Science will prove/discover God

Is science the only way someone can ''know'' God, or believe in his existence? if that were the case, there wouldn't be millions of people who believe, without any scientific evidence, already. So, the premise seems like a bit of a non-sequitur.
 
TheFrogger said:
Since the advent of science, technology has advanced and this is seen as opposing religion and disproving God. Does anyone think science will eventually discover and prove God?
Click to expand...

If the "god" is defined as post-in-rank to Nature... Either an open-ended evolving product from an earlier state of technology (singularity, archailect, etc) or stemming from an earlier life-form that was so exotic that it was susceptible to accelerated self-engineering with indefinite limits... Then by such a pre-established conception it would be within the purview of science (in principle).

But if "god" or "gods" is defined as something prior-in-rank to the object of science's study (i.e., Nature), then obviously not. It's analogous to the creators of a supertech video game forbidding (program-wise) the characters in it from accessing anything beneath the empirically verifiable causal appearances of their world. (That is, their realm's systematic recruitment of its own internal objects, reliable behaviors, and agencies to serve as a self-contained story of explanation, or network of quasi-sufficient reasons). In theory such a feat of penetrating to the "next-level" might be impossible for the inhabitants regardless of an extra barrier being introduced as added "insurance".

Prior-in-rank deities which publicly present themselves for inspection (albeit merely by their avatars and the accompanying power demonstrations and violation of natural regularities) need not be addressed since they would have aborted the context which this topic's thought-scenario rests upon.
 
TheFrogger said:
Does anyone think science will eventually discover and prove God?
Click to expand...

Doesn't most if not all scientific discoveries start out with an observation of some kind, whether it be an observation leading to a prediction or just something someone stumbled upon.

What observation can we use to predict God?
What observation is there of God?
 
Goldtop said:
Doesn't most if not all scientific discoveries start out with an observation of some kind, whether it be an observation leading to a prediction or just something someone stumbled upon.

What observation can we use to predict God? What observation is there of God?
Click to expand...
Before hominids became homo sapiens the concept of a "invisible enemy in the sky" was already present in our ancestors. Later, these invisible sky-beings became objects of worship and even sacrifice.
Anthropologists believe that this is a natural evolved result of the "fight or flight" response.

This can be seen today in Chimpanzees. A study observed an Alpha Chimp engage in a real aggressive/defensive behavior during a big thunder storm.

While the females and young cowered from the thunder and lightning and rain at the edge of a clearing, the Alpha picked up a stick and began to run around the clearing, beating the ground and bushes and raising the stick to the sky to warn this invisible enemy which made loud noises and was throwing both fire and water at his family, making every one miserable and afraid, to stay clear of his family as he was prepared to defend them to the death.

The accompanying video clearly showed the big male directing his anger at the sky, where the invisible enemy was hiding. There is your first god, a thunder god, an invisible enemy to be feared.

And history bears this out in later times when the thunder gods were the first gods to be worshipped.
Polytheistic peoples of many cultures have postulated a thunder god, the personification or source of the forces of thunder and lightning; a lightning god does not have a typical depiction, and will vary based on the culture.
Click to expand...
In Indo-European cultures, the thunder god is frequently known as the chief or King of the Gods, e.g. Indra in Hinduism, Zeus in Greek mythology, and Perun in ancient Slavic religion; or a close relation thereof, e.g. Thor, son of Odin, in Norse mythology. This is also true of Shango in Yoruba religion and in the syncretic religions of the African Diaspora, such as Santería (Cuba, Puerto Rico, United States) and Candomblé
(Brazil).
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_thunder_gods
 
Last edited:
Goldtop said:
Doesn't most if not all scientific discoveries start out with an observation of some kind, whether it be an observation leading to a prediction or just something someone stumbled upon.

What observation can we use to predict God?
What observation is there of God?
Click to expand...
God is not science.
 
wegs said:
Is science the only way someone can ''know'' God, or believe in his existence?
Click to expand...

Probably not. I'm not even convinced that science is relevant to the question of God's existence. Science observes the natural world and seeks natural explanations for what it observes. So hypothetical supernatural realities would seem to be outside science's scope.

