User Tag List

First 2345614 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 150

  1. #31
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    I think you're underestimating the intelligence of spiritual people...as if there wouldn't be any such thing as religion if everyone had an IQ of 130. I think you're also underestimating the openness to new information of most scientific-leaning people.

    I don't think that the ideas of God and science have any conflict whatsoever. I think that some of the minor, conflicting dogma that divide various religions disagree with science. Things like creationism, the infallibility of the Pope, and the sanctity of certain animals. But those things only distract from the central argument. The general idea of a supreme being who created the universe and imbued people with eternal souls does not conflict with science at all. In fact, if there is a God, it seems to me that science would be his language, since that would have been the mechanism by which he created everything. I can only attribute failure to see this to stubbornness from entrenched proponents of both viewpoints that refuse to give an inch.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mempy View Post


    I've never understood why science and God couldn't both be true. For instance, the story of how God created the earth in seven days? What if one "day" were like a few hundred million years to us? Let's get more creative, people!
    I was curious about how long it will take to get this kind of replys.

    But I still disagre with your position.
    Lately this kind of arguments are more and more poplular but I think that entire thing doesn't work.

    As for argument about intellgent people and accepting new ideas.
    Intelligence does not metter here that much key part is education.
    When it comes to science, you need to learn something so that you are able to learn something else. Which you will then use to learn something new. Once you know that you can expand even more.

    Because of this genaral public can't fully understand what science says because of information that is needed to understand information which is needed to understand ..............................................

    There is no way you can understand it unless you actually become a scientist and even then you will understand only tiny part of knowledge.

    So I will create an argument and I know what I am going to say. It is just that I need time to type and make some parts more understandable.

    Idea of God is very complex one and it is hard to move it from status quo. Everything that is against it is complex, abstract(some pars more some parts less), there is plenty of counterintuitive ideas and ......

    I will try to do my best so show this spectre of ideas(that god does not exist) in more simple form and point on details that are hidden.
    But simplification could take it's tool.

    Then you can say that you agree or disagree with me.

  2. #32
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    But why are we to believe that ideas of God(s) and religion are capable of explaining the "why"?
    'Capable' isn't the right word to me. Religion is the methodology, just like science is the methodology. They can't do the same things as each other, and it would be foolish to depend on religion for the practical things (like say, medicine, or astronomy!). But not having something to fill in what science cannot offer leaves one incomplete. It doesn't need to be a religion, specifically - many fill it in with the awe of discovery and other such things - but they will tend to manifest into belief of some type.

    (In response to nightning as well Belief simply isn't good enough to survive on - we tend to call people crazy if it is. But imagination and so forth are just belief, of a sort. It's a fake simulation of the future, of what could be... of what isn't real. Between these lies 'normal' people... and all of the workings express themselves in both science and religion.

    The issue I have with religion is not that it isn't science, but that it too often pretends to be.

  3. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightning View Post
    Science is good at explaining the "how". How does something work? What's its mechanism of action? What are the steps involved to some process? All these things can be readily tested. But when it comes to "why". Science fails, as in epic fail. These things can't be tested, nor is science meant to handle such questions.
    I have often thought this myself. Part of why science and religion are compatible is that they satisfy different needs. One addresses the heart, and one the mind. But neither is happy unless they are the explanation for everything. Science, for all its truth and utility, is as much a religion as religion is. Because it is relied upon as a worldview instead of a tool.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    As for argument about intellgent people and accepting new ideas.
    Intelligence does not metter here that much key part is education.
    When it comes to science, you need to learn something so that you are able to learn something else. Which you will then use to learn something new. Once you know that you can expand even more.

    Because of this genaral public can't fully understand what science says because of information that is needed to understand information which is needed to understand ..............................................

    There is no way you can understand it unless you actually become a scientist and even then you will understand only tiny part of knowledge.

    So I will create an argument and I know what I am going to say. It is just that I need time to type and make some parts more understandable.

