"We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further." - Richard Dawkins
"The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out the conservative adopts them." -Mark Twain
"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work... I want to achieve it through not dying." -Woody Allen
"On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter what it does." -Will Rogers
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin
"If we value the pursuit of knowledge, we must be free to follow wherever that search may lead us. The free mind is not a barking dog, to be tethered on a ten-foot chain." -Adlai E. Stevenson Jr.
"Love all, trust a few. Do wrong to none." -William Shakespeare
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -George Bernard Shaw
"You'll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race." -George Bernard Shaw
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." -Samuel Johnson
"You have to know how to accept rejection and reject acceptance." -Ray Bradbury
"It is an illusion that youth is happy, an illusion of those who have lost it; but the young know they are wretched for they are full of the truthless ideal which have been instilled into them, and each time they come in contact with the real, they are bruised and wounded." -W. Somerset Maugham
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Nature and the Creation of False Logic
"If there were no God, there would be no Atheists." -G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936)
Hmm... this one had me thinking for a while because, if you've been keeping up with my philosophy, I have previously mentioned that man does not gain knowledge; he steals it; man does not create something new; he builds on something old. Essentially what I was saying is that there is no originality in human thought because we are incapable of actually creating a new thought. Think of any invention that we've made; they're all a fusion of two or more different old ideas. It is the evolution of thought.
That brings me to the aforementioned quote "If there were no God, there would be no Atheists." Usually, when I read something at some point during the reading I come to a conclusion about what they were trying to say, what their stance was, and especially in politics or philosophy, what they really meant.
Analyze any speech or essay and you'll learn a great deal about why the author is writing and what the world is like when he's writing it. Example: analyze Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech and you'll understand a great deal about the 1960's civil rights movement, even if you don't call it that by name.
However, upon reading this quote, I was stuck. This marveled me, modesty aside, I don't frequent the realms of dumbfoundedness. What made this so eye-catching for me? Well, it follows my logic, that man cannot create something that doesn't already exist, and then takes it to a completely opposite conclusion, that there is a god.
Of course, I realized that both of us couldn't be right and likewise both of us cannot be wrong. There either is a god or there isn't, there is no middle ground. Even politicians can't find a gray area for this one. Then again perhaps I'm giving them too little credit. At any rate, one of us has to be wrong. And, therein I saw my problem. Either of us could be true based on the logic we provide. As we can't both be correct, there must be some flaw in our logic.
It got me to thinking about where knowledge came from and I realized just that, it comes from somewhere. That is, we don't have it already; we must discover it. Knowledge comes from our interpretation of nature. Remember that we are all part of nature and that without nature we would cease to exist, purely on a feeding level in the least. Therefore when we talk about whether or not a god exists we have come to two different solutions based on two different chains of interpretation.
Of course, and here's where human error comes in, we don't always go back to nature to find truth. Sometimes we solely look to man and other people's interpretations. So to find out who is right, we must trace back our chains of interpretation back to nature, to the truth. It goes as follows, in my opinion.
I believe that based on the laws of nature, there can be no omnipotent being. That is, to be omnipotent we must be devoid of time and if devoid of time, we cannot do anything because the moment we do there's time again and omnipotence cannot exist again. A paradox, an omnipotent being cannot exist without not existing.
All this serves to do is remind us that there is no middle ground. Either god exists or doesn't. In the opinion of G.K. Chesterton, because Atheists exist, god must. But what if all his logic was just a lie manufactured under the premise of truth, fused with other truths to create fiction. The sum of all parts and the total all of the parts taken individually mean different things remember.
When it comes right down to it, after all the muck is sifted through, he will say that his faith proves that god exists. However, we must ask ourselves where his faith came from. Well, directly, likely family or teachers or perhaps society as a whole. But really, it comes from the Church. And what does the Church want more than anything? Your redeemed soul? No, actually they want your money. That's all, they are the biggest example of a greedy corporate interest in the history of the world.
Of course some say they exist to unveil the secrets of the world. No, this is not true. Science does this job. Religion only seeks to prove the world based on a set of rules that earns them power and money. Greed. Corporatism run amok.
