This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

maxplastic1942's Profile

maxplastic1942's Avatar Joined over 3 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by maxplastic1942

More Discussions by maxplastic1942

Latest Comments by maxplastic1942

Go to: Does Religion = Superstition? G-D Forbid!

maxplastic1942's Avatar Jump to comment 27 by maxplastic1942

Philosophers like J Krishnamurti, whilst accepting the fact of physical evolution, deny that any psychological evolution has ever taken place, pointing out that we are just as tribal and caught in our own cultures and belief systems as were 20,000 years ago. He also made the point that if we examine ourselves honestly we will find that our so-called morality is actually no morality at all. Atheists may pin their hopes on technology eventually finding a way to cure the human condition, whilst religions hope for some kind of outside intervention from a hypothetical deity. Krishnamurti seemed to suggest that arguing about who is right is a meaningless intellectual exercise as the truth lies beyond mere verbal agreement and is to be found in the unbiased examination and understanding of our own nature as it really is, and not in a preoccupation with the endless proliferation of insanities that that same nature has caused in the outside world and the concomitant arguments generated by them. If he is correct and there is neither a personal God and that all future technological advances will be subverted in one way or another by our own lack of morality, then. surely, if there is no psychological transformation of the individual, we are all doomed to a more or less meaningless life, (apart from the spurious meanings that we invent for ourselves) either until the sun gives out or we fall victims to our own inventions.

Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:25:37 UTC | #950935

Go to: A Pentecostalist Pastor writes

maxplastic1942's Avatar Jump to comment 5 by maxplastic1942

Although some atheists and agnostics may be guilty of ad hominem attacks on particular religions, the vast majority confine themselves to attacking the reasoning process involved in the various counter arguments. It seems a presumption to use data from a single source in an attempt to falsify a scientific theory, ie, the old testament. There are myriads of creation myths and myriads of sacred texts from all around the world and if their data is reliable then there should be a general consensus between them. It hardly seems likely that the creator of the universe would have given the instruction manual to one group and not the others and if "he/she" did then that raises a host of other questions. Also there are a number of alternatives to the theory of evolution, Panspermia being the most prominent. None, as yet have proved to be a serious threat to the current model, but the main point is that the proposers of these alternative theories do not have a particular axe to grind, ie if their theories are falsified, they will move on and their whole belief system won't be threatened. This can hardly be said of the protagonists from the religious camps.

Thu, 23 Dec 2010 16:33:28 UTC | #567963

More Comments by maxplastic1942