    Idea of God is very complex one and it is hard to move it from status quo. Everything that is against it is complex, abstract(some pars more some parts less), there is plenty of counterintuitive ideas and ......

    I will try to do my best so show this spectre of ideas(that god does not exist) in more simple form and point on details that are hidden.
    But simplification could take it's tool.
    This sounds remarkably like what a priest would say when one of his parishoners questions something dogmatic. "There there, it's not for you to understand. Take my word for it, noble savage."
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  5. #35
    Queen hunter Virtual ghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    This sounds remarkably like what a priest would say when one of his parishoners questions something dogmatic. "There there, it's not for you to understand. Take my word for it, noble savage."

    That is true I am not dening that it isn't. But I have no idea how to present this on any other way since politicly incorrect one happens to be truth.
    Also I can understand why you see arrogance in my post.
    I am not saying that you are unable to understand I am just saying that you will need years and years of learning to know more about this.

  6. #36
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightning View Post
    Science is good at explaining the "how". How does something work? What's its mechanism of action? What are the steps involved to some process? All these things can be readily tested. But when it comes to "why". Science fails, as in epic fail. These things can't be tested, nor is science meant to handle such questions.
    I've heard that too, and I've even repeated it. But now that I think about it, I'm not sure it's really true. Science isn't really just about explaining how -- it's about increasing reliability in what we understand, and both the WHY and the HOW is part of our understanding. So, if you make a claim about the "why," you should ensure that your claim is reliable, just for accuracy's sake. Science is compatible with asking why as long as we're still interested in reliability. If we choose to relinquish reliability, and instead take things on faith, then science becomes irrelevant.

    The failure of science to answer questions about why the universe exists isn't really a failure, imo. It's more of a discovery, namely, that there is no reason for existence that people are privy to. I think it's rather illuminating.

  7. #37
    ish red no longer *sad* nightning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INfj
    Posts
    3,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    This sounds remarkably like what a priest would say when one of his parishoners questions something dogmatic. "There there, it's not for you to understand. Take my word for it, noble savage."
    Well no... I don't see why the public cannot understand some basic science. I know some people have stigma whenever science is involved. But the basics can be explained using simple analogies. (Just head over to TED.com and you'll see what I mean.) The main issue right now is the outreach. Scientists have to push their findings to the public. At the moment, very few people are doing so. Instead, you have mostly quacks promoting unproven/bias information for profit. People complain about them but nobody is willing to go fix it.

  8. #38
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    The thing is, God could settle the debate with an appearance, but then he'd defeat his purpose. Catch 22. Once he [or we] prove him empirically, we destroy faith too, and thus the point of religion in the first place.



  9. #39
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    The thing is, God could settle the debate with an appearance, but then he'd defeat his purpose. Catch 22. Once he [or we] prove him empirically, we destroy faith too, and thus the point of religion in the first place.
    You think the point of religion is to have faith? Hrmm. I'm not so convinced.

  10. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightning View Post
    Well no... I don't see why the public cannot understand some basic science.
    I don't either. That's why I made that analogy for Antisocial One. The science education required to make a decision on whether you can reconcile your faith with the natural world is high school level. I don't think that you have to be halfway through a PhD in physics before it dawns on you that most religion isn't particularly scientific. I think that's just a dodge...it's a way to avoid accepting that people can understand how nature works and still be spiritual. It's much easier to act as if atheism is assured once you reach a given (and quite uncommon) threshold of knowedge.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

Similar Threads

  1. Does The Thought of God Not Existing Terrify You?
    By serenesam in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 04-01-2014, 02:46 PM
  2. The irrefutable existence of God
    By Zangetshumody in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 157
    Last Post: 08-02-2013, 07:52 PM
  3. Hologram theory and the existence of fate and/or God
    By Valiant in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-21-2012, 08:05 AM
  4. The central question of religion is not the existence of God?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-25-2012, 04:16 PM
  5. Replies: 96
    Last Post: 12-25-2008, 08:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO