<rant>
So I follow someone on twitter that posted some "daily questions":
1) Who will be the first person you want to see after you die?
2) What do you believe happens after death?
As you can tell, this is a religious person. I'm not going to bother with the first one. But the second one: I'm a little lost on where the confusion is...
I am Steve. There is an enormously complex network of 90 billion neurons that connect in my brain and out pops what I and you know as Steve. I can only define me as the emergent behavior from this biology. If you tweak a few things here and there-- then you get an entirely _different_ person-- not Steve. There is no debate or philosophy necessary to understand the biological process of death. My brain is kept alive by complex biological processes. When these processes cannot continue due to a lack of resources, they atrophy, and "information" (the connections, etc.) is lost permanently. That is-- the particular configuration that makes me, me-- by _any_ meaningful definition-- is irrevocably destroyed.
So what happens after death? Nothing involving "Steve" because "Steve" died when a few percentage points of those neurons died. Period.
So here comes the Christians with their magical "souls" and other made up nonsense. I refer to it with disdain, because I'm just tired of vastly large sects of rational human beings discounting all that rationality for some "feel good" magic. Listen-- I would love to believe whatever you're selling. Religion _could_ make one feel really good about being alive, and life after death. Heck, we'd all like to feel like our silly little species has some meaning in some grand plan. That plays well to our self-centered arrogance. But we have to agree on a set of rules to talk about _reality_.
Ok you have an idea that "Steve" is somehow encoded in my "soul"-- ok show me some biology. Show me some logic-- show me some processes and mechanics. Sorry but the burden is on you buddy if you're going to spew nonsense that isn't consistent with anything observed or described using a logical methodology. Oh you don't agree with my rules? You think there's a better way to describe observation than the scientific method? Ok-- then formalize it, let it be rigorously evaluated by others, and start using it to describe predictable observation. But you have to at least be consistent with yourself, with logic, and with observation.
We shouldn't give _anything_ such a low standard before we risk our intellectual integrity on it. You must do better.
</rant>
Much Love,
Steve
Happy Thanksgiving!
1 year ago
18 comments:
While I dont believe in organized religion, there are too many clues and historical references to an alternate universe or another dimension to dismiss it because of a dislike of the bible thumpers.
Have you ever listened to the overnight radio program Coast to Coast AM? They cover some really freaky stuff from conspiracy theories to UFOs to ghosts and shadow people. Google it.
If it doesn't make you a believer, at least it will entertain the insomniac in you.
Cheers
K
Oh I used to listen to coast to coast every night. I really enjoyed it-- but I enjoyed the science guests and couldn't take some of their crazier guests :-) Dr Kaku from MIT and Brian Greene were some of my fav guests. I enjoy listening to that stuff.
I get the "too many clues" thing, and certainly agree that bible-thumpers alone are no reason to dismiss it. I dismiss it because it offers no value, because it doesn't provide a methodology for us to learn or discover anything. Combine that with the "clue" that it seems so *perfectly* suited to us and our primitive needs...when nothing else in the universe distinguishes us so well-- seems like we can look behind the curtain and accept that we created this for us.
Steve
I used to believe in an afterlife, thanks to things i thought were unexplainable - things in the world that logic and science couldn't provide a reason for, until very recently, when i watched some Derren Brown vids on youtube and was captivated by the amazing things he could do using logic and smarts, performing the weird and 'unexplainable', before proceeding to explain them. I haven't believed in an afterlife since, and a large part of me wishes i'd never actually watched them.
@Mirrorboy
Hmm Ill have to check out those vids! I can appreciate the "ignorance is bliss" argument. Sometimes its better not to know (as long as you dont then beat everyone else over the head trying to prove you're right)...
:-)
Steve
Humans seek patterns; it's part of how we learn. We see patterns in the clouds and want to know what causes them.
Humans are also tribal apes, usually led by an alpha male. So, the ultimate explanation for everything makes sense to be (if you'll pardon the phrase) the alpha-est of all alpha males.
To me, the best commentary on the soul and death comes from Randall at XKCD:
http://xkcd.com/659/
life after death is functionally equivalent for all intents and purposes to heaven and hell. the concept was meant to reward the faithful and to punish the sinners. and in order for this reward/punishment system to work, it had to be fixed into the psyche of people to turn them into believers. the more believers, hence followers, the more influential a religion becomes. and as it was true in the middle ages, the concept of number equals power is true today; and thus a likely alternate motives for religion.
i blame both the brainwashers for the psychological manipulations; and the brainwashed for not being critical enough of things that are potentially life-changing. maybe they have been critical, but chose to overlook the "negatives" of being psychologically manipulated because they are outweighed by the "positives" allaying any fear they may have of dying/death. not being critical enough or overlooking - which is worse?
hello, btw. - BB
@Austin
Agreed and I love the strip. Im keeping that in my back pocket.
