Should science replace religion?

[billvon]

Yes, we had discussed that earlier in the thread. The better question is should religion be banned and only science be relied on for answers.

I don't think religion should be banned any more than Star Wars movies should be banned. (But it would be a bad idea to rely on either for answers.)

 

[wegs]

I don't think religion should be banned any more than Star Wars movies should be banned. (But it would be a bad idea to rely on either for answers.)

lol I could live without Star Wars. (sorry to anyone who is deeply offended by my comment)

Well, one can rely on faith to supply the answers to existential questions. I do.

 

[billvon]

Well, one can rely on faith to supply the answers to existential questions. I do.

If they work for you - that's all that really matters.

 

[river]

Both should be replaced .

 

[(Q)]

Both should be replaced .

With what?

 

[river]

With what?

The Generalist Philosopher .

 

[(Q)]

The Generalist Philosopher .

So, you're perfectly willing to give up everything science has provided for you, your computer, internet connection and these forums for a start, so that you can go live in a cave and philosophize as a generalist? Your world would be wiped out in no time.

 

[river]

So, you're perfectly willing to give up everything science has provided for you, your computer, internet connection and these forums for a start, so that you can go live in a cave and philosophize as a generalist? Your world would be wiped out in no time.

You misunderstand ;

The Generalist Philosopher understands and is aware of all studies of all things .

 

[(Q)]

You misunderstand ;

The Generalist Philosopher understands and is aware of all studies of all things .

Like Cliff from Cheers. Lots of bits of useless information.

 

[river]

Like Cliff from Cheers. Lots of bits of useless information.

Encyclopedia never thinks .

 

[paddoboy]

Encyclopedia never thinks .

Neither does a rock or universe. They are inert objects, that were around before Abiogenesis and evolution took hold. But again, that being science, would be above your pay grade.

 

[river]

Neither does a rock or universe. They are inert objects, that were around before Abiogenesis and evolution took hold. But again, that being science, would be above your pay grade.

Inert objects ?

What is inert about a Rock and the Universe ?

 

[paddoboy]

Inert objects ?

What is inert about a Rock and the Universe ?

The same that appears inert about river! Yes, inert objects as recognised by any reasonable logical thinking human and not being life...the ability to eat, metabolise, grow, reproduce, and die.

 

[river]

The same that appears inert about river! Yes, inert objects as recognised by any reasonable logical thinking human and not being life...the ability to eat, metabolise, grow, reproduce, and die.

And lead to thought .

 

[paddoboy]

And lead to thought .

So? We all know that, at least with most of us...certainly not lifeless rocks though.

 

[Michael 345]

Well, one can rely on faith to supply the answers to existential questions. I do.

1. What exactly would be a sample existential question?
2. What is the answer would faith give to the above sample question?
3. How do you test any answer given by faith to the sample question is correct?

 

[wegs]

1. What exactly would be a sample existential question?
2. What is the answer would faith give to the above sample question?
3. How do you test any answer given by faith to the sample question is correct?

My faith is important to me, how can I test that to prove it to you? Why do you want me to prove it to you? Faith experiences are subjective, no two believers will explain the beauty of their faith in quite the same way.

 

[Michael 345]

My faith is important to me, how can I test that to prove it to you? Why do you want me to prove it to you? Faith experiences are subjective, no two believers will explain the beauty of their faith in quite the same way.

Well fair enough answer and I am not going to press for you to prove anything to me

You are under no obligation to me to explain your beliefs and I take your point about being subjective and different for each person

Cheers

 

[wegs]

Well fair enough answer and I am not going to press for you to prove anything to me

You are under no obligation to me to explain your beliefs and I take your point about being subjective and different for each person

Cheers

I understand that from a materialist or scientific viewpoint, most things can be tested and retested. But I think faith could be tested (maybe) with a different set of parameters? Hmm. This is a good thought experiment and I’ll need to think it through.

 

[foghorn]

I understand that from a materialist or scientific viewpoint, most things can be tested and retested. But I think faith could be tested (maybe) with a different set of parameters?

Didn't God tell Abraham to offer his son, kill him. Was that a test of faith?

Hmm. This is a good thought experiment and I’ll need to think it through.

I hope you don't have a cat... I think Abraham saw a ram and killed that instead of his son.