The Big Picture: Nerd Gods

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

It depends on the Atheist. A more militant atheist would consider belief to be akin to having an imaginary friend or being a kind of mental disorder. Consequently militant atheists tend to avoid those that are very religious the same way that other people avoid those that talk to themselves.
Otherwise, less militant (I think the term is "soft") atheists consider the views of people personal and don't mind if they believe something that they consider to be wrong.

Having said that, Atheists aren't all boring. If anything, we party like there is no tomorrow...cause there isn't.

Lol great episode, really amusing:D

Woodsey:
Coca-Cola didn't invent Santa Clause (or even the red and white suit I believe, they just put him in it since it went with the branding).

This. I believe that the legend of St. Nicholas aka Santa Claus originally came from Russia.

OT: Interesting idea Bob. I now pronounce my devotion to the Church of Shenron.

I for the life of me don't know why people care Cruise is a Scientologists. He's not trying to convert you, so who gives fuck? Is Ethan Hunt dropping his gun breaking the fourth wall and saying "Worship Xenu" in MI? No? Then just watch his movies and shut u.

JBrasington:
Oh and if anyone wants an explanation for why we're all agnostics, I have an explanation if you really care.

Probably some pedantry about how absolute truth is unachievable, so for all I know I might turn out to just be part of a dreaming person's fantasy world?

Even though I'm Catholic, I wouldn't mind making a pilgrimage to the Gundam shrines, especially if they have Domon Kasshu's Gundam along with Neo-Russia, Neo-China, and Neo-France all in one spot.

So was this whole episode just done to lead up to a Scientology joke? Because if so, well done Bob.

It almost seems like you made this episode for the soul reason of nullifying your previous message with that Scientology dig. I guess that makes this episode kinda useless then, aye?

Just as useless as a religion based on popculture.

I've been to that Buddha and Gundam. They each inspire an exactly equal amount of awe.

I'm one of those that doesn't like religion and doesn't care if any gods exist. Not sure what you call that.

dark-amon:
Actually the philosophers have had a pretty static perception of what the term 'God' means (refering to Bobs comment on humans perception of gods changing over the course of history). The premises is actually more than 2000 years old.
Why do I mention this? Because philsophers or people with a certain degree of philosophical knowledge seem to be the only people who work on the question on higher metaphysical entities on a rational level. I rarely see anyone from any church do it and amny of the atheist community that writes books on the subject lacks knowledge on metaphysical analysis.
And about the latter half of the episode, although many younger philosophers would probably find the ideas cool, but if one where to show up everyone would sigh: "another scientolgy-church!"

If you seriously think there has been no change in the metaphysical perception of God from Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Philo, Origen, Tertullian, Augustine, Aquinas, Kempis, Descartes, Leibniz, Hobbes, Spinoza, Berkeley, Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Teilhard de Chardin to Marcel, then your ignorance of the history of philosophy speaks for itself.

Emergent System:

JBrasington:
Oh and if anyone wants an explanation for why we're all agnostics, I have an explanation if you really care.

Probably some pedantry about how absolute truth is unachievable, so for all I know I might turn out to just be part of a dreaming persons's fantasy world?

Nope, Hume presented a pretty solid argument against absolute scepticism. It's a particular argument about how the question of "do you believe in God" is unanswerable. Hume also had a good thing to say about presumptuous people.

The question of do you believe in God is perhaps one of the oddest questions to be so socially prevalent. As someone who wants there to be a God but insists on logic and reason, I've found myself in a position where I attempt to create a complicated version of agnosticism, ideally one that suggested God was more likely, or belief was rational, but this is science, and we look for the answer not our answer. My initial attempts made me arrive at Agnostic Positivism, but it occurs to me that the more complicated positions have more flaws. In fact the simple position of Agnostic was always the ideal position, as long as it was qualified correctly of course.

There are 2 camps when it comes to knowledge and certainty; the Moore/Kant intuitionists and the Logical Positivists. (If there are more please inform me, I would greatly appreciate it.) Where Logical Positivists offer 2 ways to determine the truth or falsity of a statement, the Cognitivists offer just the one, intuition. (If you want to understand the struggle to Kant's critique of pure reason, I highly recommend John Cottingham's Anthology of Western Philosophy as a start.)

I would argue that Tabula Rasa makes no sense, as it suggests that we can only be taught, which Plato made clear was not true. No, I would argue that evolution has given us a brain that can comprehend sensory experience as well as give us the "a priori concept of understanding" I suggest that the human mind can't comprehend sensory experience without applying intuition to it.

I will explain why Intuition cannot answer the question of God in a moment. Logical positivists argue that truth can be synthetically determined by checking to establish the facts either way, or analytically by simply understanding the terms that occur in them.
None of these approaches can be used to prove or disprove God. The fundamental issue is that we can't define the term: God. And without defining God we can't observe God's phenomena. The problem that we can't define God means that analytically we can't even attempt to prove or disprove anything (despite attempts.) If we can't define God, we can't determine God's phenomena, and arguably God has no phenomena.

