Poll: Openness to Change

[Evangelicalhumanist]

When I read Religious Debates I almost never see one person changing the opinion for the other, even when the opposition produces viable evidence, and I highly doubt most people would actually change because of it.

That is largely because you cannot be reasoned out of what you were not reasoned into.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I would argue that the time dimension of this Universe proves that God changes, because everything in the Universe is forever changing in some way. If God is everything and everything changes, then God changes. I would even go further and say that if God does not change, it cannot really be God.

Does Everything* change? Or do things change?

*= The whole of existence; space, time, matter, energy, all as one.

Extropy. Right now entropy is several thousands stronger of a force than extropy. Some rudimentary forms of extropy does exist in nature: the Higgs-Boson particle, the way the Sun is revolving around Sagittarius A*, the way the Earth is revolving around the Sun, and so on, but humans have created an order unlike anything else, probably ever, with governments, science, religion, among other things, that increase the order, the extropy of humankind. But we are not done, and we won't be done for a very long time. Reducing the impact of entropy means cars don't break down anymore, humans don't age, paint doesn't fade, and the list goes on. By creating the technology to prevent good things from going sour, or fixing the things that do break down, we establish an order throughout Earth that effectively says to everybody else than Earth is ours, its our sovereignty, and nobody else can have it.

That is quite a Theory of Everything. Can you explain how the Higgs-Boson particle or the revolution of any bodily mass around another is an example of extropy? AFAIK, extropy has not been proven to exist and doesn't make sense considering what we know about energy.

This is what it means to be divine as humans go, effectively making God more Godlike in the process. Eventually we'll expand our operations to more planets, more star systems, more areas as we establish a human sovereignty throughout space and begin to create technology that will make more life on planets which may have none now. We have a lot of work to do to being and becoming more divine over time. Eventually, we'll create a technology that does all of this for us, and reality itself will manifest much more life in unique and creative ways. But for now, we're just really lucky to be in the position we're at right now.

I agree that if humans make it off this planet, it will give us more time to develop more advanced technology to prolong our species. We could indefinitely become Space Monkeys and expand our species across stellar systems, and if we can make it that far, who knows how far our technology could go from there.

I think it is high expectations, though. It's definitely a race against time.

So, upon further understanding and discussion with you, we don't believe in the same God. However, unlike most theists I don't think your nuts in your idea to understand God. You seem to be very similar to me, but you don't ascribe to the idea of process philosophy or process theology. And that's fine. But it's much easier to understand your God, and at least make sense of what you're saying, rather than taking a look at various religions which go nuts when describing God and the divine. You are a theist but you don't make stuff up, and that's why I enjoy talking with you, because I believe we have a mutual respect and understanding towards each other, even if we have certain disagreements about it.

Fair enough

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

Does Everything* change? Or do things change?

*= The whole of existence; space, time, matter, energy, all as one.

Individual things are all connected to each other. If you take one thing out of the equation it changes everything. So yes, everything changes. I get the fact that you could say things like "Hydrogen will always be one proton and one electron" or that space, time, matter and energy all exist as they are and they themselves don't change, but what they are and composed of in any given situation or time does.

That is quite a Theory of Everything. Can you explain how the Higgs-Boson particle or the revolution of any bodily mass around another is an example of extropy? AFAIK, extropy has not been proven to exist and doesn't make sense considering what we know about energy.

The Higgs-Boson particle, as far as I understand, is the reason why things exist the way they do. It's the reason why when there was quantum entanglement just before the Big Bang the matter and anti-matter particles didn't immediately completely annihilate each other thus producing nothing. In fact, that is the reason why scientists consider it the God particle. Yes, energy and the Higgs-Boson particle itself decays over time, but there is a certain order to everything that exists right now. Extropy in the broadest terms simply explains the effect one thing has on each other, and how that in turn creates order throughout the Universe.

