I don’t think science and “god” are mutually exclusive in any way. I’m not religious. And I don’t see a face. But I can appreciate the grandness, the order and disorder, and also see something I’d call divine. If science, if everything as a whole, just being, isn’t “god” I don’t know what is.
We already have a word for everything. The word is ‘everything.’ No need to redefine what ‘god’ means to make it fit into the grandeur of the universe. It isn’t necessary at all.
Hmm. I don’t really like to use the term god, just for that reason. But “redefining god” is a weird idea to me, as everyone’s idea of it is probably different. My “god” is everything, and I call it whatever I want, but usually I don’t call it anything in particular. I’m just trying to state that that person’s view of this picture seeming “godly” is not off the mark at all imo.
I guess my real issue, obviously it’s not with you, is with the modern connotation of “god” as a sky fairy, when that’s not been my experience with it at all.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with talking about god, especially in this sense, and I don’t see the need to interject that this god is actually science, when it’s the same thing.
I’m an atheist, and it’s mostly a joke. The image becomes pareidolia for me, and I’m sure I’m not alone. Just because we have a scientific name for everything doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy comedic wordplay and poetic imagery.
It’s not god, it’s physics.
Don’t forget the chaos.
The chaos is also physics.
I don’t think science and “god” are mutually exclusive in any way. I’m not religious. And I don’t see a face. But I can appreciate the grandness, the order and disorder, and also see something I’d call divine. If science, if everything as a whole, just being, isn’t “god” I don’t know what is.
We already have a word for everything. The word is ‘everything.’ No need to redefine what ‘god’ means to make it fit into the grandeur of the universe. It isn’t necessary at all.
Hmm. I don’t really like to use the term god, just for that reason. But “redefining god” is a weird idea to me, as everyone’s idea of it is probably different. My “god” is everything, and I call it whatever I want, but usually I don’t call it anything in particular. I’m just trying to state that that person’s view of this picture seeming “godly” is not off the mark at all imo.
I guess my real issue, obviously it’s not with you, is with the modern connotation of “god” as a sky fairy, when that’s not been my experience with it at all.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with talking about god, especially in this sense, and I don’t see the need to interject that this god is actually science, when it’s the same thing.
100%
I’m an atheist, and it’s mostly a joke. The image becomes pareidolia for me, and I’m sure I’m not alone. Just because we have a scientific name for everything doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy comedic wordplay and poetic imagery.