Tech Support Guy banner
1 - 20 of 216 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,583 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The idea of this thread is to illuminate the tension between Science and Religion - which should not be a problem within CD ;) - I hope I won't have to eat those words. All points of view welcome.

Here is the lead article which captured my interest to start this thread followed by a link to a new post I just made this morning in The Philosophy Thread that provides either illumination and/or raw material for your subsequent arguments. Let the fun begin! :)

Must science declare a holy war on religion?.

The so-called New Atheists are attacking the mantra of science and faith being compatible. Others in the science community question the value of confrontation.

Link in post#50 in The Philosophy Thread (a Carl Sagan perspective discussed by Prof. Massimo Pigliucci, a philosopher at the City University of New York).

-- Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,286 Posts
The idea of this thread is to illuminate the tension between Science and Religion - which should not be a problem within CD ;) - I hope I won't have to eat those words. All points of view welcome.

Here is the lead article which captured my interest to start this thread followed by a link to a new post I just made this morning in The Philosophy Thread that provides either illumination and/or raw material for your subsequent arguments. Let the fun begin! :)

Must science declare a holy war on religion?.

The so-called New Atheists are attacking the mantra of science and faith being compatible. Others in the science community question the value of confrontation.

Link in post#50 in The Philosophy Thread (a Carl Sagan perspective discussed by Prof. Massimo Pigliucci, a philosopher at the City University of New York).

-- Tom
interesting topic :up:
as much for the tension in scientific circles wrt religious interpretations, as to the religious interpretations of science themselves......

for now, i'll leave the latter to the evo thread ;)

from the times article
Who in the United States will read Dawkins' new book (or ones like it) and have any sort of epiphany, or change his or her mind?
the answer, imo, is "probably not"....i joined the dawkin's forum a while back...mostly 'cause there were some ongoing discussions of "cultural genes" -memes- that i thought might be fun particpate in

i was disappointed, and never really stopped to look at "why"
the sagan article you posted helped some with that...unlike so many Dawkins' enthusiasts
Sagan’s tone is always measured and humble, and yet he delivers (metaphorically) mortal blow after mortal blow to the religious in his audience.
Sagan speaks to the wonder of science, and uses it as a bridge to touch the religious....and his message is powerful, imo.....
"“And this vast number of worlds, the enormous scale of the universe, in my view has been taken into account, even superficially, in virtually no religion, and especially no Western religions.”
which is something that has always bugged me about western religious thought....it postulates a god, and then makes man the equvialent of it's cosmic "sun" around which it orbits.....taking the physical assumptions of the pre-copernican universe, with the earth at the center of what could be seen, and translating those assumptions into a relationship between a creator and man......

essentially dismissing the true wonder of "what is"

thanks for this tread, Tom....CD needs a breath of fresh air :up:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,159 Posts
thanks for this tread, Tom....CD needs a breath of fresh air :up:
You got that right iltos, but whether it's another bloody religion thread is another question. How many times is it possible to say the same things without even a hint of understanding the sheer futility and ennervating stupidity of the process. It's all been said here before! Everybody knows who will be the main protagonists in this thread, and what their positions are, so what is the point?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,583 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Hi Bob,

My own point-of-view on the topic (repeated here) is that Science and Religion are just two different sides of the same coin. My belief requires faith in both Science and Religion. ;) Ya can't buy anything with the "coin" - it only has intrinsic value for those whom adopt it.

-- Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,286 Posts
You got that right iltos, but whether it's another bloody religion thread is another question. How many times is it possible to say the same things without even a hint of understanding the sheer futility and ennervating stupidity of the process. It's all been said here before! Everybody knows who will be the main protagonists in this thread, and what their positions are, so what is the point?
heh....yeppers
being human, we like to dig trenches, and lob things out of them :D
i still applaud those who take all that dirt and build hills instead, tho :up:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,286 Posts
Hi Bob,

My own point-of-view on the topic (repeated here) is that Science and Religion are just two different sides of the same coin. My belief requires faith in both Science and Religion. ;) Ya can't buy anything with the "coin" - it only has intrinsic value for those whom adopt it.

-- Tom
:)
true
tho i was thinking that sagan's strenght -which is, to me the strenght of scientific inquiry- is just in appling that inquiry to an examination of the coin, and seeing that it has two sides :cool:

:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,161 Posts
Just one excerpt,
Or as Myers put it to fanatical Catholics at one point: "Don't confuse the fact that I find you and your church petty, foolish, twisted and hateful to be a testimonial to the existence of your petty, foolish, twisted, hateful god."
has me smiling. Reason being that it seems ironic that it is exactly the same Catholic church (the Vatican) that Protestantism broke away from that nowadays acknowledges evolution and finds means to accommodate it within its faith system. With limitations maybe but they have no problem in admitting that creation did NOT happen in six days and NOT 6000 years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,159 Posts
heh....yeppers
being human, we like to dig trenches, and lob things out of them :D
i still applaud those who take all that dirt and build hills instead, tho :up:
It would just be a bit more imaginative though if the battlefields could be shifted away from religion and politics occasionally. But valis has already raised this so there's no point in banging on about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,286 Posts
Just one excerpt,

has me smiling. Reason being that it seems ironic that it is exactly the same Catholic church (the Vatican) that Protestantism broke away from that nowadays acknowledges evolution and finds means to accommodate it within its faith system. With limitations maybe but they have no problem in admitting that creation did NOT happen in six days and NOT 6000 years ago.
yeah well....they had to deal with those silly scientist types, with their home made telescopes and blasmaphous theories....it's much easier if we're just riding around on the back of a turtle.....
forced a jump start of the THEOLOGY towards reality, mebbe....if not it's practice. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,161 Posts
yeah well....they had to deal with those silly scientist types, with their home made telescopes and blasmaphous theories....it's much easier if we're just riding around on the back of a turtle.....
forced a jump start of the THEOLOGY towards reality, mebbe....if not it's practice. :)
Nice:D

Guess the Roman church just had more evolution;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,286 Posts
Guess the Roman church just had more evolution;)
seriously....mutations among believers :D
which -kinda, sorta, maybe, not really- leads to this
you strip away all the ritual and pomp and rhetoric of religion -and ignore for the moment all of Carlin's brillaintly cynical visions about it.....and what'da'ya got left?

hope?
the "promise of eternal life" (complete with friends and family and your favorite beverage/music/sexual fetish) hope?

is it too oblique a thing to say that hope is essentially the same as wonder?....the wild eyed, hold-something-in awe kind of wonder that brings out childlike innocence and joy..... the wonder that grabbed sagan, without forcing him to sell his scientific soul?

a coin has two sides, but both are made of the same thing.....hopefully, both religious maturity and scientific childlikeness can find it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,161 Posts
seriously....mutations among believers :D
Perish the thought:eek: :)
which -kinda, sorta, maybe, not really- leads to this
you strip away all the ritual and pomp and rhetoric of religion -and ignore for the moment all of Carlin's brillaintly cynical visions about it.....and what'da'ya got left?

hope?
Sure, why not?
the "promise of eternal life" (complete with friends and family and your favorite beverage/music/sexual fetish) hope?
Not my scene. The sexual fetish bit maybe but the rest?:(:D But how about hope for this life? Maybe for the life of our kids (although we won't be around for the greater part of it)? Sorry, I digress. You know I'm not religious.

is it too oblique a thing to say that hope is essentially the same as wonder?....the wild eyed, hold-something-in awe kind of wonder that brings out childlike innocence and joy..... the wonder that grabbed sagan, without forcing him to sell his scientific soul?
I like the analogy.

a coin has two sides, but both are made of the same thing.....hopefully, both religious maturity and scientific childlikeness can find it.
....maybe even unreligious maturity and scientific childlikeness:up:

Believer or not (not) I've never understood the necessity of either fraction having to war on the other. Nor the desire by some to refute religion by science or science by religion. The belligerents (some) on both sides only confirm the fears of the opposite (some) sides. And confirm them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,286 Posts
Not my scene. The sexual fetish bit maybe but the rest?:(:D But how about hope for this life? Maybe for the life of our kids (although we won't be around for the greater part of it)? Sorry, I digress. You know I'm not religious.
ain't my thread....but i don't feel you digressing at all...
break it down (hip hop, hip hop) :D

i don't consider myself relgious at all, but i don't hesitate to associate with "sprituality"
i can go off about what i believe "god" to be (if your foolish enough to ask...the short answer is that it ain't god) but it's fundamentally unimportant to my world view...all that is important is the certainty -the "ephiphany delivered through the birth canal of experience"- that there is something going on that works in the periperhals of my vision, and it's just as significant a part of "me" as anything my brain can come up with.

and it puts that ball-o-string called hope in this life...this moment....and it's future.
and that's enough hope for me.

and a good chunk of that collected string is scientific...in both the sense of this thread, and the sense of observation, testing, and applicable proofs.
 

·
Retired Trusted Advisor
Joined
·
5,465 Posts
I agree that it is a question of different but equal, and really think the debate is as absurd as a squabble between the hunting spear and the fishing rod. The wasted time and inflicted wounds are both illogical and immoral (so shame on both sides!) The conflict, in my opinion, arises due to a confusion in terms and stems from the idea that the (apparently) Scientific theory of Evolution is perfectly equal to science (Science==Science.Evo...Any OO programmers see the bug here?) and therefore anyone who believes in a creator God has to hate science as viciously as certain muslim terorists hate America and certain members of this site loath Microsoft.

