Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   I know, lets make a new religion called science. That sounds right. Then charge people insane amounts of money, for science   (io9.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, faiths, Hubble Ultra Deep Field, David Eagleman, Ray Kurzweil, possible worlds, quantum computer, field experiment, scientific skepticism  
•       •       •

3383 clicks; posted to Geek » on 30 Apr 2013 at 9:44 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-04-30 03:44:05 AM  
suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com
What? What will the drones do about it?
 
2013-04-30 06:23:18 AM  
"Been there, done that."
 
2013-04-30 06:24:41 AM  
Ferchrissakes........ razzn' frazzn' no auto-preview-before-post.... the image embedded before I posted it.....

www.messagefrommasters.com

"Been there, done that."
 
2013-04-30 07:56:22 AM  

DjangoStonereaver: "Been there, done that."


They said "science", not "science fiction".
 
2013-04-30 08:05:32 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: DjangoStonereaver: "Been there, done that."

They said "science", not "science fiction".


Actually, DIANETICS was based on science.

Debunked science, to be sure, but still....
 
2013-04-30 09:32:57 AM  
I propose offering animal sacrifices to golden shrines of chemists.
 
2013-04-30 09:50:15 AM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-04-30 10:00:25 AM  
Science is the art of taking what we already knew, renaming it, and calling it "discovery".

Silly science. UR STOOPID!
 
2013-04-30 10:07:29 AM  
RoxtarRyan:

Is that the worship of Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart?
 
2013-04-30 10:08:36 AM  
Every star you can see in the night sky is a wish that has come true. And they've come true because of something called Spacestar Ordering. Spacestar Ordering is based on the twin scientific principles of star maths and wishy thinking.

If you'd like to know more, there are thousands of Spaceology centres all over the UK. If that doesn't convince you, well, then, maybe you just don't deserve to get what you want.
 
2013-04-30 10:14:05 AM  
Well, this already happens - we gave up older religions for newer religions because scientific evidence led us to stop trying to sacrifice people for crop yields. Science causes religions to reconfigure in to smaller sets of less absolute statements or harder to prove/disprove things, but without it we would still have "explanations" about climate, biology, etc. that were not based on any kind of reproducible, testable evidence.
 
2013-04-30 10:16:41 AM  
I have a feeling this new religion is going to conflict with my Flat Earth Society schedule.
 
2013-04-30 10:18:00 AM  
Religion is the calcified remains of older philosophies and sciences, the lifeless bones venerated in carefully wrought ossuaries.
images.wikia.com
 
2013-04-30 10:19:28 AM  

s2s2s2: Science is the art of taking what we already knewbelieve, renamingverifying it, and calling it "discovery", and then using it to do wondrous things previously deemed impossible.

Silly science. UR STOOPIDAWESOME!


FTFY
 
2013-04-30 10:21:03 AM  
Watching the David Eagleman video...question: What's the difference between the "possibilianism" and philosophical naturalism espoused by people such as Peter Godfrey-Smith?  It seems like he's coined a new name (and bought a domain name) for something that already exists.
 
2013-04-30 10:21:23 AM  

KiltedBastich: s2s2s2: Science is the art of taking what we already knewbelieve, renamingverifying it, and calling it "discovery", and then using it to do wondrous things previously deemed impossible.

Silly science. UR STOOPIDAWESOME!

FTFY


Good! You were baptised on monday?
 
2013-04-30 10:22:04 AM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: I propose offering animal sacrifices to golden shrines of chemists.


Make sure the chickens are white meat only.

Actually, you know what, I'm pretty fussy.  Why don't you just sacrifice a few restaurant gift certificates instead of trying to guess what I'd like.  Takes all the risk out of it.

/happy scientist is a non-vengeful scientist
 
2013-04-30 10:23:17 AM  
Tax exempt status, FTW!
 
2013-04-30 10:23:22 AM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: I propose offering animal sacrifices to golden shrines of chemists.


If by "animal sacrifices" you mean prime beef cooked medium-rare, then this Chemist will accept your sacrifices at the golden table of your choosing.

/Hungry
//It's not even 10:30 yet
 
2013-04-30 10:24:39 AM  
A prof in college claimed that the 3rd law of thermodynamics shook up a lot of scientists so much that it spawned a religion.  He could not name any practitioners of the religion.
 
2013-04-30 10:28:58 AM  
"Sir, the Book of Numbers needs to be abridged."

"How many pages is it?"

"Infinite. And that's not even including the imaginary ones."