Of course, we might want to argue that it's wrong somehow (or irrational or imprudent) to believe in something without satisfactory justification (what is that?). Combine that idea with a strong-empiricist premise that our only source of knowledge about objective reality is through our senses, and we might approach the 'scientistic' idea that science is our only proper source of information about anything.

I'm not entirely convinced of the necessary strong-empiricism though. For one thing, there are abstract realities like mathematical relationships. How are we aware of them? They would seem to be a strong counter-example, because mathematics is absolutely necessary to the practice of science. (Try being a theoretical physicist without the mathematical squiggles.)

What's more, while I remain rather skeptical, I'm not prepared to write off religious experience entirely. Accepting that the experiences of religious contemplatives, or even ordinary people in their everyday lives, might be evidence of... something... suggests a more expansive sort of empiricism where experience need not be restricted to sensory experience. Frankly, I'm not sure what I think about that or what my ultimate opinion will be.
 
Last edited:
Goldtop said:
No one said God is science, but if science can't detect God, how do humans do it? Makes no sense. We are as every bit as physical as the rest of the universe and our senses can only detect other physical things. How can humans claim to know something that science can't know?
Click to expand...
What is so unique about God that makes it a necessary existential aspect of the universe?
 
Write4U said:
What is so unique about God that makes it a necessary existential aspect of the universe?
Click to expand...

Human weakness in oneself. One thing I've noticed is that most theists simply can't be honest with themselves let alone anyone else, it's their fear of a jealous, selfish God and the false promises delivered by those who exploit that weakness.
 
Yazata said:
Probably not. I'm not even convinced that science is relevant to the question of God's existence. Science observes the natural world and seeks natural explanations for what it observes. So hypothetical supernatural realities would seem to be outside science's scope.

Of course, we might want to argue that it's wrong somehow (or irrational or imprudent) to believe in something without satisfactory justification (what is that?). Combine that idea with a strong-empiricist premise that our only source of knowledge about objective reality is through our senses, and we might approach the 'scientistic' idea that science is our only proper source of information about anything.

I'm not entirely convinced of the necessary strong-empiricism though. For one thing, there are abstract realities like mathematical relationships. How are we aware of them? They would seem to be a strong counter-example, because mathematics is absolutely necessary to the practice of science. (Try being a theoretical physicist without the mathematical squiggles.)

What's more, while I remain rather skeptical, I'm not prepared to write off religious experience entirely. Accepting that the experiences of religious contemplatives, or even ordinary people in their everyday lives, might be evidence of... something... suggests a more expansive sort of empiricism where experience need not be restricted to sensory experience. Frankly, I'm not sure what I think about that or what my ultimate opinion will be.
Click to expand...

Good points. I tend to believe in God as a creator and to that end, he/she/it provided the ability to figure out the mysteries of the universe through science. There's something quite special and beautiful to me, in feeling this connection with the universe through scientific knowledge. So for me, science will never compete with my beliefs as they intersect/connect. Science explains what would otherwise be unfathomable, when we think about it.

But we don’t know everything, not even close, and I don’t think we ever will. How would we ever know, all that we don’t know, though?
 
Last edited:
kx000 said:
Faith itself is the necessary property of the universe, the ultimate fundamental to life, and nature. God is LOVE.
Click to expand...
Faith itself is a necessary property of the universe, the ultimate fundamental to life and nature? Where can Faith be found? The universe has faith? Where does it say that?

God is the LOVE part of the universe? Where can that be found? In the middle of a super-nova? Where does it say that?
 
Write4U said:
Faith itself is a necessary property of the universe, the ultimate fundamental to life and nature? Where can Faith be found? The universe has faith? Where does it say that?

God is the LOVE part of the universe? Where can that be found? In the middle of a super-nova? Where does it say that?
Click to expand...
What made you respond to that post?
 
Write4U said:
Lol, now that you mention it, I wonder about that myself.......:?
Click to expand...
Maybe you're an agnostic who cannot understand why these people are so confident when they speak of God. Or that you hope that God exists. Whatever it is, keep on doing it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top