Groening
I went and saw the Simpson's Movie at the Bear Tooth tonight.
It was of decent caliber. A few good Simpson moments in there.
They did go to Alaska and mix a bunch of the different cultures into one cohesive thought: Inuit -- name (Northern Canada/Greenland), Athabaskan -- clothing (interior Alaska), and Tlingit/Haida -- totem poles (Southwest Alaska/British Columbia).
But that was really beside the point.
My point was that I also got to see part of the Futurama Movie.
From the bits I saw of that I think I appreciated it more than the Simpsons.
It might just be that where reality can be suspended in the Simpsons, that it's more believable and funny for Futurama because of the notions of things that could possibly take place in the future. So those things that seem impossible in the Simpsons, might actually work in the future.
I think that's why I'm a futurist. I believe in the idea that we're here to better our future. Fuck religion. All it does is tell us how to act.
But what was acceptable in the past (or even recent past) isn't acceptable in the amount of turnover and evolution that's seen in our current culture's ability to change. If there is going to be a religion that cohesively binds humanity into their faction of "us vs. them" then it needs to be something that is fluid and can be easily malleable with a bit of cultural pressure.
I think the problem with religion is that it tries to make laws. Granted people need laws, but when they're written down, it's set in stone.
Maybe religion needs to be more like Wikipedia. Whatever fits for that time is how people are going to believe (read). I guess the problem is -- who would give that credibility -- something that changes so much.
That's why tradition is so important. If people are told something, they like that consistency.
Maybe if you could tell people that their beliefs should be changeable, then you'll have a perfect religion (i.e. 1984). The news changed as was seen fit and people would roll with it. It was only the smart man (who happened to be the protagonist)who was able to see his way out of it all -- to realize that it was all a lie.
Why is it that in an analysis like this, that government and religion seem so intrinsically tied. I suppose it's because both are forms of oppression.
The law keeps people forcibly in line by fear of Big Brother (which is actually somewhat tangible: police).
Religion does instills the same thoughts in people's head but with a bigger consequence -- any moment of time that follows death, which, well. Is a long time.
So they're using a time in your life, which actually isn't a time in your LIFE to pyschologically get you to do what the religion wants you to do with some intangible force that looms around you, every present, ever seeing. Again, Big Brother.
Why don't people see that there's a reason for the term theocracy to exist?
Sorry Matt for taking you out of the limelight.
Good work: Futurama!
It was of decent caliber. A few good Simpson moments in there.
They did go to Alaska and mix a bunch of the different cultures into one cohesive thought: Inuit -- name (Northern Canada/Greenland), Athabaskan -- clothing (interior Alaska), and Tlingit/Haida -- totem poles (Southwest Alaska/British Columbia).
But that was really beside the point.
My point was that I also got to see part of the Futurama Movie.
From the bits I saw of that I think I appreciated it more than the Simpsons.
It might just be that where reality can be suspended in the Simpsons, that it's more believable and funny for Futurama because of the notions of things that could possibly take place in the future. So those things that seem impossible in the Simpsons, might actually work in the future.
I think that's why I'm a futurist. I believe in the idea that we're here to better our future. Fuck religion. All it does is tell us how to act.
But what was acceptable in the past (or even recent past) isn't acceptable in the amount of turnover and evolution that's seen in our current culture's ability to change. If there is going to be a religion that cohesively binds humanity into their faction of "us vs. them" then it needs to be something that is fluid and can be easily malleable with a bit of cultural pressure.
I think the problem with religion is that it tries to make laws. Granted people need laws, but when they're written down, it's set in stone.
Maybe religion needs to be more like Wikipedia. Whatever fits for that time is how people are going to believe (read). I guess the problem is -- who would give that credibility -- something that changes so much.
That's why tradition is so important. If people are told something, they like that consistency.
Maybe if you could tell people that their beliefs should be changeable, then you'll have a perfect religion (i.e. 1984). The news changed as was seen fit and people would roll with it. It was only the smart man (who happened to be the protagonist)who was able to see his way out of it all -- to realize that it was all a lie.
Why is it that in an analysis like this, that government and religion seem so intrinsically tied. I suppose it's because both are forms of oppression.
The law keeps people forcibly in line by fear of Big Brother (which is actually somewhat tangible: police).
Religion does instills the same thoughts in people's head but with a bigger consequence -- any moment of time that follows death, which, well. Is a long time.
So they're using a time in your life, which actually isn't a time in your LIFE to pyschologically get you to do what the religion wants you to do with some intangible force that looms around you, every present, ever seeing. Again, Big Brother.
Why don't people see that there's a reason for the term theocracy to exist?
Sorry Matt for taking you out of the limelight.
Good work: Futurama!
