Log in

No account? Create an account

Religion - The Life and Thoughts of Zach — LiveJournal

May. 27th, 2003

08:50 pm - Religion

Previous Entry Share Next Entry

Alright if everyone else (e.g. duck2ducks and soulsong) is going to do it, I will to. Slave to the memes that I am.

According to the SelectSmart.com Belief System Selector, my #1 belief match is Theravada Buddhism. </br> What do you believe?</b></a> Visit SelectSmart.com/RELIGION
  1. Theravada Buddhism (100%) Click here for info
  2. Unitarian Universalism (93%) Click here for info
  3. Secular Humanism (83%) Click here for info
  4. Mahayana Buddhism (78%) Click here for info
  5. Liberal Quakers (76%) Click here for info
  6. Neo-Pagan (73%) Click here for info
  7. Jainism (65%) Click here for info
  8. Taoism (64%) Click here for info
  9. Non-theist (63%) Click here for info
  10. Hinduism (60%) Click here for info
  11. Orthodox Quaker (59%) Click here for info
  12. Sikhism (57%) Click here for info
  13. Mainline - Liberal Christian Protestants (56%) Click here for info
  14. New Age (56%) Click here for info
  15. Bahá'í Faith (41%) Click here for info
  16. Reform Judaism (41%) Click here for info
  17. Seventh Day Adventist (35%) Click here for info
  18. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (32%) Click here for info
  19. Scientology (32%) Click here for info
  20. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (29%) Click here for info
  21. New Thought (29%) Click here for info
  22. Mainline - Conservative Christian Protestant (26%) Click here for info
  23. Orthodox Judaism (26%) Click here for info
  24. Islam (24%) Click here for info
  25. Eastern Orthodox (22%) Click here for info
  26. Roman Catholic (22%) Click here for info
  27. Jehovah's Witness (20%) Click here for info

Yep. Pretty much.

Except that I'm still an Atheist at heart.

Current Mood: thoughtfulthoughtful
Current Music: Adam Brodsky - Folk Remedy - All


[User Picture]
Date:May 28th, 2003 07:56 am (UTC)

Unitarian Universalist for me

Does that just mean I can't make up my mind? ::snicker::

Do you find it difficult to be a scientist and believe in god or God?

I did until I redefined god. Like this:

NAMASTÉ - (Na-ma-stay) A Sanskrit word used as a salutation or blessing. Can be translated as "the divine in me honors and blesses the divine in you, in truth, we are one, the I AM".

As we respect and love ourselves, we respect and love others. You get the idea.

The soul is merely an energy that is neither created nor destroyed, merely changing like matter and other energy. And like matter and energy, the 'reincarnation' of it sends particles of it into many things.

That's my comfy place, anyways....
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
Date:May 28th, 2003 08:10 am (UTC)

Re: Unitarian Universalist for me

See I just think of "soul" as a high level symbol for the emergent cognitive power and self-awareness of the complex adaptive system that is the brain. I mean one neuron has zero awareness (not a very small amount, but literally zero). A billion disjoint neurons have zero awareness.

Our self-awareness and self-identity and our ability to perform complex tasks and have unique emotional responses all comes not from the sum of some parts but from the whole of a system which as a system is greater than the sum of it's parts. "The Soul" is as good a name as any for the difference between the whole and the sum of the parts. But it is just a name. There isn't anything "magical" about it. There isn't anything "supernatural" about it. It is beyond our understanding because it is more complex than us but that doesn't make it "unreal". Powerful, unexpected behaviors emerge from complex systems all the time.

Similarly, "God" is a high level symbol for the "soul" of the system that is the universe. "God" is a concept, not an energy, not a entity, not a thing you can point to or communicate with. "God" is the part of the universe that is greater than the sum of it's parts.

But I don't even use those words "God" or "Soul". These redefinitions are just my way of recasting the words of religious believers in a way that lets me communicate reasonably with them. This reminds me that we can be talking about the same patterns but with different representational systems. My science and their religion can be isomorphic (or at least homomorphic).

Oops. Went off the deep end there. I think abstract algebra/set theory are my religions.

Is the set of all sets which are not members of themselves a member of itself?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
Date:May 29th, 2003 02:52 am (UTC)

Fascinating, Captain

One neuron has zero awarenes. But at the same time is all aware because it can't be separated from everything else.

Very interesting stuff but somehow a bit cold and detached.

That's about as romantic as ... well... hmmmmm... Words sure can kill a buzz.

Not an insult, just an observation. ;)

Loosen up, silly rabbit. Walk it off.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
Date:May 29th, 2003 07:56 am (UTC)

Re: Fascinating, Captain

See, for me, the philosophical ramifications of cognitive science and complex adaptive systems are a major turn on. I guess thats why I'll always be an Atheist Scientist (Church of Nobody, Scientist).

Not insulted. Just observed.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
Date:May 29th, 2003 11:46 pm (UTC)

Re: Fascinating, Captain

Rock - n - Roll, baby!

I love to see someone with a passion!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)