Why do people disagree about things?

And to answer the original question, people are allowed to disagree, because they are allowed to have varying interpretations of the phenomenon that is energy, matter, life, consciousness. Again, personally I don't accept science as the final foundation, but an investigation into the workings of what is visible and tangible.

 

A lot of people would call "the occurrence of the universe into matter" by a different name. One popular term is Quantum Mechanics.

Calling everything that leaves us in awe by the name "god" is just asking for misunderstanding.

To avoid this is why we have thousands of words in our language in the first place.

What I think as an individual has nothing to do with WHY we should agree about things. We should agree that the earth is round because it is round. This is the very same reason I don't require knowledge of all phenomenon. What I think about the universe doesn't change what IS.

 

No one can be right because that would mean someone is wrong. People dont like being wrong so they will argue until they are right; lacking the understanding that no one is right about anything because no one knows, we can only assume. We can know things because theyre part of this reality we think of as life. Things we "know" are things we've been told. That is absolutely it.


Then theres those of us who take a trip into infinity to experience truth and the beauty of not existing but being.

 

You cant expect me to take this seriously.

 

I am not denying Quantum Mechanics. But how much do you know about Quantum Mechanics? I personally do not know much, but the little I do, there are mysterious phenomenon found in that, and again there are no final answers. Frankly it's a little silly to think the issue of this is "God" vs. Science. That's old news.

I quote myself about "god" (Notice quotations implying my own choice to not completely accept the term) "being simply the occurrence of the universe into matter into life."

I like what Chapter13 said about science being just a system of labels and names. If we all were to see life being names and labels (numbers & units), that would mean to us life would evolve into a final reality where everything is separate and divided, and not from the same source, and that even if we could know we have similar origins, it would mean nothing.

and Frankly to move exactly to the point of this thread, there probably wont ever be an understanding and conscious relation between people like you and people like me because you refuse to see where we stand with science being an integral part of the mysterious foundation in our universe. Atheists pretty much call science as possession of theirs, like no aspect of it is beyond what they can be conscious of.

People disagree because some people think there is a final truth, whether it be mythical, or based at the study of nature as the explanation of all phenomenon.

 

If we all reacted the same way we would be predictable. Overspecialize and you breed in weakness. It's slow death.

 

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=387182&f=47
Very interesting, theoretical, but very well thought out.

Quantum Entanglement...a phenomenon of Quantum mechanics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement

A quote from wikipedia

"Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics as a "real" and complete theory, struggling to the end of his life for a theory that could better comply with causality, and protesting against the view that there exists no objective physical reality other than that which is revealed through measurement as it is interpreted in terms of the quantum mechanical formalism."

If you are up to date, you know scientists have been working on that last part of Einsteins work for the TOE, and have developed the String Theory that like any other theory has holes.

 

heeh2-

so people disagree about objective reality because of assumption and ignorance. can we agree on this?

 

:eggnog:

 

Well, sometimes assumption and ignorance is why a group of people agree. Racists, sexists, and most viral religion....

We can agree though, that it is possible to disagree because of assumptions and ignorance.

They are "assumptions and ignorance" in the first place, because the data behind what is REALLY happening isn't known to them. All there is left is to reveal the data, and hope they will accept it.

If everyone in the world thought the earth was spherical, where would we go from there? But let us think the world is flat, and there will be millions of new eratosthenes's calling the flat earthers idiots.

I am not advocating quantum mechanics at all, despite what you didn't understand about my prior post. You were arguing semantics and I was trying to explain the errors you were making without just saying "semantics".

 

maybe atheists and religious people are the flat earthers.

 

This seems like a bizarre thread topic. It seems obvious that there are a wide variety of reasons why people disagree. I think the disagreements fall into four broad categories of differences: interests, beliefs, values and policies. These categories can overlap, and when they do the disagreement is more intense. By interests, I'm referring to scarce commodities humans pursue: wealth, status, power, sex, etc. If there's not enough of these to go around, which is usually the case, humans disagree about how they should be distributed. Beliefs (including non-belief) seem to be the central source of disagreement on the Philosophy and Religion forum. When people hold incompatible beliefs about issues that are important to them, like the existence of God, disagreements often result, because each person might feel threatened by the insistence of the other folks that their beliefs are true, equally valie, or superior. Likewise, value differences can easily lead to disagreements, e.g., freedom vs. order, or competition vs. co-operation, etc. And there can be policy disagreements or disagreements over the best way to attain certain desired ends: e.g., economic recovery (cut taxes, spend money on stimulus measures, etc. My answer is admittedly stating the obvious, which is why I think the question is strange.

 

There are plenty of Atheist who believe the earth is flat, i'm sure. But it is not their Atheism leading them to that conclusion.

Id also like to add my contempt for the use of 'Atheist' in contrast to religion.

There are Atheist religions.

 

yes, i was being a bit lazy there, i admit.

 

Why would someone feel threatened by a fact that doesn't pose a danger to them?

 

Why ask why? It doensn't make sense but they do. And the fact of difference does pose a danger to them, because it suggests that one's own belief-system and judgment can't be trusted. The very fact of difference can be a source of disagreement. Check out the men's issues forum, where debate is raging over which is better for a penis? cut or uncut.

 

It just goes to show how deeply we hold some beliefs.

And yes, I'm atheist in the latest meaning I've been taught, which is denying a personal, omnipotent, humanly conscious higher power.

 

Ego- the need to be the one who is right- it is necessary to convince everyone else that they are wrong- even when they are in agreement with you.

 

Because thats what I do when I don't understand something.

Because I am not content with being afraid of things.

Because if no one asked why, the earth would still be the center of the universe.

I really could go on.

You are right about this. Facts are dangerous to many peoples belief systems.

I just learned new meaning in the phrase "Laugh in the face of danger".

 

To agree without understanding.

Sounds like an emotional reaction.