do you pray before you fly?

bullwinkle said:
We are not talking about decreases in entropy, we are talking increases in organizational complexity. That's my point. Rocks change state. But they don't become better adapted to their environment, become more intelligent, or gain other traits that they did not already possess.

A rock cannot gain traits that it didn't already possess. Human beings or any other animal can develop a trait they never before possessed, such as blue eyes, problem solving intelligence, an extra chromosome, or the ability to metabolize something in their environment that was formerly toxic. You don't see that from non-biological systems.

Adaptation is a uniquely biological function. But again...WHY?
Click to expand...
Respectfully, you are moving the goalposts a bit. You said life moves contrary to entropy, and specifically connected it to increasing complexity. But life does not function contrary to the second law, so this would seem to invalidate your point.

As to your question, I don't understand it. Isn't that like asking why is life? Rocks don't adapt because they are not living organisms. They are not living organisms because they are rocks.

Perhaps what you really mean to ask is why are things the way they are? Or maybe why do things exist at all? These are actually fairly profound and troubling questions. Faiths are quite good at answering this question, but there is no guarantee that they have the right answer. And none of them allow for the most maddening answer of all: our universe, and everything in it, exists because.
 
FastEddieB said:
I guess I'd say, "What's the harm?". Only downside I could imagine is the hazardous attitude of "resignation" - I'd rather have a pilot flying as deeply into the crash as possible than putting it in God's hands.
Click to expand...

Yup. Praying when you fly is like taking souvenir photos when you fly. There's nothing wrong with it, as long as you recognize that it's a distraction from your main task and set your priorities accordingly.

When Sullenberger was asked if he prayed during the US1549 crash, he replied, "There were a lot of people in the cabin doing that for me. I had to fly the airplane".
 
asechrest said:
Respectfully, you are moving the goalposts a bit. You said life moves contrary to entropy, and specifically connected it to increasing complexity. But life does not function contrary to the second law, so this would seem to invalidate your point.

As to your question, I don't understand it. Isn't that like asking why is life? Rocks don't adapt because they are not living organisms. They are not living organisms because they are rocks.

Perhaps what you really mean to ask is why are things the way they are? Or maybe why do things exist at all? These are actually fairly profound and troubling questions. Faiths are quite good at answering this question, but there is no guarantee that they have the right answer. And none of them allow for the most maddening answer of all: our universe, and everything in it, exists because.
Click to expand...

Sure, yes...why is life? As I said many posts back, science is great at "how", it sucks at "why". Ditto religion in reverse.

"Just because" is a cop-out.
 
acrophile said:
When Sullenberger was asked if he prayed during the US1549 crash, he replied, "There were a lot of people in the cabin doing that for me. I had to fly the airplane".
Click to expand...

But he's silent on the validity. Basically "others had that covered" is not at all the same as "that would be worthless."
 
bullwinkle said:
Sure, yes...why is life? As I said many posts back, science is great at "how", it sucks at "why". Ditto religion in reverse.

"Just because" is a cop-out.
Click to expand...

How about, "we don't know and that's OK"?
 
bullwinkle said:
But he's silent on the validity. Basically "others had that covered" is not at all the same as "that would be worthless."
Click to expand...

Right, but Sullenberger's views on the efficacy of intercessionary prayer are of no interest to me. What matters is that with regard to his actions as a pilot, he had his priorities right.
 
PeeGee said:
Quote:
One of the monumental ironies of religious discourse that can be appreciated is the frequency with which people of faith praise themselves for their humility while condemning scientists and other non-believers for their intellectual arrogance. There is in fact, no worldview more reprehensible in its arrogance than that of a religious believer: 'the creator of the universe takes an interest in me, loves me, and will reward me after death; my current beliefs, drawn from scripture, will remain as the best statement of the truth until the end of the world; everyone who disagrees with me will spend an eternity in hell....' An average Christian in an average church, listening to an average Sunday sermon has achieved a level of arrogance simply unimaginable in scientific discourse — —
Sam Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation, pp. 74-75

.
Click to expand...

Wow sounds like this nut job sam harris has a hard on for any one of a religious faith, and apparently never been to a church in his life.
 
Everskyward said:
How about, "we don't know and that's OK"?
Click to expand...

That's great! I am fine with that.

It's the "we don't know, we just know the answer is a purely material one" that I have problem with. It's both intellectually dishonest, and a non-scientific approach.

Progress!
 
acrophile said:
Right, but Sullenberger's views on the efficacy of intercessionary prayer are of no interest to me. What matters is that with regard to his actions as a pilot, he had his priorities right.
Click to expand...

