"Blasphemy is what an old dogma screams at a new truth."
:splat: (Robert Ingersoll)
Science 'versus' God and Religion
- Thread starter Kaiduorkhon
- Start date
"Blasphemy is what an old dogma screams at a new truth."
:splat: (Robert Ingersoll)
shekhar1438
Registered Member
The above statement is enough to describe how humans feel about LIFE. In fact, it is true that every scientist who believes firmly in his own theory, wonders all the time, about the origins of LIFE. Just an accident or some probability could not explain the complex nature of life. There is definitely more to it. I would not ascribe the unknown to GOD, but defintiely our scientific explanation is very limited to explain this complex nature of GOD.
Think about it and you will understand what i mean here..
Grantywanty
Registered Senior Member
If by religion you are referring to one of those big organizations with attendant unquestionable texts, I agree with you.
But there are many of us out here who base our not (yet) scientifically verified beliefs on experience.
There are the extremes and there is the boring middle and then there are people who are actually learning and who from this know that scientists confidence about assuming the unliklihood of a whole host of phenomena is based on hubris.
Science Vs God
Science vs God DEBATE
Science has a body of H2o that is not excited by electromagnetic waves inferred as Ice as per in your face evidence..
God in Genesis has a body of H2o inferred as water even with out Light and or electromagnetic waves exciting it and despite the above in your face evidence..
Science vs God DEBATE
Science has a body of H2o that is not excited by electromagnetic waves inferred as Ice as per in your face evidence..
God in Genesis has a body of H2o inferred as water even with out Light and or electromagnetic waves exciting it and despite the above in your face evidence..
dixonmassey
Valued Senior Member
Science and religions have many things in common, the main shared "property" - neither science nor "faith" are able to explain world around us.
That's all that's left after I deleted two posts by LaidBack and asked him not to repeat stuff that was against CR and Sciforums guidelines.
I think you should make that kind of reversed: Science and religions have many things in common, the main shared "property" - both science and "faith" try to explain world around us.
dixonmassey
Valued Senior Member
Today, I've tried to lift a tractor-trailer with my bare hands
You may guess the height.Grantywanty
Registered Senior Member
They both have ideas about the 'only' ways to achieve knowledge. Both traditional religions and science are extremely critical and afraid of intuition and emotions.
The differences between science and religion are clear..
Science consists with explanations that comply strictly to truth and or facts..
Religion consists with explanations that don't strictly conform to truth and or facts..
And an excellent example is the following..
Scientific "in ones face" Facts..
Scientific journal said:
.
.
.
.
Religion and in particular the bible states...
Bible.com said:
My opinion has religion does not conform and or comply to real truth, whilst science does conform and comply to truth, if you read the above religious quote and note that water existed rather than a body of ice before the sun was created, it should be obvious the writer is not with sound knowledge of its own implied creation!
Now tell me which individuals would accept scientific facts over their religious points of view? OY!
Moderator please don't delete this post, all I am doing is asking a question.. with my opinion and or reasoning as per below..Perhaps someone who has been brain washed would prefer to ignore "in ones face facts" by rather accepting previous indoctrinated religious statements?
And perhaps even may defend what I consider lies, with more lies!
charles brough
Registered Senior Member
I don't think it is a matter of a god interefering with science. It is a matter of what kind of god is believed. Even Einstein would agree that a Divine Force or abstract deity should not bother science. He played with the idea himself. He delighted with it. What is dangerous to science is the concept of a god that plays around with natural cause and effect---especially in such petty things as in response to prayer! That is the type of thing that the many so-called "miracles" are made of and which makes a mockery of scientific natural cause and effect.
Of all the old religion obstacles to science, the worst is "creationism." Genesis was a magnificant chapter 2,000 years ago---even 12 centuries ago or less. Now it is totally obsolete and a drag on human scientific progress.
It is killing to a society for everyone to be fighting over our own origins. It is no wonder that our present age is in decline and we feel adrift. We cannot agree on even the most fundamental thing. Our old religions are that divisive now. . .
charles, http://humanpurpose.simplenet.com
Religion provides some comforting notions relating to our mortality. Aside from that it does not seem to result in any useful results.
BTW: I envy the theist for his smug belief that he will be able to say "I told you so" to atheists.
For almost all of our recorded history, religion condoned slavery and seldom spoke against the outrageous activities of despotic rulers. Science in the last 200-300 years has brought all sorts of benefits.
There is just no need for or useful purpose to be gained by religioious beliefs. To a large extent it is holding back science due to its tendency to encourage the use of faith and emotion as a substitute for critical analysis and rationality.
Religion is hindering many from being able to deal with and contribute to our technological culture. I wonder how many potentially great medical researchers have been turned away from biology and a medical career by creationist/ID parents.
Science should start being more critical and intolerant in its view of religion. I am hoping for but not expecting the eventual defeat of the theist viewpoint.
BTW: I envy the theist for his smug belief that he will be able to say "I told you so" to atheists.
For almost all of our recorded history, religion condoned slavery and seldom spoke against the outrageous activities of despotic rulers. Science in the last 200-300 years has brought all sorts of benefits.
There is just no need for or useful purpose to be gained by religioious beliefs. To a large extent it is holding back science due to its tendency to encourage the use of faith and emotion as a substitute for critical analysis and rationality.
Religion is hindering many from being able to deal with and contribute to our technological culture. I wonder how many potentially great medical researchers have been turned away from biology and a medical career by creationist/ID parents.
Science should start being more critical and intolerant in its view of religion. I am hoping for but not expecting the eventual defeat of the theist viewpoint.
The problem with hard line atheists is that usually they haven't researched the anthropology part of religions and therefore dismiss them as useless, but there is more to religion than just the everyday visible and most annoying aspects of it.
Religion is not holding back science. As J.Campbell (a CR scientist) has said "there is no conflict between mysticism and science, but there is a conflict between the science of 2000 CE and 2000 BCE". The outdated cosmology and biology that some of the world's religions still cling to is the problem, not the religion in itself.
Hinduism, for example, has no problems with science, neither has Buddhism (that is more a philosophy).
Religion and ritual has the important role in making every day conceptual conventions (peace, freedom, redemption) and social contracts a part of the natural world of the humanity. There are inherit problems in this as well, but the important thing is that without religion and ritual human society disintegrates, because important corner stones of how we see the world are not there any more. I'm not talking about Christianity or any particular religion here.
We already are more technologically advanced than our ethics and psychology is, we are like cave men with chainsaws (pollution, accelerated climate change, etc), and it is dangerous. By taking out the safe guards that religion can provide, its function to make conceptual conventions a part of the natural (the semi-subjective) world of humanity, our society becomes disoriented and unpredictable, more dangerous to itself.
As I said, the problem with some of the religions nowadays is the outdated science that those religions use, but the problem is not in the function of religion that has been with us since the invention of language.
Religion is not holding back science. As J.Campbell (a CR scientist) has said "there is no conflict between mysticism and science, but there is a conflict between the science of 2000 CE and 2000 BCE". The outdated cosmology and biology that some of the world's religions still cling to is the problem, not the religion in itself.
Hinduism, for example, has no problems with science, neither has Buddhism (that is more a philosophy).
Religion and ritual has the important role in making every day conceptual conventions (peace, freedom, redemption) and social contracts a part of the natural world of the humanity. There are inherit problems in this as well, but the important thing is that without religion and ritual human society disintegrates, because important corner stones of how we see the world are not there any more. I'm not talking about Christianity or any particular religion here.
We already are more technologically advanced than our ethics and psychology is, we are like cave men with chainsaws (pollution, accelerated climate change, etc), and it is dangerous. By taking out the safe guards that religion can provide, its function to make conceptual conventions a part of the natural (the semi-subjective) world of humanity, our society becomes disoriented and unpredictable, more dangerous to itself.
As I said, the problem with some of the religions nowadays is the outdated science that those religions use, but the problem is not in the function of religion that has been with us since the invention of language.
Last edited:
Well he was and is wrong!
