Slashdot Mirror

It seems you are now disregarding fact in order to maintain your worldview. For example, there is the Bahá'í faith:

Bahá'u'lláh has declared that religion must be in accord with science and reason. If it does not correspond with scientific principles and the processes of reason, it is superstition. For God has endowed us with faculties by which we may comprehend the realities of things, contemplate reality itself. If religion is opposed to reason and science, faith is impossible; and when faith and confidence in the divine religion are not manifest in the heart, there can be no spiritual attainment.

I have never heard of a Buddhist denying a fact. That would run counter to their philosophy.

Further, by declaring that science need not yield where it has no answer, you are effectively suggesting that scientists make stuff up if necessary.

This one doesn't quite hold science to be a sacrement, but DOES hold that :

If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible, and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation.

And if a question be found contrary to faith? Like, for example, "What if I can explain the universe without reference to faith, i.e., by using only the evidence obtained by observation?" According to Bahai, then faith must be wavering and vacillating, thus denying the existence of true religion -- how can a religion be true if it is wavering and vacillating? The flaw in Bahai (as with any other religion) is the assertion that science and religion are compatible. They aren't. People of the Bahai faith can have their faith, or they can have science -- they can't have both.

This one doesn't quite hold science to be a sacrement, but DOES hold that :

If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible, and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation.

Paramahansa Yogananda, Parlez Vous?

This one doesn't quite hold science to be a sacrement, but DOES hold that :

If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible, and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation.

I haven't posted in a looooong time! Here goes: This is a good idea, in that we need better government. The thing is, it doesn't need Soros or anyone else to invest. There is an existing, excellent example governmental system already at work in the world. Six million people are organizing themselves around the world using a system originally designed in the late 1800's. The Baha'i World Community has three levels of government, it is completely free of corruption, it is non-partisan, it is based on individual capabilities rather than party platforms, it is free from electioneering/campaigning, and it has been functioning effectively for over 40 years at a global scale (prior to that it was functioning for many more decades at a national scale in various countries around the world).

There is an excellent wikipedia article about the Baha'i system.

As a member of the Baha'i community myself, I have first-hand experience with the functioning of this system. It is amazing how incredibly different it is from the existing governmental systems you see running in nations.

There are other people who have commented here about how this system or the other system is excellent, it's just that (some excuse for why it's not working)... The Baha'i system _is_ working. There is no excuse to offer about how it's great in theory, because it's also great in practice.

The only challenge is that you have to actually buy into it... Oh, wait, that's a challenge for every other system too. Oh well. :-D

Actually, the real challenge is that it is not just a mechanical system. It uses spiritual principles in its operation. This is difficult for many people, but still, I encourage you to investigate it and the Baha'i community itself. Mishkin.

It's much worse there than not being able to speak out against the government.

If you are a Baha'i (which is also the largest religious minority in that country), you cannot go to university, get a job or pension, and face daily threats to your livelihood and person. Topping it off, the government recently ordered its military and police to secretly MONITOR ALL BAHA'IS IN THE COUNTRY--all this while Baha'is are bound to obey all but the most unjust of laws of their government and to not interfere in politics:

http://www.bahai.org/persecution/iran

So many Iranians are indeed genuinely warm and hospitable people--such as Peter Jennings was bemused by during his visit there--but the so-called theocracy there feels quite threatened by a movement which proclaims universal equality (including specifically for women), asserts the need for an independent investigation of truth (i.e., no-clergy-required) and captures the interest of so many Iranians (at least who have had a chance to hear objectively about it).

You wouldn't know about this religious persecution there by paying attention to most of our media though, which only seems to draw attention to certain kinds of violations--a fact which Iran relies on, as a document leaked to the U.N. demonstrates that the highest authorities have a plan to quietly suffocate the community there.

While the U.S. State Dept. and Congress have often criticized Iran's actions vis-a-vis Baha'is, it doesn't go far enough if the media doesn't also catch on to hold the public's attention.

It's much worse there than not being able to speak out against the government.

