You Would Not Believe Me Anyway
Here then is this article, http://tcat.tc/112or2n, which discusses the making of your own religion, or thereby another copy of such religions as has been made before. It does not discuss the making of a religion, but the re branding of current concept of religion under a new brand. It is still the bronze age idea of "God" based religion.
You can not make your own religion, because religion has too much structure, for it to work, it must conform to the conventions of current religions. If you read the article, read some of the comments, they are as important to the discussion. There are plenty of comments from people who profess to be atheist, which by definition is the belief in nothing, yet they believe they are atheist, therefore negating the entire argument.
The author of the article states that human beings are hardwired to be religious. This is not exactly true, we are hardwired to believe in somethings, no matter what they are. Religions have this knowledge, and have used it to gain from what might be a weakness of the human. Even the belief in science or physics does not make them any more true.
This leads us to another point the author made, that religion is based on truths. This is partly true. A truth is a belief that is generally held to be true, it is not a fact. A fact is something that can not be refuted, it can be proven, and it is above truth. However if he meant that your religion should be based on "true facts" then that would not be a religion, but would be a study. However if you knew how "scientific fact" was determined, you would realize that it is just another form of religion. It is scientific fact that facts lie, that they are not immutable, and that even the physical laws are not written in stone, but may or may not be provable.
One comment used the bullet to the head argument for belief in "God". This is not an argument at all, this is a desperate plea by someone who thinks they have been wronged by some persecution by some sect of the population or another. They believe that they can "prove" or disprove the existence of "God" through a physical act. That is not how "God" works, that is how gods work, not how the "God" works. Since you can not prove your own existence, it would be impossible to prove or disprove the existence of any entity beyond your comprehension. When you can offer factual proof of your own existence, I will then begin to consider the process of proving other beings.
Let us take some basic "truths" of the physical world. All matter is the manifestation of energy into a form that is consumable. Another way to see that is that all matter is energy. However not all energy is matter, so therefore there must be energy that is not matter. All that we know is matter, energy is a force that we know because of the matter that exist. We do not have a means to detect energy, we can only assume energy exist because we can detect the results, or matter. We do not know all matter, there is matter that exist that we only assume exist because we can detect the energy that should be present. Therefore there must be anti-matter, and there must be more than one state of energy.
Okay, now I am going to leave the realm of energy for something else, nature. Nature is something we can all agree on right, it is as it is. We can sense nature, right. It is a physical manifestation of matter, that is it is physical in nature, it contains energy in a form that we can detect and sense with our limited senses. We can see, touch, taste, smell, hear even nature, right. Therefore nature must be of the physical nature, and must be matter. So I ask, what are the states of nature? Does nature have states, like energy does? These are of course questions to which there are not any easy answers.
Suppose nature has two states, this simplifies the question and allows for less confusion. It also bears out over the course of study. What are the two states of nature? Let us say they are order and chaos. The actual states are moot, and the labels we apply to them are merely for convenience of communicating the ideas that are acceptable to most people. So we will call them order and chaos, as that makes this much easier to grasp, but only marginally.
Nature has two states. The natural state is order, this is the state of balance. When this state exist, all is in balance, and nothing changes. Order is the status in balance, no energy is consumed or transmuted, and matter exist in balance. Chaos is the creative phase, here is where change exist. In chaos destruction is creation, for you can not have one without the other. Energy is neither created or destroyed, it is only transmuted, therefore only when it is unstable can it be transmuted. When it is balanced, it is not transmutable, and all matter in that state must remain in that state, for it is not transmutable. It retains the energy to be transmutable, but it is not in that state therefore is is not transmutable. Once it becomes unstable it is transmutable. Therefore one of the states of energy is entropy. By knowing or at least accepting the two states of nature, we therefore can begin to accept the states of energy. We can see this by the form of nature, the transmutation of matter that is nature. Since energy is susceptible to entropy, to decay, that would mean that nature is as well. All nature is matter, all matter is energy, therefore all of nature is ruled by the same rules as energy. Therefore all nature must decay, and from that decay comes destruction, and chaos is destruction and creation, so from destruction comes creation, therefore there is not balance, and all nature is mutable, as is all matter, but not all energy. Some energy is not mutable, some energy does not decay, some energy is not susceptible to entropy, and therefore there must be some energy that creates without the destruction.
How do we know this? We do not, or at least science does not. I know this, and I will discuss this at another time. This is "God", the energy not susceptible to entropy. It is not the "God" but if you are referring to your "God", the creator god, this is what you are referring to.
