I have always been interested in learning, in discovering. I was always fascinated by the fantastic, and yearned for the mythic. It always seemed strange to me, how I seemed weird to the masses for scouring endless pages, and documentaries in search of dragons, aliens, and ghosts. After all, most of them believe in gods, and afterlifes and things with even less evidence than the former two of my claims.
Anyway. In my search for these awesome creatures, I read many books that made promises of evidence. And yet time and again. There was nothing convincing. I couldn't find any evidence to make a claim where I could take out my game console and say, if I'm wrong about this claim, you can have this. Nope not once. Eventually, I grew tired of the search, and realized that I'm wrong. Dragon's aren't real, Aliens don't visit the Earth, Ghosts are figments of one's imagination, and slowly the myths became understood as misunderstandings and exaggeration.
Some may say I've lost the sense of wonder that exists in believing in these wild fantasies and legends, I say, "I have not, I have simply drawn the line between fiction and reality. I still think dragons are cool, aliens fighting with beam swords are awesome, and animes with demons are enjoyable. I just realize that I have no way of defending the claim that any of them are real so I won't make the claim. Much the same with deities. I could tell you of several logically possible deities (though they are either evil, weak, or indifferent, and closer to the Greek, Roman, Norse, Hindu, Shinto etc, than the idea of one all powerful being in charge of everything) and yet I could not defend a single one of these with a shred of evidence.
In the end I wish people would actively search for evidence in order to support all of their claims, and not wait for someone to "disprove" the existence of the thing they have no evidence for. Because the next time someone uses that logic with me... well then, I'm a god. oh.. if you kill me, I will rot away and become one with the universe and work in mysterious ways, and I'm right unless you disprove me.. except I won't do that because that would be intellectually dishonest.
Monday, July 4, 2011
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Great Snakes!
Today's Guest on "Why Religions Anger Me" is the Hindu practice of Nag Panchami. Snake worship is what it is supposed to be, snake torture is what it is.
So what exactly are some things that take place during this worship of snakes? well, lets see. Snakes are often starved before hand, have their fangs removed, have their mouths sewn shut, and are force fed milk (snakes and milk don't mix, it can lead to the snakes experiencing digestive troubles and often dying). And I always thought worship was meant to be a horrifying experience for the worshiper.
But yes, this is essentially what happens to these magnificent creatures on the day that they are supposed to be honored. You know.. snakes are awesome, yes, it would be awesome to have a day in their honor, where people get to learn about them, have myths about them debunked, maybe help save those that are in danger of extinction. However, forcing them through some crazy religious ritual is not awesome. It's down right inhumane, not that it bothers the religiously pious.
This I wish to have brought up in light of the recent ban on slaughtering conscious animals. This of course received a negative reaction from the Jewish and Muslim communities as it makes it impossible to have their Kosher or Halal meat, some even commenting that it was terrible that animal rights were being put before human rights... Well hate to... actually no, I love to say it. Your right to practice your religious whims ends where it brings needless harm to others, be they animals or conceited self-righteous apes (also animals).
So what exactly are some things that take place during this worship of snakes? well, lets see. Snakes are often starved before hand, have their fangs removed, have their mouths sewn shut, and are force fed milk (snakes and milk don't mix, it can lead to the snakes experiencing digestive troubles and often dying). And I always thought worship was meant to be a horrifying experience for the worshiper.
But yes, this is essentially what happens to these magnificent creatures on the day that they are supposed to be honored. You know.. snakes are awesome, yes, it would be awesome to have a day in their honor, where people get to learn about them, have myths about them debunked, maybe help save those that are in danger of extinction. However, forcing them through some crazy religious ritual is not awesome. It's down right inhumane, not that it bothers the religiously pious.
This I wish to have brought up in light of the recent ban on slaughtering conscious animals. This of course received a negative reaction from the Jewish and Muslim communities as it makes it impossible to have their Kosher or Halal meat, some even commenting that it was terrible that animal rights were being put before human rights... Well hate to... actually no, I love to say it. Your right to practice your religious whims ends where it brings needless harm to others, be they animals or conceited self-righteous apes (also animals).
Friday, May 20, 2011
Survival of the fittest?
Yes, it's an old quote. Something to do with Darwin and the theory of natural selection... though sadly, it is often skewed and used to justify terrible deeds.
There are many examples, The Third Reich, being one of them that pops up at first, but I want to focus on the stupid idea that we have to compete. That the only way that you can have comfort, is if it is through the misery of another. It's bloody everywhere. I hate it! I HATE IT!! I FREAKING HATE IT!!!