If you are a Baha'i (which is also the largest religious minority in that country), you cannot go to university, get a job or pension, and face daily threats to your livelihood and person. Topping it off, the government recently ordered its military and police to secretly MONITOR ALL BAHA'IS IN THE COUNTRY--all this while Baha'is are bound to obey all but the most unjust of laws of their government and to not interfere in politics:

http://www.bahai.org/persecution/iran

So many Iranians are indeed genuinely warm and hospitable people--such as Peter Jennings was bemused by during his visit there--but the so-called theocracy there feels quite threatened by a movement which proclaims universal equality (including specifically for women), asserts the need for an independent investigation of truth (i.e., no-clergy-required) and captures the interest of so many Iranians (at least who have had a chance to hear objectively about it).

You wouldn't know about this religious persecution there by paying attention to most of our media though, which only seems to draw attention to certain kinds of violations--a fact which Iran relies on, as a document leaked to the U.N. demonstrates that the highest authorities have a plan to quietly suffocate the community there.

While the U.S. State Dept. and Congress have often criticized Iran's actions vis-a-vis Baha'is, it doesn't go far enough if the media doesn't also catch on to hold the public's attention.

It's much worse there than not being able to speak out against the government.

If you are a Baha'i (which is also the largest religious minority in that country), you cannot go to university, get a job or pension, and face daily threats to your livelihood and person. Topping it off, the government recently ordered its military and police to secretly MONITOR ALL BAHA'IS IN THE COUNTRY--all this while Baha'is are bound to obey all but the most unjust of laws of their government and to not interfere in politics:

http://www.bahai.org/persecution/iran

So many Iranians are indeed genuinely warm and hospitable people--such as Peter Jennings was bemused by during his visit there--but the so-called theocracy there feels quite threatened by a movement which proclaims universal equality (including specifically for women), asserts the need for an independent investigation of truth (i.e., no-clergy-required) and captures the interest of so many Iranians (at least who have had a chance to hear objectively about it).

You wouldn't know about this religious persecution there by paying attention to most of our media though, which only seems to draw attention to certain kinds of violations--a fact which Iran relies on, as a document leaked to the U.N. demonstrates that the highest authorities have a plan to quietly suffocate the community there.

While the U.S. State Dept. and Congress have often criticized Iran's actions vis-a-vis Baha'is, it doesn't go far enough if the media doesn't also catch on to hold the public's attention.

The Baha'i Faith, per the Encyclopedia Britannica, is the 2nd most diverse religion in the world after Christianity in terms of the number of countries possessing a significant following of believers, and the Baha'i Faith is still severely persecuted in several countries, particularly Iran which was revealed in a secret memorandum obtained and publicized by the U.N. to have a secret blueprint to destroy the community externally as well as internally, but also Egypt which has recently been denying them a right to their vital ID cards, yet due to very emphatic admonitions from its Prophet-Founder, Baha'u'llah, against violence in the name of religion (e.g., "It is better to be killed than to kill" as applied to the context of organized religious warfare), Baha'is endure a great deal (while appealing to the national courts, the United Nations, etc.).

Original copy, in His own handwriting, in an archives building in Haifa, Israel. You can get English translations at your local library, in all likelihood. Barns and Nobel and Borders carries a few primary source books on the Baha'i Faith these days, too. Electronic copies on the Internet for over 10 years, too. Cool stuff.

Throughout the past century, the Bahá'ís of Iran have been persecuted. With the triumph of the Islamic revolution in 1979, this persecution has been systematized. More than 200 Bahá'ís have been executed or killed, hundreds more have been imprisoned, and tens of thousands have been deprived of jobs, pensions, businesses, and educational opportunities. All national Bahá'í administrative structures have been banned by the Government, and holy places, shrines and cemeteries have been confiscated, vandalized, or destroyed.

The 350,000-member Bahá'í community comprises the largest religious minority in that country, and Bahá'ís have been oppressed solely because of religious hatred. Islamic fundamentalists in Iran and elsewhere have long viewed the Bahá'í Faith as a threat to Islam and have branded the Bahá'ís as heretics. The progressive stands of the Faith on women's rights, independent investigation of truth, and education have particularly rankled Muslim clerics.

Lots of women in bikinis but the island of Bikini will be gone.

