God and BSG - an atheist rant

Television, Movies Games and Books BSG-2003
#21

I agree wholeheartedly. I’m an Atheist as well and I found the ENTIRE thing to be utterly captivating, even on a baseline conceptual level. Especially after reading what Mr. Moore said in the postmortem Q&A. The part where he talked about All Along The Watchtower specifically.

Baltar’s speech was also wicked fantastical. “Whether we want to call that God, or Gods, or Some Sublime Inspiration or a Divine Force we can’t know or understand, it doesn’t matter.”

It’s almost NOT “religious” in a way. It’s something eternal and in the end it doesn’t matter what anyone calls it, it just is.

You had at least 3 seasons to bail out :rolleyes:

#22

Wow. Lots of comments. Most very interesting and reasonable.

I titled this post a ‘rant’, and stuck it in the non-BSG thread area deliberately. I didn’t expect much response…

I was still… angry is not the right word… dissatisfied… empty… upset… yes, that’s it… with the denouement.

I did not have a problem with religion in BSG for 4.19 seasons. It was wonderfully ambiguous; much like our ‘real’ world. The so-called ‘mystical’ events could be explained away, either rationally, or as dramatic licence. The ‘heads’ to me remained internal psychological manifestations: their knowledge of the world, their real influence was minimal (as OT has argued strongly), the apparent physical manifestations ambiguous.

Prophesy was as prophesy is. Gibberish which can be taken any way one likes - especially in hindsight.

There were some events (especially the supernova) which hinted at more, but dedicated a-theistic types like me could dismiss them.

But all this was blown away at the end. The carefully layered subtlety, the hints, the coincidences, the concept of leaving interpretations of the mystical to the individual, this was destroyed by the clumsy final reveal.

The years of generally pretty-good science were crushed with the ill-conceived, and clearly impossible (from an evolutionary viewpoint) arrival on earth in our recent past, and discovering other genetically-similar-enough humans.

You see, it wasn’t the god-or-no-god which got me: it was the massive inconsistency with what had gone before.

There could easily have been reveals to satisfy both the most rabid theists and the mystics, as well as the grouches like me. Simply arriving on earth 8000 years into our future would have left the main science intact. And not had any deleterious impact on the existence of god, heads, etc. By firstly having the Head Six and Head Baltar stand next to, but not acknowledge each other, and then later not interact together, the mystery about what they were would have still remained. Strong arguments for internal as well as external agents, real or imaginary, could still have been made.

Why was the end so UNSUBTLE? BSG, for years eschewing so many traditional American TV norms and tropes, suddenly caves at the end with explicit and overt explanations when it has never done so before? Moore reverting to STTNG form?

So… it was in this context I wrote my rant here - jumping on an (obviously) favourite hobby horse of mine as a vehicle of my dissatisfaction. Hopefully you may note my posts in other threads to be slightly less strident… :slight_smile:

PS

Again, thanks folks for all the fascinating comments. GWC has always been so tolerant and polite - even in heated arguments - far better than any other forum in which I have participated. MissM, Cas, OT, HotChicken, and many others have crossed swords with me over the months, and we have all maintained wonderful respect for each other, and a lack of rancour or personal abuse. Well, apart from that godless Sandstorm idiot…

#23

Incidentally Mr Sandstorm, it’s nice to see that you made it through the fires down there as well, even if you are a bit of a grump. :wink:

#24

Hehehe… thanks mate. I’m in centre of city so there was no danger, but ‘by the gods’ it was hot!!! 47 degrees one day (the worst of the bushfires that day), the highest ever recorded here.

As for my grumpiness… well… lots of factors, particularly including the end of the best television series I have ever seen… sigh… But that’s no excuse. Call me Victor.

#25

Oh, get over it. :stuck_out_tongue:

Just kidding, of course. I agree with you on this (not on the Sitrep thing, though. I never bothered with the discussion threads there, so I just visit for news and links to Maureen Ryan’s column).

#26

Interesting take. I do find it interesting that, even though it was the Cylons who were right about theology, the colonial view still remained strong as they settled on earth, given the history of religion on our planet.

(Was the Pharaoh Akhnaten a cylon, then?) :rolleyes:

#27

I shouldn’t quote the entire post, but it’s so good…

anyway, I don’t think the ending was necessarily UNSUBTLE about the nature of the divine in BSG. Baltar’s speech in CIC was ambiguous. “I may be mad,” he says to Cavil, accepting the possibility that his experience of the divine may very well be delusional combined with a series of surprising coincidences. The “big” prophecy of the opera house turned out to be nothing more than a sort of hyper-projection or a foreshadowing of the final showdown in CIC. (I loved that. A big, mysterious prophecy that turned out to be about nothing at all but the impulse to keep a little girl safe.) Up until the fade out with Adama on the hill, it’s still pretty ambiguous.

The problem comes, I’ll admit, after the fade-out. The present day epilogue substantially changes the tone of what came before (not just in the finale, but the entire series) and is problematic in its platitudes. I’m willing to ignore the problems, though, simply because of the line “you know he doesn’t like that name,” which to me implies a breaking of the fourth wall where Ron Moore is the name God prefers, Ron Moore, as show runner, being, essentially, the God of the universe of BSG (I haven’t finished RDM’s podcast yet, so I don’t know if this was intended. Even if it wasn’t, this is a reading that I think is invited by RDM’s cameo at the beginning of this scene and I’m sticking with it).

