Editing Talk:God (RDM)/Archive 1
Discussion page of God (RDM)/Archive 1
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
::It's when Adama shows Tigh the really old picture. --[[User:BklynBruzer|BklynBruzer]] 15:18, 24 April 2007 (CDT) | ::It's when Adama shows Tigh the really old picture. --[[User:BklynBruzer|BklynBruzer]] 15:18, 24 April 2007 (CDT) | ||
::Yeah, I found it by now. It's really under the breath, which is why I missed it. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 15:24, 24 April 2007 (CDT) | ::Yeah, I found it by now. It's really under the breath, which is why I missed it. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 15:24, 24 April 2007 (CDT) | ||
==pockets of Monotheism in the colonies?== | ==pockets of Monotheism in the colonies?== | ||
| Line 34: | Line 32: | ||
Ok this is a small matter but from the mini did anyone get the feeling that the worship of one single god wasn't completely unheard of in the colonies? Six's comments about God are mocked by Baltar but he isn't shocked by the notion of one god. Basically what I'm getting at is that in the real world we have people who claim to have gone back to pagan religions and they worship multiple gods...could the opposite have been true in the colonies. That a monotheistic religion was something some colonists adapted as a way to be contrary or as even an actual alternative to the kobolian faith? I'm not saying it was widespread or even a major issue within the colonies. Basically there were colonists who wanted to be different and were mocked for having what other colonists percieved as a wacky religion. --[[User:Meteor|Meteor]] 02 February 2007. | Ok this is a small matter but from the mini did anyone get the feeling that the worship of one single god wasn't completely unheard of in the colonies? Six's comments about God are mocked by Baltar but he isn't shocked by the notion of one god. Basically what I'm getting at is that in the real world we have people who claim to have gone back to pagan religions and they worship multiple gods...could the opposite have been true in the colonies. That a monotheistic religion was something some colonists adapted as a way to be contrary or as even an actual alternative to the kobolian faith? I'm not saying it was widespread or even a major issue within the colonies. Basically there were colonists who wanted to be different and were mocked for having what other colonists percieved as a wacky religion. --[[User:Meteor|Meteor]] 02 February 2007. | ||
: Gaeta makes comments that seem to support this in "Kobol's Last Gleaming, Part I" when Adama reviews the texts regarding Kobol. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 22:11, 2 February 2007 (CST) | : Gaeta makes comments that seem to support this in "Kobol's Last Gleaming, Part I" when Adama reviews the texts regarding Kobol. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 22:11, 2 February 2007 (CST) | ||
=="Scientific Explanation" Section== | =="Scientific Explanation" Section== | ||
| Line 46: | Line 44: | ||
::::::For what it's worth, there was some concern about the FTL article as well, regarding its validity to the show. At least as far as the scientific speculation is concerned. And some articles are indeed more speculative than others, making some case-by-case decisions necessary. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter how well you source your information here, as the problem is its connection to the show itself. | ::::::For what it's worth, there was some concern about the FTL article as well, regarding its validity to the show. At least as far as the scientific speculation is concerned. And some articles are indeed more speculative than others, making some case-by-case decisions necessary. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter how well you source your information here, as the problem is its connection to the show itself. | ||
::::::I understand that you put some effort into this, and even basically agree with it, or appreciate it. But aside from a minimal note like "It's hasn't been established whether this God is supernatural or can be explained with scientific means", I don't see how we can use any of this. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 01:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT) | ::::::I understand that you put some effort into this, and even basically agree with it, or appreciate it. But aside from a minimal note like "It's hasn't been established whether this God is supernatural or can be explained with scientific means", I don't see how we can use any of this. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 01:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT) | ||
:::::::On the first point, philosophically, I do appreciate the FTL article and any article that adds more information to the show even if the show does not explicitly say it, so long as that information has a ''strong scientific'' backing. As the show holds so strongly | :::::::On the first point, philosophically, I do appreciate the FTL article and any article that adds more information to the show even if the show does not explicitly say it, so long as that information has a ''strong scientific'' backing. As the show holds so strongly a tenant of expressing realism, I am sure its creators would incorporate any strong scientific concepts into their verse as they have with the networking, nuclear arms, and AI, provided they had time to mention it. | ||
:::::::As I read through the adjacent article on cylon religion, I was unable to find the source of your quotes, but regardless most of the articles on this site imply that the cylon god is a supernatural being. This article refers to the god as a "deity" and the article on cylon religion refers to it as a "metaphysical being." The latter term does support other definitions of the cylon’s god being more of an abstract concept or an idea rather than supernatural entity, but it still does not address the actual scientific plausibility of a "god" existing. Without a possible scientific explanation, readers will always walk away with the one-sided idea that the cylon god is and can only be a supernatural being, rather than something scientifically plausible as AI. | :::::::As I read through the adjacent article on cylon religion, I was unable to find the source of your quotes, but regardless most of the articles on this site imply that the cylon god is a supernatural being. This article refers to the god as a "deity" and the article on cylon religion refers to it as a "metaphysical being." The latter term does support other definitions of the cylon’s god being more of an abstract concept or an idea rather than supernatural entity, but it still does not address the actual scientific plausibility of a "god" existing. Without a possible scientific explanation, readers will always walk away with the one-sided idea that the cylon god is and can only be a supernatural being, rather than something scientifically plausible as AI. | ||
:::::::As for my intentions, I thought my writing was bad and wrote most of it off the cuff, thus I was not particularly proud of it. My main intention was to generate discussion on this topic and have its possibility mentioned in the article. ''Given the cylon's are strongly rooted in the topic of AI and the idea of a technological singularity branches off of that topic, I believe it is more than reasonable to at least mention it in this article''. | :::::::As for my intentions, I thought my writing was bad and wrote most of it off the cuff, thus I was not particularly proud of it. My main intention was to generate discussion on this topic and have its possibility mentioned in the article. ''Given the cylon's are strongly rooted in the topic of AI and the idea of a technological singularity branches off of that topic, I believe it is more than reasonable to at least mention it in this article''. | ||
:::::::On a side note, please let me know if I should take my defenses personally to each member that criticizes my contributions rather than posting them here, as this page might become quite lengthy. And again, if you just demand better writing or sourcing, tell me exactly how (or refer me to the relevant section in the FAQ) and I will consider writing the article myself.--[[User:DuMan|DuMan]] 19:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT | :::::::On a side note, please let me know if I should take my defenses personally to each member that criticizes my contributions rather than posting them here, as this page might become quite lengthy. And again, if you just demand better writing or sourcing, tell me exactly how (or refer me to the relevant section in the FAQ) and I will consider writing the article myself. | ||
--[[User:DuMan|DuMan]] 19:21, 22 June 2007 (CDT) | |||