> >No. A model can be made. It's just that said model will possibly be
> >just our minds impossing order on a chaotic (_un_ordered) universe,
> >rather than us actually figuring out the "true structure" of the
> >universe.
>
> Doesn't every living organism provide an existence proof for
> order in the universe? Unless you have a literal interpretation
> of the Bible you have to admit these highly complex configurations
> of matter and energy were around a long time before humans started
> imposing order on the world.
I conceed... you are right. "Order" exists in the universe. However,
recgonition of that order, as opposed to choas, is a human duality. The
universe /is/. We just preceive some parts of it to have "order" and
others not to.
> >For science, this is where your circluar validity comes in. The fact
> >that we not only have a model but that the model can be used to _affect_
> >the universe in useful ways means that possibly we _are_ onto something
> >here.
>
> Just "possibly"? How about "so certain that you bet your life on
> it every day and I'm not exaggerating"?
True enough.
> >No, I'm saying that when they _lose_their_faith_, a void is created and,
> >at least as it stands, reason itelf is not enough to fill the hole.
> >Rather than face this, some people might jump...
>
> Not if they are actually reasonable.
hmmm. If you have good reasons, is it not "reasonable" to end your
life?
> I can't speak for Zero, but the CoV was created in part to provide an
> alternative for that memetic niche. It is supposed to be an extension
> of reason and science that caters to those human needs that the traditional
> religions currently fulfill. One definition of 'religion' that I find
> particularly illuminating is 'an institution whose purpose is to provide
> meaning to the lives of its adherents'.
Nice. I would tend to shy away from the "institution" part... which is
why I also don't like the "Church" part of CoV. Can we change the name
to Religion of Virus? RoV
ERiC