And you know what pisses me off even more are the people, with the power to change the system, that are in the system, they are not winners and they are not the losers, they are the ones who have yet to try, who kind of just sit there and shrug their shoulders and say.. meh, that's how the world works. Like hell it does. If that statement had any bit of truth to it, we would still be a bunch of barbarians who thought that killing each other was fun the way things were meant to be(and I mean actually killing each other, not virtually killing each other). The system is wrong, it helps the few and sacrifices the many. You pride yourselves, in having a will of your own, you pride your self in being conscious creatures.. so start behaving like them. The SYSTEM may be the KING but WE are the SYSTEM'S DEITIES, and no that crap about "I'm becoming part of the system to alter the system" rarely works. You need to create another better system, and roll with it until someone else comes up with a better idea. Evolution FTW.. angry rant end.
There are many examples, The Third Reich, being one of them that pops up at first, but I want to focus on the stupid idea that we have to compete. That the only way that you can have comfort, is if it is through the misery of another. It's bloody everywhere. I hate it! I HATE IT!! I FREAKING HATE IT!!!
And you know what pisses me off even more are the people, with the power to change the system, that are in the system, they are not winners and they are not the losers, they are the ones who have yet to try, who kind of just sit there and shrug their shoulders and say.. meh, that's how the world works. Like hell it does. If that statement had any bit of truth to it, we would still be a bunch of barbarians who thought that killing each other was fun the way things were meant to be(and I mean actually killing each other, not virtually killing each other). The system is wrong, it helps the few and sacrifices the many. You pride yourselves, in having a will of your own, you pride your self in being conscious creatures.. so start behaving like them. The SYSTEM may be the KING but WE are the SYSTEM'S DEITIES, and no that crap about "I'm becoming part of the system to alter the system" rarely works. You need to create another better system, and roll with it until someone else comes up with a better idea. Evolution FTW.. angry rant end.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
An Atheist's Argument For Faith
Now, I've spent a good amount of space on my blog defending atheism/science, and arguing against most premises of religion, if not all of it. Though I would like to attempt to defend the idea of faith. Now, I'm sure most you rationalists are thinking, wow, this guy is a mormon, and those of you on the religious right are going to be likely be conjuring some plan to quote me out of context. Those who are moderates, are probably thinking... well, I don't really know what you're thinking.
Now, in recent times religion seems to have hijacked the word faith (they're quite good at that). It seems to have been made some kind of religious virtue to have, and is looked down on by rationalists, atheists, scientists, and so on and so forth.
I would however like to say that it is a very important aspect, and that most of us, to some degree have faith. Heck, I've been an atheist for as long as I can remember. (Course I kept it a secret for a very long time, didn't quite feel like being outcast just yet, though I must say I lucked out in that my family and many of my friends didn't go crazy and stop talking to me, thank Athena for making them all reasonable).
Anyway, back to the topic of faith. I always thought of the word as a type of trust in matters of uncertainty. Not always really a bad thing, and often a necessary stepping stone. For example, when I got my first guitar, I was absolutely terrible. I didn't know anything about guitars (except that they sounded really cool) and that I had nearly failed a guitar class in jr. high. I had faith (a type of blind trust in myself) that I could in fact learn how to play guitar, and be good at it. It's taken about 5 years but I'm finally a decent player, still have a ways to go, but I likely won't make your ears bleed. The thing is that faith can be a "secular" word, and it can be a very important stepping stone in order to further yourself in situations where there is uncertainty. I still think it's stupid to think that you're right because you have faith, and that it is the pillar of truth, but it is a stepping stone. Let's not throw it away completely.
Tl;dr Faith isn't really such a bad thing, as long as it's used as a launching point for gathering evidence, not the verdict.
PS: Like I said before, don't quote me out of context.
Now, in recent times religion seems to have hijacked the word faith (they're quite good at that). It seems to have been made some kind of religious virtue to have, and is looked down on by rationalists, atheists, scientists, and so on and so forth.
I would however like to say that it is a very important aspect, and that most of us, to some degree have faith. Heck, I've been an atheist for as long as I can remember. (Course I kept it a secret for a very long time, didn't quite feel like being outcast just yet, though I must say I lucked out in that my family and many of my friends didn't go crazy and stop talking to me, thank Athena for making them all reasonable).
