{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by DocSmurf:
1/19/2013 10:30:00 PM
6
failure in religion, an issue of Knowledge A Priori
I'm not going to waste your time pointing out contradicting bible terms or mentioning that the bible doesn't account for the existence of dinosaurs.
Instead I present to you the issue of Change.
Any Information that is not knowledge a priori, also known as something that is true without testing, can be changed and loose its truth. An example of Knowledge a priori would be mathematics. Due to this and the fact that religious belief contains no mathematical evidence it is therefore not true because it can be lost.
With no priori basis of testing if it were to be lost it could never be retrieved.
For instance lets say that all the combined knowledge of humanity was lost... the bible would never reappear where as mathematics will be retrieved over time and in turn the scientific description of the universe.
The only reason dogma lives is because people believe it to be true. Take away the false belief and the lie is lost forever.
So i ask why do people cling to an unproven archaic description of the universe.
-
Well, my race has been forgotten by you mortals, and thou don't see us yapping about it.
-
3 RepliesEdited by Lies: 1/19/2013 10:32:41 PMIt's certainly easy to criticize dogma, but I'm not sure why you brought a priori into this. Science is not a priori, though I doubt you would argue that this implies scientific knowledge "is therefore not true because it can be lost." Many sciences use math, but mathematical truths do not form the basis of our scientific understanding. Your point about lost knowledge being rediscovered -- as opposed to a story of a talking snake being lost forever -- is indeed largely true, but this isn't because the knowledge is a priori; it's because it's either an a priori [i]or[/i] empirical truth.
-
1 ReplyI would've delivered the OP in a more friendly manner, but the basic gist of it does hold some weight.
-
1 ReplyYou know, after Bungie allowed religious discussion in the forum, I've found these threads to be really dry and disinteresting.
-
1 ReplyReligion is not a science. It never has been, and it never will be. If you removed religious texts from evidence, who are you to say they couldn't happen again? Religions often develop in response to significant and specific historical/spiritual events that probably could not be directly recreated if they needed to be, but that isn't the point. Who knows if, were a religious text to be removed, that it would develop in some very similar form again. I hardly see also how this is dogma related, rather than just an inquiry to the nature of religion's origins.
-
That's nice dear.
