Murdering God, for fun and profit

Many would argue that it's impossible to destroy that which is omnipotent. However, I ask you to consider - God and religion seem to be under assault today. Outward signs of religousness, and even conservative beliefs are frowned upon, sometimes even shouted down by the non-believers. Modesty and decorum are diminishing rapidly in our society, to the point where civil debate is often not even possible. And now, even our most basic and sacred ideas themselves are under attack.

Prelude.

Successive approximation.

10,000 years ago, mankind believed that the world existed only to the nearest oceans. The warm sun appeared daily, and the weather got hotter and colder in a long cycle, or seasons. Smart humans noticed that this could be predicted by using the cycles of the moon. Very astute ones knew that planting seeds at the right point in the cycle allowed them to focus their resources into well timed large harvests. Humans refined how to determine when to plant, when to harvest, and how else to improve crop yields. They also developed a world navigation technique using the known positions of stars in the sky. These two sets of useful facts (of times to plant and harvest, and star navigation) were passed on for generations and their discovery and refinement was part of the birth of science. Once these theories became workable, mankind accepted them as fact.

1,000 years ago, the Earth was one large flat surface composed of both land and water, which had the Sun and planets revolving around it; it was the center of the solar system, perhaps even the universe. A Calendar had been developed, greatly facilitating planting and other, expanding human activities. Scientists had also developed models and mathematics describing the motions of the sun, moon and planets revolving around the Earth in elaborate detail. Giant mechanical devices were constructed that showed, with great precision, how the Sun and planets revolved around the earth, including “epicycles” to perfectly explain retrogrades and other strange observations. Similarly, intrepid explorers had fantastic success crossing our vast flat planet utilizing many facts of the day. Once these theories became workable, mankind accepted them as fact.

Today, the Earth, which is a sphere now, revolves around the sun as the third planet. The sun is revolving within an arm of a larger structure of stars, a spiral galaxy. Even our galaxy is locked in a much larger dance, intertwined with superclusters of galaxies, for as far as man, and our more sensitive instruments, can see. Mankind has had great success with his new facts regarding the Earth and Sun, exploring the entire surface of the planet, and out into space. And again, once these theories became workable, mankind accepted them as fact.

Important Science Fact Inserted by Science Editor: It should be noted that the Earth is not considered a sphere any more, the “Fact” of the matter is that the Earth is somewhat oblate due to its spinning, shaping it like a slightly squished ball. And no, wiseguy, we don’t think this just happened, we think it was like this for a long long time, even 10,000 years ago.

Dropping the bomb?

One of the most important attributes in determining the meaning, or relevance of any “thing” or “event” is its context. Is a nuclear bomb good or bad? If it exploded over a populated city, most would agree, it is bad. But if it explodes 100,000 miles over it, destroying an earthbound asteroid and saving the city, then it is good, most would agree. It’s the context of the exploding bomb that would count, in this case.

The same analogy applies to virtually any object, or event. For example a pot of coffee (poured on someone’s head, or into a cup?), or killing someone (murder, or self defense?).

This simple idea can be extended to determine the meaning, or relevance for even one very specific person as well. You. But we're getting ahead of ourselves a little bit here, so, let's get back to the bomb.

After all, when the atom bomb was constructed, the stage was set. It was ‘programmed’, and performed its task given its environment, and it’s constraints. Perhaps there were even some simple mechanical “choices”, or probabilities that could occur during, or after the weapons launch. Would a mounting strut inside the bomb bay fail, or perhaps a battery in the trigger? None of these probabilities actually did occur, and the first bomb used in warfare followed its planned trajectory, and detonated on a city.

And so, here you are. And again, the stage is set. You too were programmed shortly after construction by the culture that generated you, and are performing tasks, presumably, within your expected constraints. You may even have choices, although perhaps many were specifically set upon the stage for you. How much of your trajectory is traveled by simply following the path of least resistance now in front of you, upon this stage already set? What will you ultimately have done?