The Extropy that transhumanists are concerned with is the one humans produce, the one which allows us to study and understand nature, the one that builds technology and creates sovereign governments. However, the very fact that the Sun will revolve around the Milky Way galaxy for several more billion years, and Earth will in turn revolve around the Sun, just as electrons always revolves all around nucleus of atoms, is more than enough evidence to me that order, or a loose understanding of extropy, in the form of some rudimentary way has always existed in this Universe. And ultimately it was all made possible by the Higgs-Boson particle that made other quantum particles stick together during the creation and formation of the Big Bang. This is what I've come to believe, anyways.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Everybody and every thing changes. In fact, in Earthseed, God is change. However, some people are more willing to change their spiritual and religious beliefs than others. For some people, the religion they were raised in is the religion they stick to their entire lives. For others, religion is a lifelong process of self-discovery and actualization, and change is expected upon learning new facts. I'm wondering where most of the people in Religious Forums fall regarding this question. Are you open to change and processing your religious beliefs and practices differently if you found compelling evidence to do so? Or, is the religion you believe and practice now most likely going to be the only religion for you for your entire life?

To answer the poll easier just imagine I'm rating your willingness to change, from 1-5. One being the least likely to change, five being the most. The first option is one out of five, the second is two, the third is three and so on. And of course, to make this thread a bit more interesting, I added an other option who doesn't fit into any option I listed. You may only choose one option, but can change it anytime you wish.

Overall, I would say I am a two out of five. I may change my positions slightly, adding or subtracting small, insignificant things, but overall I would say that my central theology and religious positions are the same and will remain the same probably for the rest of my life. The words I use to describe my theology changes over time but the meanings behind the words essentially stay the same.

TL;DR - How open are you to changing your religious positions? How did you answer the poll and why did you answer it that way?

Thanks for reading this and participating in advance. Remember, this is Interfaith, so no debating! Let us know what you think.

I'm perfectly open. I'd rather live in the direct truth of the matter, sober essentially, as opposed to pretending or embellishing, as fun as the latter may be.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Individual things are all connected to each other. If you take one thing out of the equation it changes everything. So yes, everything changes. I get the fact that you could say things like "Hydrogen will always be one proton and one electron" or that space, time, matter and energy all exist as they are and they themselves don't change, but what they are and composed of in any given situation or time does.

Does a completed novel change? Or does the story within, as well as the characters and world, etc. change?

The Higgs-Boson particle, as far as I understand, is the reason why things exist the way they do. It's the reason why when there was quantum entanglement just before the Big Bang the matter and anti-matter particles didn't immediately completely annihilate each other thus producing nothing. In fact, that is the reason why scientists consider it the God particle. Yes, energy and the Higgs-Boson particle itself decays over time, but there is a certain order to everything that exists right now. Extropy in the broadest terms simply explains the effect one thing has on each other, and how that in turn creates order throughout the Universe.

I very, very vaguely read up on the Higgs-Boson, and as I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong) its fundamental property is that it gives quarks and other particles their mass. How can you see this counteracting entropy?

The Extropy that transhumanists are concerned with is the one humans produce, the one which allows us to study and understand nature, the one that builds technology and creates sovereign governments. However, the very fact that the Sun will revolve around the Milky Way galaxy for several more billion years, and Earth will in turn revolve around the Sun, just as electrons always revolves all around nucleus of atoms, is more than enough evidence to me that order, or a loose understanding of extropy, in the form of some rudimentary way has always existed in this Universe. And ultimately it was all made possible by the Higgs-Boson particle that made other quantum particles stick together during the creation and formation of the Big Bang. This is what I've come to believe, anyways.

The Sun revolving around the Milky Way, and the Earth around the Sun, and electrons revolving around the nucleus, all seem to be just how the universe is playing out with the laws of physics. It doesn't negate the second law of thermodynamics. Inevitably entropy will be maxed out as time goes on, no?

 

[Exaltist Ethan]

Does a completed novel change? Or does the story within, as well as the characters and world, etc. change?

The Universe is not a completed novel. The Universe is a novel that is still be written by the author. Eventually we will be that author, before the Universe ultimately destroys itself from its own entropic heat death.

I very, very vaguely read up on the Higgs-Boson, and as I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong) its fundamental property is that it gives quarks and other particles their mass. How can you see this counteracting entropy?

Because it ultimately led to the formation of a nature that can be studied carefully through a scientific lens. If the Higgs-Boson particle for whatever reason was different and did not help the formation of the Universe, and everything that exists inside of it, it would be impossible for us to test, study or observe the Universe as it is now. But as far as I can tell we develop theories and laws of nature because nature itself has some underlying forces that always act in certain ways when given experiments or tests to perform. The consistency of this Universe is not only the reason why we exist but also the reason why things have developed a natural order to them. Both are examples of extropy.

The Sun revolving around the Milky Way, and the Earth around the Sun, and electrons revolving around the nucleus, all seem to be just how the universe is playing out with the laws of physics. It doesn't negate the second law of thermodynamics. Inevitably entropy will be maxed out as time goes on, no?

That's what we need to prevent. But we got a lot of time before that happens. Trillions of years will pass before the entropic heat death occurs in this Universe, and knowing what I know about people now, it will probably be pretty easy to stop by then.

What I'm actually more afraid of is climate change, specifically, the climate change we can't control. It's been proven that every few thousand years there's a mini ice age on Earth and the climate could eventually lead to a unsustainable future for humans, unless we all migrate closer to the equator. And I think given the history of Earth we're probably due for another ice age soon. Granted, humans have existed for hundreds of thousands of years, so I'm not too worried about it, but it could sizably affect our daily lives in very real ways if the Earth just decides to cool down and drop several degrees Celsius throughout the world. Then we'll be arguing about how to create more global warming rather than less. But I'm digressing.

The Universe and entropy seem to be expanding indefinitely and while extropy is increasing on Earth, it isn't increasing on any other planet. We need to ultimately change this so extropy accelerates faster than entropy throughout the Universe, until it matches entropic output. It will be no easy feat to accomplish and future people are really going to have a lot to figure out to literally save the entire Universe, but we've got trillions of years to figure this out, so I'm really not at all that worried about it. While it is currently impossible to measure the entirety of human extropy, Earth's extropy in general is already catching up to Earth's entropy. Things still break down, but when they do, we find ways to fix them right away. And I don't necessarily believe that extropy is the reverse of entropy. If we find ways to slow or reverse aging, time still moves forward while our DNA and/or epigenetics gets repaired. Entropy and extropy are fundamentally the same concepts with different intentions. We need to work through both of them if we're going to have a healthy and sustainable future for all of us. I firmly believe this is possible.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

The Universe is not a completed novel. The Universe is a novel that is still be written by the author. Eventually we will be that author, before the Universe ultimately destroys itself from its own entropic heat death.

Because it ultimately led to the formation of a nature that can be studied carefully through a scientific lens. If the Higgs-Boson particle for whatever reason was different and did not help the formation of the Universe, and everything that exists inside of it, it would be impossible for us to test, study or observe the Universe as it is now. But as far as I can tell we develop theories and laws of nature because nature itself has some underlying forces that always act in certain ways when given experiments or tests to perform. The consistency of this Universe is not only the reason why we exist but also the reason why things have developed a natural order to them. Both are examples of extropy.

That's what we need to prevent. But we got a lot of time before that happens. Trillions of years will pass before the entropic heat death occurs in this Universe, and knowing what I know about people now, it will probably be pretty easy to stop by then.

What I'm actually more afraid of is climate change, specifically, the climate change we can't control. It's been proven that every few thousand years there's a mini ice age on Earth and the climate could eventually lead to a unsustainable future for humans, unless we all migrate closer to the equator. And I think given the history of Earth we're probably due for another ice age soon. Granted, humans have existed for hundreds of thousands of years, so I'm not too worried about it, but it could sizably affect our daily lives in very real ways if the Earth just decides to cool down and drop several degrees Celsius throughout the world. Then we'll be arguing about how to create more global warming rather than less. But I'm digressing.

The Universe and entropy seem to be expanding indefinitely and while extropy is increasing on Earth, it isn't increasing on any other planet. We need to ultimately change this so extropy accelerates faster than entropy throughout the Universe, until it matches entropic output. It will be no easy feat to accomplish and future people are really going to have a lot to figure out to literally save the entire Universe, but we've got trillions of years to figure this out, so I'm really not at all that worried about it. While it is currently impossible to measure the entirety of human extropy, Earth's extropy in general is already catching up to Earth's entropy. Things still break down, but when they do, we find ways to fix them right away. And I don't necessarily believe that extropy is the reverse of entropy. If we find ways to slow or reverse aging, time still moves forward while our DNA and/or epigenetics gets repaired. Entropy and extropy are fundamentally the same concepts with different intentions. We need to work through both of them if we're going to have a healthy and sustainable future for all of us. I firmly believe this is possible.

It sounds like a lot to worry about, honestly. I just want to live, let the chimps fall where they may.

 

[Hamilton]

By "religious positions" I meant any of those. Beliefs, worldview or changing religions completely.

As for beliefs, I've somewhat given up. I do not anticipate new religious beliefs dramatically different from current world beliefs. Perhaps discoveries made on other planets will lead to new beliefs. Perhaps the cultures that develop there will introduce new beliefs.

I am not currently formally a member of a proper religious community, but culturally are /sic/.

Worldview is as big a concept as the world itself, with many parts and pieces. Will I change my worldview belief that people are social creatures? No. I balance that with awareness that the degree of social affinity varies among individuals.

Or that perfect justice is unattainable? Not unless I find what exists more powerful than justice, that could push it towards perfection.

Maybe I will abandon my worldview belief that mortal life has much struggle and suffering, when I achieve my goals without struggle and "the fighting stops".

Short answer: completely willing, but unlikely. For the same reason my life is at risk: "I know too much."

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Other. I really don't know. I just go with the follow and since my brain can change, I don't know.

 

[Nakosis]

Everybody and every thing changes. In fact, in Earthseed, God is change. However, some people are more willing to change their spiritual and religious beliefs than others. For some people, the religion they were raised in is the religion they stick to their entire lives. For others, religion is a lifelong process of self-discovery and actualization, and change is expected upon learning new facts. I'm wondering where most of the people in Religious Forums fall regarding this question. Are you open to change and processing your religious beliefs and practices differently if you found compelling evidence to do so? Or, is the religion you believe and practice now most likely going to be the only religion for you for your entire life?

To answer the poll easier just imagine I'm rating your willingness to change, from 1-5. One being the least likely to change, five being the most. The first option is one out of five, the second is two, the third is three and so on. And of course, to make this thread a bit more interesting, I added an other option who doesn't fit into any option I listed. You may only choose one option, but can change it anytime you wish.

Overall, I would say I am a two out of five. I may change my positions slightly, adding or subtracting small, insignificant things, but overall I would say that my central theology and religious positions are the same and will remain the same probably for the rest of my life. The words I use to describe my theology changes over time but the meanings behind the words essentially stay the same.

TL;DR - How open are you to changing your religious positions? How did you answer the poll and why did you answer it that way?

Thanks for reading this and participating in advance. Remember, this is Interfaith, so no debating! Let us know what you think.

I don't think I ever actively chose to change my position. I simply accepted what was evident as a result of personal experience.

IOW, stuff happened and I accepted what seemed obvious from that.
It was never about being willing or wanting to. My beliefs are a product of my experiences.

Am I open to changes? Not really but that doesn't seem to matter. Life happens and I am simply along for the ride.

 

[Yerda]

I think I'm fairly open to change. Not because I'm especially reasonable; I'm just not that defensive of my religious positions.