In fact, just the other day there was a forum discussing how to handle all the refugees from islands that won't be around when the ocean level goes up a few meters.

http://news.bahai.org/story/530

I mean, just think about what faith is...

Faith is what Dr. Marshall had when he injected himself with a bacteria everyone else said had no simple cure.

Faith is what the disciples had when the established governments ridiculed christ.

Simply because it was told to you by your parents and your local wizard.

There's a big difference between faith in a personal rationalization that just because we do not yet have the means to understand an entity greater than ourselves it can not exist, and the blind following of parents and wizards.

God is bigger than our finites minds can fully comprehend, yet we accept and form our own understanding of what God is based on the limited amount we can comprehend rather than outright rejecting him (it). That is faith. It's also the basis of significance testing.

It must be pretty amazing that out of the hundreds of religions all over the face of the Earth you happened to be born into the one "right" religion.

There are plenty of faiths out there which do not support that notion and embrace scientific thinking.

Unitarian? Both ways? I don't know what you're talking about, and I think you don't, either.

For informations about the Baha'i faith, check this link.

And now for an opinion piece - [t]he folk[s] who say that religions are all basically different ways to the same goal a) do not understand world religions very well and b) are essentially trying to self-forgive their own failings or doubts by simply passing them off as 'probably godly'

Stateth the article:

In reality, there is only one religion, the religion of God. This one religion is continually evolving, and each particular religious system represents a stage in the evolution of the whole. The Bahá'í Faith represents the current stage in the evolution of religion.

Bahá'u'lláh attributed the differences in some teachings of the great religions not to any human fallibility of the Founders, but rather to the different requirements of the ages in which the revelations occurred.

I believe that a human is a human from the moment of conception, making cloning (and other research on fertilised embryos) akin mutilating a fully-grown human -- i.e. illegal.

Is a child only to be considered human after birth? Or in the 23rd week of development? Such an arbitrary limit simply established by "the age required for medical science to help the embryo survive outside the womb" is unacceptable. The limits of science change, making younger embryos eligible for the title "human". But does the reality of the matter change with scientific achievement? No.

This is one of the few cases where we cannot allow science to dictate our definitions. In stead, we may turn to religion. The Baha'i Faith, the most recent complete message from the Almighty, teaches that humans are fundamentally spiritual in nature, and that the soul appears at the moment of conception. So it follows that the title of "human" must be conferred upon an embryo from day one -- or day 0 if you're a C programmer :-).

To a baha'i such as me, there is no contradiction between true religion and science, so some of the answers to questions outside the scope of science may safely be found in Sacred writings.

I believe that a human is a human from the moment of conception, making cloning (and other research on fertilised embryos) akin mutilating a fully-grown human -- i.e. illegal.

Is a child only to be considered human after birth? Or in the 23rd week of development? Such an arbitrary limit simply established by "the age required for medical science to help the embryo survive outside the womb" is unacceptable. The limits of science change, making younger embryos eligible for the title "human". But does the reality of the matter change with scientific achievement? No.

This is one of the few cases where we cannot allow science to dictate our definitions. In stead, we may turn to religion. The Baha'i Faith, the most recent complete message from the Almighty, teaches that humans are fundamentally spiritual in nature, and that the soul appears at the moment of conception. So it follows that the title of "human" must be conferred upon an embryo from day one -- or day 0 if you're a C programmer :-).

To a baha'i such as me, there is no contradiction between true religion and science, so some of the answers to questions outside the scope of science may safely be found in Sacred writings.

I held a little "computer awareness" two-day seminar for a few youth from my regional Bahá'í communities. The youth have all been using computers for quite a while, so my aim was to teach them to use their abilities to the benefit of their communities. Also I wanted to make them aware of Linux as a moral alternative to pirating software from over-priced vendors.

I started from the bottom: hardware! I have an old 486 without a case, just the basic components. I got them to identify each component, think about static electricity, put the pieces together, and see the beast run. Then we looked at variations of hardware: CPUs (486, PIII, K7, ...) RAM, disks, motherboards, graphics, looked at the external ports (network, USB, monitor, ...) This took about ½ day, and by then they could put a computer together.

