There's nothing to support any sort of psychic or mystical connection, but again, the meme model doesn't posit one.

[caveatemp]

@Keovar

I would say the meme is more a concept that belongs to psychology, like the collective unconscious. It's totally unscientific but useful. Theology is revelation as well as a process. The doctrine of the trinity wasn't elucidated until the 3rd century but it is completely supported by scripture of the 1st.

I agree with you about competing ideas. Someone said the right to believe anything does not mean anything you believe is right. This guy's argument has failed drastically with me.

[Keovar]

@caveatemp

It's a theoretical model used to describe phenomena. Theists often confuse that with some version of revealed truth. Science is a process, not a revelation. The concept of memes is itself a meme, if it provides a useful framework for discussing competing ideas, people may use it.

Not all ideas are equal, and it makes sense to accord greater respect to some over others. For example, there's an idea that genital mutilation is better than condoms in combating AIDS, but it's wrong.

[caveatemp]

@Keovar I agree with your definition of meme. I disagree that it is scientifically verifiable. It is dangerous because people use it to demonize an ideology. Tolerance is not accepting all beliefs as equally true. Tolerance is how you treat others with different world views. If you demonize them, if you say they are necrotic viruses, well, that's intolerant.

[Keovar]

@caveatemp

Why are you implying you agree with me in your first line and then disagreeing in your second one? I don't see anything dangerous and unscientific about the concept of memes.

Religion doesn't go the way of the dodo because it isn't rare or harmless, but rather insidious and predatory. It's expanding in those areas because it takes advantage of poverty like it's always done. "Pie in the sky when you die" sounds awfully good to starving people.