Consider;

Within only a few generations, the stage we are all born upon has changed dramatically.

Only a few hundred years ago, there were no cars. There were no computers. There was no television, or movies. There were no telephones. There was no running hot water. Taking a shower in the morning, eating breakfast, and going to work (among many other things), was quite different than it is today (“Hey honey, can you warm up the horse for me?”).

And there was also an angst, sometimes fear, caused by all of the mysterious, supernatural forces people encountered. Droughts, lightning, infestation, comets, disease, earthquakes, and many other forces of nature were interpreted quite differently than today. People behaved according to their knowledge and beliefs at the time. In some cases, witches were burned. These fears were not 10,000, or even 1,000 years ago. They were within the last 150 years.

Today’s vast accumulation of scientific knowledge is one of the main factors changing this stage; it brings a new, demonstrable “Scientific” context that more and more people are embracing, like the mystical beliefs of just a few hundred years ago, as if the new beliefs are real and absolutely true.

In the last century, our new science has ‘enlightened’ the stage, populating it with comforts and conveniences of all sorts. Mankind has rapidly climbed out of the ignorant and wretched darkness, in many, many practical ways.

And at the same time this new scientific context can provide comforts and solace (in that man has logical explanations for, and can control his environment to a remarkable extent), it is now being twisted, and in a sense, is being used to murder God. Not surprisingly, it’s being done for financial profit. And sometimes you can even see one of the actors express a hint of glee.

Murder God?! Now that’s a loaded statement! Before you label me a “Crazy, religious fanatic”, please, allow me to throw more gasoline on the fire; your life has been given an exact dollar value, and if the traditional concept of a soul actually does exist, it’s being “marginalized”, and soon will be merely a footnote.

And finally, before you pass judgement, I humbly assert the perhaps puzzling but true fact; I’m secular, and pro-science (the current dictionary definition of science), whether you believe it or not.

What are Science and Religion?

Seems obvious, right? Well, it turns out, it isn’t perfectly cut and dried. I checked a few dictionaries, and the differences in the meaning of these words, these ideas, seems significant. So, to have a common ground it’s important to get at least some basic definition of these two words before we get too far.

We’re not looking to try and corner, or box in either one, but just to get a shared description of them so we can examine things a bit closer. Without further adieu, here are a couple of common definitions of Science and Religion taken from modern day dictionaries;

What is Science?

Depending on the dictionary you read, the primary definition of science typically takes one of the following forms:

Study of the physical world. The study of physical and natural world phenomena, especially by using systematic observation and experiment. (msn dictionary)

or, a more “certain” definition (in another dictionary);

The state of knowing: knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding (Merriam Webster)

This second definition, in one of the best selling dictionaries, seems to be the connotation being more commonly used today (oddly, you might notice it’s occasionally accompanied with a hint of righteousness).

The difference between these two definitions is important; the two definitions cannot both be true at the same time because study is not like knowledge. Instead, study is to seek knowledge. This is similar to the difference between seeking a nuclear bomb, and having a nuclear bomb. So, they are two very different things. (Ask any despot or General!)

The big semantic question here seems to be, do we use the definition that science means study, or the other, that science means knowledge? We’ll start with the “knowledge” definition, something many would agree is synonymous with science today (ie; science does not seek nuclear bombs, science has nuclear bombs). If we run into problems, we can always fallback to the study definition.

What is Religion?

From the same two popular dictionaries;

beliefs and worship: people's beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life (msn dictionary)

Or again, phrased more forcefully ((Merriam Webster);

(1) the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

For the purposes of this work, the only quality in a definition of religion that we’ll need is that it includes the concept of “faith”, something I think most would agree is quite fundamental to religion.

What is truth?

Hey! The title of this chapter doesn’t include truth as one of the things defined. Whether our knowledge and beliefs include the truth or not, it’ll still be there. As it turns out, the concept of truth is important to our story as well. So, what is the definition of truth?

