It is a personal choice, but personal choice is not free from perception, prejudice and such. Whomever makes the choice will choose what is most akin to them. Only amongst a minority of polemic personalities does this differ, as some people believe you can learn more of yourself through the study and intergration with, the opposite of your natural inclinations.
The reason is natural and it's called the tribe. To some people people the tribe is religious, others it is racial, for some it is cultural and even social in origin(nomely the class sytem). For some their tribe is an intellectual clique or politicised faction.
To use the phrase 'A man only hears that which he understands' ~ it's a problem that dogs any speculation or indeed, progress.
The intelligent need to simplify their views for it to be cogent to the mass, and you're right the process of which often results in confusion and dogma.
The measurement of time is manmade and relative, but without our measurement of time an event still comes before, in unison with, or after another event.
Aside from any spiritual argument this entails I also espouse to the idea that the universe collapses in upon itself and rebirths anew, obeying its own life cycle just like all assembled matter. The life cycle of which perhaps suggests a Mother to it or at least something that existed before the cycle? Perhaps a matter or force that preceeds the universe as we know it rather than being exempt and outside of it as we know it.
It is strange that through science we reach a conclusion where we are all subordinate to a greater force without the use of mysticism. Creation/life has its own rules and order that, perhaps ironically, are more absolute than the doctrine of any religion.
The obvious flaw is the question what was before and what comes after? There's always a yesterday and tomorrow is always coming.
The implications of this research is that the universe is a law and creator in and of itself and that there is only matter and the laws that govern. This defeats the concept of there being an alien force upon creation(any creation), so it not only defeats god but defeats notions of the soul and ultimately negates the idea of free will, as that too must be only a perception to us as we are bound by physical law, the law that governs all creation.
I suppose whichever opinion looks the best is the better opinion, it is the one that will assumed to be true. To myself my own opinion matters most unless another can disprove it.
I'd say modern society trumpets diversity(division) more than religious societies. I'd also so we have less in common with one another than our religious ancestors did.
We're the cause of evil, not an abstract concept like religion. Religion, for the most part, teaches how to relate well to your neighbours.
A migrant adapts to the host nation, a conqueror forces the host nation to adapt to them.
Forcing the majority to change on behalf of the minority is the polar opposite of Democracy. Why should the native have to change his way of life for the benefit of the migrant's 'free choice' to live there?
Many of the high-level Bolsheviks were Jews, at a time when Jews only made up 5% of the total Russian population. This isn't a Jewish conspiracy it's simply because most ethnic-Russians at that time had very poor education and could neither read nor write.
I don't see how you could connect Communism to religion, given its founder was an Atheist and Nihilist who shunned all religion and spiritualism, and instead judged everything purely upon an economic and material basis. Not unlike other staunch Nihilists such as Libertarians in that respect.
Just expect tough times ahead as it took several years for the effects to 'kick in' back then. Although I don't believe it will be like the 1930's, I would expect the nature of work and society at large to change quite dramatically for us now as did for them then.
On paper things are worse today than they were during the great depression of the 1830's and 1930's, but with the onset of technological advancement the symptoms may not be so bad. However, add the economy to the peak-oil and general resource problems, along with overpopulation and climate change and i'm not sure.
TrueBlue1986 Forum Posts (1,322)
RE: Stephen Hawking: God did not create Universe
It is a personal choice, but personal choice is not free from perception, prejudice and such. Whomever makes the choice will choose what is most akin to them. Only amongst a minority of polemic personalities does this differ, as some people believe you can learn more of yourself through the study and intergration with, the opposite of your natural inclinations.