Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
invictius

Where's the doomworld editorial that defended our game post-Columbine?

Recommended Posts

So a guy was searching for a 17-year old editorial and accidentally started an argument about religion? This is gonna be an epic thread.

Share this post


Link to post
kb1 said:

The human brain continues to develop into the mid 20's.

A common misconception. Development slows down, but never fully stops, so the "brain stops developing at 25" thing is a myth.


Also all this talk about how we need to find God or whatever is nothing but a red herring. Look at society, and you'll see that the real God that is actually worshiped is the Invisible Hand. That's why you have "In God We Trust" written on dollar banknotes, which God do you think they're talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
fraggle said:

That's not what atheist means.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pascal's_wager


The way I've understood it is that most atheists are agnostic atheists, meaning you're willing to accept the possibility of a creator but you believe there is none. Rarely there might be someone who somehow believes there is no chance there is some supreme being, but in general atheists are just open minded people.

People bash atheists, claim they just want to sin, blah blah blah. Religious people have atheistic tendencies, for example, does a Christian choose not to believe in the thousands of other deities people have come up with?

On top of that, last I checked, non-religious people make up the bulk of our high practicing doctors, scientists, astronomers, and the like. Religious people make up our politicians and our Joel Olsteens.


Thank you for that link, by the way, sums up what I was going to bitch about. I'm on mobile so sorry about formatting.

Share this post


Link to post
Sick Bow said:

People bash atheists, claim they just want to sin, blah blah blah. Religious people have atheistic tendencies, for example, does a Christian choose not to believe in the thousands of other deities people have come up with?


That makes said Christian a monotheist, bruh.

Share this post


Link to post
dew said:

Fuck off, preacher.

Wow, uptight, are we? Funny, that, being directed to someone who never preached a single word. "And a very merry go fuck yourself, asshole." There's my sermon.

dew said:

edit: To explain my little outburst, I find it incredibly arrogant and intolerant to imply that it is somehow "alarming" that many hold a different religious position than you.

Again, putting words into my mouth. I never stated what my personal religious position was, or if I had any at all. Again, uptight and misguided. Maybe it's time to consider altering some of your views, huh?

dew said:

Should us atheists go away? Commit ourselves to some brainwashing instutition? Invite more God-fearing new members to sway the trend?

You mean, to appease me? Is that important to you? Nah, I prefer to see the truth as it is, though, sometimes, it is alarming to me.

dew said:

The paragraph continues to paint atheism as some misguided latest fashion, which in itself is quite an insult. Atheism runs in my family for over 100 years.

Yeah, my bad on that one. Seems fitting in an overwhelming majority of cases, however, based on the age when kids decide that they know how the entirety of how the world works, which was an earlier point. Kids decide to be atheist (or whatever) based on their favorite musician's, actress's, teacher's, jock's views being as such, or did that suddenly change? It's not like kids have gotten any smarter. Being a child is the dumbest time to make eternal choices.

dew said:

Feel free to rant about the tenets of faith, the shortcomings of atheism, whatever. But do not say it's alarming that there are too many atheists around. Others might start counting you people and express worries too.

Hasn't stopped you from counting, even without any facts or evidence. And, it's alarming, see what I did there?

Doomkid said:

I agreed with your entire post up to this point. The 'ancient evidence' for various religions rarely seems to be evidence at all - far more often it's a rather clear manifestation of a person's desire to romanticise history and indeed all of reality. I've yet to see anything that can objectively be called "evidence of a supreme being".

To claim to know, without a doubt, that there is a supreme being, without the ability to witness or present any credible proof, seems to me to be the most arrogant, misguided, illogical, idiotic possible conclusion. Especially when, depending on which fairy tale you choose to analyze, that supreme being seems like a huuuuge cunt.