Something factual: the thing that corresponds to fact or reality

Or;

Fidelity, Constancy

Fidelity and constancy, both of these words essentially mean the same thing; unchanging. If something is really true, your description of it cannot change. For example, if I said “2+2=6” is true, and later discovered that it was not true, then my original statement was not true, or not “the truth”.

It’s critical to understand the two concepts about truth presented in this chapter, so I’ll summarize;

- Truth exists independently from your beliefs; it is reality itself. Ten Billion people can believe this chapter will only provide definitions for religion and science, but that does not make it “true”.

- Real truth always has the quality of constancy. An absolute truth, or real truth itself, does not change (how could it, it actually is true). This is meant in the sense from the example above, where I stated 2+2=6. That didn’t change the truth, since 2+2 did in fact still equal four, despite my belief. Ultimately, the truth did not change, instead it was my definition which was forced to change (which turned out to not be the truth).

Let there be (scientific) light

Now onto the real start of the story; let’s take a quick look at the state of science in the 1800’s.

Mankind had been making relatively slow but steady progress for a few hundred years, scientifically speaking. Electricity was recently discovered, and magnetism associated with it. Their newfound strange properties were difficult to explain with the knowledge of the day. The growing scientific community studied and experimented with these new phenomena, even detecting associated “waves” that moved through the air invisibly and could pass through solid objects. These observations were inexplicable by the science of the day, and were about to trigger the next scientific revolution.

In a flash, less than 30 years, mans understanding of how the universe “worked” from the galactic to the sub-atomic scales rocked through the scientific community like an earthquake. The revelations transformed our science dramatically, as if our earth had once again changed from flat to round.

In the beginning came Albert Einsteins “Relativity” discoveries in 1905; Matter and energy are related, even interchangeable in some ways. Further, Gravity is caused by objects with mass “warping space”, which is actually “spacetime”. Einstein gave us precise formulas that define these large scale behaviors of matter and energy. Resultantly, we’ve verified the bending of light around stars, found black holes, and developed nuclear weapons.

At the end of the flash came Erwin Heisenbergs “Uncertainty Principle” discoveries in 1927; atomic level properties are ‘interrelated’ in such a way, that we can not be “certain” about things like position, direction, or even time when observing things this small. Precise formulas define this subatomic Uncertainty very well. Resultantly, we have developed advanced technologies such as solid-state computers, superconductors, and so forth.

Interestingly, part of the genesis of the uncertainty principle was triggered by Einstein. In his studies of the Photoelectric effect, Einstein observed that light (photons) is only absorbed in certain packets, or quanta, based on its wavelength. Discovering this attribute of light led to Einstein receiving the Nobel Prize, and contributed to the development of quantum mechanics, and the uncertainty principle. It would be difficult to overstate the level of impact this single mans ideas ultimately have had on science, and resultantly, all of us.

Relativity and the Uncertainty Principle were about to take mankind from the steam engine to the space shuttle in only a couple of generations.

There indeed was a new, “scientific light”.

The Temple of Modern Science is built

By the end of 1927, the new science was completely born. Given the understanding of Relativity and Uncertainty, an unprecedented string of technological developments occurred rapidly in the physical science fields of electronics, photonics, nuclear technology, and others.

And the miracles of the new science manifested themselves into things like radio and television, X-rays and fluoroscopes, CFC’s for air conditioning, and more.

With each new discovery, our enlightenment grew and our ignorance diminished. With each small miracle brought to our lives, people began to believe in science more and more.

And suddenly, in 1945, to the shock of the world, there was an echo of that initial scientific flash of light: the “atomic bomb” was unleashed.

Mans new science was now undeniable; it had the power to destroy even man himself. It’s difficult to imagine how greatly people felt their world had changed upon waking up one morning to hear of this incredible new power (with its only definition being, powerful enough to destroy a city at once).