Religion instills very backward ideas based on religious text written to imply ones concepts and or constructs to ones morality..
And no where is there a better example on how much religion is retarding science when we point out the Asian provinces, where they are decades ahead in the research in genetics, especially when one compares areas and or localities that are mainly influenced by the christian religions mentality such as it is in America, where even their leader must concede to its influence..
Another arena where religion is retarding science is that America and other localities could have been world leaders in just about all technologies had they not allowed religions to run educational institutes..
Need I point out these institutes are omitting much critical data that conflicts with their religious ideas and ideals therefore their students are wanting for more acurate data and whats more these institutes are attempting time and time again to replace more and more good sound science with a load of more and more rubbish, Can you imagine how many directors are religiously driven and because of their backward views introduce a decline rather than incline in knowledge..
America is not the only locality infected with religion and the deceit and underhanded tactics that come with it, and as long as these localities allow religions to take precedence those localities can only recede and or revert back to the dark ages, whilst those localities that disband and disallow foolish and childish religious notions will result with leading edge technology...
Therefore Religion IS holding back Science and whats more is holding back the rest of the population who are smart enough not to allow deception to over rule facts..
Again, you are talking about Christianity, not religion in general. The three abrahamic religions are in no way representation of the whole picture, rather they are a special and an unfortunate case of how a religion can go wrong.
I am speaking of religion in general and the benefits on a society a good religion can have.
I shall elaborate on it further when I have more time.
Well excuse me and my locality for being infected mainly with Abrahamic religions! Gee I wonder if an apology from you is in order?
what with your assumptions of what religions may be based in my locality.. Besides my locality being blessed with less Riff Raf than most other localities, Can you mention any religion at all that sticks to the facts and nothing but the facts as science does? And if so? How can one infer it as a religion then?
My guess would be that ALL religions are with some sort of deception and or hidden agendas just as all the religions operate, and therefore via whatever deceptions they rely upon that's what is holding back their flock.
No good has EVER come from religion and or deceit, even though most lay claim they are responsible for what ever good may have eventuated, which could have occurred with or with out implied religious influence anyway..
I meant to answer this post much earlier, but was limited with time..
Science for the most has and can explain the world and or our Universe.
The real problem why science in some localities may not, is via available institutes who are providing ones knowledge, these institutes - if religiously backed and or funded must consider what the truth will do to their religious agenda..
And if ones education is provided via Lectures that are them selves wanting for more accurate data via being infected with some religious brainwashing and or indoctrination, of course the students are going to end up wanting for truthful data, and this simply is not possible as long as Lectures are infected with a whole lot of religious garbage rather than with truth and or proper Science, the result is graduating scientists will be unemployable compared to those that have been availed a good sound education, but this leaves those rather lacking to become Lecturers and their is our backward slide..
The only way Science can progress and be able to explain anything in a completely truthful manner ~ is if all religious constructs are not allowed to take precedence over REAL truth and or REAL facts, but how can REAL truth take precedence when the religious educational institutes are over run with backward reasoning or worse religious Lectures and Directors who mandate omissions to the truth to be replaced with deceit that allows their religious constructs with the same luxury of credibility that science has..
This is one of the main reasons why powerful nations are brought to their knees! and I mean "knees" in all respects including being forced onto their knees bowing before ones dictator who may have been lucky enough to be in power at the right time.
One can only hope there is always enough intelligent individuals that over ride the illogical and religious minority by keeping them in check from destroying their Nation!..
Grantywanty
Registered Senior Member
There are many believers in what might be characterized as pagan, or nature based religions with pantheistic tendencies that have no problem with the scientific method or most of the specific conclusions of scientific research. On the other hand these people do not assume that the scientific method is the only way of ascertaining truth and further believe that scientists and their worshipers often overestimate their ability to judge the liklihood of certain phenomena that seem (or would seem) supernatural to them. This myopia on the science based believer group is further complicated by their sense that scientific explanation (which tend, for example, to assume things are dead or non-sentient) are the deepest or only possible explanations of phenomena.