You're being cute. But, there *is* a lot of circumstantial evidence, our existence notwithstanding. I witness the miracles of this world each day, don't you? Do you really believe that a bunch of active chemicals just happened to flow into each other and react in a way that generated a cell capable of generating energy, finding energy, excreting waste, protecting itself from other nearby active chemicals, and the big one: reproducing? And all of that being able to continue for millions of years on a hostile planet, to create who we are today, without some guidance? What created those chemicals, and the laws that define their interactions? And, what created that? And, even if things happened just like that, is it a grand design, or chaotic randomness? The "cunt" part you so carefully mention is probably the idea that we're not supposed to have the benefit of hard evidence. Supposedly it is your faith that is considered most precious to God - that wouldn't work if there were fingerprints, a hidden camera feed, footprints in the sand. Yeah, that's a bitch, especially to the analytical mind. Belief, without proof. I think some people still hold a grudge about the "Santa Claus" conspiracy, well into their adulthood. But Christmas without Santa just wouldn't be the same, would it?

dew said:

You mentioned certain morals being instinctively known to (almost) all humans. This is a biological imperative that has been shaped over tens of thousands of years to ensure the survival and procreation of the species. A species who teaches it's young how to survive and cooperate with others is going to have great chances of survival. I agree that many parents are not doing a good job of teaching their kids right from wrong, but logically we can infer this as the result of no longer needing to be functional to survive more so than some 'wave of atheism' that's turning our kids away from God's morals or some such.

Some scientists would have you believe that there must be a "biological imperative for survival" to explain everything we do, or else we wouldn't have continued doing it. Doesn't really explain Heavy Metal, but, ok. And, there is, in fact, a huge push to turn kids away from religion, away from the family unit, away from common sense, instinct, strive to achieve, confidence. Have you not witnessed, even on these forums, the numbers of hate-filled, fiery, low-intellegence, lazy, shy kids, whining furiously about rather inconsequential events. It is alarming - I don't know what else to say.

Doomkid said:

...other mismatched stuff...

You're mixing up my points as if I had intertwined them - I did not. Parenting, Morality, Wisdom, Religion - these were separate points - stay with me, here :).

Doomkid said:

In my opinion, one can find a far more stable moral ground than any religion can offer in 3 simple sayings:
"Treat others the way you want to be treated" - Empathy for your fellow man
"Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words cannot hurt me" - Coping skills necessary for a society which encourages freedom of speech and thought
"Take only what you need lest others go hungry" - There is no happiness to be found in the isolation of greed. Benefitting oneself at the expense of others is an act deserving of exile, not adoration

If enough people followed these 3 simple rules, we could progress much faster as a species. If enough people ignore them, the very fabric of society will diminish and we will regress as a whole.

Agreed. I, personally don't need the teachings of, say, the Bible, to know when what I'm doing is wrong (which is why Dew's 'little outburst' is so assinine.)

Doomkid said:

I didn't think this thread was going to become a religious debate but for some reason I just felt compelled to respond. (I hope you don't take any of this as a personal slight, kb1 - I don't intend it that way!)

I appreciate you saying that, and I do not feel that you slighted me - thanks. I have no idea why people feel the need to debate my opinion and concern. One could argue that I attacked someone's beliefs, I guess. Then again, I attacked a general lack of belief, so I'm not sure it applies.

bedbug182 said:

Is it also not as equally as stupid to claim that there IS , without a doubt a supreme being and then to create an entire religious code of conduct based on this belief, with out a single shred of 100% full proof evidence?

No, it's very different. There are a million ways to believe in God, but only one way to not believe. And not believing holds the worst possible downside (eternal damnation). And what's the best possible upside? Quick stay, then pine-box with the worms.

Gez said:

A common misconception. Development slows down, but never fully stops, so the "brain stops developing at 25" thing is a myth.

I never said it stops.

Gez said:

Also all this talk about how we need to find God or whatever is nothing but a red herring. Look at society, and you'll see that the real God that is actually worshiped is the Invisible Hand. That's why you have "In God We Trust" written on dollar banknotes, which God do you think they're talking about?

We each worship as we see fit, but not all ways can be right, I don't think.

fraggle said:

That's not what atheist means.

Close enough for me.

fraggle said:

Nice! I couldn't agree more - that's what I've been saying. Choosing to believe in nothing is the worst possible choice, that offers no hope, pisses off any potential God that might be watching, and has a best possible outcome of breaking even. Yay, let's choose that one - duh.