"Do I have to do everything? Just remove that Book, use some notation for it, and stick in the Book of Algorithms."
 
2013-04-30 10:33:52 AM  
Dumb question in the article. The average religious person today probably sees God differently than his 15th century counterpart precisely because of science. I know I do.
 
2013-04-30 10:39:22 AM  

Mad_Radhu: Is that the worship of Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart?


I dunno, "five rounds rapid" seems a tempting response to a lot of this.

IntertubeUser: It seems like he's coined a new name (and bought a domain name) for something that already exists.


Catchy brand names can help with mass marketing.
 
2013-04-30 10:39:27 AM  

Mr. Titanium: A prof in college claimed that the 3rd law of thermodynamics shook up a lot of scientists so much that it spawned a religion.  He could not name any practitioners of the religion.


What bullshiat humanities discipline was he from?
 
2013-04-30 10:41:05 AM  

Bondith: Mr. Titanium: A prof in college claimed that the 3rd law of thermodynamics shook up a lot of scientists so much that it spawned a religion.  He could not name any practitioners of the religion.

What bullshiat humanities discipline was he from?


... but you repeat yourself.
 
2013-04-30 10:48:12 AM  

IntertubeUser: Watching the David Eagleman video...question: What's the difference between the "possibilianism" and philosophical naturalism espoused by people such as Peter Godfrey-Smith?  It seems like he's coined a new name (and bought a domain name) for something that already exists.


I suppose it depends on whether you consider whatever "possibility" that you are entertaining is Supernatural or Natural. Philosophical Naturalism means that everything that exists (even if we don't know about it) is part of the Natural Universe. There doesn't seem to be that restriction with Possibilianism. Although despite what Eagleman says I think it is just another form of Agnosticism personally, just with a broader view of what is possible and not constrained to just a particular religious belief or set of beliefs.
 
2013-04-30 10:48:46 AM  
Love him or hate him (for most Farkers it is hate), Scott Adam's book GODS DEBRIS wasn't too bad of a read. I won't spoil it for you (Google can do it for you) but I can see how someone could use it as the jumping off point for a technocratic religion-ish belief system.

PDF Link

/Not Scott Adams I swear.
 
2013-04-30 10:52:43 AM  
I read the headline in this guy's voice.
smarty57.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-04-30 10:54:30 AM  

Marine1: Dumb question in the article.


It's kind of a shiatty article. The sort of thing a first-year philosophy student would churn out for his student newspaper.

And Possibilanism is just Strong Agnosticism. I suspect someone ignorant of philosophy came up with it independently, not realizing the idea has existed for centuries.  It's not a common position because it's so easy to demolish it ("Russell's Teapot" being the standard counter).
 
2013-04-30 10:56:13 AM  

entropic_existence: IntertubeUser: Watching the David Eagleman video...question: What's the difference between the "possibilianism" and philosophical naturalism espoused by people such as Peter Godfrey-Smith?  It seems like he's coined a new name (and bought a domain name) for something that already exists.

I suppose it depends on whether you consider whatever "possibility" that you are entertaining is Supernatural or Natural. Philosophical Naturalism means that everything that exists (even if we don't know about it) is part of the Natural Universe. There doesn't seem to be that restriction with Possibilianism. Although despite what Eagleman says I think it is just another form of Agnosticism personally, just with a broader view of what is possible and not constrained to just a particular religious belief or set of beliefs.


At about the 13:50 mark, he does offer restrictions, which seems consistent with the description of philosophical naturalism that I was taught...
"...we begin our philosophical investigations from the standpoint provided by our best current scientific picture of human beings and their place in the universe...Science is a resource for settling philosophical questions, rather than a replacement for philosophy...." - Peter Godfrey-Smith, Theory and Reality, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science.
 
2013-04-30 11:00:07 AM  
"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." - NGT
 
2013-04-30 11:00:33 AM  
South Park did it.

i117.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-30 11:07:42 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: DjangoStonereaver: "Been there, done that."

They said "science", not "science fiction".


You sound thetan-y.
 
2013-04-30 11:07:49 AM  

Bondith: Mr. Titanium: A prof in college claimed that the 3rd law of thermodynamics shook up a lot of scientists so much that it spawned a religion.  He could not name any practitioners of the religion.

What bullshiat humanities discipline was he from?


Actually he was a Chemical Engineering prof.
 