We then installed a number of operating systems: Win 98, Debian, Red Hat. I don't have an XP CD, or I'd have done that too -- RH vs Win98 just isn't fair. While installing, I spoke about the Free Software community, and it's relationship to the morals of religion, one point I like is that Free Software is much like a religion such as the Bahá'í Faith (plug) or Chritianity: the members are trying to do the right thing, for the love of it. Some say it's for the heck of it, but thats simply avoiding the reality of love. :-)

The next day we used Win98 and Red Hat to build a website. The class fragmented into those who are users, and those who are admins: for admins, I talked about TCP/IP and DNS, for users about HTML, graphics and usability.

All in all, I think it was a good seminar, and the youth seemed happy about it. Next time (in the spring) it'll be better!

You said:

The really depressing thing is that, even though I can see the system is broken, I really have no idea what to do about it. The system needs to be reformed, but I'm not entierly sure where to start.

I don't imagine that this suggestion will make you feel much better, but I personally think that the only solution is _very_ long-term and spiritual, not procedural. I come from the Baha'i Faith, and in our scripture it says:

The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established.

Hope that helps a little.

Thanks, Larry, for this elegant description of the harmony of science and religion. It might surprise some of my fellow /.'ers that the Baha'i Faith has been asserting the essential harmony of science and religion for over 150 years.

Thanks, Larry, for this elegant description of the harmony of science and religion. It might surprise some of my fellow /.'ers that the Baha'i Faith has been asserting the essential harmony of science and religion for over 150 years.

Actually, its just hard to work without pay. There's a real chicken and egg problem where if only one person starts to become more selfish, all the rest have to also become more selfish in order to "keep up". Similary, if one person tries to sacrifice for the greater good, that will only have lasting results if everyone else respects that sacrifice and does not exploit it. This is why businesses should not be considered persons, and why only a spiritual solution to economic problems will work in the long run. Check out The Prosperity of Humankind for some very insightful comments on this.

This is a really sad thing. Religion has a very bad name in Western civilization due to the many atrocities and lesser injustices committed in its name. Please people: don't confuse the religion of Islam (or Christianity or Buddhism or ...) with these ridiculous petty power plays. If you are curious, look at any original religious texts and you will see a lot of reasonableness that just isn't reflected in the behavior of the clergy/priesthood/whatever. A really interesting statement about this problem is at: http://www.bahai.org/article-1-1-0-1.html - pick your language.

Although I'm sure that donating to the EFF helps in some small way, doesn't it seem sad and pathetic that such a thing is necessary? If you can buy it, its not "Justice". For a really amazing description of Justice, check out: The Prosperity of Humankind. It's got a bit of a religious/spiritual perspective, but it actually goes through a very logical process and produces one of the best working definitions of Justice I have ever seen.

Here is a link to The Promise of World Peace

The summary:
A message on the subject of peace from the Universal House of Justice to the peoples of the world. Addresses humanity's coming of age, the spiritual roots of peace, the path to world order, the construction of a peaceful global civilization, and the basis of human happiness.

Here is a link to The Promise of World Peace

The summary:
A message on the subject of peace from the Universal House of Justice to the peoples of the world. Addresses humanity's coming of age, the spiritual roots of peace, the path to world order, the construction of a peaceful global civilization, and the basis of human happiness.

"The well-being of mankind, its peace and security are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established." - Baha'u'llah "The winds of despair are, alas, blowing from every direction, and the strife that divides and afflicts the human race is daily increasing. The signs of impending convulsions and chaos can now be discerned, inasmuch as the prevailing order appears to be lamentably defective." - Baha'u'llah "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." - Baha'u'llah Official Baha'i Web Site

As to noticing things, I think this is where heavy-thinkers get disturbed or dis-enfranchised by "organized religions" (defining organized religions as those that impose, rather than inspire belief). Speculation and contemplation of religious writings will inevitably result in paradoxes that people of simple faith will have difficulty defending to someone with good logical analysis skills. Yet there's a great and joyfull challenge for a thoughfull person in discovering consistency and constancy in the scriptures of all faiths. Metaphors and parables in religious literature have been intended to obscure the truth throughout history, both to inspire the believers to thorough study and contemplation and to protect the believer's activities from persecution. Joseph Campbell's studies show the inter-connectedness of belief systems throughout history.

