Religious people claim moral authority, but where does moral authority really come from? In this talk I show that moral authority comes from the reality based community, not the faith based community. Here I connect the dots and explain the meaning of life and he purpose of humanity in the universe from a scientific context without any subjective assumptions. Science is the new Bible.
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Bad Behavior has blocked 4154 access attempts in the last 7 days.
you have a problem.
its the “Im right(we are right) you are WRONG!” groups you have to contend with.
Their IDEAL, tends to be that if you are not apart of their group, you Couldnt be right, unless you were god or the preacher telling them WHAT to believe.
There is a secret to explaining things to SOME people(most really). Give it in SMALL portions. 1 step at a time. LET them think about it. Then add to it.
To many people want something/someone/.. to complain/bitch/yell/blame/pray/ask/tell them/Excuse to NOT be the one with the problem. WE ALL have a problem..and generally Many of the same problems. But having Someone/something to BLAME is what we are looking for. We dont want the blame..PASS THE BUCK.
Let god do it..He speaks to GOD, so he must be right..so its HIS problem.
Well,…… as my handle presignifies, I stopped listening at 4 min in. What you correctly called the majority view of science IS in my book the correct view.
You are using your “church” analogy more as a club now, a corruption, than the inward joke I have always taken it as. Indeed, you are doing all you can to bend reality to your own dogma. Not a good thing.
Morality–the morality that tells us what is good and bad in the Bible, comes for the assent of the majority. simple—not dogmatic—still subject to debate and disagreement.
Religion in all its forms argues to TELL other people what to think. Its totalitarian, beligerent, intolerant, dogmatic, unthinking and corrupting.
Turn away from the dark side.
yea, verily
Here’s to Reality and Science !!!
Alphie, leave the land of Oz.
Amen, and the road is yellow from all the pee stains.
Meaning of life based on STRICTLY fundamental science, not your meta- constructs:
Entropy must rise and must do so following the path of most micro-states possible. This, very fundamental law of Physics points both to inevitability and the purpose/meaning of the life: creating the most possible complexity in the Universe in order for it to produce the most chaos possible in the collapse. No morality there, just the brute forces of Nature.
No matter how hard Progressives/Left/Atheists/materialists/… try to invent “universal” morality one fundamental problem remains. It is always arbitrary. And as all human arbitrary things go – trivial to manipulate.
Assigning morality through transcendental belief (religion) carries advantage: immutable arbiter. Allowing set of behavioral “laws” to persist and be tested by survival – if negative feedback is built in the morality of it, system will inevitably fail. As seen by societal collapses of Communist/Nazi/Progressive morals driven societies. Morality of Progressivism->inevitable corruption->inevitable spying->inevitable oppression of those who disagree,…
If morality is not based on something outside of ourselves, say like religion or even natural law, then moral authority rests on the individual, and more succinctly, the individual who has the most power.
Then why bother voting?
One intersection of morality and science that I do enjoy is how morals may be (partially) explained by Darwinian Selection for our species. We’ll never know how much of its application is correctly applied, but its fun to think about.
Then there is always Freud–one of the great Jewish Scientists/Theorists that fundamentally changed the way we think about ourselves… even in non-“Freudian” ways.
But… in the end, the area is 80% occupied by: Sociology. A very squishy “half-science.” Hoomans and free will and herd instinct being what it is.
Damn–I am half drawn to go back and view the rest of the video. Is it anything more than evangelical crap trying to substitute one belief system over the others? Confusing “proof” with preference? Thats how it started out… but Marc has been thinking and dealing with his dogma for years now, and its not a standard approach with obvious roots in magical thinking.
Yeah….. we all should give it a fair listen.
Well, I stopped at 41 minutes in. Maybe I’ll try to finish after a good nap?….. or in a few days.
Good extemporaneous speaking though… doubt if I could do it. I even agree with most of the “ideas” behind what you are saying but your vocabulary is very different than mine. I think its just vocabulary…meaning if we took a particular point like “… and the Universe evolved into us…” I think we could pick through that illusory egocentric imposition on our own understanding and thrash the metaphor and analogies down to the bedrock scientific facts that we both believe.
Most philosophies sound good within their own context and exposition. What is the Church of Reality going to do come up against angry Fundies who want to take you down? There is a whole bunch of morality in killing everyone who disagrees with you in order to establish…. harmony.
You believe in harmony don’t you Marc?
Ha, ha.
I wonder if faith healers can cure frothing at the mouth?
Religion and god were created by some humans to control other humans of a weaker will and mind. Religion Is about and always has been about and always will be about control.
The belief that the universe has an inherent moral compass, base, or direction is proven false by the observation of that same universe. An atom has no moral center, a tornado has no culpability in where it lands, and humans are a recently evolved species that has some members who think their species is the center of the universe with a god who has a plan for them.