Sick Bow said:

The way I've understood it is that most atheists are agnostic atheists, meaning you're willing to accept the possibility of a creator but you believe there is none. Rarely there might be someone who somehow believes there is no chance there is some supreme being, but in general atheists are just open minded people.

So, just, anything goes, no real commitment, just flipping in the breeze...

Sick Bow said:

People bash atheists, claim they just want to sin, blah blah blah. Religious people have atheistic tendencies, for example, does a Christian choose not to believe in the thousands of other deities people have come up with?

A Christian believes in the one-and-only God, period.

Sick Bow said:

On top of that, last I checked, non-religious people make up the bulk of our high practicing doctors, scientists, astronomers, and the like. Religious people make up our politicians and our Joel Olsteens.

Actually most people believe in a higher power, supposedly. Thank Goodness, heh.

Anyway, 2-cents. Carry on.

Share this post


Link to post

All the members above could start a religious argument starting with whether the Ford Mustang is a bad car or not.

Share this post


Link to post
dew said:

("TL;DR", and a funny GIF)

Nice! A funny image.
Yes, I tried to respond to those that took the time to communicate their thoughts, including you. It would be kinda rude not to.

And, yeah, you read it (and instigated it, by the way - good job). I hope it benefits you and others, now or later.

And now I'm done.

Share this post


Link to post
kb1 said:

I witness the miracles of this world each day, don't you? Do you really believe that a bunch of active chemicals just happened to flow into each other and react in a way that generated a cell capable of generating energy, finding energy, excreting waste, protecting itself from other nearby active chemicals, and the big one: reproducing? And all of that being able to continue for millions of years on a hostile planet, to create who we are today, without some guidance?

But there was guidance, the imperative to survive

The "cunt" part you so carefully mention is probably the idea that we're not supposed to have the benefit of hard evidence.

No, it's all the aids and cancer and children starving to death and stuff that makes me say that

Some scientists would have you believe that there must be a "biological imperative for survival" to explain everything we do, or else we wouldn't have continued doing it. Doesn't really explain Heavy Metal, but, ok.

We can't currently explain consciousness scientifically, but I don't want to live by any particular religion just because there are things we currently cannot explain. With each passing year we're making new discoveries and explaining things we once did not understand.

Every religion has a somewhat clearly laid out set of moral codes, usually in book form, with loads of arbitrary shitty rules in there that have nothing to do with survival or being a good person, hateful shit like 'stone gays to death' just randomly peppered in there.. Like, what the fuck?

And not believing holds the worst possible downside (eternal damnation). And what's the best possible upside? Quick stay, then pine-box with the worms.

but which set of rules (in other words, which religion) is the one with the correct instructions on how to get into heaven? The one that says to stone gays, the one where it's okay that the prophet married a 6 year old, or one of the other thousands of religions/belief systems out there?

Assuming all Christians go to heaven, about 70% of humans currently alive are headed for the eternal fires, however assuming simply believing in a god is good enough means only about 16% are headed there, but if that's the case, why are there all kinds of random sets of totally clashing rules attached depending on which religion you believe? Who's to say who has the right rules/moral teachings that get you into heaven? If they're naturally programmed into us then why do people have (often bloody) disagreements on this stuff?

Also wtf eternal damnation for not believing despite no convincing evidence? lol seriously what a petty cunt of a god. That's just how I see it though, as an atheist I have plenty to live for here in the real world, stuff like living to see humans progress and improve with new discoveries in medicine and technology, mainly because I care about my species, the planet and my fellow men without the fear of eternal damnation or punishment. I just try to be nice to people because I like it when people are nice to me. No fear required!

I have no idea why people feel the need to debate my opinion and concern.

I think it's both interesting and healthy when we challenge and discuss our ideas! It either makes one see a new perspective they didn't before or reaffirm why they feel the way they do - when discussed in a sensible fashion, that seems like a win-win to me. I would never hold what someone believes on a religious level against them as long as they're not like actively hurting people or whatever, I don't think a person's particular afterlife/supreme being theories is a reason not to get along and have interesting conversations, frankly speaking!

