The same people who 100 years ago might have thought "OMG, if I only could work in aeronautics, it would be sooo cool and exciting" now look at it as, meh, just another possible desk job."
Or, you could try to get a job working for one of the firms trying to commercialize space flight.
Or, if automobiles are your thing, you could try to get a job a Tesla motors...
Name the industry, and there is probably SOME area in which new, interesting work is happening.
It always cracks me up when some atheist on an Internet forum sites himself as evidence that not believing in God has no impact on a person's morality.
I've never met you. How do I know you're not some totally awful, awful person?
If you can be a billionaire wearing shirts that you slept in I don't even know why I even bother wearing a collar at all:).
Other way 'round. Sergey can wear whatever shirt he wants because he is a billionaire (also note his hair looks as if it has just been slept in as well in that video). You, on the other hand, not being a billionaire, must wear the shirt that The Man tells you to wear.
You can also inflate the number of lines of code arbitrarily by just liberally mis-applying patterns. Just have everything get packed in a decorator, made by a factory, which is a singleton, register it with a manager, etc, etc, etc. The number of lines of overhead can be grown arbitrarily, without actually adding any functionality.
Historically, some of the worst atrocities have been carried out in the name of God.
To ignore the millions murdered by totalitarian atheist regimes in the 20th century and pretend that only the non-atheist is capable of atrocities is nothing more than pure bigotry and ideology.
And if you're one of the people saying "Yes, atheists killed millions but it wasn't BECAUSE they were atheists" and then say "But religious people kill people BECAUSE they are religious", well, just call yourself an idiot because frankly I can't be bothered.
If you think about it, where do you still find chalkboards outside school ?
No, of course not. We're way beyond that now. We all have whiteboards.
I work in a very highly rated computer science department, and whiteboards are everywhere, and usually have a lot written on them. Meetings, hallway conversations, lectures, you name it.
We are in the powerpoint era.
Have you seen some of the dreck that is inflicted on captive audiences through PowerPoint? Again, at this same university, I've seen very good lecturers totally forgo PowerPoint and give very good reasons at the beginning of the semester why they think it does not facilitate good teaching. You can sit at a computer or print out and read a PowerPoint presentation on your own. What's the point in having someone read it to you out loud?
Yes, it is possible to use PowerPoint as part of a good lecture or presentation. But I don't think there is a positive correlation between use of PowerPoint and the quality of knowledge imparted.
There might not be an ultimate purpose to everything, but I can still create my own purpose for my own life.
To be consistent, you need to be honest that ideas of "purpose" are just as imaginary and arbitrary as the idea of a "God," if you are an atheist. You can pretend you have a "purpose", just like a theist can pretend to know God (from your perspective). Purpose in the sense you are using it is not a scientific or rational term, which any atheist worth his salt claim as the only modes of thinking that are worthwhile. It can not even have any meaning except as a sort of delusion.
You are demonstrating my point very well that atheists in general are unable to cope with this simple logical consequence of being an atheist.
Let me try to get at this a different way. "You", as you understand yourself to be, is a convenient fictional construct. In reality, there are a bunch of processes going on inside your brain that very well might be competing against each other, influenced by various hormone levels at that particular instant, what you happened to have for dinner, how much sleep you've had, and many other factors. Very likely, your desire for this thing you call "purpose" is likely an elaborate ruse to try to get you laid because that is what you are really programmed for. As well as getting enough food, water, etc. to stay alive long enough to get laid a few times, that is. For example, scientists have done experiments where they managed to show that someone decided to do something in one part of their brain first, then some other part of the brain created a justification for why they did it after the fact (I don't remember the exact details, think it was in the New York Times).
Which all goes to say, the very idea of human "purpose" is self delusional bullshit. In fact, the very idea of a real "self" is likely self delusional bullshit as well, which raises the question of just what the thing is being deluded if the self doesn't exist...
Ouch, I just pulled a philosophical muscle. I better stop and put some ice on that now.
If you're saying what I think you're saying here, you're talking about Pascal's Wager
His argument is fundamentally different from Pascal's Wager. It does not in any way rely on God being pleased by your believing in Him. It relies on you being fundamentally happier and less stressed by believing in God in THIS life. So the existence of God, Heaven, or anything else is totally irrelevant.
I think it's pretty clever, and traditional objections to Pascal's Wager do not apply.
You can make up your own meaning and purpose, if you like, one that's not based on a fantasy.
I find it fascinating that atheists are unable to come to terms with this point.
Once you start "making up meaning and purpose" you are firmly in the realm of the religious. It is no different than "spirituality", "good and evil", etc. You know, all those things that atheists claim are arbitrary, human constructs that don't really exist.
So, yes, an atheistic universe is necessarily devoid of purpose, meaning and similar fantastical human constructs. Believing that meaning and purpose and such are "real" is tantamount to believing in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
As opposed to:
1) something (the Universe) exists and has no creator
The dilemma is that the universe appears to have a "creation moment", in the sense of nothing exists, then BANG! everything exists. That is the popular understanding of the Big Bang Theory. At which point a lot of people who understand Physics will object with "Well, actually, it's not quite that simple..." but I'm not in a position to affirm or refute such arguments, only appreciate the fireworks as they detonate overhead.