Anyway, back to the topic of faith. I always thought of the word as a type of trust in matters of uncertainty. Not always really a bad thing, and often a necessary stepping stone. For example, when I got my first guitar, I was absolutely terrible. I didn't know anything about guitars (except that they sounded really cool) and that I had nearly failed a guitar class in jr. high. I had faith (a type of blind trust in myself) that I could in fact learn how to play guitar, and be good at it. It's taken about 5 years but I'm finally a decent player, still have a ways to go, but I likely won't make your ears bleed. The thing is that faith can be a "secular" word, and it can be a very important stepping stone in order to further yourself in situations where there is uncertainty. I still think it's stupid to think that you're right because you have faith, and that it is the pillar of truth, but it is a stepping stone. Let's not throw it away completely.
Tl;dr Faith isn't really such a bad thing, as long as it's used as a launching point for gathering evidence, not the verdict.
PS: Like I said before, don't quote me out of context.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Prayer, The dark side.
I will personally fire a kamehameha wave at any omnipotent deity that would listen to my prayers before helping the countless (well, not really countless, but more of I'm too lazy to find the actual number, but it's likely over 2 billion) of people that needlessly suffer, and that's just the people I'm taking into consideration here. I haven't even looked at the billions of animals and other lifeforms that are abused.
Now, I understand as to why someone would pray.
They think that it actually does something. Well at best it is a placebo, at worst, it's extremely harmful, because it leads people to neglect processes that would actually be helpful.
Yet I have another reason for not praying. I don't want the help of a magic sky man. Even if there was 100 percent undeniable proof that a magic skyman existed I wouldn't ask for it's help. That's just sad. I can't even think of doing that. That's no better than cheating, rigging the system, taking steroids. If I were able to do well on a test because I prayed to a god, then there is something inherently wrong with that test, because it is not testing my intelligence, it is testing my ability to beg a superior to help me. Also if this being helps me before a more needy creature, then that shows a lot about the character of this being.
But I suppose I am being too harsh. There are plenty of people who put a genuine effort in, and then ask that god look over them. I suppose that is understandable, I have no contempt for such a request, but I think it is a little silly. What this does is it gives credit for your actions, and for the actions of the people that helped you to a being that doesn't actually exist. Really, if you can do something with god's help, you can do it without... though I suppose for irrational actions like flying planes into buildings filled with innocent people, or shooting abortion doctors, one would need "god's" help, because there would be no rational reason for committing such an act and believing it to be a good thing.
Anyhow, this is the way I see it.
If you want to help fight a disease, instead of giving money to a church or a temple, or whatever, and asking for god to help rid the disease, donate that money to a research fund, that is working to cure the disease of your choosing.
Instead of praying that god help you with your test, or football game, or interview, take those minutes to practice, or just relax.
Instead of trying to make a deal with the big man, like help me win this lottery and I will donate 1000 dollars a year to a poor person, work hard to make lots of money, and then donate that money to those in need (and as a bonus you'll actually be a morally good person, as opposed to a bargaining scumbag who thinks is paying a small fee for a large reward.)
Anyhow, that's my reasoning. It's why I never honestly prayed to a god. I can't recall if I ever thought that god was real (To my knowledge, it was just a pretend thing... at least that's what I remember concerning my earliest recollect-able memory), but as far as memory serves, I always disliked participating in prayers and other rites of religion that are supposed to bring forth the help of god.
Some say, "God helps those who help themselves" I say, "Those who help themselves, help themselves."
Also, head over to god-comics.com for a laugh, though some of the comics are pretty graphic. They are also hilarious, like the one I posted up top.
Now, I understand as to why someone would pray.
They think that it actually does something. Well at best it is a placebo, at worst, it's extremely harmful, because it leads people to neglect processes that would actually be helpful.
Yet I have another reason for not praying. I don't want the help of a magic sky man. Even if there was 100 percent undeniable proof that a magic skyman existed I wouldn't ask for it's help. That's just sad. I can't even think of doing that. That's no better than cheating, rigging the system, taking steroids. If I were able to do well on a test because I prayed to a god, then there is something inherently wrong with that test, because it is not testing my intelligence, it is testing my ability to beg a superior to help me. Also if this being helps me before a more needy creature, then that shows a lot about the character of this being.
But I suppose I am being too harsh. There are plenty of people who put a genuine effort in, and then ask that god look over them. I suppose that is understandable, I have no contempt for such a request, but I think it is a little silly. What this does is it gives credit for your actions, and for the actions of the people that helped you to a being that doesn't actually exist. Really, if you can do something with god's help, you can do it without... though I suppose for irrational actions like flying planes into buildings filled with innocent people, or shooting abortion doctors, one would need "god's" help, because there would be no rational reason for committing such an act and believing it to be a good thing.
