Heaven Is a Fairy Tale Says Physicist Stephen Hawking

[Sally]

For example it makes me sick to my stomach when people in a position of power (politically or otherwise) claim to have God on their side, and that everything they do must therefore be God's will. I don't know what's more dangerous - when they actually believe it or when they don't. I'd sooner the powers that be assume they are on their own with the abilities - and normal human failings - that nature gave them.

Well indeed, Caz. It is, of course, a time-honoured tradition amongst empire builders and despots and has a very respectable historic pedigree.

What is rather more concerning is that it still appears to work in this day and age.

[Steven Russell]

It's not a case of there being two equally valid but opposing viewpoints, either of which people can choose to embrace though is it?

While science is based on verifiable data, religion relies on "faith" which is belief without evidence.

If I said here on the boards that the french music hall performer Le Petomane was Jack the Ripper, you would want to see evidence wouldn't you? Or would you just take my word for it?

Let's face it: religion may provide solace to people in times of distress but it is utter bunk and the sooner we realize that, the better.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[caz]

It doesn't bother me that there will always be 'believers'. It's not something I can do much about even if I wanted to. However, I can and will resist any efforts to push their beliefs on me, and I will remain cynical about their true motivation. For example it makes me sick to my stomach when people in a position of power (politically or otherwise) claim to have God on their side, and that everything they do must therefore be God's will. I don't know what's more dangerous - when they actually believe it or when they don't. I'd sooner the powers that be assume they are on their own with the abilities - and normal human failings - that nature gave them.

Quite clearly you don't see, Caz.

The scientists campaiging for reason while ridiculing people - now there is a contradiction in terms.

And, I would be the first to say there probably is no god, although I wouldn't discount it outright.

As for Hawking, if he's anything like Dawkins then he's extremist in his pursuit, and to him the ends will justify the means, which makes him a tyrant.

Er, no FM. It's a fact that heaven either exists or it doesn't. If we take the Patrick Moore stance of "we simply don't know", then Hawking may be right or he may be wrong, yet some sensitive souls seem to be saying he is flat out wrong. They can't then whinge about him 'ridiculing' them. It's all a bit silly really.

If it has to boil down to opinion on either side, while right or wrong cannot be established, why is anyone getting heated about Hawking's personal conclusions? What's all this about him being a 'tyrant'? Isn't he simply exercising free speech, and saying in effect that in his view the opposite view sucks?

Love,

Caz
X

[Errata]

Your compassion does you credit, Errata. But surely in the grand scheme of things, it is wrong to encourage people to believe in that which does not exist.

Surely you can see the evil which has been committed over the centuries in the name of God: an entirely imaginary being.

Best wishes,
Steve.

PS Not to mention a complete psycho nutter if the Old Testament is to be believed.

Hahah. Yeah as a Jew when people talk about a "kind and Loving god" I ask what bible are THEY reading? Cause ours is pissy and vengeful.

I'm in a weird position, because I am not a fan of G-d, I just can't seem to not believe. Like, we don't talk. I want to be left alone, I leave him alone. I don't go to services and theres an occasional one sided shouting match. So I'm really not your average believer.

But, do I want people to believe in things that don't exist? I do. Justice only exists if we work at it and believe it is possible. Same for peace, enlightenment, advancement. Someone had to believe in a car before a car could exist.

I don't know if heaven exists. It doesn't really feature in my half of the book. I certainly can't prove it exists, on the other hand I can't prove it doesn't. I don't think believing in it is harmful. I was reading about quantum physics, and how we keep needing more dimensions to make the math work. Euclidean had your standard three, Einstein added a fourth, String Theory has ten I think. Well, how many dimensions are there? We can actually prove all three are true. But if there are 10, why didn't Einstein see it? Does that mean that special relativity is wrong? But if we are adding dimensions only to make the math work, then maybe the math is wrong and we have no idea how many dimensions are hanging about. Maybe there were three, until Einstein created a fourth, and then Nielsen left one out and created another seven. If we create our own reality, then I'm pretty sure there is a Heaven. If we are just trying to identify all of the dimensions that might be lurking out there, well, for all I know one of them is Heaven.

One of the wonderful things we get out of Quantum mechanics is the Schroedinger's Cat postulate. We know through math and experiment that the act of observing disturbs the observed. If we expect light to be a particle, it will be. If we expect it to be a ray, it will be. We profoundly affect our surrounds simply through expectation and belief. Supernatural mind powers are mathematically possible. Physicists are now looking at the nature of the human soul. Maybe G-d is like a car. Maybe he didn't exist before someone thought him up. But cars are real.

Of course evils have been perpetuated in the name of Religion. It's also been perpetuated in the name of Economy, National Pride, Shipping Rights, and I'm not even a little sure what the Falkland Islands was about. Evil in the name of what is holy is still evil. Good in the name of the blasphemous is still good. Good things happen in the name of religion too. Not necessarily as spectacular, but more pervasively. If Catholics burned Jews at the stake, they also hid them from the Nazis. If Muslims blew up the Trade Centers, they also have risked everything translating and escorting our soldiers. Copts joined hands around Muslims at Tahrik square to protect them while at prayer. Muslims created a human wall around an old Jewish cemetery to protect it from bulldozers a few miles away, and on September 11, a bunch of us from my congregation formed a human wall around their mosque while rednecks with guns cruised by slowly. It's a melange, like most of the human experience. I know we stood up because we thought if they saw that Jews of all people were protecting them, then people would think twice. We used the perceived animosity between two groups to make a statement. And I think it was a good statement to make.