Until such time as the big guy walks into my living room and shakes my hand, I'll be skeptical, thank you very much.
Many of us believe God did come into many people's living rooms, embraced them (I think this was more culturally appropriate than shaking hands at the time, if I'm not mistaken), talked with them, ate with them, wept with them, etc.
Of course, that doesn't answer your demand for it to happen to you personally, but thought it interesting to point out nonetheless.
Then he's going to throw my heretical ass in hell _forever_ over the crime of believing only what my senses tell me for ~100 years.
This certainly has nothing to do with the Christian God. Reasons Jesus cited for people entering hell include not showing kindness to other human beings as if they were God Himself. Faith in God (along with repentance) is for forgiveness of wrongs of omission and commission for which we are already responsible.
If you've never done anything wrong, or never failed to do something you should have done, then you shouldn't have any problem entering heaven, regardless of your theological opinions.
(which, for some unknown reason, was shouldered by Asian and European banks more than US banks)
Doesn't sound so mysterious, really. Europe and Asia needed some place to park the US dollars they get from selling us stuff. U.S. real estate (and real estate around the world) was going up for a long time, so they probably used some of those dollars to buy the-now-infamous mortgage backed securities.
I don't have any figures to prove this, but it seems reasonable, no?
Conspiracy implies that the facts of the matter are concealed from most people.
Everything you mention is pretty much common knowledge at this point. Which I think either disqualifies it as a conspiracy, or marks it as an extremely poorly concealed one.
Which goes back to the original point that governments are very bad at keeping things secret.
Slashdot Mirror
The same people who 100 years ago might have thought "OMG, if I only could work in aeronautics, it would be sooo cool and exciting" now look at it as, meh, just another possible desk job."
Or, you could try to get a job working for one of the firms trying to commercialize space flight.
Or, if automobiles are your thing, you could try to get a job a Tesla motors...
Name the industry, and there is probably SOME area in which new, interesting work is happening.
-jimbo
Except the motor mimic girl, but the show went on hiatus mid beatdown.
That drove me nuts!
They show her watching Bruce Lee. Show her get a video iPod with all kinds of crazy stuff to study.
Then, she follows the bad guys I'm all like "Yes! Finally we get to see her go all Bruce Lee Kung Fu on those guys!"
Then, ..., nothing. She's kidnapped and held hostage like any stereo-typical female victim character.
I love Heroes, but that is hard to forgive.
-jimbo
It always cracks me up when some atheist on an Internet forum sites himself as evidence that not believing in God has no impact on a person's morality.
I've never met you. How do I know you're not some totally awful, awful person?
-jimbo
If you can be a billionaire wearing shirts that you slept in I don't even know why I even bother wearing a collar at all :).
Other way 'round. Sergey can wear whatever shirt he wants because he is a billionaire (also note his hair looks as if it has just been slept in as well in that video). You, on the other hand, not being a billionaire, must wear the shirt that The Man tells you to wear.
-jimbo
You can also inflate the number of lines of code arbitrarily by just liberally mis-applying patterns. Just have everything get packed in a decorator, made by a factory, which is a singleton, register it with a manager, etc, etc, etc. The number of lines of overhead can be grown arbitrarily, without actually adding any functionality.
Isn't that a J2EE best practice?
-jimbo
Historically, some of the worst atrocities have been carried out in the name of God.
To ignore the millions murdered by totalitarian atheist regimes in the 20th century and pretend that only the non-atheist is capable of atrocities is nothing more than pure bigotry and ideology.
And if you're one of the people saying "Yes, atheists killed millions but it wasn't BECAUSE they were atheists" and then say "But religious people kill people BECAUSE they are religious", well, just call yourself an idiot because frankly I can't be bothered.
Karma away!
-jimbo
If you think about it, where do you still find chalkboards outside school ?
No, of course not. We're way beyond that now. We all have whiteboards.
I work in a very highly rated computer science department, and whiteboards are everywhere, and usually have a lot written on them. Meetings, hallway conversations, lectures, you name it.
We are in the powerpoint era.
Have you seen some of the dreck that is inflicted on captive audiences through PowerPoint? Again, at this same university, I've seen very good lecturers totally forgo PowerPoint and give very good reasons at the beginning of the semester why they think it does not facilitate good teaching. You can sit at a computer or print out and read a PowerPoint presentation on your own. What's the point in having someone read it to you out loud?
Yes, it is possible to use PowerPoint as part of a good lecture or presentation. But I don't think there is a positive correlation between use of PowerPoint and the quality of knowledge imparted.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
There was calculus Before Christ?
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Well said. What I said applies only to the strictly materialist atheist.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
There might not be an ultimate purpose to everything, but I can still create my own purpose for my own life.
To be consistent, you need to be honest that ideas of "purpose" are just as imaginary and arbitrary as the idea of a "God," if you are an atheist. You can pretend you have a "purpose", just like a theist can pretend to know God (from your perspective). Purpose in the sense you are using it is not a scientific or rational term, which any atheist worth his salt claim as the only modes of thinking that are worthwhile. It can not even have any meaning except as a sort of delusion.