Sully and his comments were not brought up by me. I'm just pointing out what he said versus what another post implied he said, but didn't.
 
Henning said:
That doesn't answer "why", but rather "how". Why does life exist at all?
Click to expand...
In a time where we struggle to answer even basic questions ("Why aren't we attracting enough pilots?" "Where do liberal Democrats come from?"), it would seem unlikely that we will ever answer that question...
 
Henning said:
That doesn't answer "why", but rather "how". Why does life exist at all?
Click to expand...

As has been said before, we don't know and that's ok. And don't forget that abiogenesis may be prolific, or an extremely rare (if not unique) occurrence. Perhaps there is no "why". Perhaps it was just a random fluke. Again, we don't know and that's ok.
 
bullwinkle said:
Sure, yes...why is life? As I said many posts back, science is great at "how", it sucks at "why". Ditto religion in reverse.

"Just because" is a cop-out.
Click to expand...

"Just because" is not at all a cop out. It is an answer that the non-religious -- who are not armed with the ability to explain the currently unexplainable by way of a supreme being -- must consider. Personally, I find it an extremely difficult answer to come to terms with. Our universe may exist because it does, and that is wholly unsatisfying and a bit disturbing to my human mind.
 
asechrest said:
"Just because" is not at all a cop out. It is an answer that the non-religious -- who are not armed with the ability to explain the currently unexplainable by way of a supreme being -- must consider. Personally, I find it an extremely difficult answer to come to terms with. Our universe may exist because it does, and that is wholly unsatisfying and a bit disturbing to my human mind.
Click to expand...
Funny. I find the notion that the entire universe was created with a purpose that we cannot discern to be even less satisfying, if not downright disturbing.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Funny. I find the notion that the entire universe was created with a purpose that we cannot discern to be even less satisfying, if not downright disturbing.
Click to expand...
Well, I think humans are programmed to find reason in things. So the idea that the universe might exist "for no reason" is unsettling to me.
 
Flying itself is a form of prayer, especially when it's being done for its own sake.

Rich
 
RJM62 said:
Flying itself is a form of prayer, especially when it's being done for its own sake.

Rich
Click to expand...

This I absolutely agree with. I have no practical reason to own, or even fly an airplane. I have no business uses, I can't make any money with it, my wife doesn't like to fly, so we don't vacation, or do "weekend getaways" with it, so flying for me is a complete waste of time and money.

I do it because I like to do it and so far I can afford to throw away a large amount of money doing it. I actually prefer to fly alone most of the time. Me, the earth and the airplane, that's it. I really enjoy the the sights from my magic carpet and when the the sights are excellent, the weather calm, and beautiful, the airplane is running smooth, that is when I can almost believe in some supernatural wonder being and a connection with the universe.

Then I land, put the plane away and it's back to reality. :sigh:
 
I do. It usually starts off with "Before take-off checklist."
 
Henning said:
That doesn't answer "why", but rather "how". Why does life exist at all?
Click to expand...

It's a question for you - it's not a question for me. That's one of the great things about religion and faith, the "why are we here" question is already answered.
 
I save the prayers for just before the crash. Don't want to waste them. :D
 
bflynn said:
It's a question for you - it's not a question for me. That's one of the great things about religion and faith, the "why are we here" question is already answered.
Click to expand...

If you'd been born in India, you'd probably have a totally different answer to the "why" question. And you'd be just as adamant about your belief. You believe what you do based primarily on where you grew up and how you were indoctrinated as a child.
 
Jay Honeck said:
In a time where we struggle to answer even basic questions ("Why aren't we attracting enough pilots?" "Where do liberal Democrats come from?"), it would seem unlikely that we will ever answer that question...
Click to expand...

The answer may come sooner than you think, CERN is looking in the correct direction.

There is only one existential product that sentient life produces and that is thought. Thought is the only thing that leaves our bodies and is not restricted by physics to remain on Earth. Thought consists of two things, information and energy, both measurable outside our bodies, and the energy carries the information whether inside our outside our bodies.

All of creation is made of three basic things, energy, information, and quanta. Information tells quanta what to be, energy excites quanta into existence, and quanta group together to form matter; the byproduct of this reaction is gravity.

As sentient life forms, we add to the information that creates the future of the multiverse, and the energy that keeps the universe expanding as one of our functions.
 
bflynn said:
It's a question for you - it's not a question for me. That's one of the great things about religion and faith, the "why are we here" question is already answered.
Click to expand...