Synthetically we can disprove claims of the religious about God's phenomena, such as God created the world in 7 days. But we can't check the facts of God's existence. For one our sensors are not advanced enough, and even if we could observe the entire universe we can't guarantee that we possess the necessary sensors to detect God's existence. Absence of fact however is not actually terms for dismissal. For a multitude of reasons, such as; scientific discovery could not function like this. But also with no facts there are two theories, that God exists and that God doesn't exist. With no facts to support the claim both would have to be dismissed or neither would have to be dismissed. But it's a polarised question so dismissal is not applicable.

So does Intuition work? I'm afraid not. From Plato to Kant philosophers have pointed out that we not only acquire knowledge from sensory experience, but we also realise knowledge. Plato used the example of a slave boy working out a mathematical problem without advice, but by the process of dismissing the incorrect answers. An intuitionist would suggest that we can observe the phenomena, such as the Earth, and our intuition would allow us to realize the truth. The obvious problem is that what phenomena? Even if there is a phenomena, where? The other issue is that we still haven't defined God, or God's 'tools'. And without that we are not in a position to understand the relationship between evolution and the big bang and God.

gnostic church is a good one. too bad they are probably seen as heretics at this point

Thought myself to be agnostic for a long while. but have since converted to the church of atheism. By that i mean, i don't give a crap what religion you are as long as you don't try to recruit/convert me.

Rainboq:

Captain Pooptits:
Haarooohee, Bob? Haarooheee?

You just lost all nerd credibility with me. Stop your preaching now. Right now goddam.

It's Haruhi ffs.

Oh be quiet, he can pronounce it however he pleases.

OT: I was laughing so hard at the end, good one Bob!

He sure can but that doesn't make it right. I don't care one way or the other, just throwing my 2 cents.

Personally, I disagree with the idea that we could just choose who or what we worship/believe in. Yes, some fictional characters have admirable qualities (superman, spiderman etc) but suppose someone chose to worship a character with a differant set of morals (Punisher springs to mind). We end up with a whole bunch of people running around commiting acts that, in their minds, are totally acceptable.

Society has a set of morals already (Don't kill, steal, rape ... etc) but what if you choose a belief system that perhaps allows you to do some of these things?
Usually whenever this happens it's called a cult and ends in a shoot out or something.

I'm probably rambling, but my point is: People shouldn't be able to deify whatever they want. Religion is too fucking dangerous to be controlled by morons.

I welcome any responses.

From the middle of this movie, somehow I knew you would mention about $cientology... And when you mentioned it... I laugh my ass off, and then just "Nevermind" like this whole monologue didn't happend xD

What about worshiping Saxton Hale as the new, more awesome chuck norris?

I'm a Bokononist. Scientology and Jedi are for the birds.

mesoforte:
Atheist=/=Hating religion

Probably wasn't intentional, but the subtext was there.

Well, he did add the descriptor "Militant" so I don't think he was directing it at all atheists. Though, as an agnostic myself, it's been my experience that atheists are considerably more like religious folk than they like to admit. While I've never seen atheists standing on the corner yelling (yet), they do seem eager to share their opinion in personal conversation and don't like being disagreed with, which is pretty much status quo for obnoxious religious people.

Referring to the video, Moviebob (and everyone else) should check out Brandon Sanderson's works. I've never seen an author deal with religions in quite so many different and interesting ways without being preachy one way or another, but he pulls it off. Here's a quick list of things that happen in his books:

In one book a character becomes God.

One book deals with a Romanesque (or Greek-esque) Parthenon of deities.

Another book deals with a similar faith, but the Gods have fallen.

(Here's the kicker) And in one book, God dies.

And this is all from a guy who teaches at BYU. Crazy, but there it is.

Falseprophet:

dark-amon:
Actually the philosophers have had a pretty static perception of what the term 'God' means (refering to Bobs comment on humans perception of gods changing over the course of history). The premises is actually more than 2000 years old.
Why do I mention this? Because philsophers or people with a certain degree of philosophical knowledge seem to be the only people who work on the question on higher metaphysical entities on a rational level. I rarely see anyone from any church do it and amny of the atheist community that writes books on the subject lacks knowledge on metaphysical analysis.
And about the latter half of the episode, although many younger philosophers would probably find the ideas cool, but if one where to show up everyone would sigh: "another scientolgy-church!"

If you seriously think there has been no change in the metaphysical perception of God from Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Philo, Origen, Tertullian, Augustine, Aquinas, Kempis, Descartes, Leibniz, Hobbes, Spinoza, Berkeley, Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Teilhard de Chardin to Marcel, then your ignorance of the history of philosophy speaks for itself.

Not no change. however we still define god by the three premises of power, knowledge, goodness presented presocratic. Deny that these are the three premises isn't used througout history in defining godly perfection and you really don't fit calling other people ignorant.

