Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Where do science and religion overlap?

Where do science and religion overlap?

4 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Nowhere.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2015/04/how-do-science-and-religion-overlap-noma-imagines-not-at-all-stephen-j-gould/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Atheist%2004%2022%2015%20%281%29&utm_content=&spMailingID=48503190&spUserID=NTExMjEzNzE3NzkS1&spJobID=662735744&spReportId=NjYyNzM1NzQ0S0

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Until we find out where the universe came from and why it exists and what existed before it and what will exist after it and what our place is in all of that, there will always be religion, Wordslinger.
No amount of science or philosophy or anything else will ever overcome that.

So science and religion will have to co-exist for the long time foreseeable future. And that will be a very long time.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Bob wrote:Until we find out where the universe came from and why it exists and what existed before it and what will exist after it and what our place is in all of that,  there will always be religion,  Wordslinger.  
No amount of science or philosophy or anything else will ever overcome that.

So science and religion will have to co-exist for the long time foreseeable future.  And that will be a very long time.  

 
You may be right Bob, but one is real and the other isn't.  Current trends indicate the realists are on the rise, more than ever before, while the other side is shrinking fast.  At the current rate of growth, Atheists and Agnostics will be the majority in America within 50 years.  Maybe sooner.

Like the link said, science studies the age of rocks and religion deals with the rock of ages .....

We're now a technological species, one that has to pay attention to facts.

Bye bye Father McGillicuddy, and get yer fuckin' hand off my knee!!

boards of FL

boards of FL

Bob wrote:Until we find out where the universe came from and why it exists and what existed before it and what will exist after it and what our place is in all of that,  there will always be religion,  Wordslinger.  
No amount of science or philosophy or anything else will ever overcome that.

So science and religion will have to co-exist for the long time foreseeable future.  And that will be a very long time.  

 


We will never find out where the universe came from, why it exists, or anything else that you mention there unless religion can be beaten back. Religion is the very antithesis of trying to answer those questions, as religion claims they are already answered.


_________________
I approve this message.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I agree with every single word you wrote in that post,  boards.

Especially because you used only the words "beaten back" and did not try to add to that to say "beaten back by science".

That's because I don't see humans ever being able to answer those questions (and ten thousand more because those are just for openers) simply by applying a "scientific method".  I think human science is probably so infinitesimally crude in comparison to those questions,  that it would be like expecting an amoeba to find some "method" which would allow him to  swallow a whale except make that whale be the size of the universe.

And also because you used the word "unless" instead of the word "until".
That's because I don't believe humans have any more capacity to be able to answer those questions than the amoeba does. And as long as they don't they will always have religions. Not gonna be able to beat that back.

I love these kinds of threads so please keep this one going.  Who's next?

boards of FL

boards of FL

Bob wrote:That's because I don't believe humans have any more capacity to be able to answer those questions than the amoeba does.


Humans, amoeba, trees, we all evolved from the same thing. Who knows where evolution will take our species. Human beings will continue to evolve and our science will continue to evolve with it. Religion, on the other hand...


_________________
I approve this message.

polecat

polecat

Where do science and religion overlap? Climate-change-prayer

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

boards of FL wrote:
Bob wrote:That's because I don't believe humans have any more capacity to be able to answer those questions than the amoeba does.


Humans, amoeba, trees, we all evolved from the same thing.  Who knows where evolution will take our species.  Human beings will continue to evolve and our science will continue to evolve with it.  

Some people believe extraterrestial beings are already here and are mating their species with ours.
That's a common theme in the UFO "abductee" world. And we can laugh at that all we want but a Harvard psychiatrist was the one who promulgated that claim.

So if that's the case, then maybe our evolution will speed up rather dramatically.
In the absence of that I dunno. Might take too long. lol

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Wordslinger wrote:
Current trends indicate the realists are on the rise, more than ever before, while the other side is shrinking fast.  At the current rate of growth, Atheists and Agnostics will be the majority in America within 50 years.  Maybe sooner.


Can you supply some research (a link) which supports that assertion, Wordslinger?

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I have my own little theory about why the extraterrestrials (or time travelers or dimension travelers or whatever they are) have not wanted to reveal their presence in any big way.  

It's because they know if they were to do that,  hundreds of millions of Earthlings would see them as either a "second coming" (of whatever god they worship),   OR an invasion by Satan from hell.  And a collapse of human society would likely result.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Oh hell I just realized that's the Prime Directive on Star Trek.  Hell now I'm plagiarizing Gene Roddenberry.  lol

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Bob wrote:would see them as either a "second coming" (of whatever god they worship)

Shoot, there's a whole history channel tv series ("Ancient Aliens") which is popularziing that theory. The one which says all these gods and deities the ancient peoples claim were actually just the same extraterrestrials/extradimensionals/time travelers/whatevers which we continue to see today.
I mean how could those ancient people with absolutely zero awareness or understanding of inner space, the heavenly bodies, the solar system, the universe; how in the hell could those people be expected to differentiate between gods and extraterrestrials? And of course the answer is they couldn't.
We don't know what they were seeing.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Bob wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
Current trends indicate the realists are on the rise, more than ever before, while the other side is shrinking fast.  At the current rate of growth, Atheists and Agnostics will be the majority in America within 50 years.  Maybe sooner.


