Recent Activity

Defaultblog-thumb

Andrew Torr commented on What is your definition of God? 100 words or less. on February 21, 2008, 3:33 PM

Exactly 100Gods explain the otherwise unexplained or misunderstood. Gods are typically personified force or intelligence invented by cultures to explain the workings and origins of the world, forces in human nature, and mortality. Gods are abstract and metaphysical, but their domain shrinks with the advancement of scientific knowledge, the limits of which will always allow for some creative interpretation of the %u201Cpurpose%u201D or ultimate %u201Cfirst cause%u201D of existence as a whole. Despite this limitation, such beliefs carry with them real physical consequences in the behavior of those who hold them. These beliefs are usually nonetheless attractive and difficult to abandon. Shenanigans.

Defaultblog-thumb

Andrew Torr commented on Is America the new Rome? on February 1, 2008, 6:02 AM

It absolutely is. The "founding fathers" drew most of their ideas for our government from the Roman republic, incorporating more recent philosophy like Voltaire, Hobbes, Paine, etc. I'd say we're about in the Marian Reforms phase. Bush wasn't our Caesar, but he cleared his way.I'm sort of surprised that they didn't divide the office of president into smaller units, as the Romans had 2-3 consuls in office, typically. I think we could function very well as a better emulation of the Roman republic with the addition of our Bill of Rights.

Re: What are this election's most dangerous ideas?

This question is pretty easy to answer for me. In the 21st century, the age of the world wide web, computing power surpassing human intelligence, scientific understanding spanning from the Planck length to 14 billion years of cosmic history, and most importantly, nuclear weapons powerful enough to deface a planet, we still have with us a remnant of the Dark Ages - religious faith. I find it very odd that superstition prevails in light of our astonishing intellectual accomplishments over the past few decades. More than that, it's frustrating. If religion were nothing more than a force for good in the world, I would have no problem. It's not that simple. As long as people can be convinced of the veracity of ancient claims regarding the supernatural, or even nature, with absolutely no reason or evidence, suicide bombing, racism, the stoning of women, and the looming threat of nuclear war will always follow. It's time to put the Bible and the Koran back on the shelf with other bronze age fiction like the Iliad and Odyssey and move on. In fact, it's overdue. The possibility of a Biblical literalist holding the office of president should be a VERY frightening thought to anyone with the intelligence to interpret this sentence. And yet, it is reality. We know Zeus doesn't throw lightning bolts, we know the sun is not a chariot that flies over the earth, we know that there are no fairies, satyrs, dragons, or unicorns, and it should follow that prayer is just as superstitious, as well as souls, prophets, virgin birth, etc. Would you trust a man who believes hurricanes are the result of the lack of sacrifices to Neptune with the United States nuclear arsenal? Why is it any better to trust someone who believes in a talking snake in a tree? WAKE UP AND SMELL THE APOCALYPSE … Read More

January 29, 2008   | 

Defaultblog-thumb

Andrew Torr commented on Re: Re: How should the Bible be interpreted? on January 17, 2008, 7:15 AM

That has much more to say about its efficacy than its veracity. If Voltaire had been raised a Muslim, he would have been just as influenced by the Quran, or as a Greek the Iliad and Odyssey. Jefferson, anyway, was inspired by Thomas Paine and the ancient Greek philosophers more than anything else. The Greeks invented democracy. While it is a valuable literary work, the ideals found in the Bible are simply barbaric, not ethical. It could have been written about any other god with any other number of fables and myths and have the same effect because it was believed to be the authoritative word of the creator of the universe. It has less to do with the contents of the book and more to do with the creativity of the readers.

Defaultblog-thumb

Andrew Torr commented on if the big bang theory is true... on January 16, 2008, 3:09 PM

I dont think you completely understand the Big Bang theory. Also, its not an attempt to explain the ultimate beginning of the universe, its just an explanation of what happened as far back as we are able to perceive given a lot of observations. Ive heard some interesting explanations from baby universes to colliding ten dimensional membranes. Its kind of impossible to know at this point.

More