Odd Ball


June 12th, 2011 by The Fashionable Philosopher



“Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.” – Albert Einstein

Faith and Miracles

June 5th, 2011 by The Fashionable Philosopher



Some of you may have read this post. Where I point out the requirement for faith being the reason for the lack of scientific evidence for God. The biggest thing I hear when I mention this idea to people is: “well what about miracles, aren’t they proof for God?” This is a very good question.

Miracles happen all the time right? Most religious people have seen things happen, or not happen that appear to be miracles. The big question is, can the miracle be defined as one if it comes under scientific scrutiny? Not usually, even when someone came back from the brink of certain death and everyone says “it’s a miracle!” Odds are, if you look at it from a purely physical scientific way, you would be able to describe exactly what happen and why that person survived. Even if it was some how guided by God there would still be no way to prove it, because it could just be coincidental.

Now you may think, “what about those big miracles?” Even a lot of those would be explained away scientifically or chalked up coincidence. Even if someone said “God will bring a plague of locusts to destroy your crops” and it happened scientists would say “coincidence.” Now what about those undeniable miracles, like turning water into wine? Well God has never performed a miracle in a place where it could be measured. They would think the person who performed the miracle pulled a clever switcheroo on some unsuspecting people.

Katie from orlajames.com said, “the non-believers will always offer an explanation for a miracle-like event, while those with faith will quickly explain it is an act of God, but people must have reason to have faith.”

The point is God has never performed a miracle that could be proven. Even brining people back from the dead. Scientists say “well he must of been in a coma.” If you think about it, has science (real science, not kook science) ever put a seal of approval on a miracle? The answer is “no.” God is smarter than all of us put together and I don’t think He will ever do anything that will prove He exists, otherwise how could we choose anything else except Him?

How is the Soul Connected to the Body?

May 23rd, 2011 by The Fashionable Philosopher

1 Comment


So this post is pretty much speculation, but worth a look I think. First you might want to read this post, where I touch on this subject a bit.

Most of you have probably heard the quote from Einstein “God doesn’t play dice with the universe.” Einstein said this when asked about his belief in Quantum Mechanics. Basically one of the ideas of Quantum Mechanics is that the smaller things get the more chaotic they get. Einstein thought that the universe was not chaotic on any level. There is a big problem with Einstein’s idea if you are a person of faith. If there were no chaos in the universe then like a computer program with no external input the actions of everything from the first moment in time to the last would be pre-determined. Everything in the universe would be decided at the moment of it’s creation. There would be no freewill and your fate would be locked and unavoidable.

I think this is where we get freewill from and how our souls interact with our minds. With the analog nature and complex nature of our brains Quantum Mechanics can come in to play. My idea is that basically our souls can affect our minds on a very small scale leading us to make choices we otherwise wouldn’t if we were just soulless animals and chaos was affecting our decisions.

This idea can be extended further by the degree our souls affect our decisions. Basically how close or far from God we are. For those among you who know about Neural Networks, you know that connections that are used more often are strengthened. If our souls used specific neural pathways then our connections to our souls could be strengthen by making decisions that broke from our regular animalistic behavior. Although I rather doubt it to be the case. I favor the idea that your soul has a more general effect over your whole mind and the health of your soul is the mechanism which makes it easier or harder to control your animalistic behavior.

Stephen Hawking Thinks there is no Heaven

May 17th, 2011 by The Fashionable Philosopher

1 Comment


Probably not many of you read this story about how Steven Hawking believes we are little more than complex computers and there is no heaven. One thing about the article is quite true, you will never find scientific proof for heaven or God. Within the universe there is no need for God for everything to function properly. However absence of proof isn’t proof of absence.

If we are nothing more than computers than do computers have awareness? Is there some kind of series of operations that a processor can perform that would give it awareness? No of course not. There is a fundamental difference between the human brain and a computer, beyond that we are analog and they are digital. The details are for another post at another time, but like Chaos Theory describes (not my theory the other one), small effects can result in large differences on the real world scale. Partially because of the analog nature of the human brain, but also because of the way it works, small random quantum fluctuations in the human brain can result major differences.

Basically what I’m saying is a computer is based on highly discrete processes and decisions. So if you run a computer under the exact same conditions the result will always be exactly the same! The human mind is fundamentally different, otherwise we wouldn’t be aware. The human mind will not produce the same result even one time running the same experiment. No matter how well you try to control or track all the variables, the result will always be different! It’s the nature of quantum mechanics, the human mind is not just a computer!

Lastly I’d like to cover his statement saying science and religion are almost impossible to reconcile. I covered this here, but I will summarize. Because God requires faith no scientific experiment could either prove or disprove God. Otherwise, if you could prove God did this or that, God would be scientific fact! This can’t be or you would need no faith. It’s understandable for a scientist to not believe in something that is, by definition, untestable. However because of that, why bother making any statements just because there is no proof to the contrary? It’s bad science to do so!

The End of America is the End of the World?

May 16th, 2011 by The Fashionable Philosopher



So today I see a lot of people pointing to ill signs in the US economy, to the strengthening of “enemy” nations around the world, to weakening political influence of the US and saying “the end times must be here.” Firstly I think Uncle Sam still has a lot of life left in him. Secondly I don’t think the end of America’s dominance in the world would mean the end times are here. The world got by for a long time before the founding of the United States. It will no doubt get by when the US is no longer there.

We must be pretty egotistical to think that the end of our nation would mean the end of everything. Although without the US the world would be much less stable, as it was before the US existed. However it got by, even with the lack of stability. Sure there were wars, nations came in and out of existence and people like Napoleon (actually shortly after the US came to exist, but the US’ power was still limited) came to power. Yet the end never came, even though people were saying it would.

Given things in the world look “bad” but how bad are they really? There are two billion Christians in the world. It’s hard to not admit that evil seemed much more pervasive in our parent’s and grandparent’s times with WWI and WWII. We have a long way to go to get back the evils done just sixty five years ago and the end of the US would be a a large step to make those things possible. However the evils of the end times are leap and bounds beyond what we have seen so far.