Can you supply some research (a link) which supports that assertion,  Wordslinger?
Ask and ye shall receive ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nigel-barber/atheism-to-defeat-religion-by-2038_b_1565108.html

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Wordslinger wrote:
Bob wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
Current trends indicate the realists are on the rise, more than ever before, while the other side is shrinking fast.  At the current rate of growth, Atheists and Agnostics will be the majority in America within 50 years.  Maybe sooner.


Can you supply some research (a link) which supports that assertion,  Wordslinger?
Ask and ye shall receive ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nigel-barber/atheism-to-defeat-religion-by-2038_b_1565108.html

Hmmm.  Interesting.  This also supports it and this one has a Gallup poll to back up it's position.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20141219-will-religion-ever-disappear

I wasn't aware of this trend. Especially when it comes to our country because the evangelicals are so visible.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

The battle, I think, is between those who believe in mysticism or superstition, and those who believe in intellectualism; scientific facts.


In essence, a war between MYSTIC BELIEF and RATIONAL THOUGHT.


Show me a better way to convert sunlight to electricity and my life will be improved -- as will the lives of everyone else.  Hook the device up to a well-pump and we can all irrigate our carrots.   



My opponent prays for rain.  God Willing, he won't starve ... maybe.  

Which would you rather depend on science, or God?

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Wordslinger wrote:The battle, I think, is between those who believe in mysticism or superstition, and those who believe in intellectualism; scientific facts.


In essence, a war between MYSTIC BELIEF and RATIONAL THOUGHT.


Show me a better way to convert sunlight to electricity and my life will be improved -- as will the lives of everyone else.  Hook the device up to a well-pump and we can all irrigate our carrots.   



My opponent prays for rain.  God Willing, he won't starve ... maybe.  

Which would you rather depend on science, or God?

Well obviously any sane person would rely on science more than religion for any technological advance.

But that's not the reason so many still cling to religion.  So many still cling to religion because neither science nor anything else can provide the answer to those aforementioned questions for them. And they need answers and closure and they will have them even if they have to invent them.

Just like science can't resolve their angst about their mortality.  Most people have to believe there's continued existence after death.  It's just too hard for them to accept that death is the end for them.  They aren't satisfied with being fortunate to experience life.
So they adhere to religion which promises them a far better existence than the one they had when alive.
And that's the case for both muslims and christians.  Even though the two religions claim to be so different and so at odds with each other,  the truth is they have a WHOLE LOT in common.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Bob wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:The battle, I think, is between those who believe in mysticism or superstition, and those who believe in intellectualism; scientific facts.


In essence, a war between MYSTIC BELIEF and RATIONAL THOUGHT.


Show me a better way to convert sunlight to electricity and my life will be improved -- as will the lives of everyone else.  Hook the device up to a well-pump and we can all irrigate our carrots.   



My opponent prays for rain.  God Willing, he won't starve ... maybe.  

Which would you rather depend on science, or God?

Well obviously any sane person would rely on science more than religion for any technological advance.

But that's not the reason so many still cling to religion.  So many still cling to religion because neither science nor anything else can provide the answer to those aforementioned questions for them.   And they need answers and closure and they will have them even if they have to invent them.

Just like science can't resolve their angst about their mortality.  Most people have to believe there's continued existence after death.  It's just too hard for them to accept that death is the end for them.  They aren't satisfied with being fortunate to experience life.
So they adhere to religion which promises them a far better existence than the one they had when alive.
And that's the case for both muslims and christians.  Even though the two religions claim to be so different and so at odds with each other,  the truth is they have a WHOLE LOT in common.


Why does it matter how we got here?  We're here.

Why does it matter what happens after you die?  Where do you go when you sleep?

How did life start?  I don't know and it doesn't bother me that I don't.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Wordslinger wrote:


Why does it matter how we got here?  We're here.

Why does it matter what happens after you die?  Where do you go when you sleep?

How did life start?  I don't know and it doesn't bother me that I don't

It's called human curiousity,  wordslinger.  And for a great many humans,  the nature of our existence is the ultimate curiousity.  

It's perfectly acceptable to me that you and others have no curiousity about this and can live your lives without ever giving it a thought.  
But it's something many of us begin to ponder about early in our lives and that curiousity stays with us until our demise.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Bob wrote:

Just like science can't resolve their angst about their mortality.  Most people have to believe there's continued existence after death.  It's just too hard for them to accept that death is the end for them.  They aren't satisfied with being fortunate to experience life.
So they adhere to religion which promises them a far better existence than the one they had when alive.

Immediately after  I wrote that sentence you see in the quote above (the sentence I've put in bold font),  I realized that it needs more discussion.  
That sentence really does a disservice to all those who are forced to experience life in ways that are definitely not "fortunate".
Here is just one of the millions of examples of those whose life cannot be characterized as "fortunate"...

