So I was reading Xenocide by Orson Scott Card and in it there is a discussion about the inner and outer universes. Which the inner universe represents what we deem outerspace, while the outer universe represents what the inner universe is expanding into. Now that got me thinking, what is the universe expanding into? There has to be some space that our universe is expanding into. NASA says however that there really is nothing outside of the universe. Well then, what the hell is the universe expanding into, if there is no extra space to expand into?!
Another thing, is there really such thing as a free will? At a conference I went to(NSLC) we had a ethics problem. During the whole problem, I realized that a majority in our group was viewing it from the standpoint of being under the gaze of an omnispent being, God if you will. If you believe in God, can you believe in free will? Is free will possible, if God controls everything and knows whats going to happen to you? Even what I was taught about God knowing everything, I was also told that sometimes stuff just happens. Well if thats true then there really isn't an omnisipent being. Or this omnisipent being knows what is going to happen, but you have the free will to not follow what is intended. Yet again, that screws up the idea of a all-seeing, all-knowing God because if It knows this, why can't It stop you from doing the wrong thing? Yes, we are "fallen", so does that mean that we had no free will til we ate from the tree of knowledge? If so, then intelligence is bad because God cannot keep us under Its power. It still remains to be seen however if free will exists or not. Understand what I say doesn't reflect my beliefs, these are just ideas that have popped into my head over the years.
I wondered about this too. It does seem that most discussions in the States involving ethical or egotistical questions sooner or later makes one understand that the majority in participation are discussing the issue under the premises of God's existence.
A professor asked us to argue for and against euthanasia before in a camp I was attending and I mentioned the fact that most people who are against euthanasia cite that it is morally wrong for religious reasons, mainly christianity. Nowhere has this issue created as much controversy as in the US, mainly because US still has greatest christian culture in the world. I argued that this stance was invalid because we cannot force people to be christians, in the same way we cannot use religion as a basis for moral rights or wrongs. I would apply this to abortion also. I do not find it fair that whilst western culture preaches tolerance, there is an underlying stretch of intolerance and a fear of liberty for the individual, often in politics which is suppose to be highly secular. It is a mass issue that, because it has slithered into the people's conscious, no one can place the blame on any one individual politian to have expressed a repression for freedom, for tolerance. This always exists under the guise of national security.
As I always say, I'm always seeking a way to thwart my author.
_______________________________
You have a concept of what you should be and how you should act, and all the time you are in fact acting quite differently; so you see that principles, beliefs and ideals must inevitably lead to hypocrisy and a dishonest life. It is the ideal that creates the opposite to what is, so if you know how to be with 'what is', then the opposite is not necessary.
J. Krishnamurti, Freedom from the Known