All of us, we are wrong...

by daystar 24 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  daystar

  So, 75% of the world's population is religious, believes in a higher power. How can they all be wrong?

  In the early 1600s, a great deal of controversy surrounded one particular astronomer. For thousands of years, it was believed that the earth was the center of the universe, that the earth did not move, based, relatively recently, upon certain bible verses such as Psalms 93:1, Psalms 104:5, and Ecclesiastes 1:5.

  This was the official position of the Church. Much scientific evidence of the time also seemed to support the geocentric view. However, we know very well now, the geocentric view of our universe was incorrect. Copernicus published a book suggesting the quite heretical idea that the earth revolved around the sun. He was so fearful of being charged with heresy, by the Church, that he waited until he was on his death bed before publishing the book. Galileo took up this torch and was very nearly charged with heresy until he recanted.

  Was the majority of the world wrong? This would seem to be the case.

  It has been postulated (and I apologize for not being able to source this at the moment) that at any point in time, 90% of what our species believes to be true about our universe is incorrect.

  Now, does that mean I personally believe that people who believe in a higher power(s) are patently wrong about everything? Well, certainly not. What I'm suggesting is that we are all living our lives based upon our best guesses; that Truth is an illusion; that very little, if anything is a certainty, no matter what side of any argument you stand upon.

  Just because a majority of people believe something to be true does not necessarily make it so.

  (In philosophy, this is a logical fallacy, argumentum ad populum, "appeal to the people". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum. We should all take classes on logic and philosophy, critical thinking, myself included.)

  http://www.paulstips.com/brainbox/pt/home.nsf/link/08082006-Seven-rules-for-sharpening-up-your-thinking-skills
• 

  serendipity

  Agreed.
• 

  Butters

  Actually, technically, in space, nothing "moves". Movement is an attribute confined to the non celestial bodies. If you were able to look at space through a microscope, all your would see is nothing. In order for something to move, it has to go from one place to another. Since space is not a place, it is an expanse, nothing within it is actually going from one place to another.
• 

  daystar

  butters

  Thank you for proving my point! Much has changed since Galileo's time.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Butters,

  you take a serious philosophic discussion and try to reduce it to trivial nonsense. RELATIVITY.

  None of us is able to look at all or even some of the celestial bodies in space thru a microscope. So, we look at things from our
  relative position. You say that if we were to look at space in that microscope, we would see nothing. You take a true enough
  statement and jump to the broad misapplication that "nothing within [space] is actually going from one place to another."

  Relatively, now, compare the original supposition that the Earth is the center of the universe with understood science now.

  I was going to make the joke that, perhaps you need to justify why your life or career is going noplace, but it was just a joke.
• 

  skyking

  OnTheWayOut You take a good tread and make it your personsonal attack dog. WHY attack Butters? His statement goes along quit well with the topic. I am going to say something that I will probable regret I have an IQ 150 in science and math I see things differently than most people see. I bet OnTheWayOut you could not understand what he was actually saying could you.
• 

  LittleToe

  Daystar:

  It has been postulated (and I apologize for not being able to source this at the moment) that at any point in time, 90% of what our species believes to be true about our universe is incorrect.

  So on the evidence of the postulation, there's a 90% chance that this statement is false, then?
• 

  compound complex

  Dear Daystar,

  This is a topic near and dear to my heart. I am currently engaged in reading Dava Sobel's GALILEO'S DAUGHTER and rereading her expert treatise on 'a lone genius who solved the greatest scientific problem of his time' : LONGITUDE. That lone genius was John Harrison. Both he and Galileo studied the realities of the universe, made remarkable discoveries, and suffered for the mere proclamation and attempted implementation of said discoveries. Whether it was the Church, the Admiralty, or the Astronomer Royal, these two men fought against bias, Church "truths" and corruptible, or at least misled, men with agendas.

  I have to include a passage from LONGITUDE which bears directly on one's knowing the truth of a matter yet putting oneself at great risk for acting in accord with facts: "Only two men washed ashore alive. One was Sir Clowdisley himself, who may have watched the fifty-seven years of his life flash before his eyes as the waves carried him home. Certainly he had time to reflect on the events of the previous twenty-four hours, when he made what must have been the worst mistake in judgment of his naval career. He had been approached by a sailor, a member of the ASSOCIATION's crew, who claimed to have kept his own reckoning of the fleet's location during the whole cloudy passage. Such subversive navigation by an inferior was forbidden in the Royal Navy, as the unnamed seaman well knew. However, the danger appeared so enormous, by his calculations, that he risked his neck to make his concerns known to the officers. Admiral Shovell had him hanged on the spot." Moving ahead of the ORGANIZATION?

  Well, Daystar, I am going to spend some time considering your questions, vis-a-vis the old standard "But 50-million [ fill in the blank ] can't be wrong." I hope the above information has piqued your curiosity regarding other sources available on your subject. Perhaps, though, you are already familar with Ms. Sobel's eminent work.Till later,

  Yours truly,

  CoCo
• 

  daystar

  LittleToe

  Precisely, though not very practical. Hmm... I wonder why AC titled that one book "The Book of Lies"...
• 

  Butters

  There is also the possibility that nothing is absolute, and all is possible. Life, for instance, (if you can call it that), in within the human mind, is like a ride at an amusement park, it has many ups, downs, thrills, chills, and spills, and it's fun, for a while. But many people have been on that ride for a very long time and they begin to question, "Is it real? Or just a ride?"...others have been there and they come back to us and tell us, don't worry, don't be afraid, EVER, because...It's just a ride. Life is just thought. We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death, and we are the imagination of ourselves.