Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

A geeky theory

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) writes | about 3 months ago

User Journal 8

The multiverse theory is as falsifiable as God himself. Therefore, I have a theory of sociology- that anybody believing in the multiverse has simply fallen for a new religion created by comic books and bad science fiction.

The multiverse theory is as falsifiable as God himself. Therefore, I have a theory of sociology- that anybody believing in the multiverse has simply fallen for a new religion created by comic books and bad science fiction.

cancel ×

8 comments

So you're saing religion = bad comic book sci fi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46920935)

Hey, street goes both ways.

I can't say I disagree. If you replace the names, stories in the Bible or other religious text do resemble a favorite Internet meme of mine:

Chuck Norris told Noah to build an ark to save himself and two of every animal. Then Chuck killed every mofo on the planet.

Chuck Norris told Moses to go to Egypt and free his people. When the pharaoh refused, Chuck sent 10 plagues over to Egypt.

Chuck Norris dictated to Moses 10 things people shouldn't do, or they'll be punished for all eternity (read: be roundhouse kicked by Chuck forever)

Chuck Norris is his own father, and his own son. Then there's Chuck's spirit, forming the Holy Trinity that is all one and the same, but are all equally awesome.

etc.

Re:So you're saing religion = bad comic book sci f (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 3 months ago | (#46925035)

In a way. The best theology has always been great literature. But what I'm saying is that the multiverse theory is particularly bad literature.

A religion of cheap comic strips.

Re:So you're saing religion = bad comic book sci f (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46927855)

The best theology has always been great literature. But what I'm saying is that the multiverse theory is particularly bad literature.

Perhaps we have different definitions of those words, but I disagree. Whether literature is good or bad isn't about which theories or topics you choose to write about, but HOW you write them and how you incorporate them into your work.

You can write great literature about god. You can write great literature about the multiverse. You can write great literature about gods in a multiverse. A good writer can write good literature about almost anything.

This leads to one different that should be noted between literature about god, and literature about the multiverse: people don't treat all literature, even bad ones, relating to the multiverse as Biblical truth and live their lives around it. Can't say the same for religion and its literature.

Re:So you're saing religion = bad comic book sci f (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 3 months ago | (#46930581)

"Perhaps we have different definitions of those words, but I disagree. Whether literature is good or bad isn't about which theories or topics you choose to write about, but HOW you write them and how you incorporate them into your work."

I completely agree. My point is that the writing level of the multiverse theory folks, is equally as untestable as any religion, and is as bad as the writing and logic you find in cheap (and even not-so-cheap) comic books.

"You can write great literature about god. You can write great literature about the multiverse. You can write great literature about gods in a multiverse. A good writer can write good literature about almost anything."

They could, but they haven't. Closest I've seen is maybe the discussion on multiple dimensions in GEB, and even that falls a bit flat. The difference is character development. God, in the various forms, has personality. Even when we get Him or Her terribly wrong, there's still personality. Random quantum fluctuations don't leave much room for character development.

"This leads to one different that should be noted between literature about god, and literature about the multiverse: people don't treat all literature, even bad ones, relating to the multiverse as Biblical truth and live their lives around it. Can't say the same for religion and its literature."

I've met people who do. They're usually persuaded to New Atheism as a religion, and they truly do treat the universe as one random possibility among many. Another common part of their philosophy is therefore denying any meaning in the universe, and sometimes going so far as to deny any meaning to their own thoughts (since, after all, in their philosophy, even the human brain is just a collection of quantum events, with no free will, deterministic on the macro level but indeterministic on the quanta level).

Re:So you're saing religion = bad comic book sci f (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46939127)

My point is that the writing level of the multiverse theory folks, is equally as untestable as any religion, and is as bad as the writing and logic you find in cheap (and even not-so-cheap) comic books.

Sure, in which again I will point out the street goes both ways. That multiverse theory may be no better than cheap comic books doesn't stop religious theories from being no better than cheap comic books.

Chuck Norris can walk on water (because the water's afraid of him)

Chuck Norris fed a million people using two loaves of bread and five fish (he roundhouse kicked the bread and fish into a million tiny pieces, but each piece is filled with the awesomeness of Chuck's kick that it is enough to fill your stomach for a week)

The difference is character development. God, in the various forms, has personality. Even when we get Him or Her terribly wrong, there's still personality. Random quantum fluctuations don't leave much room for character development.

Apples and oranges. God is a character. Of course you can easily inject personality and character development into a character

"The multiverse" or random quantum fluctuations are not characters. Well, I suppose if you wanted to you could anthropomorphize them, but that doesn't inherently make the resulting literature better.

I've met people who do. They're usually persuaded to New Atheism as a religion

Allow me to clarity. The multiverse theory knows that itself is just a theory. We know that a theory could be wrong.

If there are people who treat these theories like religious infallible truth, that's just them being stupid and not understanding what the word "theory" means, and they do not represent the mulitverse theory (no more than, say, radical Muslims represent religion)

Re:So you're saing religion = bad comic book sci f (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 3 months ago | (#46939337)

That multiverse theory may be no better than cheap comic books doesn't stop religious theories from being no better than cheap comic books.

Not in and of itself, true. But at least it's possible to get better literature out of a God with a personality, than out of a fanatical jihadist belief in Random Quantum Fluctuations.

If there are people who treat these theories like religious infallible truth, that's just them being stupid and not understanding what the word "theory" means, and they do not represent the mulitverse theory (no more than, say, radical Muslims represent religion)

Exactly my original point.

Re:So you're saing religion = bad comic book sci f (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46942427)

But at least it's possible to get better literature out of a God with a personality, than out of a fanatical jihadist belief in Random Quantum Fluctuations.

Again, apples and oranges. The literary value of the work doesn't say anything on the soundness of the theory. If somebody writes great literature about the Flying Spaghetti Monster, better than any God with personality, that doesn't validate that the FSM exists, or that God doesn't.

Exactly my original point.

How so? Your original point in the JE is a generalization on "anyone" who believes in the multiverse, not just the "fanatical jihadists".

Re:So you're saing religion = bad comic book sci f (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 3 months ago | (#46949087)

Good literature about the FSM gives a His Noodly Goodness a personality, hallowed be his meatballs.

I'm not saying anything about the soundness of the theory, or the trueness of the doctrine here, only the aesthetic qualities of the work.

It takes a fanatical jihadist to believe in the multiverse, because the description of the theory is so incredibly bad.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...