Clearly that is not so. As a Christian I can see nothing immoral with penecilin, asprin, smallpox vaccines, and donating blood; nothing immoral with the motor car, and of course nothing immoral in the computer. NOW BY CONTRAST there are "christian"* groups who consider some of those things to be wrong, the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mennonites being prominent examples. There are some things made possible through Science that I would agree should not be, like internet Porn or nuclear missiles. However those matters must be threshed out by and only by religion--science is as ill equipped to do so as an angler to correct and instruct a throwspearsman.

What is interesting is that when you look at what Christianity has a right to say (which means accepting the words of the Bible and it's take on moral or philosophical questions) and what Science has a right to say (that is such things as can be quantified, analyzed, hypothesised about and have hypothesis validated about) there is a surprising amount of correlation. In so much as the Bible is an authority on the physical world and in so much as Science can measure Supernatural forces (including miraculous events and Social or personal character changes in our world) the two come into sync. Of course when the Pope exalts the science of Aristotle and Co. to the level of prophesy Catholics find themselves in the way of great scientists as they try to clean out previous errors of their discipline. Likewise when evolution and Atheism are raised to the level of dogma, even though science is now finding that the chance of the proof Darwin sought is seriously over-estimated, of course it finds itself faced with an entire crusade of believers who insist on trusting in a God not only who loves them, but who is powerful enough to do something with and for that love.

Even where the two cannot compare notes the end results speak for themselves: christianity works wonders in areas that Science has failed miserably to handle, including simple things like comforting the mournful, encouraging service, forgiveness, and love. Science works wonders where pastors have no pomp, like the microwave and CAT scans. To bicker is childish and self defeating. To the scientific and religious extremist: "grow up both of you!"

There should be no war between Science and Christianity (I cannot speak for other religions) but, only between Evolution and Christianity or Science and terracentricism where some absolute twit (oops, I should be more compasionate.) seems to want to scewer a fish or cast for a prize buck.



*I placed the word christian in quotes because the JW's cannot be considered christian on many central matters of docrine (like the question of Christ) and don't even title themselves christian. The Mennonites as a group are most definitely christians; some of the best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,286 Posts
It would just be a bit more imaginative though if the battlefields could be shifted away from religion and politics occasionally. But valis has already raised this so there's no point in banging on about it.
that's where you come in, Slack.....start a thread :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,583 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
...a coin has two sides, but both are made of the same thing.....hopefully, both religious maturity and scientific childlikeness can find it.
Hi Bob,

A coin may have two sides, but it also has an edge! And that edge is aka a circumference that somehow (despite however thick or thin it might be) holds both sides together.

-- Tom (the metaphor works for me) :)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,271 Posts
I agree that it is a question of different but equal, and really think the debate is as absurd as a squabble between the hunting spear and the fishing rod.
Good point as when I saw the title I thought that you might as well ask who would win in a game between the Boston Celtics and the New England Patriots. Or the Atlanta Braves vs the Calgary Flames. The point being that it's not even the same game. There is no standard on which to make a comparison or to measure success.

Science has a method. Without that method it becomes philosophy. Then, with a little work, you might be able to twist and transform that philosophy with complete freedom of thought. Then having no rules of verification, one might be able to take a shot at comparing it to religion. I would doubt that anyone that claims success in this fruitless endeavor understands either religion or science.

My own point-of-view on the topic (repeated here) is that Science and Religion are just two different sides of the same coin. My belief requires faith in both Science and Religion. ;) Ya can't buy anything with the "coin" - it only has intrinsic value for those whom adopt it.
I've seen a lot of scientist trying to justify their results against religion and a lot of theologians trying to justify their beliefs against science but this is a new one. Note that I used "results" for science and "beliefs" for religion. The only coin that can hold both is human. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,161 Posts
The thread title brings up a Scientology advert on mine. Now there's a thought (and perish it):D
 

·
Gone but Never Forgotten
Joined
·
26,895 Posts
Ent said:
As a Christian I can see nothing immoral with penecilin, asprin, smallpox vaccines, and donating blood; nothing immoral with the motor car, and of course nothing immoral in the computer. NOW BY CONTRAST there are "christian"* groups who consider some of those things to be wrong, the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mennonites being prominent examples. There are some things made possible through Science that I would agree should not be, like internet Porn or nuclear missiles. However those matters must be threshed out by and only by religion--science is as ill equipped to do so as an angler to correct and instruct a throwspearsman.
As a Christian you hail the good things science have bestowed upon the unscientific and Christian but in the same breath blame science for such ill defined terms as porn and nuclear missiles? Scientists did not invent porn or nuclear death. It is the self serveing politicians and businessmen that did so. You might as well blame the first human ancestors who invented fire that cooked their food and rid it of disease, heated their homes and warded enemies for the person that commited arson and burned down your home.

Am I missing something here? :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,161 Posts
I blame whoever invented the wheel. We've had nothing but trouble since.;)
 
1 - 20 of 216 Posts
Top