The science behind the arrival of humanity on earth and what that would mean for human evolution, etc. is another matter, and is, indeed, a little off key to how science was treated throughout the series (not entirely, though. There is no sound in space, after all, and flying anywhere near a singularity would probably tear you apart much, much sooner than what we saw, not to mention the impossibility of faster than light travel and artificial gravity). I’m willing to suspend my disbelief there in the name of artistic license, because it gives the characters the ending I feel they deserved AND it allows for a cleaner, closed ending that does not require either 1. having had the civilization on THIS earth have been completely wiped out, as in “Revelations,” or 2. dealing with earth-bound humans having to deal with the sudden arrival of a bunch of other humans from beyond the solar system, either of which would be necesssary were the show set in the future (though option 3. the earth of “Revelations” is OUR earth and the fleet ends up on another planet at the end could’ve been a possibility, though one that, ultimately, given the show’s mythology, would’ve been far less satisfying, dramatically, than the ending we now have).

In the end I take comfort in the knowledge, as I’ve said elsewhere, that art need not concern itself with facts but, rather, with truth. That scientific fact doesn’t quite jibe with the ending of the series is not that important so long as the ending is true to what the series has said about humanity and its place in the universe, which I think it does.

That’s just my two cents, adjusted for inflation, of course. :smiley:

#28

While I was happy with the reveal of real spirituality and a “god” influence, Im inclined to agree with RSS and Armando concerning the lack of subtilty in the very end act of the show. I dont do so because I am upset that it flies in the face of evolutionary theory (as I dont believe in evolution to that degree), but rather that it forced us to connect with the show on very blunt and forceful terms. And I will admit that it defies some of my world view and so that makes it difficult for me to connect with the very end of the show in contrast to how I was able to connect so deeply in previous episodes and seasons. I think the ability to interpret the meanings of elements in the show for ourselves is what made its messages so important and profound, but taking away that ability at the end sort of made me feel robbed.

But with all that said and to be totally honest, when I get right down to it I think nothing upset me more than flying Galactica off into the sun.

#29

I would hope people would have seen it as light-hearted, that certainly was my intent.

Honestly though, I think that people who are that “hardcore” for lack of a better word need a lesson in suspension of disbelief if they have any hope of enjoying this show. It’s been discussed many a time on GWC that, in this imaginary universe, religion and prophecy have real-world implications. And like Armando said, I think RDM went to great lengths to make it ambiguous, with Baltar’s speech, and Head-Baltar saying “You know it doesn’t like that name” at the end.

I don’t think that coming to Earth 2.0 “8000 years into our future” would have afforded them the same opportunity to bring full-circle the “All of this has happened before, and all of it will happen again” theme. Plus, with the current geopolitical climate, I’m not so sure that Earth won’t be a nuked wasteland in another 8000 years’ time.

#30

Evolution is not a belief system.

#31

Its not? Then what would you say that it is?

#32

A process that has been observed in action.

#33

Evolution is a scientific theory, based on empirical data. Its evidence-based nature makes it the polar opposite of a belief system.

#34

Since I didnt specify to which degree I believe and dont believe in this “process” I cant help but see your response as a knee-jerk reaction.

Its evidence-based nature (which I dont agree with) makes it evident (to those who interpret it as so) at best, making it unable to be proven and requiring it to be belived in.

#35

Well, the great thing about science is that it doesn’t bend to the ideology of a single person. The evidence is there, whether you choose to educate yourself or remain willfully ignorant of it.

An interesting viewpoint, though. Do you also believe that everything that wasn’t directly observed cannot be understood through evidence?

#36

Knee jerk reaction to an honest answer to your question? You asked what evolution is if it isn’t a belief system. It is an observed process. That is the simple, non-political answer to your question. So I’m not quite sure what “knee-jerk” you are referring to.

If I had wanted to go into a knee-jerk response I would have pointed out that there is more evidence for evolution than there is for the theory of gravity. I refrained from doing so because it really had no place in the answer to your question.

#37

Thank goodness it doesnt, its bad enough it has been caught doing it to groups of people. I am not going to compare acedemics or resort to pissing contests as such over it, but I have educated myself and continue to do so, and I am most certainly not “willingly ignorant” as you say. Typical personal jab as a defense though - nice

As I previously stated, such things can only be made evident.

#38

If one is looking for an example of evolution in action, one such evolutionary leap was observed last year in a strain of E. Coli.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.html

You see, iGhost, a scientific theory makes predictions which are testable. This is what separates scientific theory from a belief or philosophy.

#39

Ok I apologize, I misunderstood the direction your response came from. Then I modify my response as a question of what part/kind/type of evolution are you referring to when you say it is an observable process?

#40

Since I was never asked to clerify, now seems like a good time to mention that I have no trouble with the idea of adaptation or “micro-evolution” for a lack of a more popular name, but macro-evolution is something i just dont buy and I dont think that the prior makes the latter imminent. It is not testable.