DMT-Nexus member
Posts: 1892 Joined: 05-Oct-2010 Last visit: 02-Oct-2024
|
Peter watts is a great author, not as popular as he should be. Very intelligent man. Here's him hammering it home in good humor: Touching on characters in science fiction, evolution, the nature of human behavior, god, and sex. Free will does not agree with the laws of physics.... This is good material, and this guy deserves a hell of a lot more credit. Especially after the way he has been treated by his country. Wise people like this are so outspoken it's depressing. Art Van D'lay wrote:Smoalk. It. And. See.
|
|
|
|
|
DMT-Nexus member
Posts: 3335 Joined: 04-Mar-2010 Last visit: 08-Mar-2024
|
His talk was interesting, but his atheism was a bit much. I’m really tired of atheists, especially the militant variety. (Peter Watts doesn't seem to be very militant in his atheism.) Atheists criticize religious fundamentalists, yet fail to see fundamentalism in themselves. Both devout religious people and atheists say “I know things about the nature of existence.” (Things that can’t be known!) I much prefer an agnostic stance. An agnostic says “I don’t know the true nature of existence. There is much about existence that lies beyond human understanding.” gibran2 is a fictional character. Any resemblance to anyone living or dead is purely coincidental.
|
|
|
DMT-Nexus member
Posts: 1892 Joined: 05-Oct-2010 Last visit: 02-Oct-2024
|
I prefer to take the agnostic route myself, but then again I'm much more inclined to side with science. But for sure, science does not have all the answers. It's just infuriating when people use that as an excuse for the existence of a god, etc. If there IS something similar to what we perceive as god, IT is one incredibly intelligent sonnofa... Art Van D'lay wrote:Smoalk. It. And. See.
|
|
|
DMT-Nexus member
Posts: 3335 Joined: 04-Mar-2010 Last visit: 08-Mar-2024
|
Orion wrote:I prefer to take the agnostic route myself, but then again I'm much more inclined to side with science. But for sure, science does not have all the answers. It's just infuriating when people use that as an excuse for the existence of a god, etc. If there IS something similar to what we perceive as god, IT is one incredibly intelligent sonnofa... An agnostic stance is not an anti-science stance. I very much value science, but I also understand that there are questions that lie outside of the scope of science. gibran2 is a fictional character. Any resemblance to anyone living or dead is purely coincidental.
|
|
|
DMT-Nexus member
Posts: 1654 Joined: 08-Aug-2011 Last visit: 25-Jun-2014
|
Right G2... You can even be deistic or theistic and still embrace science. They are not mutually exclusive. Take Ben Franklin. Full on scientist. Full on deist. Plenty of scientists believe in G*D... and a bunch more believe in some form of intelligent design. "Curiouser and curiouser..." ~ Alice
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it." ~ Buddha
|
|
|
DMT-Nexus member
Posts: 1892 Joined: 05-Oct-2010 Last visit: 02-Oct-2024
|
gibran2 wrote:Orion wrote:I prefer to take the agnostic route myself, but then again I'm much more inclined to side with science. But for sure, science does not have all the answers. It's just infuriating when people use that as an excuse for the existence of a god, etc. If there IS something similar to what we perceive as god, IT is one incredibly intelligent sonnofa... An agnostic stance is not an anti-science stance. I very much value science, but I also understand that there are questions that lie outside of the scope of science. Of course, I just tend to lend my ear well to scientists, as I have something to work with, something to back up those claims. Everything outside of that is purely conjecture (when its not direct experience of course). Some even say science proves nothing, but it gives evidence for it, which I think is what watts is getting at with his approach to writing, even though he is creating works of fiction afterall. Art Van D'lay wrote:Smoalk. It. And. See.
|