dimreepr

No, I mean every accepted religion and their version of the concept. If we simplify humanity, and put the scientifically literate at one end of the spectrum and the uneducated (by which I mean the illiterate among us) at the other; fate removes subjectivity from the other end of 'our' spectrum, bc our agency has been removed from the equation.

I'm sorry but I can't let this pass, "religions don't"? Isn't God a way of removing subjectivity? Two different system's with different approaches, both effective (arguably), so I find it difficult to dismiss an approach to life, that was historically successful.

Why?

I wish I could, but the clown car is center of attention, while the kingmaker places his pawn...

Indeed, but the right stuff is difficult to determine if we decide to declare the leaf as legitimate currency; we may need to burn down a few forests... 😇

The problem with religion is, the bible is stuck in the time it was written and our context has changed over time; if the speed of light was a thing in the bible then it would be a reasonable axiom, from which to calculate, the likely shift in context, and therefore, a greater understanding of what was written.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, "Trump seems determined to bankrupt America (He's writing cheque's that nobody can afford)", energy is just a side effect.

Doesn't that mean a theory is less than?

That's what I thought, just not why I thought it... I was thinking of the beginning, and where the energy came from, for a quantum fluctuation to be significant...

“There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.” ― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe Assuming absolute zero means no movement, would that mean electrons stop orbiting the protons?

Now you've got me in a logic loop, if I can't +1 this and I can't +1 myself (assuming 1 of my reply, had some sort of influence, in the past), who can I +1, Zeno?

We just want to know stuff and we want to believe the stuff we know is correct; no time equals no history to learn from, just empty space...

Aren't we lucky??? We have the freedom to express an opinion... 😉 Make the most of it, while it's still fashionable.

He has no real concept of a freedom that lies outside of comfortable, banging one's head against a brick wall, is a fundamental freedom he can't understand. He's the sort that complains about his, perfectly acceptable holiday, bc the sheets had a slight stain; I paid for a perfect holiday and I only have two week's in which to enjoy it and that stain... grrrr...

There you go again, assuming that your "concept of freedom" differs from anyone else's. If you have to have specific condition's in order to achieve peace/freedom then your imposing prison on yourself.

Your being very arrogant, you seem to be denying all of us any chance of freedom. You need to imagine someone like Dr Hawkins, he is entirely dependent on other's for 'everything', right down to his voice; but he's freer than you ever could be, bc he accepts his prison/limits, he escapes in the only way he can, think about it... 😉

Thanks but no thanks. TBH I can't think of worse prison sentence 'life with no possibility of cheese'... 😉 Just a word to the wise-arse @raphaelh42 , we aren't born free from our family, turtles are but most of them die; a child has to obey the rules, an adult understands why... 😉

OK, I'll bite, what are the coordinates?

Indeed, at what point do the rules slide us into a dystopian society?

There's a reason the homeless congregate around cities...

I don't see how it wasn't intended to set our future goals; we should try to remove percieved dogma, from the most likely initial intention of the various religions, given so much cross-over in any Venn diagram. I think it's fair to say that contentment with now, in order to alleviate the fear of tomorrow, is definitely at every intersection I'm pretty sure there's nothing explicitly written that says, science and religion can't work together.

And even before we had money, we were exchanging human qualities (skills) and or commodities. Not to mention the biggest problem for the loner, all the good bits on the planet, already have humans on it.

Anarchy means less freedom, bc you always cede control to biggest bully's in the playground. Do your family have to live by your rules? Or is your children free to play with the cute looking tiger?

How can you possibly understand how a machine thinks, you may as well claim to be a dog's prophet; you have no idea how a dog's perception work's, given it's primary sense imput is probably smell. Assimov thought long and hard about the limits of AI under the 3 laws (our imposed limitation), IOW if we program the AI with the 3 laws in mind, then the more it anticipates the needs of people, the more it's going to lie to us.

I think perhaps we're talking past each other, in the context of this question, given the intention of the OP. "Setting our future goals, ethically, pragmatically; and acting in such a way that those goals are achieved, is a very different one." Indeed, it's a very religious aspiration, that has worked in the past; I'm not sure that science has the tool's.