Human beings will be extinct in a few millennium just like 99.99% of all of the other species that have ever existed on this tiny speck of rock.
Just how tiny is that speck?
http://tinyurl.com/4qvnfqn
Get over it already
Didn’t Spinoza cover a lot of this already albeit without bobbo’s eloquence? 🙂
FTW
And his Theological-Political Treatise is only 250 pages long. Faster than reading a bobbo comment.
this should be interesting. looking forward to watching…
the main issue i have w/ current (mainly western) science is that its all mostly a dogmatic farce, based on flawed models rooted from outdated and/or flawed theories, *not* true science.
current consensus science completely ignores the subtle energies and consciousness. -not allowed in a “gravity only” based universe. our science is basically a “kinetic only” model
only recently have they even begun to admit the “every man/celestial object is an island” ideology is wrong.
-anyway, i’ll comment back tomorrow on the vid.
-s
Washedout—will there be enough suds left over for me to get a first wash on my dirty undies? With the preamble to your analysis, I don’t know how much soap will be left.
Hmmmm….. science is science. Its a method. Not a set of values or proof of anything. Not moral…. or immoral. And to this GREATEST engine of the journey we make towards truth we have yet found, we get all kinds of BS attached. Ha, ha—gee===it is kinda like the bible that way. I guess BS will attach to anything????
But I dither.
Just for grins: Marc says: “Here I connect the dots and explain the meaning of life and he purpose of humanity in the universe from a scientific context without any subjective assumptions. ” /// I didn’t hear that in the 41 minutes I invested in the mixed metaphor onslaught I indured. The closest explanation I heard was that as the thinking component of the universe we have an obligation to continue our existence as long as possible. WTF? I mean===I AGREE===but this ain’t science. It ain’t even morality. Just a bald assertion. But I post to relate an old fable I heard that seems applicable. I will truncate:
Exploring scientist is Dark Africa comes across a tribe that will not kill animals as it is against their religion/morality. The scientist think he scores BIG when he shows the Chief a microscopic study of the water the tribe drinks. See those dots moving around? They are all animals and you’ve been drinking and killing millions of them each time you take a drink of water. Doesn’t this make your whole religion/belief system something of a sham??? And the explorer left the next day to find the headwaters of the Zambesi or whatever. On his way out, he came across the village and everyone therein was dead. The tribe met and decided not to drink water anymore in the faithful observation of their beliefs. Moral: be careful what you tell other people. Some people take their beliefs seriously.
Anyhoo….now that that is off my chest, I didn’t see any “meaning of life” scientifically based or otherwise in the presentation.
Maybe Soundbath can cleanse us all.
Yikes! Why am I suddenly seeing the face of Marc Perkel? Shooting for celebrity status?
Never knew or cared who he was. Now I have an image and voice to try to forget.
Should all the regulars post their faces here? I hope not.
I’ll listen to as much of this as I can but it may not be very long due to the raggedy, overblown signal I’m hearing. That & I don’t really have time to devote an hour to the subject matter.
I don’t have a problem with Marc other than he needs to find a proofreader somewhere. It wouldn’t have to be a proofreader-from-hell (that would me me) but just a second pair of eyeballs that can put a red circle around grammatical clunkers & missing words. It’s tough to proofread one’s own stuff, even for the best of us (me). To publish raw text to a blog without help is hubristic & ill-advised.
What are you proof reading? All I see is the header on the OP? Nothing wrong with that unless you can educate us all?
I’ll summarize it for you. A bullshit salesman from The Humanist Church is shilling a totalitarian claim to moral authority, his point of difference with other religion is that instead of a stated and established philosophy, culture, they prefer to make it up as they go along. Any inconvenient rules can be changed at their next ethics committee.
IMHO,
Morals keep you from doing things that’ll get God mad at you.
Ethics keep you from doing things that’ll get society mad at you.
Facing Adversity, Some Find Solace in Science:
http://psmag.com/blogs/news-blog/stressful-times-turn-to-science-58781/
Ha, ha.
Some in the science community try to argue by appealing to authority rather than using the scientific method to prove something.
Just like in religions, science has its share of charlatans.
Far too many self-absorbed intellects prefer to follow those who preach their “scientific” authority rather than approach things with scientific skepticism.
Marc,
The more bong hits I take, the more it all makes sense! At the next talk wear an interesting hat. Perhaps a magenta Mitre with dreadlocks?
I get no spam but I have too much pork for just one fork.
Snoogins!
One last thought…the next talk should be given from a hot tub and Skyped into No Agenda. THAT is my Sunday morning message and massage.
Speedos are optional…
“Science is the new Bible”? Who needs any Bible.
We are not amuzed.
“Science is the new bible” .. Good analogy and add another analogy in techno-speak..
Science is Open Source . The Bible is proprietary and the coder died thousands of years ago.
He just kind of GOSUBed without RETURN?? Nasty.
Jesus H, what was that all about?