Anyhow, this is the way I see it.
If you want to help fight a disease, instead of giving money to a church or a temple, or whatever, and asking for god to help rid the disease, donate that money to a research fund, that is working to cure the disease of your choosing.
Instead of praying that god help you with your test, or football game, or interview, take those minutes to practice, or just relax.
Instead of trying to make a deal with the big man, like help me win this lottery and I will donate 1000 dollars a year to a poor person, work hard to make lots of money, and then donate that money to those in need (and as a bonus you'll actually be a morally good person, as opposed to a bargaining scumbag who thinks is paying a small fee for a large reward.)
Anyhow, that's my reasoning. It's why I never honestly prayed to a god. I can't recall if I ever thought that god was real (To my knowledge, it was just a pretend thing... at least that's what I remember concerning my earliest recollect-able memory), but as far as memory serves, I always disliked participating in prayers and other rites of religion that are supposed to bring forth the help of god.
Some say, "God helps those who help themselves" I say, "Those who help themselves, help themselves."
Also, head over to god-comics.com for a laugh, though some of the comics are pretty graphic. They are also hilarious, like the one I posted up top.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Science, Destroyer of Creativity? I think not!
So here we go again.
I haven't blogged in a while, but I'm back. This is simply a topic that I can't be silent about.
Now I know many people think science is a close minded way of thinking but to the contrary.
I'm going off of something a friend of mine said, "I'm surprised you're going into an applied arts program, you think with science, so you always think inside the box, most artists are religious because they aren't inhibited by only what's real."
Now I must say.. It's not that I lack an imagination.. it's simply that I don't call things that have no evidence, fiction. And I enjoy fiction very much.. usually in the form of anime and video games.
However what interested me was the comparison that was brought up. Science is narrow minded, but religion is not..
BLASPHEMY!!!
Science is by far the most open minded field in all of existence. You can claim whatever you like, you're in no matter limited to only what the books say. The only catch is that if you want to claim that something is true. You need to back up your claim with facts. If science has a theory, and newfound facts contradict the theory, science revises the theory.
On the other hand, religion is pretty much as close minded as things get. One is not allowed to question it, one is not allowed to challenge it, one is not allowed to present evidence against it. No matter what kind of evidence one presents it doesn't change it's delusions. It claims to be the absolute truth, and it won't alter it's stance until it's PR is in danger. If one presents contradictory facts to a religion, the religion simply says. "This book is the book of truth, and I'd rather believe the word of some bronze age writers than the meticulous work of scientists who have access to much more knowledge and better equipment. Since this book was written by my imaginary friend, I will throw out the facts that are in front of my face."
There's also another difference.
We need Science, but we'd be better off without Religion.
Just compare the amount of suffering that has been a result of listening to authority and absolute truths without first questioning them. Science has progressed to make our lives better. Yes, the increased technology has lead to more lethal weapons.. but it's our imaginary friends, and our irrational pride, statism, and piety that leads to those weapons being used.
Whether it be the word of gods, god kings, or whatever. Question everything, doubt everything, scrutinize everything. If they can back up their claims good for them. However, in most cases when someone tells you not to question something, it's because, they don't actually have the answers.
I haven't blogged in a while, but I'm back. This is simply a topic that I can't be silent about.
Now I know many people think science is a close minded way of thinking but to the contrary.
I'm going off of something a friend of mine said, "I'm surprised you're going into an applied arts program, you think with science, so you always think inside the box, most artists are religious because they aren't inhibited by only what's real."
Now I must say.. It's not that I lack an imagination.. it's simply that I don't call things that have no evidence, fiction. And I enjoy fiction very much.. usually in the form of anime and video games.
However what interested me was the comparison that was brought up. Science is narrow minded, but religion is not..
BLASPHEMY!!!
Science is by far the most open minded field in all of existence. You can claim whatever you like, you're in no matter limited to only what the books say. The only catch is that if you want to claim that something is true. You need to back up your claim with facts. If science has a theory, and newfound facts contradict the theory, science revises the theory.
On the other hand, religion is pretty much as close minded as things get. One is not allowed to question it, one is not allowed to challenge it, one is not allowed to present evidence against it. No matter what kind of evidence one presents it doesn't change it's delusions. It claims to be the absolute truth, and it won't alter it's stance until it's PR is in danger. If one presents contradictory facts to a religion, the religion simply says. "This book is the book of truth, and I'd rather believe the word of some bronze age writers than the meticulous work of scientists who have access to much more knowledge and better equipment. Since this book was written by my imaginary friend, I will throw out the facts that are in front of my face."