So what have I learned from this quote. There is false logic. The sum of the parts of true logic can be assembled to create false logic and from that false logic stem the evils of society. The creators of Church doctrine realized that to profit themselves they can combine the truths contained in the laws of nature and the truths in the desire of man to understand the truths of the laws of nature. This fusion of ideas leads to the understanding that man can gain profit off man by combining truths to make lies. Knowing this, the founders of the Church pieced truths together like "the universe was created" with truths like "there was a beginning of the universe" and "there was something before there was the beginning of you" and extrapolated these ideas onto the universe errantly to create a doctrine of false truths in order to brainwash man into giving them money because it is the key to salvation.
So which of us is right? Well, false logic is never true. So G.K. Chesterton must be wrong. And if you can either be right or wrong, and he's wrong, then I must be right even if I couldn't prove it, which I can and have.
Hmm... this one had me thinking for a while because, if you've been keeping up with my philosophy, I have previously mentioned that man does not gain knowledge; he steals it; man does not create something new; he builds on something old. Essentially what I was saying is that there is no originality in human thought because we are incapable of actually creating a new thought. Think of any invention that we've made; they're all a fusion of two or more different old ideas. It is the evolution of thought.
That brings me to the aforementioned quote "If there were no God, there would be no Atheists." Usually, when I read something at some point during the reading I come to a conclusion about what they were trying to say, what their stance was, and especially in politics or philosophy, what they really meant.
Analyze any speech or essay and you'll learn a great deal about why the author is writing and what the world is like when he's writing it. Example: analyze Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech and you'll understand a great deal about the 1960's civil rights movement, even if you don't call it that by name.
However, upon reading this quote, I was stuck. This marveled me, modesty aside, I don't frequent the realms of dumbfoundedness. What made this so eye-catching for me? Well, it follows my logic, that man cannot create something that doesn't already exist, and then takes it to a completely opposite conclusion, that there is a god.
Of course, I realized that both of us couldn't be right and likewise both of us cannot be wrong. There either is a god or there isn't, there is no middle ground. Even politicians can't find a gray area for this one. Then again perhaps I'm giving them too little credit. At any rate, one of us has to be wrong. And, therein I saw my problem. Either of us could be true based on the logic we provide. As we can't both be correct, there must be some flaw in our logic.
It got me to thinking about where knowledge came from and I realized just that, it comes from somewhere. That is, we don't have it already; we must discover it. Knowledge comes from our interpretation of nature. Remember that we are all part of nature and that without nature we would cease to exist, purely on a feeding level in the least. Therefore when we talk about whether or not a god exists we have come to two different solutions based on two different chains of interpretation.
Of course, and here's where human error comes in, we don't always go back to nature to find truth. Sometimes we solely look to man and other people's interpretations. So to find out who is right, we must trace back our chains of interpretation back to nature, to the truth. It goes as follows, in my opinion.
I believe that based on the laws of nature, there can be no omnipotent being. That is, to be omnipotent we must be devoid of time and if devoid of time, we cannot do anything because the moment we do there's time again and omnipotence cannot exist again. A paradox, an omnipotent being cannot exist without not existing.
All this serves to do is remind us that there is no middle ground. Either god exists or doesn't. In the opinion of G.K. Chesterton, because Atheists exist, god must. But what if all his logic was just a lie manufactured under the premise of truth, fused with other truths to create fiction. The sum of all parts and the total all of the parts taken individually mean different things remember.
When it comes right down to it, after all the muck is sifted through, he will say that his faith proves that god exists. However, we must ask ourselves where his faith came from. Well, directly, likely family or teachers or perhaps society as a whole. But really, it comes from the Church. And what does the Church want more than anything? Your redeemed soul? No, actually they want your money. That's all, they are the biggest example of a greedy corporate interest in the history of the world.
Of course some say they exist to unveil the secrets of the world. No, this is not true. Science does this job. Religion only seeks to prove the world based on a set of rules that earns them power and money. Greed. Corporatism run amok.
So what have I learned from this quote. There is false logic. The sum of the parts of true logic can be assembled to create false logic and from that false logic stem the evils of society. The creators of Church doctrine realized that to profit themselves they can combine the truths contained in the laws of nature and the truths in the desire of man to understand the truths of the laws of nature. This fusion of ideas leads to the understanding that man can gain profit off man by combining truths to make lies. Knowing this, the founders of the Church pieced truths together like "the universe was created" with truths like "there was a beginning of the universe" and "there was something before there was the beginning of you" and extrapolated these ideas onto the universe errantly to create a doctrine of false truths in order to brainwash man into giving them money because it is the key to salvation.