2013-04-30 11:15:26 AM  
I for one welcome our AI Gods
 
2013-04-30 11:19:54 AM  

KiltedBastich: s2s2s2: Science is the art of taking what we already knewbelieve, renamingverifying it, and calling it "discovery", and then using it to do wondrous things previously deemed impossible.

Silly science. UR STOOPIDAWESOME!

FTFY


Leave him alone, to think what he likes. The world needs ditchdiggers, too.
 
2013-04-30 11:22:12 AM  

Lonestar: Good! You were baptised on monday?


You just go on showing how much you don't understand how science works. The only thing repeatedly claiming science is a religion does is show just how little you know about science and scientific methodology.
 
2013-04-30 11:25:27 AM  

jso2897: Leave him alone, to think what he likes. The world needs ditchdiggers, too.


Even so, in a democracy it is in the best interests of all concerned that even ditchdiggers understand the bare minimums of how things work. Otherwise they are easily swayed by any shill with a convincing line of derp, and you end up with the Tea Party. Anti-intellectualism at the individual scale is harmful to the individual, and concerns me but little. Anti-intellectualism at the societal level is harmful to all of society, including myself and those I care about, and thus concerns me a great deal.
 
2013-04-30 11:26:41 AM  

KiltedBastich: jso2897: Leave him alone, to think what he likes. The world needs ditchdiggers, too.

Even so, in a democracy it is in the best interests of all concerned that even ditchdiggers understand the bare minimums of how things work. Otherwise they are easily swayed by any shill with a convincing line of derp, and you end up with the Tea Party. Anti-intellectualism at the individual scale is harmful to the individual, and concerns me but little. Anti-intellectualism at the societal level is harmful to all of society, including myself and those I care about, and thus concerns me a great deal.


So basically you're no better than door to door Christianity salesmen, telling everyone what and how to think?
 
2013-04-30 11:36:23 AM  

DjangoStonereaver: Marcus Aurelius: DjangoStonereaver: "Been there, done that."

They said "science", not "science fiction".

Actually, DIANETICS was based on science.

Debunked science, to be sure, but still....


Well...  Debunked science IS a kind of science.
 
2013-04-30 11:37:25 AM  

LL316: KiltedBastich: jso2897: Leave him alone, to think what he likes. The world needs ditchdiggers, too.

Even so, in a democracy it is in the best interests of all concerned that even ditchdiggers understand the bare minimums of how things work. Otherwise they are easily swayed by any shill with a convincing line of derp, and you end up with the Tea Party. Anti-intellectualism at the individual scale is harmful to the individual, and concerns me but little. Anti-intellectualism at the societal level is harmful to all of society, including myself and those I care about, and thus concerns me a great deal.

So basically you're no better than door to door Christianity salesmen, telling everyone what and how to think?


3/10

There's no glaring spelling or grammatical errors, thus someone at some point taught you English and that undermines your argument.
 
2013-04-30 11:38:02 AM  
LL316:

So basically you're no better than door to door Christianity salesmen, telling everyone what and how to think?


Exactly, except the whole being perfectly open to criticism and encouraging peer review, the ability to admit error, accepting new data, ect.  Oh, and let's not forget the actual physical, concrete benefits of his belief, like computers, vehicles, safe food, medicines, ect.

You are in the wrong thread to be intellectually dishonest or stupid.
 
2013-04-30 11:40:57 AM  

jso2897: Leave him alone, to think what he likes. The world needs ditchdiggers, too.


You got a ditch that needs diggin'?
I can send someone out!
 
2013-04-30 11:41:20 AM  

IntertubeUser: LL316: KiltedBastich: jso2897: Leave him alone, to think what he likes. The world needs ditchdiggers, too.

Even so, in a democracy it is in the best interests of all concerned that even ditchdiggers understand the bare minimums of how things work. Otherwise they are easily swayed by any shill with a convincing line of derp, and you end up with the Tea Party. Anti-intellectualism at the individual scale is harmful to the individual, and concerns me but little. Anti-intellectualism at the societal level is harmful to all of society, including myself and those I care about, and thus concerns me a great deal.

So basically you're no better than door to door Christianity salesmen, telling everyone what and how to think?

3/10

There's no glaring spelling or grammatical errors, thus someone at some point taught you English and that undermines your argument.


Not trolling.  Atheists who tell others how to live are no better than Christians (Muslims/Jews/etc) who tell others how to live.  I think the world would be a better place if there was a genocide of everyone who told anyone how to live.
 