@BB
agreed as well. i went to the symphony last week with my boss, his wife, and a bunch of their friends (church-goers). They are evangelical Presbyterians. They _actually_ refer to people as believers and non-believers. I was amazed, and a bit put off. Its amazing how *much* of their lives and time is spent talking about religion. I know _they_ view this as a good thing, but its so sad to me. They don't get that time back...ever! While I may have strong opinions and sound aggressive here, I still have a sense of decorum and respect peoples right to have a good time without being confronted with extremely aggressive atheism. So I kept my mouth shut, but it was interesting to note. That and I swear two of them are gay. :p
Steve
Steve, I'm aware of the fact that I say this to you for the first time. I never felt it more like I do now. And oddly it is hardly related to this blogpost.
I love you, man. You are awesome.
A wise man once said that if god did not exist it would be necesary fo man to invent him. So we did. It is entirely unscientific (and illogical) to believe in a god or gods that give a flying f**k about a bipedal species that happened to evolve on a remote planet in a remote part of one galaxy out of thousands of galaxies.
Davey.
Michio Kaku is hot!
. . . fanboy moment complete . . .
While I agree there is much to the universe we do not currently, and probably never will, understand, the concepts of Heaven and Hell sound like the inventions of men desperate for answers where there can be none. That the Catholic Church added Limbo and Purgtory to the afterlife scenarios, then removed Limbo again, speaks volumes.
As I've written elsewhere, and possibly here, reading the Bible to strengthen my faith turned me into an atheist. The God portrayed in the OT is a monster, worthy of scorn rather than worship. He sounds much more like the invention of men, rather than a divine being of love.
Absolutely !
When you're gone, you're gone !
I have no rebuttal. I like this post and can't argue with it. I would like to hope there is something else out there. The world also seems so mathematically perfect to me. You have actually made me look at atheism not as a negative, but as a rational state of mind. I really hope this is the context you were trying to convey because this post really made me think. If our soul is placed into our body, why do we have no recollection of earlier times. "Paranormal activity"(Not the movie) however also gives me some kind of hope? I am glad to have read this post once again, very insightful.
I have no rebuttal. I like this post and can't argue with it. I would like to hope there is something else out there. The world also seems so mathematically perfect to me. You have actually made me look at atheism not as a negative, but as a rational state of mind. I really hope this is the context you were trying to convey because this post really made me think. If our soul is placed into our body, why do we have no recollection of earlier times. "Paranormal activity"(Not the movie) however also gives me some kind of hope? I am glad to have read this post once again, very insightful.
@MaybeOneDay
Yes that was certainly the point of view I was trying to portray :-) Atheism, the _absence_ of a belief in god is a humble, rational point of view, which seems to be the _only_ rational, logically consistent position. The rest require this leap of "faith" which contradicts observation... and there's just no reason to make that leap--outside of making ourselves feel better. We should be extremely skeptical of such "intellectual masturbation" ;-)
Much Love,
Steve
I couldn't have said it better myself. When you are dead, you are dead. End of story!
Good one.
Unfortunately, it isn't only Christians, they're just the most populous in our society.
There must be some value in religious beliefs, or not so many would hold them dear; I just never could figure out what it was once I passed the age of rules and moved on to reason.
We are who we are and what we are. The good ones respect others - human or otherwise - and the bad ones don't.
@Nahanni
Yes I think the "value" that you hinted at is the psychological benefit that believe oneself special can provide in our daily life. We all want to grant ourselves "worth" in order to give us a purpose -- give us a motivation to keep living. There was a philosopher that once said "there is but one true philosophical question: suicide" (or something like that) and the point is that we must find _something_ in this world to define our happiness and goals and motivations -- without this we have no reason to exist, and thus could/should commit suicicde. So we define the things that motivate us. Often people do this through imaginary means like religion. This has value to the subject of course, and the religions have (not surprisingly) evolved so that they stimulate our primal biology of fear and arrogance (the ones that don't have faded away -- a good demonstration of market forces). However, we shouldn't confuse this psychological, self-centered value with _real_ value -- i.e. value to humankind. Things such as science, which exists specifically to further the body of knowledge of _all_ mankind will always have _strictly greater_ value than some self-centered, arrogant thing like the "intellectual masturbation" of religion.
In any case, thanks for the comment.
Steve
Post a Comment