I think we hate that Religion is one of those things we can't talk people out of. No one has ever convinced a 20 year old boy that he doesn't actually know what love feels like either but we keep trying. If we as a people outgrow religion that's fine. But we have to do it on our time, and forcing it is typically violently counterproductive. I mean, a lot of people have a god in their lives on the same level as their parents. You wouldn't try to convince a guy his mother is worthless sham of a relationship, even though by adulthood parents generally are useless? I mean people get ugly about their mothers. Its not so surprising they get ugly about their god.

[Fleetwood Mac]

[QUOTE=Steven Russell;175592]

Surely you can see the evil which has been committed over the centuries in the name of God: an entirely imaginary being.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[QUOTE]

The most misleading statement I've ever heard in my life, and the one that abdicates responsibility like no other is this: "religion is the root of all evil".

In the event there is no god, then surely religion is a human construct, so, presumably, human beings are the problem as opposed to religion or god?

[Fleetwood Mac]

So there are no scientific facts, but it's a fact that heaven exists so Hawking is wrong and a horrid man to say it doesn't.

I see - I think.

Love,

Caz
X

Quite clearly you don't see, Caz.

The scientists campaiging for reason while ridiculing people - now there is a contradiction in terms.

And, I would be the first to say there probably is no god, although I wouldn't discount it outright.

As for Hawking, if he's anything like Dawkins then he's extremist in his pursuit, and to him the ends will justify the means, which makes him a tyrant.

[Steven Russell]

Their is no evil in allowing parents to believe that their dead child is in a place of eternal happiness and peace. It harms no one. I don't know if it's true or not, but I think that anyone who is bound and determined to convince that couple that their beautiful little girl is rotting in the earth feeding worms is kind of a monster. It ain't always about truth. Where science is. I say we need both.

Your compassion does you credit, Errata. But surely in the grand scheme of things, it is wrong to encourage people to believe in that which does not exist.

Surely you can see the evil which has been committed over the centuries in the name of God: an entirely imaginary being.

Best wishes,
Steve.

PS Not to mention a complete psycho nutter if the Old Testament is to be believed.

[Errata]

It really bugs me when it is suggested - or believed - that religious faith comes first, and is what gives people the will to lead a moral life, doing good and helping others. Can't it just be accepted that some people are born with that will, and some will go on to have a religious faith while others won't?
Love,

Caz
X

Of course. And if I sounded like I don't acknowledge the wonderful work of compassionate people of any or no faith at all, I apologize. And I don't think Stephen Hawking is a bad guy for saying what he did. Perhaps a bit of a hypocrite, but I tend to be extra judge-y on such things.

My thing is, science and religion have been having an epic battle for a while now. And given a choice, I'll take a scientific explanation over a scriptural one every time. But religion is backing off, and science is asking new questions, and now they are working together in new and fascinating ways. And I think that's awesome. There are great mysteries and little mysteries that neither has been able to solve independently. Maybe they can solve them together. But I am suspicious of any scientific devotee who announces that there is no god, or no need for god. In a religious sense a god is a being with powers who answers questions and solves problems. So if science is the new religion, then scientists are the new gods, and quite frankly we aren't nearly imaginative enough as humans to fill that role.

Their is no evil in allowing parents to believe that their dead child is in a place of eternal happiness and peace. It harms no one. I don't know if it's true or not, but I think that anyone who is bound and determined to convince that couple that their beautiful little girl is rotting in the earth feeding worms is kind of a monster. It ain't always about truth. Where science is. I say we need both.

[c.d.]

So is it a fact that there are no facts? Also, could God make a burrito so hot that he couldn't eat it?

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

Its a fact that I am drinking a vodka tonic

[Robert]

Sally, a fact, and knowledge of a fact, are two clean different things.

[Sally]

I agree with Fleetwood Mac to an extent. I would say there are no scientific facts that are absolute - because knowledge is in a constant state of evolution.

I'm not sure that anybody can say with certainty that heaven doesn't exist as a fact. I don't see how it can be anything other than an opinion - likewise that it does exist.

[Robert]

I would say that there are facts. At 17.38 PM May 20th 2011 there either is or isn't gravity. But our theories, or "knowledge," are revisable. So while there may be facts, we can never be 100% certain that we know what they are (barring certain truths of logic and mathematics).

[caz]

So there are no scientific facts, but it's a fact that heaven exists so Hawking is wrong and a horrid man to say it doesn't.

I see - I think.

Love,

Caz
X

[Fleetwood Mac]

It can be called a scientific fact that fairies don't exist, because as a theory it won't be tested before a non-existent hell freezes over. Faith alone can't test it. It's like threatening the theory of evolution with your imaginary friend. You can shout and stamp your feet, using your right to free speech, but there are certain theories, nay facts, that won't be changed.

Love,

Caz
X

Not the case, Caz.

There is no such thing as a scientific fact.

Science is based on what we know of the world, and it's fair to say knowledge is cumulative; I'd imagine we'd all agree there is much to discover and some of us won't be surprised to find that what we had taken as truths, turned out to be wide of the mark.

Take evolution: this may be proven to be inaccurate tomorrow; take gravity: it may cease to exist tomorrow. It is unlikely, based on what we know of the world, but not impossible.

Descartes showed that you can cast doubt on almost anything, the problem is that once you go down that road it is difficult to view an idea as anything more than an idea, which is uncomfortable for some people as it can erode identity.

But, anyway, there is no such thing as a scientific fact.

And, more importantly, reason is not the be all and end all. Intuition, imagination, emotion, feeling are all important to human beings when making judgements.