Atheism is a religion too – Universe may be a much more complex system than we can comprehend

In my opinion atheism is a religion for sure. But I can see also that it can be a less harmful religion than the others. I am agnostic myself because lack of proof is not a proof of inexistence. If religious books are just astrology and religions are just way to use power and control, it doesn’t still prove anything to any direction. It can be true only in a singular narrow case when viewed from specific perspective.

Because universe may be a much more complicated than you or me can see or understand or comprehend. Even 100 years of advanced technology might be indistinguishable from magic. Think of a civilization that would be 1000 000 years ahead of humans. Then when you think that (don’t think captain Kirk, that is not 1000 000 years ahead of us I hope), how could you tell the difference between a god and this kind of being? I am sure you couldn’t.

You could compare yourself to ant. Ants would believe that everything they know and see is the universe that exists. However, they can not comprehend beings like humans for sure. But still we humans exist.

And what it comes to the topic, death:
– each cell dies because it has programmed to die
– different animals have different lifespans, because they have different genetic code, not because they would be worse designs that are worn out faster – think what if you could change the genetic code? Dying becomes obsolete.
– I can already also predict one another thing: humans will have life span of at least 1000 years before humans are capable of any kind of interstellar travel. Forget captain Kirk that dies under age of 100 years. The real captain Kirk could be 900 years old or more. And in fact, it would not be out of the question even that the real captain Kirk would live in a computer and the biologic bodies would have been long time abandoned already as obsolete, or it could be that the beings are combinations of technology and biology (cyborgs).

There can be many levels of existence and everything is relative and biased by the eye of the beholder and with the very limited knowledge, it is impossible to draw sure conclusions, and with more information, already done conclusions are usually refined and corrected. You never can play only one horse, because there are many horses, and the likelihood that you play the wrong horse is higher than when you would not be conclusive about which horse to play. I find being agnostic the only way to be without religious belief. Because just a belief that something simply does not exist is a belief already, and it is not scientific.

  1. The implications for interstellar travel from a 1000 year life-span are quite interesting; Would we perceive the long journey time to be as less of a problem? What about the fact that one could undertake such a journey and still find one’s friends and family alive upon returning? At least it ought to be easier to find willing candidates when they would actually live long enough to get to see their destination… Is a long life-span (by our standards) perhaps even a pre-condition for interstellar travel? Pending definitive results from Grand Sasso this would seem to be the case – for even with suspended animation, and lightspeed fraction velocity, a short hop to Proxima Centauri and back would take longer than you have to live.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

You must be logged in to post a comment.
%d bloggers like this: