Religious people claim moral authority, but where does moral authority really come from? In this talk I show that moral authority comes from the reality based community, not the faith based community. Here I connect the dots and explain the meaning of life and he purpose of humanity in the universe from a scientific context without any subjective assumptions. Science is the new Bible.

 



  1. ECA says:

    you have a problem.

    its the “Im right(we are right) you are WRONG!” groups you have to contend with.
    Their IDEAL, tends to be that if you are not apart of their group, you Couldnt be right, unless you were god or the preacher telling them WHAT to believe.

    There is a secret to explaining things to SOME people(most really). Give it in SMALL portions. 1 step at a time. LET them think about it. Then add to it.

    To many people want something/someone/.. to complain/bitch/yell/blame/pray/ask/tell them/Excuse to NOT be the one with the problem. WE ALL have a problem..and generally Many of the same problems. But having Someone/something to BLAME is what we are looking for. We dont want the blame..PASS THE BUCK.

    Let god do it..He speaks to GOD, so he must be right..so its HIS problem.

  2. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    Straw man argument, proposing a “faith/secular” antithesis when we religious reject any claim to moral authority, singularly or collectively.

    God alone makes the rules.

    Therefore your argument is irrelevant to the “faith community, because their authority doesn’t exist, God alone has the authority.”

    Its megalomaniac to suppose society, given its huddled masses yearning to be entertained and drugged, rather than think critically on important issues, that your secular based community will produce superior results.

    Fact is, the best society is (by any objective examination), the American experiences up until the boomer’s rejection of scripture as their authority.

    Now we are devolving into tyranny, progressives progressly chipping away at personal liberty, subjecting all to the mores of the state, regardless how unnatural and perverted these are.

    • ECA says:

      Taxed..
      GOD suggests rules YOU..should live by.
      Rules of the land are SUPPOSED to be of a consensus of ALL..
      And WHICH God do you claim?
      Christ? gave no laws.
      The Bible god? those are the original Jewish laws? Are you jewish? or do you contend those as Christs laws?

      HOW about, Common laws of all religions? those are pretty specific..and cover most of the 10 commandments..WHICh is about 10 laws, maybe 20 if you construe them around abit..

      • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

        Our constitution/Bill or Rights is a Christian document…we understand the separation of church and state…

        Morals cannot be separated from Government, the humanists certainly don’t try, neither should the religious.

        We can’t establish a law based upon such “authorities”, but we can allow such “guide our decisions” in governance.

        Hence there is a moral foundation for many of our laws….lately those morals are from the secular community, not religious…but they are still codifying what they think is right into law.

        • ECA says:

          The constitution ISNT a document created ONLY for Christians of BY ONLY Christians..

          MORALS are for the individual. YOU live by your OWN MORALS..
          LAWS are created by MAN, to rule over man, and Control MAN.
          This is WHY, LAWS can be different from MORALS. You either live by both, or your own.

          Yes, there is a MORAL foundation, but they REALLY have more logical and personal reality. Other wise we would have better CORP LAWS..

          1. you dont want someone to Kill your kids.
          2. you dont want your neighbor Sucking up to your wife, or your property.
          On and on..

          But there are rules for government also..
          KEEP AND BARE(?) ARMS.. yes this has a meaning..WE are here to CONTROL our government.

  3. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    I consider the Benghazi, IRS, War Crimminal Obama, backing of Jihadists AGAINST secular liberation in the ME….the natural produce of the tree of progressive tyranny.

    Supposing yourselves God, you dominate man to his own injury, in conformity with the latest lefty boodoggle or supposition popular among the elites…

    DDT is an excellent example of the blood on progressive hands. Without sound reason they caused its banning, and subsequently millions of Africans have died of malaria…

    Even now when it been shown DDT harms nothing but the mosquitoes it was meant to kill….progressives won’t legalize it.

    They rather millions more die first, than admit their collective was terribly wrong about it.

  4. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    In other words, now that progressives have proven their hatred for privacy, and individual choice….your argument has been completely contradicted by the Obama Administration.

  5. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Well,…… as my handle presignifies, I stopped listening at 4 min in. What you correctly called the majority view of science IS in my book the correct view.

    You are using your “church” analogy more as a club now, a corruption, than the inward joke I have always taken it as. Indeed, you are doing all you can to bend reality to your own dogma. Not a good thing.

    Morality–the morality that tells us what is good and bad in the Bible, comes for the assent of the majority. simple—not dogmatic—still subject to debate and disagreement.

    Religion in all its forms argues to TELL other people what to think. Its totalitarian, beligerent, intolerant, dogmatic, unthinking and corrupting.

    Turn away from the dark side.

    yea, verily

    • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

      The self contradiction of your handle shows irrationality only, not how long you pretend to listen while the “inner phonograph” keeps playing its own song.

      For example, “majority view of science” (i.e., a consensus) is not science…its popular opinion. While one might say it perhaps points to the correct view, its not scientific proof of a view.

      What “majority view” of the science community hasn’t eventually been overturned by new data?

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        Hey Numbnuts—how can you so often be so close and yet continuously circling the drain? Every “idea” in science has been not so much overturned as understood more deeply as in Newtonian Physics was not overturned by Einstein but rather placed in its proper context.

        All going to the POINT—that Science is not “a view” or a set of beliefs, or a dogma, or a church=====>It is a PROCESS–always open to a better hypothesis that explains more, provides a better context.

        Thus have I spoken, just as it is.

  6. pedro says:

    Morality doesn’t exist in the universe. Physics are not moral.

    Geez!

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      Exactly so my good Pedro. We live in an existential universe that has no right or wrong, no morals—but hoomans have imagination and we can imagine just the opposite. Doesn’t change the universe, but we all live in our imaginary worlds.

      FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOM–the state of living in our own imaginary world.

      Amusing.

    • ± says:

      You are correct that the universe has no “morality” property.

      But the term is a useful tool and I think it has a very clear cut and simple meaning: That (idea, law, proposal, action, etc.) which is most moral is that which creates the best outcome for the most people.

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        Thats part of what liberalism/democratic party is all about but it needs further polishing.

        Imagine an island with 1000 Black People and 100 Whites. Could the most good be provided by enslavement of the whites to the majority will of the Blacks?

        Most would argue there are some Inalienable Rights that must be recognized beyond what is good for the majority.

        This example drives me to what I think is one central core of morality is that we have to recognize our common humanity and withstand the siren’s call to hypocrisy.

        Something the RICH cannot do. RICH = CRIMINAL–grounded on a fundamental morality gone missing in our gerrymandered world.

        Yea, verily!

        • ± says:

          I would tell you that I’m sorry that you’re so bitter about rich people, but I’m not. Too bad about your life.

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

          How to spot the morally bankrupt and vapid: they will take any sideshoot from the main argument.

          Or…. maybe it is just an abysmal lack of humor?

          Pedro? Of course, just being his kneejerk silly self. Irrelevant when not informing us of things we can’t confirm.

          Ha, ha.

          • pedro says:

            You write stupid things like rich=criminal but I’m the knee jerker. Figures.

  7. Dallas says:

    Here’s to Reality and Science !!!

    Alphie, leave the land of Oz.

  8. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    National Socialism, with its Eugenics and Big Government Solutions, was very progressive, which is why it took over Germany at the time.

    Everyone loves a helping government.

    Government help is like a Trojan horse, once your survival depends upon it, your freedom is gone.

    Stalin, Mao, Castro, Hitler were progressives, believing in the power of the people to establish what is right. Unfortunately for them all, their theories don’t work in practice….they destroy wealth creation and that requires someone to blame…hence these all murder their own people, desperately trying to make their impossible philosophies work in reality.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      The only reason the theories of the Third Reich did not become Universal Pablum was because he violated his pact with Russia.

      Kinda a morality tale in itself.

      The meaning of History, the morality we take from it and live with later, is all decided by majority assent/agreement. There is no other way until the Hive Collective is controlled by some computer program–but even then, in a very certain sense, whatever morality there is will be established by the like minds who adhere to it.

      Self Awareness and actualization, or imposed from without. Limited and faulty. What else is there?

    • Wrigsted the Dane says:

      Your Founding Fathers was progressive, the Loyalists were good conservatives.
      You’re just an old fart who are scared of progress. Fortunately, the next generation is smarter than us, just as we are smarter than our parents. Do you remember the day you tried to explain something to your parents and realized that they would never understand. The same thing happens to your children and grandchildren.

  9. dusanmal says:

    Meaning of life based on STRICTLY fundamental science, not your meta- constructs:
    Entropy must rise and must do so following the path of most micro-states possible. This, very fundamental law of Physics points both to inevitability and the purpose/meaning of the life: creating the most possible complexity in the Universe in order for it to produce the most chaos possible in the collapse. No morality there, just the brute forces of Nature.
    No matter how hard Progressives/Left/Atheists/materialists/… try to invent “universal” morality one fundamental problem remains. It is always arbitrary. And as all human arbitrary things go – trivial to manipulate.
    Assigning morality through transcendental belief (religion) carries advantage: immutable arbiter. Allowing set of behavioral “laws” to persist and be tested by survival – if negative feedback is built in the morality of it, system will inevitably fail. As seen by societal collapses of Communist/Nazi/Progressive morals driven societies. Morality of Progressivism->inevitable corruption->inevitable spying->inevitable oppression of those who disagree,…

  10. Producer Jeff says:

    If morality is not based on something outside of ourselves, say like religion or even natural law, then moral authority rests on the individual, and more succinctly, the individual who has the most power.

  11. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    One intersection of morality and science that I do enjoy is how morals may be (partially) explained by Darwinian Selection for our species. We’ll never know how much of its application is correctly applied, but its fun to think about.

    Then there is always Freud–one of the great Jewish Scientists/Theorists that fundamentally changed the way we think about ourselves… even in non-“Freudian” ways.

    But… in the end, the area is 80% occupied by: Sociology. A very squishy “half-science.” Hoomans and free will and herd instinct being what it is.

    Damn–I am half drawn to go back and view the rest of the video. Is it anything more than evangelical crap trying to substitute one belief system over the others? Confusing “proof” with preference? Thats how it started out… but Marc has been thinking and dealing with his dogma for years now, and its not a standard approach with obvious roots in magical thinking.

    Yeah….. we all should give it a fair listen.

  12. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    What science is behind the spark of life?

    There are electro-chemical processes that are scientifically definable…

    But what are the precise “elements” that make up the “life force?”

    If you cannot describe life scientifically, identify its “working parts,” how can you discuss its “meaning in a scientific context.”

    Seems to me you are trying to fly to Mars before you can walk.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      Alfie–you don’t have to understand everything, or even very much, to understand “an element” as completely as is needed.

      Take an apple falling from a tree? You don’t have to understand gravity to whatever degree on your way to Mars you falsely posit, to KNOW you don’t want to take a long walk on a short pier.

      You have obviously totally bullshitted yourself, but this forum has higher standards.

      Ha, ha. I love poking Alfie. Listen to him squeal like a pig:

      • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

        You know what an apple is, can scientifically observe gravity’s effects on it and so can discuss the “meaning” of an apple, the how it behaves in gravity, “scientifically.”

        Life, the particles that make it up, is/are unknown.

        AND meaning is not subject to scientific observation, its a deduction.

        My point, elegantly simple, Marc has misused the word science…in an attempt to make religion its antithesis and therefore win the argument via prejudice.

        What he has failed to realize, many of the greatest scientific discoveries have been by religious people, because of their faith in God.

        For example, Bayesian probability is named after 18th century clergyman Thomas Bayes.

        Humanists have little to commend them. I find their work product defective, for example B. Russell’s objection one can regress infinitely from created to creator and therefore its impossible to know the Prime Creator.

        But his premise is a finite God creating finite things, while the Christian God of the Bible is infinite:

        27 “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You. How much less this temple which I have built! (1Ki 8:27 NKJ)

        15 For thus says the High and Lofty One Who inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy: (Isa 57:15 NKJ)

        God is Holy, separate from the finiteness of His creation, hence no images of Him are possible, He does not have “shape”

        5 “To whom will you liken Me, and make Me equal And compare Me, that we should be alike? (Isa 46:5 NKJ)

        Bertrand Russell’s argument is applicable to finite gods, not the infinite Christian (and Jewish) God of the Bible.

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

          What he has failed to realize, many of the greatest scientific discoveries have been by religious people, because of their faith in God. /// No, because their faith in God was irrelevant and they used the Scientific Process to examine and test the world. Doesn’t matter if you believe in God or Dont, or Satan, or Santa Clause—put a kite up in the air during a thunderstorm and you can discover electricity==publish it===and others can confirm it.

          simple, non faith based active investigation.

  13. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Well, I stopped at 41 minutes in. Maybe I’ll try to finish after a good nap?….. or in a few days.

    Good extemporaneous speaking though… doubt if I could do it. I even agree with most of the “ideas” behind what you are saying but your vocabulary is very different than mine. I think its just vocabulary…meaning if we took a particular point like “… and the Universe evolved into us…” I think we could pick through that illusory egocentric imposition on our own understanding and thrash the metaphor and analogies down to the bedrock scientific facts that we both believe.

    Most philosophies sound good within their own context and exposition. What is the Church of Reality going to do come up against angry Fundies who want to take you down? There is a whole bunch of morality in killing everyone who disagrees with you in order to establish…. harmony.