Considering a large portion of the religious stuff that people rely on to shape and justify their faith actually is fan fiction, I'd certainly put a lot of rise-and-fall stuff down to bad fan fiction. For example, things like the received notions of Hell and Satan and the like in Christianity are purely fabrications made up by writers in subsequent ages which have no basis in scripture (the Hell of the Bible is simply an empty shadow realm where a few angels are exiled, not a fiery realm of punishment and damnation where humans go). One of the oldest extant Christian sects (one of a number of such ancient groups in Iraq) actually worships God through 'Satan', but have to downplay the reality of their faith because all that bad fan-fiction that grew up around 'Satan' subsequently has been used as an excuse to persecute them for hundreds of years. Likewise, something like the Islamic ban on making depictions of Muhammad post-dates his death by hundreds of years and has no scriptural basis, a reality of bad fan-fiction most starkly driven home by the fact that very early Muslim artwork does actually depict him! Something that makes the fact that people have died in riots over the subject in recent years particularly tragic.

I really like this idea.

Here begins the 1st national Church of Stan and Jack (working title)

And there's no shortage of religious texts with underlying moral themes.

1. The importance of family (Fantastic 4)

2. Responsibility and sacrifice (Spider Man)

3. Accepting people regardless their differences (X-Men)

4. Repentance for past wrongs (Iron Man)

5. Humility (Thor)

I'm also partial to the Trekkie Church. It's just like Secular Humanism, but using Star trek metaphors

dark-amon:
goodness presented presocratic.

What the hell does that even mean?

I bow to no god...except for the Unconquered Sun. And possibly Autocthon, but...he's not really a god, and more of a god-shaped spaceship thing that people live inside...

I already ahead of you bob. I worship the original mask

image

Bruce Campell

image

and have the tattoos to prove it.

My official religion is detailed in Guyver, being that we were genetically engineered by aliens but left behind during a war.

image

God Im old school

Frank_Sinatra_:
The Church of Gundam

So who is the head honcho?
Katoki?
Tomino?
Char?

we already have a diety Mobile Suit the GOD Gundam I think we can appoint Amuro as Jesus and Tomino as God

This reminds me of this one time I was watching a documentary on the discovery channel about how a lot of supernatural events in the bible and other things could be explained by aliens. And I was like, "You know, that's a lot more reasonable than what most religions would say..."

Agnostic club!

Falseprophet:

dark-amon:
goodness presented presocratic.

What the hell does that even mean?

sorry, missed the -button. pre-socratic (that wich was before Socrates) there was three premises presented in the definition of divine perfection power, knowledge and goodnes. They have been used in presenting arguments on both sides of the god-argument since.

If I'm going to worship someone, he might as well be badass.
image

dark-amon:

Falseprophet:

dark-amon:
goodness presented presocratic.

What the hell does that even mean?

sorry, missed the -button. pre-socratic (that wich was before Socrates) there was three premises presented in the definition of divine perfection power, knowledge and goodnes. They have been used in presenting arguments on both sides of the god-argument since.

This presumes that God is divinely perfect. Plato's 'god' was more of an imperfect molder of matter.

I was hoping Bob would mention that "Rosalina as God of the Mario Universe" theory that he espoused in the second Game OverThinker episode. I know I'd go to the Church of Rosalina.

JBrasington:

dark-amon:

Falseprophet:

What the hell does that even mean?

sorry, missed the -button. pre-socratic (that wich was before Socrates) there was three premises presented in the definition of divine perfection power, knowledge and goodnes. They have been used in presenting arguments on both sides of the god-argument since.

This presumes that God is divinely perfect. Plato's 'god' was more of an imperfect molder of matter.

however Platos god was not a relevant part of his philosophy. Like Aristotle the god was just an explanation in their philosophy. Religious philosophy was hardly a relevant part of philosophy before Augustine.
I do however when re-reading my first post see that I did a poor job writing it. It does seem like I say that the perception of gods where neverchanging. Tp be more precise: There was a lot of different views on how the world existed in pre-socratic times. They became more non-changing with Augustine and the ending of the ancient period. However Augustine and those after did take alot of inspiration from the greek philosophers, on one part the three parts of Gods perfection wich is highly relevant in Augustines defence of the free will

mesoforte:
Atheist=/=Hating religion

Probably wasn't intentional, but the subtext was there.

Yeah, but there is an unfortunate correlation between the two since we've got to defend our position all the damn time even though we're not the ones trying to prove anything other than WYSIWYG.

Okysho:
Gundam shrines... Hell yes

I'd do many pilgrimages :D

The problem with nerd gods is A) it's pretty well determined that they're total fiction B) if any of them are in the DC continuity you already have hundreds of interpretations before the 'church' even starts branching and C) if you allow one fictional comic-book or literary character to be worshipped, you have to allow all of them.

Imagine: A joker cult. O.o (though a batman cult would be awesome)

Dorian6:
I really like this idea.

Here begins the 1st national Church of Stan and Jack (working title)

And there's no shortage of religious texts with underlying moral themes.

1. The importance of family (Fantastic 4)

2. Responsibility and sacrifice (Spider Man)

3. Accepting people regardless their differences (X-Men)

4. Repentance for past wrongs (Iron Man)

5. Humility (Thor)

I'm also partial to the Trekkie Church. It's just like Secular Humanism, but using Star trek metaphors

Tony isn't so much making up for past wrongs as he is for wrongs he's committing now. =P

I'm already a devout member of the Church of Captain Falcon.
image

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here