A war was won, and perhaps the future of mankind changed; but this was just a stop along the way to “smell one of the roses” our new science had given us. An inexorable array of technologies continued; advanced chemistry, microwaves and radar, solid state computers, superconductors, Teflon, lasers, and more.

And then, to our awe, in 1969 a man set foot on the moon.

With the thunderous roar of a Saturn Five rocket, science had thrust a man to the moon, and mankind fully into our new era. Our potential was limitless now, and it brought great hope to those who watched.

And the torrent of every day miracles continued to pour forth; cures for terrible diseases that have plagued mankind for eons, chemistry to improve our fuels and foods, portable gadgets of all types, to communicate, gather information, or just for entertainment.

And the new priests of the new temple were canonized, their works legendary: The book of Einstein; “The theory of Relativity”, The book of Darwin; “The origin of species”, the book of Heisenberg; “The Uncertainty Principle”, and so on.

The Temple was complete. The foundation made of solid depleted uranium. The walls composed of a stunning variety of advanced materials. A nuclear furnace churns within. From its spire, a brilliant coherent enlightenment shines outward, on to us.

People “believe” in gravity and the theory of gravity, people believe in lasers and coherent light, people believe in nuclear bombs and e=mc^2.

And now, the people believe in science.

Faith.

Intermission time folks. Trust me, this is the time to grab a drink, or some popcorn, because this short interlude is where the trains collide, well, sort of.

Earlier, we looked at the definition of Religion. I pointed out that an important component of it is faith. So, let’s get specific; what is faith?

belief or trust: belief in, devotion to, or trust in somebody or something, especially without logical proof

This seems like a pretty common definition today.

Editors Note: In case you missed it, the locomotives just collided. But don’t worry, the cars haven’t started piling up yet.

Faith?!

Faith? What about truth? I would have bet the case was being made that science is not truth, or knowledge! I mean, the foreword, slipping the definition of Truth in there with science and religion, choosing the “Knowledge” instead of “study” definition, and so on. So how do the trains collide at the word “faith”?

Developing practical knowledge, regardless of its truth, has become a fantastic new engine of profit in our society, with many new fortunes having been minted since the temple of science was founded. Top scientists are highly sought after, are able to expend billion dollar budgets, build enormous, sophisticated machines, and manage large staffs. Scientists do all of this, entirely paid for with other people’s money.

Consider;

Why would a rich man risk so much capital? What would it take to justify risking such enormous sums of money? Is discovery or invention an easily calculated, errorless equation, because science is composed of real truths, and the businessman really has no risk?

It would be difficult for any man, who seriously considers the history of science, to believe sciences “knowledge” is composed of entirely truths, and in general, is a “sure bet”. Recall, truth is constancy, and the history of science has shown that scientific theories clearly are not constant, or unchanging.

In fact, many believe science is simply successive approximation. If this is true, it’s quite possible, even likely, that not a single one of science’s theories are completely correct. Nonetheless, successive approximation has essentially marginalized truth in today’s world, where things simply need to be “close enough” to achieve practical results. Truth can slip away quietly now, our approximations are close enough for practical purposes.

So again, why would a rich man risk so much money on a bet that isn’t for sure, on the search for better, more useful or practical knowledge?

Consider;

A man walks over to his boss. He says, “Hey Boss, I’d like to build a billion dollar machine”. The boss says, “What on Earth for?” The man says, “I’m not sure, I’m searching for knowledge.”

There’s several possible responses from the boss at this point, usually beginning with a laugh, and possibly ending with “You’re fired. I suggest you pursue your ambitions working at the library.”

Alternatively, if the man told his boss that it was “To produce the first man-made gravitons, and enable us to develop the first anti-gravity engine”. Perhaps the boss would engage him in a discussion, and eventually begin funding the massive effort.

