Pope Says Technology Causes Confusion Between Reality and Fiction 779
Pope Benedict XVI has warned that people are in danger of being unable to discern reality from fiction because of new technologies, and not old books. "New technologies and the progress they bring can make it impossible to distinguish truth from illusion and can lead to confusion between reality and virtual reality. The image can also become independent from reality, it can give birth to a virtual world, with various consequences -- above all the risk of indifference towards real life," he said.
Interesting (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Informative)
It could be said to come down to the question of if the universe is deterministic.
If you somehow saved a copy of the universe and played it a second time if it would turn out the same like a finite state machine or if it would turn out differently.
from the inside there's little difference, you have as much or as little "free will" (as fuzzy a term as that is) either way.
Re:This is just red meat for the /. crowd (Score:5, Informative)
The actual article seems like a troll as it only reports a couple of snipits. Here's [speroforum.com] a better one with the full quote I found via google. The Pope was actually talking about the way modern media reports the news.
Today, for example, the world of appearances has an increasing weight with the development of new technologies; but if on the one hand this has doubtless positive aspects, on the other, the image can also become detached from reality , it can give life to a virtual world, with diverse consequences, the first of which is the risk of indifference to the truth. In fact, new technologies, together with the progress that they bring, can result in what is true and what is false becoming interchangeable, it can lead to confusing the real with the virtual. In addition, reporting of an event, happy or sad, can be consumed as entertainment and not as an occasion for reflection. The search for ways to authentically promote man then disappears into the background, because the event is presented primarily to arouse emotions. These issues are alarm bells: an invitation to consider the danger that the virtual distances us from reality and does not stimulate the pursuit of what is true, the truth.
Re:Guess he never saw the Creation museum... (Score:5, Informative)
Just so you know, the Catholic church welcomes scientific explanations for the origin of mankind besides "Creation Science", including the theory of Evolution, so long as that science is used in a non-misleading way (for example, Evolution is fine so long as you recognize that there was a God that started it in the first place, but superstitious "mind science" like New Age theories are obviously false, assuming that you believe all of the other Catholic doctrines). You're thinking of fundamentalist, Protestant churches and denominations which take a rather extreme biblical literacy approach (which the Catholic Church hasn't had for well over a thousand years).
Re:Indifference towards real life? (Score:1, Informative)
He has. They are. Google it.
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Informative)
Axiom 1: Assume an all-knowing God. (All knowing implies knowledge of that which has not yet come to pass).
Axiom 2: Assume a God that is always right. (Follows somewhat from Axiom 1).
Axiom 3: Define "free-will" as the ability to make an independent choice.
Question 1: Can free-will exist?
Suppose an individual is presented with the choice between X and Y. If God is all knowing, then God will know that the individual will 'choose' X. If God always knows this, and God must be, and is always right, then the individual must choose X. If the individual chooses Y, then God was wrong, and, therefore, God did not know the outcome. Thus, the individual must always choose X, and, therefore, there is no choice being made at all. For there to be an all-knowing God, all choices must be predetermined, and no choices actually exist.
Now, personally, I have seen folks try to route around this logic by saying, "Well God actually knows all-possible outcomes. That's what all-knowing means."
This is logically inconsistent. If God knows all-possible outcomes, but does not know the outcome that will actually be chosen, then God is not all-knowing. God simply knows all possible permutations of reality, not which permutation will actually occur. If God knows all possible outcomes, and knows which outcome of any given choice will follow a decision, then we fall back to the original logical demonstration that free will cannot exist in a reality with an all-knowing being. It is merely an illusion hosted by lesser beings.
Now, mind you, this is not necessarily an argument that there is no God or anything like that. It is merely an argument that a reality in which there is an all-knowing being as well as individual free will is a logically inconsistent reality. Now, whether or not reality is logically consistent, or, for that matter, an all-knowing being would have to be logically consistent is an entirely different argument. This argument merely holds that, in a logically consistent reality, free-will and an all-knowing being are logically inconsistent.
Re:Guess he never saw the Creation museum... (Score:2, Informative)
or do they say "well I guess you're right, looks like there's no reason to believe a soul exists
You can logically prove that a soul doesn't physically exist in this world. However, the soul just so happens to be spiritual and cannot be represented by matter alone, therefore that conclusion is left up to whether or not you believe God exists (which the Catholic church does).
and we really should support birth control in order to make people's lives better"
Assume for a second that all life is sacred. Assume for a second that sex was never meant to just be a pleasureful act, and was meant to represent the love of God Himself by allowing us to spread that love another generation by "becoming one" in the act of sexual intercourse. If those assumptions are true, which this Catholic church believes, why would the Catholic church ever approve of birth control techniques? It goes against their religion, which you, if I am not mistaken, are not forced to be a part of. If you don't agree with their morals, stop complaining about them. Also, you fail to note that there is such a thing called "abstinence" which has been around ever since sexual intercourse was made in the first place and it is the only proven way to prevent pregnancy 100% of the time, especially considering that you are never required to have sex unless somebody forces you.
As for the catholic church molestation issues, the Church itself says that if you have deep-rooted, perverted sexual tendencies, you should seek help with those before you become a priest. There are only a few bad eggs in a giant basket of them here, figuratively speaking. The underlying principles that molestation is a grave sexual offense and that it severely separates yourself from God are still true in the Church's eyes; if Pope Benedict XVI truly is covering up these instances without a good reason (which I'm not sure is possible to have), then maybe we just have a bad pope on our hands.
tl;dr, It's their beliefs, not yours. Respect them for that please and stop claiming they're so backwards that they don't allow any fun. The problem isn't the church, it's you. Just because a church that you don't agree with and that you are not a part of doesn't approve of things that you want to fulfill your own selfish sexual desires, logically speaking, does NOT mean, in any way, that the Church is backwards; agree to disagree!
Re:Hmm (Score:3, Informative)
Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem.