Science (ssss) vs. Religion

Homepage Forums Creative Corner Science (ssss) vs. Religion

0
Avatar of Tine
Tine (@tine)    1 year, 8 months ago

OoOOooOoOOO

what a useless argument…………

consider what each describes and how each is a mental framing tool,

( science ) is a description of the cause / effect nature of the physical environment
( religion ) is a description of the cause / effect nature of how we interact as humans and why

they do not describe the same thing, therefore any argument between the two about which is MORE right-er-er than the other, is a failure to understand the point of the framing tools,

and is a reflection that the ‘right-er-er’ stance stems from a deeper issue, one that is easily identified if the history of both framing devices is viewed in terms of how they have co-existed.

consider, ID, intelligent design, it represents a fusion of science and religion to prove the un-provable, to make religion just as logical as science. has anyone taken a second to consider the theories? man… they stretch for relevancy.

ID is a direct response to the scientific communities taunt, ‘Prove it!”, therefore is not relevant when the core truth is examined as the motivation for its creation was found as a way to argue a point that has no end due to its illogical nature.

0 votes, posted 11.16.2012 at 4:33 pm
+

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Avatar of Ray Butler
Ray Butler (@trek79)1 year, 8 months ago ago

But of course is the arguement “lies do not exist, that is why they are lies” but really think about it. If I say “computers don’t exist” the statement itself exists, just truth does not exist with it. So this means errors in wording are acceptable to the universe. You are right back where you started, the same point. According to many scientific minds, things only exist at all due to error, if there is no design the only explaination is error of nature, random fluke.
Does anyone see the hypocrisy of science? Just as bad as any religion, if you ask me. Science says there is a cause for everything but then it says there is no cause for anything in the same breath. Be consistent.

+
Avatar of Michelle
Michelle (@montelimart63)1 year, 8 months ago ago

I feel that nowadays, people are more apt to support science and discredit religion entirely. However, like some of the other commenters have mentioned already, science has its limits as well. If left unchecked, it can function as dogma just as any organized religion can. And religion wasn’t always narrow-minded and oppressive (like Christianity is today). I feel as if both are necessary and neither is superior. Well, actually, I don’t know if religion is necessary… but some form of spirituality is necessary.(maybe? I’m still not so sure….)

+
Avatar of Ray Butler
Ray Butler (@trek79)1 year, 8 months ago ago

I think that is the point, REAL science tells us we don’t know everything, people with fake scientific minds use science to tell us how wrong we all are about the universe, like they know better. Science has NOT confirmed or denied the existence of God, but then it says we can only use the available information, well every piece of information we have, be it quantum physics or a fairy tale you read to your kid, this is all available. What justifies ommission of information, what decides information is not information at all?
It just seem like elitism, judgementality, exclusionary. Fair enough if you are looking into a specific field, you do not consult the Brothers Grimm, but if you are looking into everything then shouldn’t everything be considered? I am just saying look under everything rather than only looking at one field. Another thing is just that, we are looking to develop science rather than reverse engineer it, it is like adding cards to the top of the deck in an attempt to reach the bottom of the deck.

+
Avatar of Dan
Dan (@danfontaine)1 year, 8 months ago ago

Science and Religion are both retarded means for the cause of interacting with life.
We don’t really need any perspective beyond our own center of the universe.
Just stop thinking you are bad.

+
Avatar of Nnobody
Nnobody (@nobodylies)1 year, 8 months ago ago

@montelimart63, Non-religious people are far more oppressive than the Christians could ever be. Separation of church and state. The words Jesus and (to a lesser extent) God being banned from movies and media, not to mention the word Christ being stripped from the famous upcoming holiday. I must disagree with you, Christians are not very oppressive.

+
Avatar of
Anonymous (@)1 year, 8 months ago ago

Religions often preach love without knowing what Love is (see Chapters 16 and 25). Many religious fundamentalists interpret their god’s love for them to be inseparable from its hatred for others. The U.S. political movement known as the Christian religious right is one such group (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_right). Its primary spokesmen are Robert Grant, Pat Robertson, John Hagee, Rod Parsley, Franklin Graham, James Dobson, and Jerry Falwell (deceased 2007).