And this is where today’s scientific “faith” is borne; from the marriage of capitalism and science, each a willing parent, creating a trust between them along with a belief in something, and undertaking an endeavor together. It is done for two purposes; to learn about (on the scientific hand) and profit from (on the business hand) a specific idea, or thing.

It’s not really important whether any particular venture a scientist, together with a business, was successful or not; that’s not really the point.

However, what seems startling about this mutually beneficial relationship is that in much of today’s science, “The search for knowledge” includes “profit” as an integral, fundamental motive.

Interestingly, as a result of this science and business collaboration, each of the participants seems to be acquiring some of the others attributes. At a global scale, business is becoming a major engine of discovery. Also globally, science is becoming a major engine of profit. At more atomic scales, it would seem the practices of each, for better or worse, are also integrating.

In looking even closer at how faith and science are intermingling, it appears the new science requires a broader, more widespread trust and belief than only the businesses original faith in profiting. After all, someone must provide the profit.

So, the people must believe in, trust, and have faith in science and the myriad of products it produces, that they purchase and consume. If the people did not have this faith, the business and science partnership could not work, since there would be no profit.

People trust that their cell phones won’t explode on them, or cause cancer. People trust that the drugs they take will not cause a heart attack, or damage their kidneys. People believe television and radio waves, plastics and polymers, or even our milk and cookies (with chemical additives, incorporated genetic modifications, and irradiated processing) are understood, and are harmless.

And the people have placed a great faith in the temple of Science.

The Crucible.

OK, something is clearly wrong here!

First off, it appears that our accelerated scientific progress today requires faith, a good amount of it in the form of businesses having faith in a “return”, or a profit, and also from consumers of the science, in the form of believing that all of these miracles won’t harm us.

And so, if science is actually successive approximation, our closest estimates as of today, then we must have picked the wrong definition for science earlier. That probably explains what’s out of whack here!

Our alternative definition of science was that science is study, or seeking to obtain knowledge, more of a quest than actual knowledge, or truth itself. That would seem to explain most of this train wreck. So, this would mean that scientists, businesses, journalists, etc, don’t actually know all of these things, for sure, but have achieved workable results, and are no doubt continuing study.

But it seems that even “science is study”, or “the search for knowledge” isn’t sufficient enough to explain what science really is becoming today.

So what is today’s science then, and how could faith become so intrinsic to it?

Modern Science is not the “old science” anymore, it’s something else altogether. Changing the purpose of science has changed what science itself is; it does not match any of the definitions in today’s dictionaries in an important way.

So let’s describe what science appears to be turning into:

Science: The pursuit of practical knowledge, for profit.

It’s important to consider that changing the definition of any thing to include the words, “for profit”, may fundamentally change the thing itself. Clearly ideas like love, sacrifice, charity, forgiveness, or trust, all would be fundamentally different if profit was required.

And the “twisting effect” profit would have on these concepts appears to be the same as observed with science, or truth; close enough (practically speaking) for profit.

The Temples Toxic Fallout.

Mankind’s faith in his science has increased in direct proportion to the benefits he has received from it, and the benefits have been numerous and substantial, they permeate almost all aspects of our lives now.

But the “consumers faith” in the temple of science is different than the “business faith”. The business faith is primarily in the joint venture producing a profit. The consumers faith is in the benefits and safety of the product itself, with perhaps a little underlying faith in science “understanding what it is doing”, and the business not duping them somehow.

In reality, it appears the difference in the businesses faith and the consumers faith can be tangible. The business faith is in profit; the consumers faith is in benefit, with safety. Since products or technologies are actually developed in the hope of profit, they may not include a large amount of safety. Again, this difference in the nature of the two faiths can seem to manifest itself into something real, that can actually be touched, and felt.

Consider the following early inauspicious lesson, as business began driving modern science toward the search for profit;

One of the early technologies of the new science, electricity, was beginning to catch on. This magical source of energy could power lights, make small, smokeless motors work, and held unlimited promise. One day in 1889, a carpenter in Lyons, France accidentally contacted a 250-volt AC generator. Manmade electricity had killed its first man.