There's also another difference.
We need Science, but we'd be better off without Religion.
Just compare the amount of suffering that has been a result of listening to authority and absolute truths without first questioning them. Science has progressed to make our lives better. Yes, the increased technology has lead to more lethal weapons.. but it's our imaginary friends, and our irrational pride, statism, and piety that leads to those weapons being used.
Whether it be the word of gods, god kings, or whatever. Question everything, doubt everything, scrutinize everything. If they can back up their claims good for them. However, in most cases when someone tells you not to question something, it's because, they don't actually have the answers.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Martial Arts and Skepticism
So as you all know, I hope you do anyhow, I am a great skeptic.
Now, you may ask, what does martial arts have to do with skepticism?
Well I will tell you what. You see, the problem is many school of modern martial combat function like religions rather than institutions of science. Your teacher tells you something, and you have to buy it. That's it, you are not allowed to question it in the slightest. Especially if you train at one of the mac dojo's.
Each style has it's own set of techniques, and they are fundamentally very similar, however the fact remains that none of these styles are all powerful, yet many people versed in just one style tend to think it is the ultimate. I have known of Muay Thai fighters that scoff at karate and wing chun or tae kwon do, and vice versa. Only rarely does someone take a lesson from all the styles.
Now I'm not the greatest fighter, heck, I wouldn't even probably match up against any of the people I am criticizing in a "fight". However, that has a lot to do with my passive attitude, since I find fighting to be extremely stupid, and when I spar my goal is to try and defeat my opponent without harming them. Of course in a life or death situation, the only option would be a savage and brutal offense on my part until my attacker was immobilized or I was slain.
Returning to the original idea however, I will explore two different kicks. Both of them are called a roundhouse. However they hold their origins in two branches. The first being Tae Kwon Do, and the other being Muay Thai (I know other styles also have roundhouses but I will use these two for the sake of this article.)
The Tae Kwon Do Roundhouse features a snap and a return, while the muay thai version has a follow through.
Now if one were to only be versed in one school of combat, they would likely claim that their version is superior. However the problem, is that neither kick is perfect, and it is best to have both in ones arsenal. In actual combat you have to deal with circumstances like terrain, weather, environment, clothing (if you're in a suit and you get attacked, you will have to react differently than if you had your gi)
I'm not saying that these martial arts terrible, but I do ask that anyone who partakes in any type of training question every part of it. And don't be afraid to experiment, just know, that if you claim something is the ultimate style, it truly must be unbeatable in any circumstance.. I have yet to come across such a style or such a martial artist.
Learn from them all, but do not fall victim to any.
Now, you may ask, what does martial arts have to do with skepticism?
Well I will tell you what. You see, the problem is many school of modern martial combat function like religions rather than institutions of science. Your teacher tells you something, and you have to buy it. That's it, you are not allowed to question it in the slightest. Especially if you train at one of the mac dojo's.
Each style has it's own set of techniques, and they are fundamentally very similar, however the fact remains that none of these styles are all powerful, yet many people versed in just one style tend to think it is the ultimate. I have known of Muay Thai fighters that scoff at karate and wing chun or tae kwon do, and vice versa. Only rarely does someone take a lesson from all the styles.
Now I'm not the greatest fighter, heck, I wouldn't even probably match up against any of the people I am criticizing in a "fight". However, that has a lot to do with my passive attitude, since I find fighting to be extremely stupid, and when I spar my goal is to try and defeat my opponent without harming them. Of course in a life or death situation, the only option would be a savage and brutal offense on my part until my attacker was immobilized or I was slain.
Returning to the original idea however, I will explore two different kicks. Both of them are called a roundhouse. However they hold their origins in two branches. The first being Tae Kwon Do, and the other being Muay Thai (I know other styles also have roundhouses but I will use these two for the sake of this article.)
The Tae Kwon Do Roundhouse features a snap and a return, while the muay thai version has a follow through.
Now if one were to only be versed in one school of combat, they would likely claim that their version is superior. However the problem, is that neither kick is perfect, and it is best to have both in ones arsenal. In actual combat you have to deal with circumstances like terrain, weather, environment, clothing (if you're in a suit and you get attacked, you will have to react differently than if you had your gi)
I'm not saying that these martial arts terrible, but I do ask that anyone who partakes in any type of training question every part of it. And don't be afraid to experiment, just know, that if you claim something is the ultimate style, it truly must be unbeatable in any circumstance.. I have yet to come across such a style or such a martial artist.
Learn from them all, but do not fall victim to any.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)