    You believe in harmony don’t you Marc?

    Ha, ha.

  14. Captain Obvious says:

    I wonder if faith healers can cure frothing at the mouth?

  15. So What? says:

    Religion and god were created by some humans to control other humans of a weaker will and mind. Religion Is about and always has been about and always will be about control.

    The belief that the universe has an inherent moral compass, base, or direction is proven false by the observation of that same universe. An atom has no moral center, a tornado has no culpability in where it lands, and humans are a recently evolved species that has some members who think their species is the center of the universe with a god who has a plan for them.

    Human beings will be extinct in a few millennium just like 99.99% of all of the other species that have ever existed on this tiny speck of rock.

    Just how tiny is that speck?

    http://tinyurl.com/4qvnfqn

    Get over it already

    • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

      Contradicting your theory is the the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, Christian documents….

      As Obama would say, a charter of negative rights for the Government.

      Government control was rendered impossible, freedom reigned.

      But progressives undermine the constitutional freedom of the individual, in favor of Big Brother….and they do this because they don’t believe in God….don’t believe He is the author of our rights…

      They consider themselves the authority…and they tend to tyranny….in every culture, every age, progressives (those who considered themselves gods) dominate man to man’s injury…without fail.

      The Chief Progressive Obama is just the latest glaring example.

      • So What? says:

        Nothing in your comment changes the reality of how and why religion was created, which is not a theory, it’s history.

        You also missed what is actually the most important part of the comment by attempting to contradict the first paragraph.

  16. Mextli says:

    Didn’t Spinoza cover a lot of this already albeit without bobbo’s eloquence? :-)

    • Captain Obvious says:

      FTW

      And his Theological-Political Treatise is only 250 pages long. Faster than reading a bobbo comment.

  17. Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

    Studying atoms will not lead to a “scientific understanding” of murder, adultery, theft etc. Those are moral issues that cannot be decided by scientific observation of forces.

    Contrary to your presentation, most humanists do cite culture as their “Bible”….

    A missionary cannot tell a head hunter to stop killing in the name of Jesus, because its his culture that informs him what is right and wrong, not ours.

    The problem that “relativism” has are situations where the cultural norm is against humanist sensibilities. For example, Dr. Walter Martin once argued with a Jewish Philosopher how defective his “cultural relevancy” argument is, by applying it to Nazi Germany. The Fuehrer set the cultural norm and he determined the Jews betrayed the Fatherland and would all be turned into lamp shades, now “what do you, Professor, a Jew….have to say to them in response?”

    You can’t object to being turned into a bar of soap because its their culture that establishes right or wrong, not yours. Now the head hunter would eat you….and there is nothing you can say against it.

    So relativism doesn’t work and that leaves the humanist with nothing…

    You don’t have a Bible, although you clearly you want one, badly.

    Best thing you can do is convert, then its simple to point to the text that says “thou shalt not kill.”

    • Captain Obvious says:

      How many times are you going to bust Godwin’s Law on this thread?

      • Taxed Enough Already Dude says:

        God Always Wins is True because it conforms to fact, hence it is a Law of existence, analogous to the “law of gravity”….we all see it, all the time…we can’t deny it.

        A true “church of reality” would scientifically observe the perversions that have overtaken our land, and deduce the cause of our abandonment:

        18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
        19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
        20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
        21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
        22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
        23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man– and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
        24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
        25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
        26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
        27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
        28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
        29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
        30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
        31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful;
        32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

        (Rom 1:18-1 NKJ)

      • Freemantle A. Silverboard says:

        Now captain it’s either Hitler or bible quotes so you’re pretty well screwed in any case. Besides he only does it when he comments.

        • Captain Obvious says:

          Mr Silverboard is quite correct. I acknowledge the Buddha within.

  18. soundwash says:

    this should be interesting. looking forward to watching…

    the main issue i have w/ current (mainly western) science is that its all mostly a dogmatic farce, based on flawed models rooted from outdated and/or flawed theories, *not* true science.

    current consensus science completely ignores the subtle energies and consciousness. -not allowed in a “gravity only” based universe. our science is basically a “kinetic only” model

    only recently have they even begun to admit the “every man/celestial object is an island” ideology is wrong.

    -anyway, i’ll comment back tomorrow on the vid.

    -s

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      Washedout—will there be enough suds left over for me to get a first wash on my dirty undies? With the preamble to your analysis, I don’t know how much soap will be left.