Unless you consider that God inspired mankind to science because religion had failed due to corruption over money and greed. The original sin in Adam and Eve was greed, being given everything and told to enjoy it and being asked to spare a small bit of food, and then taking that food away. The Apple represents our thoughts, which are 'God's food', and the sin is that our thoughts go to supporting money and markets rather than mankind. All of mankind is one, all linked through a single intelligence which is God, "the spark of life", and when we harm or neglect anyone else on the planet in the quest for money, we violate the First Commandment.

This is the issue that is at the heart of the current Mid East conflicts as well. Moses failed, Christ failed, and Mohammed failed. After three strikes at religion, God changed tacks and we developed science in order to correctly explain God so we would evolve into a peaceful, cohesive, and productive species. Science was meant to be the chemotherapy to cure the cancer within God that mankind has become. Unfortunately, it has failed as well, and we will more likely than not die as a species here on Earth, never being born from our womb. Homo sapient is not the final stage of our destined evolution, however we have thrown ourselves off track of that destiny through our Freewill.

Having faith in a lie that allows one to be selfish and hateful towards others regardless who they are is no better than having no faith at all. If you have faith that claiming Christ or whomever as your savior and that the wine and wafer will 'save you', you are in for a rude shock. When Christ said to follow and believe in him, he meant you have to live the life, not just pay lip service to it.

The biggest injustice to God ever is the utterance of the phrase, "Don't question God"; God wants you to question, if you don't, he can't provide the answers.
 
Henning said:
The original sin in Adam and Eve was greed, being given everything and told to enjoy it and being asked to spare a small bit of food, and then taking that food.
Click to expand...

Unless you're speaking metaphorically, it's pretty clear that Adam and Eve never existed. And snakes are anatomically incapable of speech.
 
write-stuff said:
If you'd been born in India, you'd probably have a totally different answer to the "why" question. And you'd be just as adamant about your belief. You believe what you do based primarily on where you grew up and how you were indoctrinated as a child.
Click to expand...

The details change, but the basis remains the same across all the major religions and philosophies around the world, and the basis is supremely simple: "Be kind to each other and take care of each other." That's our only job, that's it, and we can't manage to do it.

There is a reason that 30% of the 10 Commandments are prohibitions on coveting. Only one is against murder, and nowhere at all is sex or sexual orientation mentioned.
 
write-stuff said:
Unless you're speaking metaphorically, it's pretty clear that Adam and Eve never existed. And snakes are anatomically incapable of speech.
Click to expand...

I find it funny when people take metaphorical texts and use literal interpretations as evidence of their invalidity.

It's like reading a science textbook and claiming it's invalid because it doesn't provide good emotional support.
 
write-stuff said:
Unless you're speaking metaphorically, it's pretty clear that Adam and Eve never existed. And snakes are anatomically incapable of speech.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that all the incest their children committed is pretty disgusting. :no:

But nobody with any semblance of a logical brain can possibly take that story literally? Yes?
 
Henning said:
<snip>
There is a reason that 30% of the 10 Commandments are prohibitions on coveting. Only one is against murder, and nowhere at all is sex or sexual orientation mentioned.
Click to expand...

You don't need to sink to that level with the names.

Find a reference supporting your assertion. I did.

Here are some more references:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/adultery
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/adultery
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=adultery

They all mention sex.

Coveting another's wife is covered in another commandment.
 
narchee said:
Not to mention that all the incest their children committed is pretty disgusting. :no:

But nobody with any semblance of a logical brain can possibly take that story literally? Yes?
Click to expand...

Incest? Sure, but what about self-impregnation?

Who was Cain's wife? The only woman in the universe at that time was Eve, if you take the story literally. But he found a wife somehow…and he was afraid that people who found him would kill him, even though the only other people in the universe were his parents.
 
write-stuff said:
Unless you're speaking metaphorically, it's pretty clear that Adam and Eve never existed. And snakes are anatomically incapable of speech.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of Christian theologians, and virtually all Jewish ones, interpret the Genesis creation story metaphorically. There is abundant internal, external, and historical evidence that it was intended to be interpreted metaphorically.

Muslims have a vaguely similar creation story and are somewhat more likely to take it literally (although many do not). The story in the Qur'an has some interesting differences, including the observation that life originated in water:
God has created every living being from water: Some of them creep on their bellies; some walk on two feet and some of them walk on four legs. God creates whatever He wants. He has power over all things. (Surah 24:45)
​
Both accounts share the same fundamental tenets:


  • God created everything.
  • God created humans as a special being who was able to commune with God, and who shared some of God's attributes (the capacities for reason, compassion, creativity, etc.).
  • Humans started out innocent and good.
  • Humans became corrupt when they turned away from God.
  • God wants them back.

Rich
 
Well....
 
Last edited:
I know for fact these cats prayed before their flight(s)...


fbi_hijackers1.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top