You are demonstrating my point very well that atheists in general are unable to cope with this simple logical consequence of being an atheist.
Let me try to get at this a different way. "You", as you understand yourself to be, is a convenient fictional construct. In reality, there are a bunch of processes going on inside your brain that very well might be competing against each other, influenced by various hormone levels at that particular instant, what you happened to have for dinner, how much sleep you've had, and many other factors. Very likely, your desire for this thing you call "purpose" is likely an elaborate ruse to try to get you laid because that is what you are really programmed for. As well as getting enough food, water, etc. to stay alive long enough to get laid a few times, that is. For example, scientists have done experiments where they managed to show that someone decided to do something in one part of their brain first, then some other part of the brain created a justification for why they did it after the fact (I don't remember the exact details, think it was in the New York Times).
Which all goes to say, the very idea of human "purpose" is self delusional bullshit. In fact, the very idea of a real "self" is likely self delusional bullshit as well, which raises the question of just what the thing is being deluded if the self doesn't exist...
Ouch, I just pulled a philosophical muscle. I better stop and put some ice on that now.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
There are also hypotheses, such as alternate dimensions of time or an eternally oscillating universe, that allow a universe without a first cause.
And let me guess, these theories are in principal unverifiable through the scientific method. Kind of like God.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
A believer, on the other hand, is complacent, and happy without needing to know any more.
Like Isaac Newton, for example.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
If you're saying what I think you're saying here, you're talking about Pascal's Wager
His argument is fundamentally different from Pascal's Wager. It does not in any way rely on God being pleased by your believing in Him. It relies on you being fundamentally happier and less stressed by believing in God in THIS life. So the existence of God, Heaven, or anything else is totally irrelevant.
I think it's pretty clever, and traditional objections to Pascal's Wager do not apply.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Neither does believing in invisible superhero father figures in the sky.
Recent research tends to refute your assertion.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
You can make up your own meaning and purpose, if you like, one that's not based on a fantasy.
I find it fascinating that atheists are unable to come to terms with this point.
Once you start "making up meaning and purpose" you are firmly in the realm of the religious. It is no different than "spirituality", "good and evil", etc. You know, all those things that atheists claim are arbitrary, human constructs that don't really exist.
So, yes, an atheistic universe is necessarily devoid of purpose, meaning and similar fantastical human constructs. Believing that meaning and purpose and such are "real" is tantamount to believing in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
an all-powerful sky-deity that can have a mortal son, and then kill him and call it "mercy"...
It was the Roman government, actually.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
As opposed to: 1) something (the Universe) exists and has no creator
The dilemma is that the universe appears to have a "creation moment", in the sense of nothing exists, then BANG! everything exists. That is the popular understanding of the Big Bang Theory. At which point a lot of people who understand Physics will object with "Well, actually, it's not quite that simple..." but I'm not in a position to affirm or refute such arguments, only appreciate the fireworks as they detonate overhead.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Until such time as the big guy walks into my living room and shakes my hand, I'll be skeptical, thank you very much.
Many of us believe God did come into many people's living rooms, embraced them (I think this was more culturally appropriate than shaking hands at the time, if I'm not mistaken), talked with them, ate with them, wept with them, etc.
Of course, that doesn't answer your demand for it to happen to you personally, but thought it interesting to point out nonetheless.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Then he's going to throw my heretical ass in hell _forever_ over the crime of believing only what my senses tell me for ~100 years.
This certainly has nothing to do with the Christian God. Reasons Jesus cited for people entering hell include not showing kindness to other human beings as if they were God Himself. Faith in God (along with repentance) is for forgiveness of wrongs of omission and commission for which we are already responsible.
If you've never done anything wrong, or never failed to do something you should have done, then you shouldn't have any problem entering heaven, regardless of your theological opinions.
-jimbo
(which, for some unknown reason, was shouldered by Asian and European banks more than US banks)
Doesn't sound so mysterious, really. Europe and Asia needed some place to park the US dollars they get from selling us stuff. U.S. real estate (and real estate around the world) was going up for a long time, so they probably used some of those dollars to buy the-now-infamous mortgage backed securities.
I don't have any figures to prove this, but it seems reasonable, no?
-jimbo
Conspiracy implies that the facts of the matter are concealed from most people.
Everything you mention is pretty much common knowledge at this point. Which I think either disqualifies it as a conspiracy, or marks it as an extremely poorly concealed one.
Which goes back to the original point that governments are very bad at keeping things secret.
-jimbo
Do not, under any circumstances, EVER become a parent.
Thank you.
-jimbo
Why do I need to know about OS and compiler design to develop high level software for solving real problems?
Leaky Abstractions
-jimbo
I can prove to you that rape is funny. Picture Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd.
Not funny.
-jimbo
Cable TV was supposed to deliver the kind of raw material that the public craves.
Sopranos? Sex in the City? Isn't there a channel called Skinemax (or so I hear).
Just how raw do you want?
-jimbo