Personally, I'm Baha'i. I believe in progressive revelation from God that is guiding us in building a united, peacefull world. We can't wait around expecting miracles if we're not ready to start making things better ourselves. To do that requires a bit of faith, and alot of hard work and thought. I think it's my beliefs as a Baha'i that makes me so enthusiastic about open source. It's a community working together despite of, or even because of, their differences to make something better.

Personally, I found the AI aspect of the article the most interesting. I am a fan of Douglas Hofstadter. His books Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies and Le Ton Beau de Marot are incredibly beautiful and insightful. I strongly recommend them to anyone who is interested in AI, philosophy of knowledge, psychology etc. etc.

Now, in an attempt to stay on-topic, I will come back to the article. Hofstadter's basic message seems to be that intelligence is a matter of degree more than anything else. Things such as medium (biological, mechanical, electrical etc.) are irrelevant to the basic question. If he is right, then I can see intelligent beings being much more likely.

As a strongly religious person, I believe that there is some "soul" which imparts to us an aspect that makes us (the human species) unique on the planet (please moderators - that's just an opinion :). But the teachings of my faith seem to be quite clear that every planet has its creatures (not necessarily intelligent) (Unfortunately I don't have a good reference to this specific aspect of my faith).

But in another way, I have to admit that I feel very threatened by the possibility of other intelligence. As an individual I like the fact that I am a member of a species which has done absolutely incredible things. Humanity has created intended beauty in a way that so far seems completely unique in the world. I believe strongly that we can overcome our multitude of problems, and when we do, we will do more that is completely unimaginable at this time. If AI or ET's were to usurp that position of beauty-creators, it would be very very damaging to humanities self-concept. That said, I am fascinated by AI, and I would love to do work in the field (after I make my startup millions :).

As a final comment in this decidedly rambling post: get SETI@home !

I have a few ideas to suggest that may not be very popular, but which would probably help a lot. Most of "my" ideas about this aren't really my own - I'll try to credit where credit it due.

• I think the primary principle that we need to add is the concept of the Unity of Humanity. Can anyone doubt that will now live in a global society? We travel and communicate with a facility and frequency that would utterly astound people from even 25 years ago. Our national economies are so tightly interlinked it is ridiculous. Corporations have known this for a long time and have a huge lead on social institutions as a result. Our social institutions, (dare I say it here) government must catch up and the only way is by organizing at a global level. The UN and the Baha'i community are both diverse global organizations that are working on putting this principle into practice. Our technological efforts must be refocused in such a way as to bring the greatest benefit to humanity. Environmental issues also come under this category.
• As a consequence of the previous point, we need to inform ourselves of globally held beliefs about the fundamental rights of people. The vast majority of countries in the world have agreed on just such a list of rights in the form of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Any technological and societal developments need to be carefully examined with this fundamental statement of rights in mind. This might mean that Napster should be stopped - or it might mean that it should be promoted - but either way, we need to look at the effects of new technologies on these rights and always choose rights ahead of what is new and cool and in our own personal interest.
• The final principle, which is implied by the previous two points, is that technologies are not "neutral". This will be a big point of contention with many here on Slashdot, but I hold to it. Marshall McLuhan has said "the medium is the message" - what is this other than a statement that technologies have very specific measurable effects on people and societies. These effects are not neutral. For a simple example, consider the lightbulb - it requires a very large power generation and distribution infrastructure in order to be useful. The creation and operation of that infrastructure has societal effects - some good, some bad - definately not neutral.

I am writing a paper on the topic of the careful pursuit of technology. It is in progress so my appologies for the rough and unsubstantiated parts :) A book called The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom has some very interesting related points and is generally a good read.

Note to flamers: Iran has one of the best human rights records in the Middle East, and is one of the most democratic countries in the area. Don't believe what you see on CNN. Note that women can vote in Iran (evil) and men can't vote in Saudi Arabia (our ally).)

If you truly believe the above, how do you explain the persecution of Baha'is in Iran?
You want to find out what I'm talking about:
http://www.bahai.org/bworld/main.cfm?token=105971& DocumentID=234