Monday, 24 January 2011

Scientosophy - A New Religion

What was there before the big bang? God? Then what came before God? This is a major problem for the world's religions and one only my proposed religion - Scientosophy - has the answers to. 

The abiding state of truth in the universe is one of consistency. It is not possible for two statements to contradict each other and for them both to be true. Every explanation for the origin of the universe is either contradictory or incomplete (i.e. you can always ask "and what caused that?"). If an explanation is happened upon that is patently complete and consistent, then surely that must be the truth - Scientosophy.

The basic premise is that in the future, human knowledge and technical know-how evolves to the point where we are able to formulate a way to create a big-bang, a universe. We would be able to position the start point of this universe anywhere within our own space and time. As it was created inside our universe, all the same dimensions and laws of physics would hold in it as do in ours. The key understanding now is that this new big bang gets positioned at the same point as our big bang! It isn't a second universe, it IS our universe. This creates a closed loop in time, thus avoiding any causality problems. We have become our own creators.

A good religion also needs a purpose, and by golly does this one have a purpose. To ensure humans reach the stage of intelligence to pull this feat off we need to encourage selective breeding - smart people should have more kids,and stupid people should have fewer. As the uberintelligent head of the religion I would, of course, have mating privileges with any of the Scientosophy women I choose, and any of them can choose to have AI from my seed. 

The reason it is important to reach the universe creation point as soon as possible, and not just hang around happy that it will happen some time, is due to the question of free will and determinism. Before we create our universe we are stuck in a time loop and so can't be sure of our free will. The sooner we can precipitate the loop point, the sooner we free the whole of humanity (and any aliens out there) from the slavery of determinism and allow us to be truly conscious - individual pioneers in the brave new world.

Of course, some of the Scientosophy rituals involve hallucinogenic drugs; I wouldn't want anyone thinking too clearly about how likely these religious tenets are, even if they are eminently more plausible than those of any religion I can think of!


HavenNyx said...

::laughs:: Love it. I don't know about intelligent women as broodmares but stupid people should certainly breed less.

ResCogitans said...

i tried to jot down some notes on where evolution may take society... the stupid, uneducated, and poor, tend to reproduce more - so could a split in the human race be possible, a la the eloi and morlocks in HG Wells' Time Machine?
i couldn't make any kind of coherent post on it as my thoughts were too jumbled and kept veering off on tangents, but it is certainly an interesting question.

Anonymous said...

Res, anyone ever told you you're crazy perchance?
LOL, I like the way you think though.

may contain traces of nuts said...

once upon a time there were 3 girls standing in a paddock, as the sun rose to mid morning one of the girls said to the girl in the middle "I never knew you were blonde", the girl on the other side said "no she isn't, she is brunette" - perspective

ResCogitans said...

notme: yes! but i'm actually completely sane, it is everyone else's way of seeing things that is crazy. and please note there is no ~ at the end of that statement!

nuts: there is certainly room for perspective on things that are subjective, but i don't view truth as subjective. if a word is woolly enough to allow for different interpretations then that is a problem of the language used to describe the truth, not a problem with truth itself.
wittgenstein's tractatus, 7.0 = what we cannot speak of, we must pass over in silence. this is how he killed philosophy - either statements can be coded into propositional calculus and proved, or the statements are too woolly to have any truth value.

may contain traces of nuts said...

ah but what is the truth, the only solid consistent truth i have found has been in numbers, all the rest is open to subjection. one mans blue is another mans grey, one mans right is another mans wrong.