'Atheism Is Also A Religious Position,' Dorfl rumbled.(Thanks for that, Terry)
'No it's not!' said Constable Visit. 'Atheism is a denial of a god!'
'Therefore It Is A Religious Position,' said Dorfl. 'Indeed, A True Atheist Thinks Of The Gods Constantly, Albeit In Terms of Denial. Therefore, Atheism Is A Form Of Belief. If The Atheist Truly Did Not Believe, He Or She Would Not Bother To Deny.'
'Did you read those pamphlets I gave you?' said Visit suspiciously.
'Yes. Many Of Them Did Not Make Sense. But I Should Like To Read Some More.'
'Really?' said Visit. His eyes gleamed. 'You really want more pamphlets?'
'Yes. There Is Much In Them That I Would Like To Discuss. If You Know Some Priests, I Would Enjoy Disputation.'
'All right, all right,' said Sergeant Colon. 'So are you going to take the sodding oath or not, Dorfl?'
Dorfl held up a hand the size of a shovel. 'I, Dorfl, Pending The Discovery Of A Deity Whose Existence Withstands Rational Debate, Swear By The Temporary Precepts of A Self-Derived Moral System—'
'You really want more pamphlets?' said Constable Visit.
Sergeant Colon rolled his eyes.
'Yes,' said Dorfl.
...
'Excuse Me,' said Dorfl.
'We're not listening to you! You're not even really alive!' said a priest.
Dorfl nodded. 'This Is Fundamentally True,' he said.
'See? He admits it!'
'I Suggest You Take Me And Smash Me And Grind The Bits Into Fragments And Pound The Fragments Into Powder And Mill Them Again To The Finest Dust There Can Be, And I Believe You Will Not Find A Single Atom of Life—'
'True! Let's do it!'
'However, In Order To Test This Fully, One Of You Must Volunteer To Undergo The Same Process.'
There was silence.
'That's not fair,' said a priest, after a while. 'All anyone has to do is bake up your dust again and you'll be alive ...'
There was more silence.
Ridcully said, 'Is it only me, or are we on tricky theological ground here?'
There was more silence.
Another priest said, 'Is it true you've said you'll believe in any god whose existence can be proved by logical debate?'
'Yes.'
Vimes had a feeling about the immediate future and took a few steps away from Dorfl.
'But the gods plainly do exist,' said a priest.
'It Is Not Evident.'
A bolt of lightning lanced through the clouds and hit Dorfl's helmet. There was a sheet of flame and then a trickling noise. Dorfl's molten armour formed puddles around his white-hot feet.
'I Don't Call That Much Of An Argument,' said Dorfl calmly, from somewhere in the clouds of smoke.
Science is a religion. Really. You go to a church, some guy up the front reads from a big book and says "this is how the world works". You go to a physics tute, some guy up the front reads from a big book and says "this is how the world works." I don't really see a lot of difference, do you?
Look, science says you're meant to question everything until you get proof that doesn't change. But by their own definition, proof can only be ascertained by direct experience. What are you going to do, disbelieve the fundamental laws of physics until you've replicated every single possible experiment for yourself and from that, deduce Boyle's Law and the Theory of Relativity from just your own evidence? Nope, you take it on faith that these guys with more letters after their names than in them know what they're on about.
"We have effectively in science a one party system with a deep commitment to a particular faith. Most scientists, and indeed I myself, have been taught to look at animals, plants and people as being entirely purposeless, living organisms as having originated purely by chance. Lacking any meaning, any value, simply there as animate, automatic mechanisms that can be explained in terms of ordinary physics and chemistry. Many people within science have become very wedded to this mechanistic model, and indeed for some people it has become a kind of religion, and therefore they experience any questioning of this model as an attack on their most fundamental acts of faith. Unfortunately, more and more modern science, no matter which doctrine you care to look at, is rapidly showing that this mechanistic model, this reductionist outlook on science, is proving to be more and more untenable, it just doesn't work, and this of course makes a lot of traditional scientific thinkers very unhappy."
-- Rupert Sheldrake (double first honours Ph.D. in biochemistry at Cambridge, Knox doctorate in philosophy & history at Harvard, Vice Chancellor of Research Fellows at Britain's Royal Society, and Senior Scholar of the Perrott-Warwick School of Parapsychology at Trinity College, Cambridge)
"Possibly the most absurb belief amongst my peers is that what we know [as the body of scientific knowledge] is immutable, and that once a theory has been proven by the scientific method the knowledge thus gained is unchangeable. Too much importance is placed on what we do know, and far too much effort spent on discrediting and denying anything which does not readily slot into place within the current body of scientific knowledge, or anything which attempts to change that knowledge with new facts. What is truly important is what we still don't know." -- Sir Martin Rees (Astronomer Royal, Baron Rees of Ludlow, Plumian Professor of Cosmology & Astrophysics, Cambridge)
Accept nothing. Question everyting. All truths are subjective, all facts are relative. The only thing in the entire universe which does not change, is change. The only thing you, as a human being, can ever accept as a truth or a fact is what enters your brain by direct sensorial input. Anything that happens outside the confines of your own skull is thus, by its very nature, questionable.
Reality only exists because we agree to it. When reality shifts, the greement has been changed.
Joseph Campbell, mythologist and theologian, once examined the core teachings of all the world's major and many minor religions, and discovered that the similarities were far too frequent to be considered coincidence. Central to virtually every religion and every system of siritual belief we find the Golden Rule:
• Baha'i: "Lay not on any soul a load that you would not wish to be laid upon you, and desire not for anyone the things you would not desire for yourself." -- Baha'u'llah, GleaningsY'know what's sad? The two fastest-growing religious cults -- atheism and science -- don't have a golden rule.
• Hinduism: "This is the sum of duty: do not do to others what would cause pain if done to you." -- Mahabharata 5:1517
• Buddhism: "Treat not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." -- Udana-Varga 5:18
• Taoism: "Regard your neighbour's gain as your own gain, and your neighbour's loss as your loss." -- T'ai Shang Kari Ying P'ien 213-218
• Christianity: "In everything, do to others as you would have them do to you, for this is the law." -- Jesus, Gospel of Matthew 7:12
• Unitarianism: "We affirm and promote respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part." -- Unitarian Principle
• Judaism: "What is hateful to you, do not do to others. This is the whole Torah; all the rest is commentary." -- Hillel, Shabbat 31a
• Islam: "Not one of you truly believes until you wish for others what you wish for yourself." -- The Prophet Muhammad, Hadith
• Wicca / Paganism: "As so long as ye harm none, do what you will be the whole of the law."
1 comment:
that's because the golden rule is ethics, not morality, and is univeral.
Post a Comment