I’m in no way implying that the deployment of new discoveries for profit is destined to cause an occasional injury or death. Certainly science, and the carpenter, have progressed dramatically since man first “grappled with electricity”. Our knowledge is vastly greater; our rate of progress has accelerated dramatically, increasingly pumped by the engine of profit. Surely we are improving our science, technologies, and products all of the time.

Indeed, it appears science for profit has made significant progress from that first, primitive electrocution;

Our scientists and businesses develop nuclear weapons and technologies, and in developing and testing them in a profitable manner, later discover nuclear fallout, and the extremely toxic properties of nuclear materials and radiation; after many people suffer and die from the use of the discoveries.

And our scientists and businesses develop X-Ray and related technologies, in a profitable manner, producing the fluoroscope, and decades later discover it causing cancers and injuries; after many people suffered from the use of the discoveries.

And our scientists and businesses develop additives for our fuel, like lead, and in developing and testing it in a profitable manner, decades later discovered its toxicity, and caused us brain and nerve damage; after many people suffered from the use of the discovery.

And our scientists and businesses developed a “safe” replacement additive for lead, called MTBE, and, and in developing and testing it in a profitable manner, decades later discover it’s cancerous and toxic effects; after many people suffered from the use of the discovery.

And our scientists and businesses develop insulators, like asbestos, and in developing and testing it in a profitable manner, discover its toxicity and cancerous effects decades later; after many people suffered from the use of the discovery.

And our scientists and businesses develop food additives for us, in a profitable manner, and later discover toxic and cancerous effects in things like food dyes, and artificial sweeteners; after many people suffer from the use of the discoveries.

And our scientists and businesses develop chemicals, like CFC’s to cool our air, and refrigerate our foods, in a profitable manner, and later discover that CFC’s are destroying part of our atmosphere, causing skin cancer, and threatening our planet, decades after the use of the discoveries.

And our scientists and businesses develop medicines and drugs, to treat diseases of all types, such as headache remedies, or drugs to ease the pain of arthritis, and later discover them to be causing liver damage or heart attacks, after many people suffer and die from the use of the discoveries.

And yet somehow, defying conventional logic, despite all of the death, and all of the suffering, even the endangerment of our planet itself, the new science and business model retains its golden luster to the consumer, its hypnotic appeal, and its faith. And the people continue living the dream, believing the dream.

Some may attribute this to science having some sort of “Teflon” coating, but it should be pointed out that there has been recent concern regarding the toxicity of teflon as well.

The Monster Appears

But this ugliness is not the actual monster, it’s simply human wreckage we’ve noticed in its wake. The true monster has largely been invisible to us through a variety of increasingly sophisticated stealth techniques; obfuscation, shrouding, misdirection. And it has been feeding, growing stronger, more insidious, and more cunning.

Discovery, powered by ever increasing profits, was being held back to some extent by the relatively low initial “faith” of business (demonstrated as investment, and trust in profit), and comparatively slow feedback loop of business re-investing its newest found profit.

To increase profit, business would have to become more fleet.

And so, business became aware of how this cycle, this loop, affected profit, and has been “opening up the throttle”. By increasing its expenditures and reducing the time to market (regulatory oversight, testing, packaging, distribution, etc), the pace of this “cycle of discovery and profit” has steadily been increasing.

To amplify this cycle, and mitigate losses, business has conceived of, and implemented an ingenious strategy, “deferred liability cost capture”.

What is DLCC? Simply put, it means that many businesses now selling new technology products are calculating in probable future liability costs, and having us pay for them as we buy the products.

To further reduce the overall length of the product development cycle, business is calculating its DLCC using ever shorter and shorter product safety testing cycles, and simply increasing the DLCC factor used in the profit equation. This strategy has the effect of freeing up R&D “pipelines” to pump more products through, thus increasing profit.