Where do science and religion overlap? Boston-marathon-boys-funeral

"The 8-year-old boy killed in the Boston Marathon bombing appeared to reach for his mother in the final, grueling moments of his life, court testimony revealed Thursday.
Footage from the terror attack shows a small blurry figure, believed to be young Martin Richard, raising his hands right after the second blast near the marathon’s finish line, Boston.com reported.
A trauma surgeon from Massachusetts General Hospital who previously testified in the trial said Martin most likely suffered severe pain in the last moments of his life.
Survivor Stephen Woolfenden, said he saw Richard’s eyes 'rolled back in his head' after the explosions and put his hand on the back of the boy’s mother, Denise, to comfort her.
This was despite Woolfenden losing his own left leg in the bombing, which he said he didn’t immediately notice. He said Denise asked if he was okay, and an anguished Woolfenden simply said, 'Yes.'

Not all human life can be described as "fortunate".  I was very thoughtless when I implied that in the earlier post.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

And please please please don't try to read anything into why I chose that particular example.  And please please please don't try to bring "butchmeup" or "godzilla" into this.
It's just one example.  I could of course easily pick a child (or an adult) of any color,  any nationality,  any creed,  any ethnicity,  any religion (or no religion), any socio-economic class or any other grouping and instead use that example to make exactly the same point.
And of course it applies equally to both natural and man-made unfortunate-ness.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Bob wrote:And please please please don't try to read anything into why I chose that particular example.  And please please please don't try to bring "butchmeup" or "godzilla" into this.
It's just one example.  I could of course easily pick a child (or an adult) of any color,  any nationality,  any creed,  any ethnicity,  any religion (or no religion), any socio-economic class or any other grouping and instead use that example to make exactly the same point.
And of course it applies equally to both natural and man-made unfortunate-ness.



Bob, one would have to be inhuman not to be deeply moved by the incident you related.  Yes, in a sense, one could conclude the child was unfortunate.  But is that reality?

The child was in the wrong place at the wrong time, something each of us can relate to in one way or another.  Is that luck, or fate, or God's hand?

It's hard for me to blame luck or fate.  And since God is supposedly omnipotent, he surely could have spared that kid and his mom the awful  suffering they were forced to endure.  I guess that means God chose not to interfere.  Or?  Who knows?

I'm happier dealing with two plus two!!

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Have you ever watched people interviewed for tv after a tornado, wordslinger.
The ones whose child survived it always give credit to God.
But I've never heard the parents of a child killed by a tornado blame it on God.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Bob wrote:Have you ever watched people interviewed for tv after a tornado,  wordslinger.
The ones whose child survived it always give credit to God.
But I've never heard the parents of a child killed by a tornado blame it on God.

True.  That's an interesting point.  I guess many believers need to have faith their personal imaginary friend is truly a friend.  That makes sense.

As for myself, I don't have that luxury.  If I lived in tornado alley I'd be sure to have a deep, large and well stocked tornado cellar to protect my family.

When you abandon the God fantasy, you prepare for emergencies on your own.  I spent some twenty years studying records of early frontier America, from 1730 through 1794.  The true frontiersmen, like Kenton, Girty, the Zanes and Boone, were not fervent and seldom were seen in a church.  They were, most of them, wonderfully self-reliant and tolerant.  

One of the benefits of Atheism is the knowledge that you and you alone are in the driver's seat of your life.  It works for me.

Guest


Guest

Interesting thread, guys.

I think, if most Christians were honest, they'd agree with the man in the bible who says to Jesus, "I believe but help me in my unbelief."

He was talking to God in the flesh, Jesus, and Jesus did not explain all of life to him. He was right there and mystery was not revealed.

I agree we will never have answers to all. I do appreciate and love the ability of scientists to research, test, hypothesize, and conclude theory. Where would we be today without it? I think as we get closer to answers, though, the debates rise strongly on those areas that might define science and religion separately. Many want it to meld. Many want one to be superior to the other.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

SheWrites wrote:Interesting thread, guys.

I think, if most Christians were honest, they'd agree with the man in the bible who says to Jesus, "I believe but help me in my unbelief."

He was talking to God in the flesh, Jesus, and Jesus did not explain all of life to him.  He was right there and mystery was not revealed.  

I agree we will never have answers to all.  I do appreciate and love the ability of scientists to research, test, hypothesize, and conclude theory.  Where would we be today without it? I think as we get closer to answers, though, the debates rise strongly on those areas that might define science and religion separately.  Many want it to meld.  Many want one to be superior to the other.  


Thanks for your thoughtful input.  The strong advance of technology and it's impact on society and culture demands that we entrust more and more of our lives and the advancement thereof, to realities and not belief.  That's why religion is dying in America, and is mostly dead in the modern industrialized nations of Europe.

If you want to discuss values and morality, these are good religious subjects.  But for Christ's sake, don't confront reality with Bibilical explanations of how the universe began, how we began, and why we're here, etc.  That's bullshit confronting reality, and as you can see, reality always overcomes anything less.

We humans can't win with any sort of combination of nonsense and reality.  The moral values of men who lived two thousand or more years ago really don't apply anymore to modern society.

Pork and shellfish are quite safe to eat, now that we have refrigeration.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Where do science and religion overlap?

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum