the unanswerable question topic - god

Dehumanizer12

Magnus Worm
Jun 11, 2010
59
3
8
Brasil
For those with some interest in philosophy, maybe sociology in here....

As Voltaire quoted (and mr.Dane cited on The Seven Tongues of God), ''if God did not exist it would be necessary to invent him''....
In the ninteenth and twentienth centuries, the age of the exponential advance of technology (even in the realm of the arts, with photography, cinema and recorded music), philosophers as Nietzsche proclaimed that God was dead.

Modernity was marked by the rationalization of so many aspects of everyday life, and the algorithmic calculation through machines and computers just pushed that to another level.

As I've been reading and observing the latest researches on institutions such as MIT and silicon valley based companies, technology is the biggest thread. These institutions have earned power and reputation among important schools, colleges, media companies in recent years.... They have been analysing the advance of techné and developing several projects with such an unidimensional approach that is very concerning.
In the past, electronic and telecommunication companies as EMI invested on technology of recording and also loaned their researching facilities to the development of heavy weaponry.
Other communication companies led to the development of satellite technology that enabled thing like GPS, but also tele-guided missiles...
the same goes for the internet, which led to a democratizations of means of expression, but also plays a big role on government spying and cyberterroristic activity.

Yet, these companies and universities that I just mentioned, they're taking only Dr.Jeckyl part of it, and technology is seen as the new messianic intervention.

For some further discussion... Is technology the new God?
 
Not the new god, just whats keeping us alive. Imagine how long it would take for humanity to go extinct if there were no electricity. After so many years were all just to inexperienced and genetically decrepit to survive in nature.
 
Actually, in historical terms whenever there has been an event that required us to return to sustenance farming, we've managed. We back track to an earlier stage of sociological development and forget all of the advances that are a result of NOT having to spend all day farming/hunting just to survive. Populations dwindle, of course, but the species survives. You can't extrapolate or dependence on electricity to the fact that we'd go extinct if it disappeared. You have to remember that we wouldn't be living as we do now, but in a much simpler way and we'd most likely get by.

Your genetically decrepit argument is miles off too. How genetically different are you from our ancestors of tens of thousands of years ago? Not at all is the answer.

In response to the OP - Define "God". Define "technology". What is meant by this analogy? There are a thousand questions and only ham-fisted answers. Philosophers and other "intellectuals" have always, and probably always will, tried to find a way to look at the human race and its stage of development as somehow gone off track, which, of course, assumes there is a right track to be on anyway. Coming back to what I've said before, technology has allowed us to focus our energy on other things and therefore continues this wonderful development of ours. There would be no time to ruminate and philosophise if technology hadn't developed to the point where we don't have to hunt and farm just to eat.
 
Your genetically decrepit argument is miles off too. How genetically different are you from our ancestors of tens of thousands of years ago? Not at all is the answer.
a) Thats not true
b) Not really what I meant. I was talking about things like allergies and diseases that can be treated with modern medicine but would be directly or indirectly fatal in the "natural world". Such factors would have been kept to a minimum due to natural selection, but nowdays all but the most seriously ill people in the first world can live long enough to have children. Not saying that thats a bad thing, mind you, just that most people would be fucked if they didnt have access to their medicine. Not to mention our immune systems are totally untrained, for the most part. How many people do you know who put bandages and disinfectant on every tiny scrape? Most of the people I know do and if they dont they almost always get a nasty infection. Of course some people would survive, the poorest 3rd world countries would probably remain largely unchanged. We in the west could adapt also, given enough time, but in such a scenario looters would be a huge problem. How long do you think people here will stay nice and civilised if they dont know when they can eat again? That right there is the biggest threat.
 
Everything derek said: absolutely true!
Everything by refraction: naaaah.
God vs. technology: Dehumanizer said: Technology is really important in our lives today, so it's the new god. I think there's something missing in between... It's like: Owl ... Moon ... Night ... Shoes
 
Mr. Sister:

That's probably right...
Not only by the language barrier (I need to practice my English more oftenly) but also because I was in a rush when I wrote the text... It surely needs to be worked up...

Derek:

I understand and actually agree with most of what you're saying... I didn't want to deny the importance of technological improvement. My question was (or meant to be) directed more specifically to the relation between technology and way of thinking.
I'm sure that technology can be important to the development of medicine, i.e....
On the other hand, as Adorno noted, there is something that bonds the H-Bomb and the slingshot...

Technology is a big issue. But an unidirectional mind would not see that it can also be harmful... so, the biggest issue is not technology itself, but who will make use of it (man) and with which purposes....