athests: do u just follow science,man made laws and go with flow rules?
542482
No. I think for myself. Science has a large number of self-correcting proceedures, so I think it will eventually get the correct answers once enough data is in. But science itself does not deal with morality, just existence. \nFor morality, I look at what hurts people and society and what helps people and society. I look for promotion of learning, art, literature, and love between people. I look to promote the type of world that I would like my daughter to live in: one that is open to new ideas, that doesn't ostrasize people for who they love, and that protects those that are in need of protection. This often means I don't 'go with the flow'.
1034148
I think you are on the right track..... just go with the flow.
548150
I wasn't there to know. but I think that Safety and health are created by God. So he doesn't need to work by their laws. because with out him there wouldn't be any thing to put laws into
930197
go with the flow if it happen then it does if not don't stress it
80190
'superstitions' as it suggests: not yet proven science.\nso, no. \nbut somehow, you are obliged to follow relatives' or family's way of life. it's the basic respect for others' beliefs.\nso, there...
530732
Of course, you have to follow the laws.
179261
Just go w/ the flow.  That's how I scored.
511667
Sorry friend. Doesn't look like many people do out here in cyber space. Tell me, what IS a flow team?
762444
That is their own man made law
518447
I guess for Intellgent Design, one of the wonderful things about not actually being science is that you aren't bounded by the same rules, obligations and constructs.\n\nAs a result, they can shift and move anyway the (political) wind blows.  Good for them, bad for rational thought and society.
363716
For an engineer you have committed an uncommon error -- creating a general rule based purely on a limited (and likely flawed)sample. \n\nIn your own words: "I have never met a computer programmer... who had any real engineering skills(or an real engineering degree)."\n\nIs not THE foundational principle of Engineering that only calculable, repeatable, verifable infomation should be the basis for decisions?\n\nI assure you there ARE plenty of people who "write code" that have REAL enginnering degrees, those degrees may be in the traditional engineering disciplines of ME, EE, CE, ChemE as well as Industrial Engineering, Systems Engineering, Software Engineering, and other fields from schools as "hard core" as Georgia Tech, Carnegie Mellon, MIT, Purdue, Univeristy of Illinions, Cal Tech or others. Typically people with such skills are much more likely to be found in highly techincal fields, were their skills are more valuable. You certainly would want not the same person hacking together a website that you would trust to write the code that guides the Space Shuttle, manages doses of gamma radiation, or powers the internal workings of life-safety communication equipment.\n\nComputer Science is a field of study that has existed at the University level for over fifty years. While the logic contructs that are its underpinnings are shared by both fundamental mathematics and linguistics, its reliance on technolgy set it distinctly apart from those related fields -- just as chemistry & physics share many foundational tenants one deals primarly with the constituents of matter while the other deals with its motion/energy.\n\nVirtually all complex software can be reduced to a small decision tree, just all virtually all engineering problems can be reduced to simple calculations, yet I wonder if engineers who oversee pot hole repairs need to rely on as robust a set of calculations as those who construct bridges that span San Francisco Bay?\n\nThere ARE standards to become a Licensed Professional Engineer in CE, ME, EE, ChemE, and there are standards  for those interested in Computer Engineering as well. I suspect that the number of CEs that are LPEs far far exceeds those who are Software Engineers...\n\nRight now I know of no "search engine" that can tell me instantly how many engineers are in the US and the world. Further there is no simple query that I know of that would separate out those that are restricted to "computer code writers". I suspect that if and when such search engines and query facilites are built it will be by those who have a thorough knowledge of both Computer Science and Engineering...
120963
every one has his own test.be normal.men dont like artificials.
411858
You are controlling your life.  Deciding to go with the flow is your own decision. Even doing nothing about a situation is making a decision (to do nothing).  Don't be so hard with yourself.  I was well over 30 before I decided what I wanted to do.  Stick it out if you can.  At least with that subject you will learn alot about yourself (and therefore others).  If you can't stick it out then leave, and when you do learn what it is that makes your heart sing - go for it, get the qualification then - like I did.\nGood luck
97990
simple, follow their rules.
636102
I think you are going the right way about it already.\nEvery system you try will have flaws. Most sciences overlap into other sciences. Just look at Archaeology, anthropology and forensic science. Just these three can be intertwined. Just go simple else you will have a mammoth task and a diagram that will confuse you as much as those you show it to.\nI don't envy your task but would be interested to see the outcome.\nCOP OUT
1004184
churches are manmade as are their rules.  Following your own heart in spirituality is your best barometer of a successful life.  Why worry about their rules?  Create your own life and be the best you can be.
743412
I believe in Hume's Fork:\n\n "Either our actions our determined, in which case we are not responsible for them, or the result of random events, in which case we are not responsible for them."\n\nIf you apply physics, matter is confined to follow certain laws.  We are all composed of matter as well as the things around us, as well as certain other laws.  But the infinite amount of interactions between our bodies, our environment, mind, and matter are too vast to ever calculate or predict.  It is useless to even ponder the question of destiny.  \n\nHowever, the theory of quantum physics implies that quarks (pieces of atoms) are dynamic particles that are not confined to any laws and can actual pop in and out of existence.  There interaction with other particles does affect their actions as well.  The quantum theory is  a theory, and by no means can anyone  base such a question of destiny on analysis of the movement of atoms.\n\nIn layman's terms, we don't have free will to the extent of being able to directly decide what we will do in the future, there is no one  decision making soul or 'me' that hits the execute button before an action is made.  But we do have a brain system that carries out processes of analysis that takes part in making a final decision.  But the processes at this time are too complex to map out nor to pin-point one major influence because the influences on our behavior are too vast.  The two basic ones are nature, nurture.  Others environment, genes.