Kurwa said:

All the members above could start a religious argument starting with whether the Ford Mustang is a bad car or not.

thanks for your insightful contribution

Share this post


Link to post
kb1 said:

Close enough for me.

Yeah, uh no. Words have meanings, apparently unless all you're really interested in doing is making up a straw man to argue against. Which is what you're doing. If you'd like to take part in an actual adult discussion maybe let the rest of us know.

Share this post


Link to post
Kurwa said:

All the members above could start a religious argument starting with whether the Ford Mustang is a bad car or not.


Only heathens like mustangs. Satan likes mustangs too.

Share this post


Link to post

See, mustangs are horses.

Four mustangs are four horses...riden by men. Four horsemen.

The four horsemen...

...OF THE APOCALYPSE.

Share this post


Link to post
TraceOfSpades said:

See, mustangs are horses.

Four mustangs are four horses...riden by men. Four horsemen.

The four horsemen...

...OF THE APOCALYPSE.

I'll take the 1997.

Share this post


Link to post

Shit my Found On Road Dead mustang has lasted me a good 10 years. Here's to hoping praying blood sacrifices to last another 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Fonze said:

Shit my Found On Road Dead mustang has lasted me a good 10 years. Here's to hoping praying blood sacrifices to last another 10.

Considering my parent's Mustang (looks exactly the same in the image above) has lasted almost 20 years, I'd say you're good.

Share this post


Link to post

I sacrificed a goat for my old minivan. It lasted me 666 weeks! FUCKIN' SLAYEEERRRR!

Share this post


Link to post
bzzrak said:

So a guy was searching for a 17-year old editorial and accidentally started an argument about religion? This is gonna be an epic thread.


The last epic thread I can think of was the bird game thread started by coolkid.

Share this post


Link to post
Doomkid said:

(lots of good stuff)

Yes, I do appreciate a good healthy discussion, even a debate. Thanks for keeping it civil, and providing good feedback!

One note on what you discussed: My understanding is that having faith absolves you from the fear of getting it wrong. Yeah, all the books have been written by man, and are therefore, quite suspect, though there's maybe some good in there. It's not so much about which particular religion, it's about having faith. The faith has to be blind faith, otherwise, it's not faith. That's the catch. Not only is that not petty, it's damn hard to do! And, if you think about it, it's the only way it could work.

And, I guess you have to act right too, at least based on your built-in morals. It doesn't have to change who you are, though you may decide to make a few different choices. (Note: I'm not preaching, just trying to clear up a few points, as I see them, of course.) And, I also hold nothing against you, or anyone here for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post

Quite an interesting response, kb1. Your perspective is a bit clearer to me now in that it doesn't really matter which religion a person subscribes to as long as they have that faith. I wish all discussions about this kind of thing could remain civil like this one has, I see no reason to not just respectfully disagree and accept it as an interesting difference of opinion. Cheers man!

Share this post


Link to post
Doomkid said:

We can't currently explain consciousness scientifically


Can't we?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognition

The processes are analyzed from different perspectives within different contexts, notably in the fields of linguistics, anesthesia, neuroscience, psychiatry, psychology, education, philosophy, anthropology, biology, systemics, logic, and computer science. These and other different approaches to the analysis of cognition are synthesised in the developing field of cognitive science, a progressively autonomous academic discipline. Within psychology and philosophy, the concept of cognition is closely related to abstract concepts such as mind and intelligence. It encompasses the mental functions, mental processes (thoughts), and states of intelligent entities (humans, collaborative groups, human organizations, highly autonomous machines, and artificial intelligences).

Share this post


Link to post

It wasn't made clear but I meant that as an answer for the oft-asked question by many Christians, "why did we develop consciousness when no other species has if there isn't a God looking out for us specifically/whos image we were created in? The only answer I can think of is because the ability to think critically allowed us to develop advanced tools thus improving our chances of survival/procreation. I guess it can be explained regardless of which way the question is framed though so yeah, I was wrong to say that.

Share this post


Link to post
Doomkid said:

It wasn't made clear but I meant that as an answer for the oft-asked question by many Christians, "why did we develop consciousness when no other species has if there isn't a God looking out for us specifically?" The only answer I can think of is because the ability to think critically allowed us to develop advanced tools thus improving our chances of survival/procreation. I guess it can be explained regardless of which way the question is framed though so yeah, I was wrong to say that.

