I’ve figured out why it’s so hard to be a spiritual person, it’s because nothing spiritual exists, so it cannot be proved. So then what’s the point in looking there if you find nothing.
true that.
The world is as it is. Existence is solid and finite. People are largely estranged and cold at first glance, but watch them a while and you’ll see their good sides.
Unfortunately their is no purpose in life beyond enjoying the good ends and propagating the species.
Life is involuntary. No one chose to be here. If you can’t make yourself happy, try and make someone else happy and might find that makes you happy too.
I totally agree though… it’s just atoms and space at least 99.9999999% of the time.
The parts that throw a wrench into it for me
1.dimensions you cant comprehend the ones above you.
2.an infinite number of universes leaves plenty of room for well anything.
3.the pattern of no matter how big or small our view of atoms and the universe becomes they always find something even smaller or bigger. Our whole universe might look like atoms to something huge.
Theres more but these topics keep me from ruling out gods completly.
These ideas, especially the second, are taken by many to constitute a crisis in modern science… There is not a shred of evidence for either of them, and science-as-evidence-based is thus at stake when these notions are considered to be ‘known’.
The former, though I personally do not understand it fully, is said to be in principle subject to experiments. If so it would take much, much larger particle accelerators than the LHC to show - very indirect - evidence of it. To me it reaks like a mathematical trick… you know, in topology you can ‘solve’ many continuity problems by positing an extra dimension, or as many as you’d like.
The multiverse theory though… that seems resistant to empirical proof by evidence in principle. That’s when science ought to really watch it’s statements…
I think it is worrisome that these ideas that are currently no more than fantastic speculations, have made it into popular-science books as matters of fact already.
I agree with you. Those were just the three that science shows interest in and therefore would be proven right or wrong first due to funding and interest.
This last point is the one i struggle hardest with. Microchips first off nothing i can find explains them in any amount of detail. But harnessing this awesome power has given humans the ability to truly create and breath life into machines. At the speed it ridiculously leaps forward we will have self aware life that will self improve without the burden of conventional evolution. I guess my point is if we can do it…its not out of the realm of possibles that we too are a creation sculpted to a certain extent to maximise our potential by an unknown.
I’ve seen a cat come back from the dead, new born kitten, no breath, no heart beat. its mother cried and licked it for twenty minutes and all of a sudden, it mewls…Maybe there is science for it, but my professor of Modern Medicine Theory was a former heart surgeon…he had patients come back from cardiac arrest after 30 minutes or more of no oxygen to the brain who later recovered with no issues.
In short, for everything science can explain? there is a something it can’t. besides, 100 years ago the idea of a machine tat didn’t require human contact to function? that was MAGIC. So what is considered magic or ‘fantasy’ or ‘sci fi’ now, could well be science fact in another 50 years!
1 Like