So which of us is right? Well, false logic is never true. So G.K. Chesterton must be wrong. And if you can either be right or wrong, and he's wrong, then I must be right even if I couldn't prove it, which I can and have.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Rantings of a Mad Man XVII: Unadultered Truthiness
Morgan Freeman is god; he's merely playing an actor.
Near bankruptcy, Pepsi once offered to sell the Pepsi brand to Coke. They rejected. Oops.
I write these things because I can't think of ways to make these things into full entries.
You will spend in upwards of 30 years of your life sleeping.
Manny Ramirez and Alex Rodriguez both are ahead of Barry Bonds in home runs for their ages.
Green eyes are a mutation.
A chromosome controls whether or not you can curl your tongue lengthwise.
Annual flowers must be replanted every year, yet annual events happen every year of their own volition.
Evolutionarily, penis size is shrinking.
Apparently, making out in the backseat of a car is now a sin to the Catholic Church.
The guy that plays on The Shield is the only person who could play the Kingpin if they choose to have him appear in the Spiderman movies. Seriously, you know which guy I'm talking about.
There is trace amounts of cocaine in Coke.
Democrats sandbag failed candidates while Republicans run the same failed candidates again and again. Nixon and McCain for instance.
Want less acne? Sweat more, it clears the pores.
They say that everyone needs more fiber. Then, everyone needs more calcium. Then everyone needs more Vitamin D. Fucking hell! Can't we all live in peace?
If you think all batteries are the same... erm... realize that Energizer batteries are the longest lasting of ALL batteries. I mean, hasn't every fourth grade science fair ever proven this? The same goes for Bounty paper towels as most absorbent and strongest paper towel. What else... drinking fountains are dirtier than public toilets. Use Brita filters because our drinking water has far too much lead in it. Volcanoes are cool... well, at least the first sixteen times. Earthquake models are NOT experiments! And finally, there are FAR too many websites giving free science fair ideas, it's not rocket science, really. Well, unless it is rocket science...
What is the big problem we have with nudity? Honestly, I think we'd learn a lot about what we value in society if we all get rid of clothes for a year.
Of course conjugal visit sex is great, that way you can tell Bubba that you have a headache that night.
What is the big deal about personal space? Hey you, you've invaded my personal space! The United Kingdom of My Knuckles are going to impact the Confederation of Your Teeth if you don't apologise? C'mon.
Why doesn't Last Comic Standing get ratings? It's far better than Dancing with the Stars, America's Got Talent, and Big Brother 9(?). In the very least, it's different every night.
What's the deal with ripping telephone books in half? Seriously those things are useful. How about ripping apart a book I won't need for the rest of the year. The Bible anyone? Please? The edges are gilded and it's leatherbound, might pose an interesting challenge if you're interested.
What does the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, and god have in common? That's right, they all cost way too much money to support especially if you're dating someone.
With all the men who've died in wars, general stupidity, and whatnot, there still is a basic 50-50ish split between the male and female population. Not to mention the live expectancy gap. See, men need to be promiscuous , it keeps the balance in check. Either that or women start killing themselves in greater quantities. Maybe that's why ancient tribes sacrificed virgin women. See they were on to something.
Too much salt leads to high blood pressure. Too much sugar leads to diabetes. Too much fat leads to obesity. Too much cholesterol leads to heard disease. Do you see a pattern? Only in America could one or more of these things be a factor.
The United States, Canada, Belize, South America, India, Australia, and New Zealand were all, in part or whole, English colonies. Yet, India is the only one which rejected the English language after the end of imperialism.
Why are dimes smaller than pennies and nickels?
And finally... AOL used to be the shit. Now it's just shit.
Saturday, June 16, 2007
I really don't have anything to say, but my posts have been infrequent lately so I figured I should try something. Then again, the page views have been just as infrequent, so I don't know why it matters. Hehehe. It's not that I care really, just add it to the pile of shit.
And what a pile of shit it is too. That's where it all goes for me, the pile of shit. Vacation, family, summer, to the pile with them all.
How many people can say that they hate summer vacation? I know, it's scary; I wouldn't have believed it myself before college. Well live and learn. How many people truly, honestly, completely and utterly cannot stand their families? Me! Me! Ohh! Ohhh! If I could sleep away June-August I'd be more than happy. Why? The atmosphere! It's night and day, good and bad, heaven and hell, open and closed. Plus there's no one around
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)