My answer to that would be "mu" because it is incredibly arrogant to believe that no other species has developed consciousness; something any competent ethologist would dispute.

In fact if I had to choose what distinguishes mankind from animals, it would be the belief that there is something that distinguishes mankind from animals.

Share this post


Link to post
Gez said:

My answer to that would be "mu" because it is incredibly arrogant to believe that no other species has developed consciousness; something any competent ethologist would dispute.

In fact if I had to choose what distinguishes mankind from animals, it would be the belief that there is something that distinguishes mankind from animals.



My answer would be "moo"

Share this post


Link to post
Gez said:

In fact if I had to choose what distinguishes mankind from animals, it would be the belief that there is something that distinguishes mankind from animals.


Couldn't have said it better myself ^^

Share this post


Link to post
kb1 said:

Do you really believe that a bunch of active chemicals just happened to flow into each other and react in a way that generated a cell capable of generating energy, finding energy, excreting waste, protecting itself from other nearby active chemicals, and the big one: reproducing? And all of that being able to continue for millions of years on a hostile planet, to create who we are today, without some guidance? What created those chemicals, and the laws that define their interactions? And, what created that? And, even if things happened just like that, is it a grand design, or chaotic randomness?

You really shouldn't be calling anyone else's beliefs absurd. They're going to turn around and do it right back to you.

And what do you mean "what created those chemicals"? I hope you're aware that you don't have to be God to make chemicals. You can even do it yourself at home by mixing ammonia and bleach and inhaling deeply. Try it!

Share this post


Link to post
Gamer With Dignity said:

And what do you mean "what created those chemicals"? I hope you're aware that you don't have to be God to make chemicals.

By all means, recreate the chemical reactions that occur in a typical star on a massive scale. Because that's how our sun does it.

Gamer With Dignity said:

You can even do it yourself at home by mixing ammonia and bleach and inhaling deeply. Try it!

I'd rather die.

Share this post


Link to post
Gez said:

My answer to that would be "mu" because it is incredibly arrogant to believe that no other species has developed consciousness; something any competent ethologist would dispute.

Sure, but most of these laymen discussions are basically getting at "why are humans different on some level" when it comes to intellect, social interaction, inventiveness etc no matter how off base that assumption may be. It's often (incorrectly, in my opinion) used as "evidence" that we were created in some kind of divine/godly image. I would agree that we're just one more species. Many spiritual/religious people claim we were created in God's image so I was basically trying to respond to it on that level.

Share this post


Link to post
Doomkid said:

"why did we develop consciousness when no other species has

That's easy.

We didn't. Because other animals have cognition.

Sure, it's pretty self-evident that we're pretty far ahead in this front, but a lot of the mental skills and such often thought to be unique to humans ... aren't. Emotions occur in animals as simple as the invertebrate insects, our close relatives gorillas can understand and feel sad at their own and other beings' mortalities ( even if they have to be taught the concept of it ), and crows have their own languages. Not just squawks and warbles that they instinctively understand, but languages actual grammar and dialects and they're actually major grammar nazis that'll get pretty annoyed at you if you don't speak correctly. Speaking of, crows have excellent problem-solving skills, as do several other animals, and tool use goes hand-in-hand with that. Some animals will just have sex for recreational purposes, heck, female monkeys will do so in exchange for food. There are birds that actually find humans more attractive than their own species.

Reverse furries are a thing that actually exist. Let that sink in.

It's worth remembering that we are animals, too. What we are takes from the same ancestor as every other animal, and it's not like nature took its sweet time waiting for humans to spring up to provide all those things typically thought unique to, well, humans. Evolution is a very gradual and very, very random process, and has more than once proven that it's willing to provide one path with a trait of another even if there's absolutely no logic to it. It's becoming less and less reasonable to say that humanity is special in any way - it's literally within the realm of possibility for a new subspecies of crow that's caught up to us mentally to spring up in five years, even if it would require some pretty supreme luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×