Whew, that sounds complicated!

Put simply, increasing values of DLCC means; to fuel increased profits, the consumer is unwittingly doing more and more of the product safety testing, and even paying the business to do it, both with their money, and it appears sometimes, with life or limb. And the businesses know this, that’s why they calculate DLCC (because it’s important to profit).

As a sign of the rise of DLCC, and again defying conventional logic, in 2001 corporate liability settlements exceeded research spending. Practically speaking, and ignoring the sanity of the whole idea, it probably won’t take very many years to achieve the most profitable, sustainable ratio; business and science are remarkably effective at solving equations like this, when profit is at stake.

Genetically modified food, cloned animals, supercollider’s, and more. Science and business march on, together.

And now, tens of millions of people take new drugs, for example, the cholesterol reducing drugs, called “statins”. And the people place a great faith in their science and business.

And now, hundreds of millions of people use, and live in close proximity to ever increasing frequency (1+ GHZ) phones, electronic gadgets, and home networking technologies, passing many “watts” of high frequency energy through their bodies much of the time. And the people place a great faith in their science and business.

And now, the businesses have calculated in the potential liability costs, and are having us pay for our own injuries and deaths ourselves. They’ve also devised and developed complimentary business strategies, and taken legislative steps to further reduce potential liabilities (such as a one year limitation to filing lawsuits against drug companies, and statutory settlement limitations).

And so the new technologies affecting your life shall continue to come to market faster and faster. And the more profitable, more cunning monster will soon be everywhere around us, wrapping more tightly around every aspect of our lives, seeking yet more profit every day.

But the title of this story is not “Murdering Man: for fun and profit”. So, let’s move on, to something that hasn’t been turned into a number to be crunched in a margin of an accountant’s spreadsheet.

So how could God, the omnipotent, Supreme Being himself possibly be affected, never mind murdered, by any of this? Is there some secret weapon of the new science for profit?

Murdering God

“God - the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshiped as creator and ruler of the universe”

There are many definitions of god, it seems the most variable one of all we’ve looked at so far. Out of all the beliefs in god, among many cultures, I’m only going to pick one attribute, which seems fairly common; worship.

Worship makes sense as an attribute of god across most cultures, certainly here in western cultures. I don’t know if god himself requires it, or if it is for our own sake, but again, it seems true in real life observations, god is worshipped, although it seems less and less each day.

And of course, without worship, god is not god anymore, given that our god, by definition, is worshiped.

The chain of events leading to his impending demise can finally be summarized as;

In the past, man placed the bulk of his faith in God. As science has given us knowledge and many miracles, mankind is shifting much of his faith to science.

But science is seeking profit.

And so, man is shifting his faith from god to profit.

And if god is worshipped no more, and man has all of his belief, his trust, and his faith invested in science for profit, the god that is worshipped will not be.

But perhaps formal worship will return again (provided there is a profit in it, of course). Perhaps one day people will be born, live their lives, and die worshipping a different god, one defined in dictionaries as;

God - the Being perfect in profit, who is worshipped by man

Epilog.

And this is the stage you've been placed upon, which now has a stunning technological background (instead of a mystical background). Your faith, they now say, should be placed in science.

But it appears that if you look carefully, science is not what it seems; it's not what's written in the dictionary, it's not what our parents told us it is, and it's clearly not something pure and altruistic, such as the pursuit of knowledge (at least todays science isn't).

I ask you to reconsider a statement I made at the beginning of this story; I asserted that it was possible to determine the meaning of a specific person, you.

Although it's a lifelong journey to fully determine your meaning, it's important that the first few steps be chosen carefully; they'll form a basis, a context, a background from which you'll choose the direction that you walk for the rest of your life.

And as one of those important first steps, perhaps the most important, I ask you to choose a direction; will you believe that science, todays science, is what should define you?

Or will you believe that it's something else?