So yes the author of this article was presenting this with "tongue in cheek", but he was not far off. All standard religions are created this way. All religions that have a "God" are created this way. The god religions, the polytheistic religions that do not have a "God" are a different breed, but they are stone age religions, and have long since been forgotten. Any religion with a creator "God" is the same and any religion, a creation of man to understand creation, but more so to understand nature. That most of them, nearly all of them have been corrupted by man is not surprising. That they have been and are still used to manipulate the peasants is not surprising. That they are opposed, that other variations are devised to "correct" the weaknesses is not surprising, they are creations of man, they will continue to reflect the creators.
Belief is false, even if it is based in fact, as even facts are false. Belief can be true to some, but it will not be true for all, and there will be a point where it will fail to be true for most people. This is because belief is influenced by emotions, and emotions are influenced by perceptions, and perceptions are based on instruments that are not specific enough to present facts that are irrefutable.
However, we are, for the most part hardwired to "believe" in something, even if that something is ourselves. We are further given to believe in concepts that are for the most part universal among humans, though they may not be so among other species. I do not think a tree believes its death is noble, and though it will play its part in decomposition, which is far more important than we as humans tend to present, it does not think of such things, at least I do not think it does. I want to believe that there is a spirit, that there is a form of energy that is not transmutable, but I can only say that I believe that there is such, I only have personal experience, and perhaps some conjecture as to the truth of the non-transmutable energy that is in all of nature. That although every bit of matter, and all of the anti-matter, be it made of light energy, or dark energy is transmutable energy, but I can not say that with impunity.
As any one that reads this knows, I have recently lost member of my family, my brother to be exact. I have at least lost the matter that mattered to most people. That is his "soul cage" has ceased to be useful to the spirit that within it existed. That is something I believe, that although entropy may destroy the matter that matters most to most people, that the energy that is most important to the matter that matters most to me, is not transmutable, that is can not exist in this dimension as it is, nor can it be detected in any way with any instruments that we have, as we would have to create them, and therefore they would only detect that which is detectable by our own abilities. That we have not ventured beyond this dimension is only proof that we have no imagination. It i only proof that fear rules us, and that makes us susceptible to those who would attempt to manipulate us. As humans we are susceptible to manipulation because we allow emotions to guide us. We can not do otherwise, as that point of energy, as dense as it is, it is only chaos, it is not able to come into balance, and therefore we can not either. How this is, I can not say, I can not say because you would not believe me anyway.
Peace
JD
You can not make your own religion, because religion has too much structure, for it to work, it must conform to the conventions of current religions. If you read the article, read some of the comments, they are as important to the discussion. There are plenty of comments from people who profess to be atheist, which by definition is the belief in nothing, yet they believe they are atheist, therefore negating the entire argument.
The author of the article states that human beings are hardwired to be religious. This is not exactly true, we are hardwired to believe in somethings, no matter what they are. Religions have this knowledge, and have used it to gain from what might be a weakness of the human. Even the belief in science or physics does not make them any more true.
This leads us to another point the author made, that religion is based on truths. This is partly true. A truth is a belief that is generally held to be true, it is not a fact. A fact is something that can not be refuted, it can be proven, and it is above truth. However if he meant that your religion should be based on "true facts" then that would not be a religion, but would be a study. However if you knew how "scientific fact" was determined, you would realize that it is just another form of religion. It is scientific fact that facts lie, that they are not immutable, and that even the physical laws are not written in stone, but may or may not be provable.
One comment used the bullet to the head argument for belief in "God". This is not an argument at all, this is a desperate plea by someone who thinks they have been wronged by some persecution by some sect of the population or another. They believe that they can "prove" or disprove the existence of "God" through a physical act. That is not how "God" works, that is how gods work, not how the "God" works. Since you can not prove your own existence, it would be impossible to prove or disprove the existence of any entity beyond your comprehension. When you can offer factual proof of your own existence, I will then begin to consider the process of proving other beings.
Let us take some basic "truths" of the physical world. All matter is the manifestation of energy into a form that is consumable. Another way to see that is that all matter is energy. However not all energy is matter, so therefore there must be energy that is not matter. All that we know is matter, energy is a force that we know because of the matter that exist. We do not have a means to detect energy, we can only assume energy exist because we can detect the results, or matter. We do not know all matter, there is matter that exist that we only assume exist because we can detect the energy that should be present. Therefore there must be anti-matter, and there must be more than one state of energy.
Okay, now I am going to leave the realm of energy for something else, nature. Nature is something we can all agree on right, it is as it is. We can sense nature, right. It is a physical manifestation of matter, that is it is physical in nature, it contains energy in a form that we can detect and sense with our limited senses. We can see, touch, taste, smell, hear even nature, right. Therefore nature must be of the physical nature, and must be matter. So I ask, what are the states of nature? Does nature have states, like energy does? These are of course questions to which there are not any easy answers.
Suppose nature has two states, this simplifies the question and allows for less confusion. It also bears out over the course of study. What are the two states of nature? Let us say they are order and chaos. The actual states are moot, and the labels we apply to them are merely for convenience of communicating the ideas that are acceptable to most people. So we will call them order and chaos, as that makes this much easier to grasp, but only marginally.
Nature has two states. The natural state is order, this is the state of balance. When this state exist, all is in balance, and nothing changes. Order is the status in balance, no energy is consumed or transmuted, and matter exist in balance. Chaos is the creative phase, here is where change exist. In chaos destruction is creation, for you can not have one without the other. Energy is neither created or destroyed, it is only transmuted, therefore only when it is unstable can it be transmuted. When it is balanced, it is not transmutable, and all matter in that state must remain in that state, for it is not transmutable. It retains the energy to be transmutable, but it is not in that state therefore is is not transmutable. Once it becomes unstable it is transmutable. Therefore one of the states of energy is entropy. By knowing or at least accepting the two states of nature, we therefore can begin to accept the states of energy. We can see this by the form of nature, the transmutation of matter that is nature. Since energy is susceptible to entropy, to decay, that would mean that nature is as well. All nature is matter, all matter is energy, therefore all of nature is ruled by the same rules as energy. Therefore all nature must decay, and from that decay comes destruction, and chaos is destruction and creation, so from destruction comes creation, therefore there is not balance, and all nature is mutable, as is all matter, but not all energy. Some energy is not mutable, some energy does not decay, some energy is not susceptible to entropy, and therefore there must be some energy that creates without the destruction.
How do we know this? We do not, or at least science does not. I know this, and I will discuss this at another time. This is "God", the energy not susceptible to entropy. It is not the "God" but if you are referring to your "God", the creator god, this is what you are referring to.
So yes the author of this article was presenting this with "tongue in cheek", but he was not far off. All standard religions are created this way. All religions that have a "God" are created this way. The god religions, the polytheistic religions that do not have a "God" are a different breed, but they are stone age religions, and have long since been forgotten. Any religion with a creator "God" is the same and any religion, a creation of man to understand creation, but more so to understand nature. That most of them, nearly all of them have been corrupted by man is not surprising. That they have been and are still used to manipulate the peasants is not surprising. That they are opposed, that other variations are devised to "correct" the weaknesses is not surprising, they are creations of man, they will continue to reflect the creators.
Belief is false, even if it is based in fact, as even facts are false. Belief can be true to some, but it will not be true for all, and there will be a point where it will fail to be true for most people. This is because belief is influenced by emotions, and emotions are influenced by perceptions, and perceptions are based on instruments that are not specific enough to present facts that are irrefutable.
However, we are, for the most part hardwired to "believe" in something, even if that something is ourselves. We are further given to believe in concepts that are for the most part universal among humans, though they may not be so among other species. I do not think a tree believes its death is noble, and though it will play its part in decomposition, which is far more important than we as humans tend to present, it does not think of such things, at least I do not think it does. I want to believe that there is a spirit, that there is a form of energy that is not transmutable, but I can only say that I believe that there is such, I only have personal experience, and perhaps some conjecture as to the truth of the non-transmutable energy that is in all of nature. That although every bit of matter, and all of the anti-matter, be it made of light energy, or dark energy is transmutable energy, but I can not say that with impunity.
As any one that reads this knows, I have recently lost member of my family, my brother to be exact. I have at least lost the matter that mattered to most people. That is his "soul cage" has ceased to be useful to the spirit that within it existed. That is something I believe, that although entropy may destroy the matter that matters most to most people, that the energy that is most important to the matter that matters most to me, is not transmutable, that is can not exist in this dimension as it is, nor can it be detected in any way with any instruments that we have, as we would have to create them, and therefore they would only detect that which is detectable by our own abilities. That we have not ventured beyond this dimension is only proof that we have no imagination. It i only proof that fear rules us, and that makes us susceptible to those who would attempt to manipulate us. As humans we are susceptible to manipulation because we allow emotions to guide us. We can not do otherwise, as that point of energy, as dense as it is, it is only chaos, it is not able to come into balance, and therefore we can not either. How this is, I can not say, I can not say because you would not believe me anyway.
Peace
JD
Comments
Post a Comment