Religious Quarantine

[ssl]

After reading the thread about the student and the professor (which is an old joke - the professor has no brains), and my own thoughts of recent, I have decided that truth itself is an indefinite concept.

If truth is undefinable, and falsity is the opposite of truth, which makes it definable, why are we arguing against truths? We should spend more time on figuring out the false things in life. These actions will eventually result in a basic set of truths for all to learn and live by.

But it goes deeper into the rabbit hole, because not only do you have to understand the question posed - "Is the grass green?" - the questioned must pick out the relevant information not asked - "Does the energy in the form of light bouncing of what society has termed grass fall in the range of what society accepts as the color green?" - yet there is ambiguity in both questions, because there is even more information missing:

- What grass are we looking at?
- What season is it?
- What type of grass are we looking at?
- We had to look at something?
- et cetera...

So, what is truth? Is it a static statement, such as "grass is always green" (but brown in non-growing times, such as winter and autumn)? Or is it more dynamic, like "grass on the planet Earth is normally green, but on Mars, it is purple"?

If it is dynamic, then it seems unchanging truths should probably change over time. Such as religion. Yet they stay the same, keep their past ways in the present, ever pressing upon the public to keep the traditions alive, while the world marches on into the future.

Heck, I hate rambling, because I go onto a tangent, and never get back to the original point. Now my mind proposes this:

Does religion quarantine progress?

 

[Accountable]

The human brain is dynamic. Truth is not. Not everything is relative, but the human mind is.

What do you mean "quarantine"?

 

[ssl]

The human brain is dynamic. Truth is not. Not everything is relative, but the human mind is.

What do you mean "quarantine"?

block in, stopping the advancement of, applying boundaries to an object, et cetera

like an antivirus software's quarantine area, where infected files sit, until deleted or fixed.

like a person quarantined in their own house, whether for serious medical issues that would make an epidemic look like a mosquito bite, or a serious criminal on house arrest with the finest SWAT team on 24 hour patrol on the premise with snipers in a 10 mile radius on call for any type of escape.

or you could think of a box...

 

[Accountable]

In that case, I guess we need to decide on a definition or category of "progress," because the US is arguably very religious, yet has made huge technological advances, or progress.

Old-school empires were often built in the name of religion, and their rate of growth was called "progress."

The USSR squelched religion, and their progress undeniably slowed, reversed, then crumbled.

 

[ssl]

I was looking at the traditional side of things and did not look at that side. My view was warped!

Interesting point.

 

[lumpenstein]

After reading the thread about the student and the professor (which is an old joke - the professor has no brains), and my own thoughts of recent, I have decided that truth itself is an indefinite concept.

If truth is undefinable, and falsity is the opposite of truth, which makes it definable, why are we arguing against truths? We should spend more time on figuring out the false things in life. These actions will eventually result in a basic set of truths for all to learn and live by.

But it goes deeper into the rabbit hole, because not only do you have to understand the question posed - "Is the grass green?" - the questioned must pick out the relevant information not asked - "Does the energy in the form of light bouncing of what society has termed grass fall in the range of what society accepts as the color green?" - yet there is ambiguity in both questions, because there is even more information missing:

- What grass are we looking at?
- What season is it?
- What type of grass are we looking at?
- We had to look at something?
- et cetera...

So, what is truth? Is it a static statement, such as "grass is always green" (but brown in non-growing times, such as winter and autumn)? Or is it more dynamic, like "grass on the planet Earth is normally green, but on Mars, it is purple"?

If it is dynamic, then it seems unchanging truths should probably change over time. Such as religion. Yet they stay the same, keep their past ways in the present, ever pressing upon the public to keep the traditions alive, while the world marches on into the future.

Heck, I hate rambling, because I go onto a tangent, and never get back to the original point. Now my mind proposes this:

Does religion quarantine progress?

What the Hell are you talking about? :wtf::confused

 

[siasl]

What the Hell are you talking about? :wtf::confused

pretty sure this it's a mythos and logos sorta thing...
it just coming at it from that place outside of both

 

[All Else Failed]

After reading the thread about the student and the professor (which is an old joke - the professor has no brains), and my own thoughts of recent, I have decided that truth itself is an indefinite concept.

If truth is undefinable, and falsity is the opposite of truth, which makes it definable, why are we arguing against truths? We should spend more time on figuring out the false things in life. These actions will eventually result in a basic set of truths for all to learn and live by.

But it goes deeper into the rabbit hole, because not only do you have to understand the question posed - "Is the grass green?" - the questioned must pick out the relevant information not asked - "Does the energy in the form of light bouncing of what society has termed grass fall in the range of what society accepts as the color green?" - yet there is ambiguity in both questions, because there is even more information missing:

- What grass are we looking at?
- What season is it?
- What type of grass are we looking at?
- We had to look at something?
- et cetera...

So, what is truth? Is it a static statement, such as "grass is always green" (but brown in non-growing times, such as winter and autumn)? Or is it more dynamic, like "grass on the planet Earth is normally green, but on Mars, it is purple"?

If it is dynamic, then it seems unchanging truths should probably change over time. Such as religion. Yet they stay the same, keep their past ways in the present, ever pressing upon the public to keep the traditions alive, while the world marches on into the future.

Heck, I hate rambling, because I go onto a tangent, and never get back to the original point. Now my mind proposes this:

Does religion quarantine progress?

It totally depends on how religious of a society you are. If you live in a theocracy odds are things like social progress and science take a back seat.