2013-04-30 11:45:27 AM  
"Any agnostic is free to believe that his favorite religion has not yet been completely disproven. "

Huh? I always thought agnostics were devoid of beliefs or assertions when it came to the metaphysical... That at present, the answer to the eternal question is unknowable.
 
2013-04-30 11:48:35 AM  

LL316: IntertubeUser: LL316: KiltedBastich: jso2897: Leave him alone, to think what he likes. The world needs ditchdiggers, too.

Even so, in a democracy it is in the best interests of all concerned that even ditchdiggers understand the bare minimums of how things work. Otherwise they are easily swayed by any shill with a convincing line of derp, and you end up with the Tea Party. Anti-intellectualism at the individual scale is harmful to the individual, and concerns me but little. Anti-intellectualism at the societal level is harmful to all of society, including myself and those I care about, and thus concerns me a great deal.

So basically you're no better than door to door Christianity salesmen, telling everyone what and how to think?

3/10

There's no glaring spelling or grammatical errors, thus someone at some point taught you English and that undermines your argument.

Not trolling.  Atheists who tell others how to live are no better than Christians (Muslims/Jews/etc) who tell others how to live.  I think the world would be a better place if there was a genocide of everyone who told anyone how to live.


So in your mind, education and religious superstition are the same?
 
2013-04-30 11:51:33 AM  

LL316: IntertubeUser: LL316: KiltedBastich: jso2897: Leave him alone, to think what he likes. The world needs ditchdiggers, too.

Even so, in a democracy it is in the best interests of all concerned that even ditchdiggers understand the bare minimums of how things work. Otherwise they are easily swayed by any shill with a convincing line of derp, and you end up with the Tea Party. Anti-intellectualism at the individual scale is harmful to the individual, and concerns me but little. Anti-intellectualism at the societal level is harmful to all of society, including myself and those I care about, and thus concerns me a great deal.

So basically you're no better than door to door Christianity salesmen, telling everyone what and how to think?

3/10

There's no glaring spelling or grammatical errors, thus someone at some point taught you English and that undermines your argument.

Not trolling.  Atheists who tell others how to live are no better than Christians (Muslims/Jews/etc) who tell others how to live.  I think the world would be a better place if there was a genocide of everyone who told anyone how to live.


Then you're doubly a fool.

First for conflating science and atheism, which are unrelated concepts, philosophically speaking. I attacked anti-intellectualism, not religion, and decidedly not theism. While I have my own issues with religion, anyone who has ever met a Jesuit would never for a second make the mistake of assuming that all religion requires anti-intellectualism. And as I myself am actually a theist, you are just that much more guilty of projecting your own preconceptions onto what you misunderstood from my argument.

Second for failing to recognize that everyone everywhere ever has had people who told them how to live. Your parents, your relatives, your neighbors, your teachers, your boss, your spouse, your religious leaders, your community, your police, your government. I could go on. The only differences is that sometimes you don't notice because you've already implicitly agreed to it, or have never known any other way of living. Humans are social animals, and living in society means compromise, always. You may try to deny it if you wish, based on your ideology. You'd be wrong, and your attempted denials would be futile, but you can certainly try.
 
2013-04-30 12:01:35 PM  

FarkinHostile: LL316:

So basically you're no better than door to door Christianity salesmen, telling everyone what and how to think?


Exactly, except the whole being perfectly open to criticism and encouraging peer review, the ability to admit error, accepting new data, ect.  Oh, and let's not forget the actual physical, concrete benefits of his belief, like computers, vehicles, safe food, medicines, ect.

You are in the wrong thread to be intellectually dishonest or stupid.


Um, you do know what website you're on right?
 
2013-04-30 12:03:45 PM  
Some people are trying to turn science from the central method on how we observe the world around us to the end all be all of every decision we will ever make as a species. These tend to be the same people who think atheism makes one the most brilliant person on the planet. Since the parapsychology movement has been picking up steam here and there because of scientists getting into the fields and publishing their experiments, there seems to be a backlash against them by other scientists that want to keep things nice and physical. But there are always militant outsiders with everything.
 
2013-04-30 12:03:52 PM  
Maybe we should make transhumanism a religion and use the money collected to fund research in that direction.  Transhumanism promises many of the same things as religion does like immortality and a higher state of existence, but unlike religion it can actually deliver on at least some of these things because it is based around science and technology.

/Off to start the First Church of the Divine Deus Ex Machina
//Donations are welcome
///no Bitcoins, please
 
Displayed 50 of 90 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report