Wednesday, April 3, 2013

Remodelling the desktop

So, as we speak (or as I speak), this desktop's being slowly remodelled. I'll probably unveil the changes later. I suppose it would be brilliant fun, right?

Hopefully it'll look as original and indisputably sexy as this:

Aereas wants to match wits?

I'm up for it :)

I doubt my wit's up to part with the wittiness. Although, which one of us is more cynical? I can't tell anymore, right?

Perhaps your cynicism overshadows mine? (Which I maintain I have none of and it is in fact, realism)

Religion is touchy, agreed. A bit more awkward when I'm somewhat unsure of my conversation partner's religion.

OH GODS MONTY PYTHON YES.

Sorry, I skipped ahead.

Couldn't resist.

"We shouldn't damn something that we see as unrealistic or improbable as 'impossible'."

"You're impossible!

No...just highly improbable."


I like the default font XD

The thing about the purpose of religion is that I no longer see a contemporary need for it. People will come to the same conclusions with or without what they perceive as divine alms.

"If there was no God, it would be necessary to invent it."

Right?

Perhaps pre-mass education we might have needed something to fill the gaps in knowledge. And in a way, religion continues to fill the gaps of knowledge pretty nicely. But again, doesn't that indicate its role in a knowledge driven society? 

I suppose what gripes me the most is the resistance to change. Perhaps I don't have a problem with the actual religion, the actual scriptures, codices, whatever but rather the agents of that resistance. I'm not intolerant to the point of excluding people from talking to me who have a counterpoint religion to my blasphemous and heretical outlook.

[In fact, it's probably the opposite, barring a few exceptions but I really really dislike barring anyone from contacting me. It feels wrong.]

I don't particularly read widely nor do I come from a background of philosophers, theologians, etc. However, with tolerance comes a right to an opinion I suppose.

I wouldn't care so much about religion if it wasn't as disruptive as it is beneficial. Perhaps my morals have always revolved around the Hippocratic Oath.

[And just on a side tangent, I really enjoyed one of my guest speakers for an ethics lecture. He was way, way, way better than the actual proper uni lecturer. She has no passion. No jazz. No style. No anything really. I guess I don't respect people who I don't find interesting. Is that wrong? Possibly. I do feel that most people are interesting, but it's a hit and miss kind of thing.

How this relates is that he mentioned that in a lot of ethical cases, the ends must justify the means.

To paraphrase:

The removal of organs for the purpose of human experimentation leading to death is almost undoubtedly considered morally incorrect or wrong.

The removal of organs for the purpose of treating a carcinoma (cancer) is almost undoubtedly considered morally correct or right.]

Pantheism is an idea I like only insofar as an idea that I can play around with when I'm bored. Mostly it's what the gods represent that intrigues me, and not the gods themselves. And with that said, I believe that these gods, as varied as they are, are made in the image of humanity - never the other way around.

I do believe that humanity can and always will be better than the last generation.

Science and religion aren't entirely the same thing, however they do have the same mode of proliferation. Which is generally self-proliferation. Ie; knowledge begets knowledge and faith begets faith. (Although, I wonder how many people believe in humanity as a whole? I really do wonder.)

And here's where I completely disagree. Richard Dawkins (Yes, the brilliant biologist) commented that the question of "Why do we exist?" is completely irrelevant to science. You can explain the physiology of us, but the ultimate question of "why?" is unimportant. It's like asking "Why does a mountain exist?". Well, because it does.

I don't believe that people need a purpose - they act...according to their actions. It's not something which I believe really needs much explanation. If people needed a purpose to live, the world population would probably be 100,000 right about now. (Which makes my job as a future health professional all the more easier.)

When people say "Godless", I think they mean "purposeless" and I cannot describe my life like that at all. My purpose is to act in accordance to my own selfish and amoral philosophy.

I'm using the word believe a lot, but then again, I suppose I'm espousing my own kind of faith right?

My only real purpose (if you can call it that) is to extend the lifespan of as many people as I can.

Before anyone mentions to me that that is a "good" purpose, consider those who advocate euthanasia. And those who believe through their organised religion that they are not allowed blood transfusions under any circumstances. Surgeries. Immunisations.

I see the pain ahead of me in trying to deal with this people, and when I ask an adult about it, their reaction is "Oh but you get used to it and you can separate it from you. Professionalism."

