The ideal goverment is one that is ethical and altrustic in nature; It should work for the people, not itself or corporations. This was the type of goverment our founding fathers had in mind when they created the constitution. In theory this is a hard goverment to argue against, and I myself don't argue against this theory. However, theory and reality don't always match, this is the case for our goverment. The goverments currently favors the corporations, not the majority of people(both parties are guilty of this). This is because politicians interest is in being re-elected, not in doing what is ethical, and the corporations are the politicians primary source of funding.
To illustrate this point lets look at the food industry. The food industry is concerned with efficiency, not ethics. Their cattle are grown in mass feed lots, and they made to be more fat than they evolved to be. The food industry is also not concerned with diseases, until it becomes a widespread epidemic (ie. mad cow, salminila etc.) The ethical thing to do would be to put more restrictions on the meat companies,but the current political landscape doesn't allow this to happen.
However, there is an important relationship between ethics and polotics. When the majority of the public demands ethical change polotical change occurs as well. The public can also change corporations with their money. If everyone bought organic foods, the supermarkets would only carry organic food.
3/9/10
3/2/10
A New Religion, Theisism
All religions have most of these four aspects, some of which I have alluded to earlier. They are: customs, a stance on a higher power (God or Gods), a model or method for how the universe works, and philosophies on how to live you're life.
For example Christianty has the following: Customs-Christmas, Communion, Confession. God- There is one God, Jesus is the son of God, Good people go to heavan bad people go to hell. World- The earth is the center of the universe, the earth was created in seven days, intelligant design. Philosophies- You shouldn't sin, repent all sins, love thy neighbor.
So based on what I previously posted I have come up with a new religion, Theisism (pronounced Tice'ism).
Theisism has the following: Customs-Thou shall eat at Chipoltes twice a week, thou shall rarely be on time for class or work, thou shall go out and party on Thursday+Friday+Saturday night, then on the seventh day thou shall do thy homework Higher Power-there is a god, but we are a long ways away from being able to cromprehend Gods true nature World- The universe exisist as best described by science, and our understanding of it changes with science Philosophies- A mix of Nietzsche and Descartes, but mostly a less strict version of Nietzsche (more on this later),exercise the body and the mind, be kind and compassionite, and love thy neighbors.
For example Christianty has the following: Customs-Christmas, Communion, Confession. God- There is one God, Jesus is the son of God, Good people go to heavan bad people go to hell. World- The earth is the center of the universe, the earth was created in seven days, intelligant design. Philosophies- You shouldn't sin, repent all sins, love thy neighbor.
So based on what I previously posted I have come up with a new religion, Theisism (pronounced Tice'ism).
Theisism has the following: Customs-Thou shall eat at Chipoltes twice a week, thou shall rarely be on time for class or work, thou shall go out and party on Thursday+Friday+Saturday night, then on the seventh day thou shall do thy homework Higher Power-there is a god, but we are a long ways away from being able to cromprehend Gods true nature World- The universe exisist as best described by science, and our understanding of it changes with science Philosophies- A mix of Nietzsche and Descartes, but mostly a less strict version of Nietzsche (more on this later),exercise the body and the mind, be kind and compassionite, and love thy neighbors.
Where Religions Went Wrong
For this post I will use examples from Christianity, simply because this is the established religion that I know best. I'm not trying to say that Christianty is better or worse than other established religions. What I'm trying to do is point out the fallicies of all religions.
There are certain parts of religion that I accept, and other that I do not. The parts that I accept are the parts that cannot be proven or disproven, such as the existence of God (see the previous post for why I beleive this is true). In Christianty these beliefs include: the idea of heavan and hell, the existence of one God with Jesus Christ as his son. There is no way to prove or disprove these ideas, and therfor I respect those beliefs and won't say they're wrong (I don't have the same beliefs, but everyone is entitled to have their own beliefs). I also accept athiests and their beliefs for the same reasons.
Another component of religion is their philosophies. Philosophies are also not inherintly right or wrong, they are a way of living. In Christianity, they adhere to the idea of avoiding sin, and then repenting when they do sin. Buddhists believe that they will suffer and to end this suffering they must remove all cravings (poor Tiger, he must have really been suffering). I believe that people are entitled to have their own philosophies, just as they are entitled to their own beliefs.
Where religions have gone wrong is in their attempt to explain the world, they tried to explain the rules. Beliefs and philosophies aren't right or wrong, but finite details, such as when and how the earth was created, can be proven or disproven. Religions were attempting to explain how the universe works, but we have science for that now. The age of earth or the genisis of humanity can be proven based on facts. These facts weren't known when Christianity, and other religions, were created. Therefore the main fallacy of older religions is in their lack of adaptability in their model for the rules of the universe.
There are certain parts of religion that I accept, and other that I do not. The parts that I accept are the parts that cannot be proven or disproven, such as the existence of God (see the previous post for why I beleive this is true). In Christianty these beliefs include: the idea of heavan and hell, the existence of one God with Jesus Christ as his son. There is no way to prove or disprove these ideas, and therfor I respect those beliefs and won't say they're wrong (I don't have the same beliefs, but everyone is entitled to have their own beliefs). I also accept athiests and their beliefs for the same reasons.
Another component of religion is their philosophies. Philosophies are also not inherintly right or wrong, they are a way of living. In Christianity, they adhere to the idea of avoiding sin, and then repenting when they do sin. Buddhists believe that they will suffer and to end this suffering they must remove all cravings (poor Tiger, he must have really been suffering). I believe that people are entitled to have their own philosophies, just as they are entitled to their own beliefs.
Where religions have gone wrong is in their attempt to explain the world, they tried to explain the rules. Beliefs and philosophies aren't right or wrong, but finite details, such as when and how the earth was created, can be proven or disproven. Religions were attempting to explain how the universe works, but we have science for that now. The age of earth or the genisis of humanity can be proven based on facts. These facts weren't known when Christianity, and other religions, were created. Therefore the main fallacy of older religions is in their lack of adaptability in their model for the rules of the universe.
The Relationship Between Science and Religion
On my facebook page I put that I'm agnostic, but really it's more complicated than that. I believe that there is a God(or Gods), in one form or another. However, at this time we are unable to comprehends the true attributes of God. Therefor, we shouldn't make statements using God as validation.
I believe in the existence of God based on the philosophies of Descarte. Descarte said that, there must be a god because there are ceartain rules that govern our existence. He used the example of math, specificly geometry. I believe that this can be applied to every aspect of the universe, from the micro to the macro. Science is humanities attempt to understand these rules, and express them in formulas, rules, and theories. However, science is composite, it's based on prior assumptions. Think of it as a skyscraper. The latest discovory is the top floor, and the basic rules the discory is predicated upon is the foundation of the building. Using the same anology the understanding of God existence is somewhere in outerspace. We will have to build many more levels before we can understand God.
I believe in the existence of God based on the philosophies of Descarte. Descarte said that, there must be a god because there are ceartain rules that govern our existence. He used the example of math, specificly geometry. I believe that this can be applied to every aspect of the universe, from the micro to the macro. Science is humanities attempt to understand these rules, and express them in formulas, rules, and theories. However, science is composite, it's based on prior assumptions. Think of it as a skyscraper. The latest discovory is the top floor, and the basic rules the discory is predicated upon is the foundation of the building. Using the same anology the understanding of God existence is somewhere in outerspace. We will have to build many more levels before we can understand God.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)