As a metaphor, however, it is wonderful. Noah is an archetype, one who preserves the diversity of nature through a period of flood. There are perhaps parallels to the global warming of our own time and the need for preservation of species.
Furthermore, in opposition to Pharyngula’s point of view I think, religious texts serve a very important survival purpose for dealing with archetypal events, with a perspective of thousands of years of experience. The world was created six days ago, if a day is a thousand years, and this is the birth of written language — and the beginning of scripture.
I love religious texts, myself – Bhagavad Gita, the Koran, the Torah, the Bible, the Tao (which to me is more of an instruction book for how the world works than a religious text), the Yoga Sutras – all of’em. I just wish the people who claim to follow them would actually, you know, FOLLOW them. Be nice to other people and such.
Pray in private, and all that, instead of having to prove to everyone how religious they are and foisting it on everyone else, and trying to stop the advancement of science.
I see no conflict at all between religion and science, they are simply different ways of understanding the world, just as I see no conflict between music and mathematics. Bringing them together, in fact, may be quite desirable.
I know you don’t disagree but Pharyngula seems to have a hostility to religion that is as irrational as any creationist denial of evolution.
Here. I suppose I wasn’t as much participating as expressing my disagreement with PZ’s violent rhetoric, but it was in any case an obnoxious conversation which gave me little reason to visit again.
Pretty sure PZ was speaking metaphorically. But you never know. ;^)
He’s taken on the ID crowd with a passion, though.
I don’t see religion and science as necessarily at odds with each other, but that’s why I like the Tao Te Ching. I tend to think a lot of the things we eventually learn will rock the science world as well as the religious folk. ;^) It fascinates me to look at matter and see how little of it there actually is, once you get down to the empty space in atoms, and then the empty space in electrons and protons and neutrons… Kinda makes you go hmmmm.
Mostly I find PZ humorous and I enjoy humor, though.
I respond to metaphorical violence as potentially serious, because even if not meant literally it can be heard as advocation by someone who will take it literally. But I don’t mean to tell you anything but how I feel so you know why I might respond to PZ the way I do. If you enjoy him, it doesn’t bother me.
I think we are knitting together a real community here and that it’s important sometimes to just say what we feel. Knowing where everyone is coming from helps us anticipate one another better and work more effectively together.
Quantum fields are not statistical noise, and we can consciously alter them. Everything is connected.
9 Responses
As a metaphor, however, it is wonderful. Noah is an archetype, one who preserves the diversity of nature through a period of flood. There are perhaps parallels to the global warming of our own time and the need for preservation of species.
Furthermore, in opposition to Pharyngula’s point of view I think, religious texts serve a very important survival purpose for dealing with archetypal events, with a perspective of thousands of years of experience. The world was created six days ago, if a day is a thousand years, and this is the birth of written language — and the beginning of scripture.
I view our present mission as building a kind of ark for humanity.
Oh, absolutely, Whig!
I love religious texts, myself – Bhagavad Gita, the Koran, the Torah, the Bible, the Tao (which to me is more of an instruction book for how the world works than a religious text), the Yoga Sutras – all of’em. I just wish the people who claim to follow them would actually, you know, FOLLOW them. Be nice to other people and such.
Pray in private, and all that, instead of having to prove to everyone how religious they are and foisting it on everyone else, and trying to stop the advancement of science.
I see no conflict at all between religion and science, they are simply different ways of understanding the world, just as I see no conflict between music and mathematics. Bringing them together, in fact, may be quite desirable.
I know you don’t disagree but Pharyngula seems to have a hostility to religion that is as irrational as any creationist denial of evolution.
Or rather, PZ. I don’t actually read his blog because when I did briefly attempt to participate in comments I was made to feel very unwelcome.
Here. I suppose I wasn’t as much participating as expressing my disagreement with PZ’s violent rhetoric, but it was in any case an obnoxious conversation which gave me little reason to visit again.
Pretty sure PZ was speaking metaphorically. But you never know. ;^)
He’s taken on the ID crowd with a passion, though.
I don’t see religion and science as necessarily at odds with each other, but that’s why I like the Tao Te Ching. I tend to think a lot of the things we eventually learn will rock the science world as well as the religious folk. ;^) It fascinates me to look at matter and see how little of it there actually is, once you get down to the empty space in atoms, and then the empty space in electrons and protons and neutrons… Kinda makes you go hmmmm.
Mostly I find PZ humorous and I enjoy humor, though.
I respond to metaphorical violence as potentially serious, because even if not meant literally it can be heard as advocation by someone who will take it literally. But I don’t mean to tell you anything but how I feel so you know why I might respond to PZ the way I do. If you enjoy him, it doesn’t bother me.
I think we are knitting together a real community here and that it’s important sometimes to just say what we feel. Knowing where everyone is coming from helps us anticipate one another better and work more effectively together.
Quantum fields are not statistical noise, and we can consciously alter them. Everything is connected.