It angers me because I wholeheartedly disagree. How can you just separate yourself from that situation? And again, I understand the reality of the situation - I can't act in way X,Y,Z because it would be illegal and immoral.

But to satisfy my own need, I will fight for the lives of others.

If that isn't selfish, I'm not sure what is.

In essence, I'm using my skills to use other people to satisfy my own philosophy.

Anyway, scientists being "Popish"? But they're already Pop-ular!

Strictly speaking, it would be the first time anyone in a privileged position of faith would ever be considered stylish.

I really like my lab coat, but I'm aware that it may or may not have formaldehyde on it. Preservation chemicals for cadavers and all.

Joe is a character that I do respect, but only to a certain extent. It feels wrong to me that someone of that intelligence and experience would speak about their religious worship as though they were talking about their parents.

It is incredibly unnerving because it to me, wrongly or no, seems to be regressive. To childhood? I'm not sure.

I believe it might be ironic that the conservative "tough" mindset of "each to their own" and "Me + God => OTP" includes a vulnerability when that faith is removed.

Which would explain practically all Chrisitan/Catholic political groups.

Speaking of which, I'm still going to nonchalantly tear up their flyers on election day. Man do they make me mad.

And speaking of which, I'll happily wail on them about how their ideas are completely unfounded and backwards after their hemmorhoid performed by a bisexual female surgeon who happens to hate religion with a passion.

But then that would be wrong of me as a medical professional. I suppose maybe when they meet me in the street.

Fear is for those who do not know.

Knowledge is and always will be a means to the ends of power.

I don't particularly have a recap as nice as Aereas mostly because he's organised and I just don't care.

The reason why I argue is because I disagree vehemently with the agents of that dogma and I would normally leave it at that EXCEPT for when their actions affect other people adversely.

I refuse to believe that people can harm others because that is what they believe in.

Well, I better do a summary actually...ehehe.

1) Remodelling the interface. Stay tuned next week.
2) Yay for Monty Python
3) This post isn't that long
4) We no longer really need religion. Keyword: Need. Wants are totally different and any parent will tell you that.
5) Change is necessary
6) Humanity can and always will be better
7) My entire philosophy probably revolves around healthcare
8) I hate dogmatic political groups
9) Knowledge is pow(er)
10) Aereas is a much better presenter of ideas.

Hoping to see you all later.


2 comments:

Harvard said...

As a Christian I can confidently say that separation of church and state is one of the best things to ever happen to Christianity.

The following comment may be really long, you don't need to bother reading it if you want.

Anyway~

I think your idea of religious dogma and your desire to extend everyone's lifespan is related in an abstract yet logical way.

If you met a person who had a debilitating illness, who specifically didn't want that illness to be treated - for example a blind man who vehemently wanted to remain blind. Would you treat them anyway under the assumption that their quality of life would be better and they just don't know it?

It's nearly the exact same principle driving evangelism. Christians believe that every single person's afterlife (and not necessarily current life - although most Christians will advertise a better current life as well) would benefit from conversion to Christianity. Naturally, people of other religions would likely think otherwise. The question of whether it's right nor not to evangelise is often debated, although Christians will believe bothering a stranger for five minutes doesn't compare to an eternity at peace with God.

Which brings us to another embarrassing problem. Evangelism is not necessarily always an altruistic act. Some people do it because they want to increase church numbers, or because they somehow think that converting people will earn them brownie points in heaven. This is really tragic, and it smuts the implications of proper Evangelism. I guess if you were to go by my analogy, it'd be something along the lines of a doctor who only treated patients who paid his exorbitantly high fee. In the end, sick people are cured and that's never a bad thing. On the other hand, that particular doctor is a terrible person.

The problem is that Christianity is a complex religion, although the basic requirements for its entry are very simple. I would very much so enjoy a world where every person professing to be a Christian has read the entire bible and regularly meets up with people to discuss what they think about it. But that dream is about as idealistic as a world where every existing person is a Christian. And the second case scenario more or less voids the necessity of the first :/

I guess what I'm saying is, your idealism is pretty cool. When you graduate, hand me your business card so I can recommend your services to everyone I know.

And I wonder if you'd blow a gasket after working for a long time to cure someone only for them to thank Jesus and not you.

sorry for leaving an outright essay on your post by the way.

Toan said...

That's ok - I'll respond tomorrow cause I'm lazy like that.