      Hmmmm….. science is science. Its a method. Not a set of values or proof of anything. Not moral…. or immoral. And to this GREATEST engine of the journey we make towards truth we have yet found, we get all kinds of BS attached. Ha, ha—gee===it is kinda like the bible that way. I guess BS will attach to anything????

      But I dither.

  19. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Just for grins: Marc says: “Here I connect the dots and explain the meaning of life and he purpose of humanity in the universe from a scientific context without any subjective assumptions. ” /// I didn’t hear that in the 41 minutes I invested in the mixed metaphor onslaught I indured. The closest explanation I heard was that as the thinking component of the universe we have an obligation to continue our existence as long as possible. WTF? I mean===I AGREE===but this ain’t science. It ain’t even morality. Just a bald assertion. But I post to relate an old fable I heard that seems applicable. I will truncate:

    Exploring scientist is Dark Africa comes across a tribe that will not kill animals as it is against their religion/morality. The scientist think he scores BIG when he shows the Chief a microscopic study of the water the tribe drinks. See those dots moving around? They are all animals and you’ve been drinking and killing millions of them each time you take a drink of water. Doesn’t this make your whole religion/belief system something of a sham??? And the explorer left the next day to find the headwaters of the Zambesi or whatever. On his way out, he came across the village and everyone therein was dead. The tribe met and decided not to drink water anymore in the faithful observation of their beliefs. Moral: be careful what you tell other people. Some people take their beliefs seriously.

    Anyhoo….now that that is off my chest, I didn’t see any “meaning of life” scientifically based or otherwise in the presentation.

    Maybe Soundbath can cleanse us all.

  20. See no evil, hear no evil says:

    Yikes! Why am I suddenly seeing the face of Marc Perkel? Shooting for celebrity status?

    Never knew or cared who he was. Now I have an image and voice to try to forget.

    Should all the regulars post their faces here? I hope not.

  21. t0llyb0ng says:

    I’ll listen to as much of this as I can but it may not be very long due to the raggedy, overblown signal I’m hearing.  That & I don’t really have time to devote an hour to the subject matter.

    I don’t have a problem with Marc other than he needs to find a proofreader somewhere.  It wouldn’t have to be a proofreader-from-hell (that would me me) but just a second pair of eyeballs that can put a red circle around grammatical clunkers & missing words.  It’s tough to proofread one’s own stuff, even for the best of us (me).  To publish raw text to a blog without help is hubristic & ill-advised.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      What are you proof reading? All I see is the header on the OP? Nothing wrong with that unless you can educate us all?

    • Peace and Love says:

      I’ll summarize it for you. A bullshit salesman from The Humanist Church is shilling a totalitarian claim to moral authority, his point of difference with other religion is that instead of a stated and established philosophy, culture, they prefer to make it up as they go along. Any inconvenient rules can be changed at their next ethics committee.

  22. pedro says:

    Marc, what would Einstein say?

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      Pedro–such a sad withdrawn shriveled up intellectual life.

      Tell us: what would Einstein say?

      • pedro says:

        The same thing a guy who signs Bibles and advises to read it would say.

  23. Guyver says:

    IMHO,

    Morals keep you from doing things that’ll get God mad at you.

    Ethics keep you from doing things that’ll get society mad at you.

  24. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    Facing Adversity, Some Find Solace in Science:

    http://psmag.com/blogs/news-blog/stressful-times-turn-to-science-58781/

    Ha, ha.

    • Guyver says:

      Some in the science community try to argue by appealing to authority rather than using the scientific method to prove something.

      Just like in religions, science has its share of charlatans.

      Far too many self-absorbed intellects prefer to follow those who preach their “scientific” authority rather than approach things with scientific skepticism.

  25. John Cheever says:

    Marc,

    The more bong hits I take, the more it all makes sense! At the next talk wear an interesting hat. Perhaps a magenta Mitre with dreadlocks?

    I get no spam but I have too much pork for just one fork.

    Snoogins!

  26. John Cheever says:

    One last thought…the next talk should be given from a hot tub and Skyped into No Agenda. THAT is my Sunday morning message and massage.

    Speedos are optional…

  27. Rich says:

    “Science is the new Bible”? Who needs any Bible.

  28. God, inspiring Id, Ego, and Super-Ego with the trade mark monicker "I Am"since 1922 says:

    We are not amuzed.

  29. Dallas says:

    “Science is the new bible” .. Good analogy and add another analogy in techno-speak..

    Science is Open Source . The Bible is proprietary and the coder died thousands of years ago.

  30. Rich says:

    Jesus H, what was that all about?