Posted in Commentary

42: The Cunninghams chat about what’s wrong with people, the Bible, and the nature of the universe. Like ya do.

S:  so what is the difference between faith in science and faith in religion?

K:  there is none

that’s why the argument between them is so silly

S:  alchemy versus sorcery

K:  an apt analogy

scientists can be as dogmatic as anyone else

S:  to me though, science at least builds on what we all know to what some can figure out to speculation based on these, while religion seems to go the other way.

Everything comes from the top down

K:  that’s to be expected

S:  we all know water moves down instead of up

so we figured out gravity

K:  Science is supposed to be descriptive; religion is prescriptive

S:  and we then created a model using gravity to explain tidal forces

the religions of the world would say water moves down because god(s) prefer it that way, but they could and have created places/times in which that was reversed by their will and the tides are an effect of their will or their forces, or Neptune turning in bed

K:  I’m pretty sure no religion in the world says that anymore.

I suppose it’s a question of intellectual evolution. In primitive societies, only primitive myths were available.  Not everyone has intellectual curiosity to examine things for themselves. Those people advance, and those who are curious about the curious also advance.

That’d be Stephen Hawking, and then you and I.

However, I think, from what I observe of people and their behavior in the world, that the primitive approach still holds sway.

People are possessive about things and people, like Monte with his food.

they see everything as a potential threat

they live in near constant fear

I think that there’s a great deal of the world who has barely left the trees, honestly.

Picture them with big eyes and curly, fuzzy tail, and you see them for what they are.

they never develop past 3 years old–all instinct, no intellect

I really don’t know how you nudge people like that down the path of enlightenment when it scares the hell out of them.

S:  “I’m pretty sure no religion in the world says that anymore” Last time I checked the three major religions had a story about Noah’s Ark and a story about the Red Sea

I don’t think you can nudge them toward enlightenment

K:  yeah, but not one of them has anything to say about Neptune

S:  they don’t have the capacity unless they are wiling and able to think critically and also accept that even the best scientific theory may be disproven but that does not negate the scientific process

K:  my question is that I would think that critical thinking would be evolutionarily beneficial

so why hasn’t it selected IN more than it has?

S:  because smart people get beat up and killed

S:  Which do you see more of, wolves or sheep?

K:  true

S:  I could explain the Red Sea with this same science

if the Moon were to be struck with a meteorite and shifted in its orbit at the time the Hebrews arrived at the sea, causing a massive tidal effect

K:  the Red Sea supposedly parted down the middle; it didn’t lean to one side.

S:  no, but if the tide rushed out

plus, how accurate were the chroniclers?

K:  however, if the people who were there were previously inlanders and had never been to the sea before, never seen a tide, it might’ve been amazing to them

S:  eureka

K:  it probably was tidal

S:  maybe even an earthquake induced tidal wave

drawing the water out and then forcing it back in

K:  could be

S:  there are a number of tectonic features in the Mediterranean

so I assume some persist into the Middle East

K:  Right, but the timing was brilliant and I don’t believe in coincidences, as you know

S:  right

K:  Science is great, but there are some things beyond current science–always. That doesn’t make those things, or science, untrue. It just means we don’t know yet.

S:  maybe Moses was learned in the astronomy of the ancient Egyptians and knew of the meteor

maybe there were preliminary quakes that tipped someone off who had seen a tidal wave before

certainly more plausible explanations, if the story is at all accurate, to my way of thnking

K:  more plausible than the hand of god helping Moses part the ocean?  of course

Old testament is myth as sure as any other, and probably most of the New.

S:  of course Gou a’uld technology stolen from Ra would have done the same thing

K:  Do you think that I think Moses parted the Red Sea?

S:  nope

I was just saying that some find it easier to believe in that than in the scientific explanations that I suggested, and if I put those ideas to them and could not prove it, they would deny science, but they have no proof and nothing like the structure of real events that I linked my theories to, and I guess that is the difference

K:  because science is complicated, and requires you to believe in invisible things, too, like magnetic and gravitational forces.

either way, you have to suspend disbelief. Why not pick the one you like best?  Plus, if you choose religion, there’s a Big Daddy as a bonus, to take care of you.

Science offers no such comforts.

S:  my faith is based on extrapolating from the known/seen to greater applications

their faith is based on one simple causer

K:  because it takes a greater intellect to think abstractly; remember your Piaget

I think your answer is there: God’s will is 1 simple causer.

S:  we have seen evolution in all lower life forms

K:  and there is evolution in ours, or you and I wouldn’t be here.

our brains make your blindness and my crippledness non-issues, and keep us from being eaten by wild animals and jerks in Lincolns.

you’ve given the answer.

If everything is God’s will, you only need one answer.

Science has different answers for every situation.

which is easier?  most people cannot understand either one, so again, you pick what’s easiest.

S:  right

K:  I would say that it goes both ways

I felt my life was easier when I was a confirmed atheist.  I had my 1 answer: chaos reigns.

S:  and in one, these annoying geeks keep trying to explain it to you while in the other one, perfect people with bright teeth and good hair tell you just to follow along

K:  when I experienced things that made me think there was more to the universe than meets the eye is when things got complicated for me.

S:  well, but you did not join an organized religion

K:  correct, nor will I

S:  so chaos still reigns

K:  I don’t know–I would say seeming chaos reigns.

I cannot claim enough knowledge to know for sure.

The difference between me and religious folks is that I don’t claim to have any certain answers.

S:  but the point is that the chaos is one of the forces in play in the universe

K: maybe

S:  duality is present

K:  as I said, it may only look like chaos to us

S:  where there is order there must be chaos

K:  says who?

S:  me

and probably Kosh cause he’s a bastard like that

K:  the wider universe looks like chaos to us–it’s so huge

and when you look into the middle of an atom, it looks like chaos to us, because we’re so huge

Tucson looks beautifully peaceful from Mt. Lemmon

given our own experiences of different perspectives, it’d be foolish to assume that any one perspective about anything is absolutely accurate, let alone about the entire workings of the universe.



I've been doing some form of creative writing since 9th grade, and have been a blogger since 2003. Like most bloggers, I've quit blogging multiple times. But the words always come back, asking to be written down, and they pester me if I don't. So here we are. Thanks for reading.

4 thoughts on “42: The Cunninghams chat about what’s wrong with people, the Bible, and the nature of the universe. Like ya do.

  1. “given our own experiences of different perspectives, it’d be foolish to assume that any one perspective about anything is absolutely accurate, let alone about the entire workings of the universe.” This is so true.

    I think many people have an easier time in having faith in science because of the tangibles they can feel/see/etc. There are intangibles in the sciences, too, but it seems only dedicated research scientists delve into those areas. Religion, for me anyway, seems to urge a blind faith in the intangibles. I do have a problem with that despite my “need” to also believe in a divinity bigger than us. Maybe it comes down to what an individual needs in their life in order to shape their system of beliefs. It’s all another example of the conundrum of human existence and I’ve no true answer.

Your thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s