The scientific paradigm (see Section 2.1) has produced the theory of biological evolution. Since God is unnecessary in this theory, fundamentalist Christians are attempting to impose an antievolutionary doctrine on the educational systems in several States in the U.S. This doctrine takes two forms, creationism and intelligent design. Both doctrines are derived from Biblical stories of a universe created by God, and as such, require a belief in a dualistic God (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism).

Fundamentalists often create enemies on whom to displace their feelings of self-punishment, self-fear, and self-hatred (see Section 11.8). Their (unrecognized) self-punishment can be so unbearable that they try to compensate by believing that they are god’s favored few, and, in the name of this god, endeavor to eliminate a competing religion by trying to convert, demonize, or kill its adherents. Their fear of another religion or teaching can be even greater than their fear of death.

The belief that God has sanctioned violence leads to additional violence, not only among believers, but also among nonbelievers. (The daily news contains ample evidence that this is so.) Scientifically, this has been demonstrated by having a group of 500 students read a passage depicting violence in the Old Testament. Half of the students also read another passage saying that God commanded that the evil-doers be chastened. The half reading the additional passage were more likely to act aggressively in a later exercise, whether they were believers or not (Nature 446, 114-115 (8 March 2007)).

Following are a few examples of violent clashes between competing religious beliefs that resulted in executions, massacres, and wars:

· In less than a century after Mohammed (570-633) died, Muslims, in their missionary zeal to convert the “infidels”, conquered Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, North Africa, and the South of Spain. In the eighth and ninth centuries they conquered Persia, Afghanistan, and a large part of India, and in the twelfth century they had already become the absolute masters of all Western Asia, Spain and North Africa, and Sicily.

· Between 1095 and 1270, with the blessing of the popes, and with the intention of protecting the Holy Land and keeping the pilgrim routes open to Jerusalem, Christians launched several crusades, mostly from France, slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Muslims.

· In 1478, Pope Sixtus IV initiated the Spanish Inquisition in order to purify Christian communities of all Jews and Muslims, even those who had converted to Christianity. This quickly became an instrument to expand state power and to fill its treasury with the estates of those found guilty of being less than fully Christian.

· In 1517, Martin Luther (1483-1546) in Wittenberg, Germany, repulsed by papal authority and its practice of buying and selling indulgences (the remission of religious penalties for sinning, including freeing the soul from purgatory) rebelled by posting his “Ninety-five Theses” on the door of the Wittenberg Castle church. Simultaneously, he called upon lay people to take responsibility for their own salvation and to renounce Roman authority.

· In Switzerland in 1523-1524, peasants in the Zurich district, using the argument that ruling authority should be based on the Scriptures, revolted against the town council, claiming that they should not be required to pay tithes on their produce because there was no biblical justification for doing so. Townsmen, with their own interpretation of the Bible, rejected the peasants’ demand, noting that the Bible did not forbid such payments, and said that the peasants should make them out of “love”. This so provoked the peasants that the revolt grew to hundreds of thousands in several countries. In 1525, territorial princes and large cities reacted by raising large armies that defeated and destroyed the revolt.

· In 1535, in Münster, Germany, believing that protection of “true” religion demanded harsh measures, Protestants, allied with the Catholic Church, persecuted and executed thousands of Anababtists (a sect that believed only adults should be baptized, founded in 1525 by Konrad Grebel, Balthasar Hubmaier, and others, and from whom the Baptists, Amish, Mennonites, Quakers, and Hutterites of today are descended).

· Between 1550 and 1650, about 100,000 people in Europe, mostly women, were persecuted for alleged witchcraft, and about 60,000 were executed. Under torture, or the threat of torture, many confessions were obtained, but no proof that an accused person ever attended a Devil-worshipping “black” Sabbath was ever produced in any witch trial.

· From 1618 to 1648, the Thirty Years’ War was fought between Protestant and Catholic states in the Holy Roman Empire (comprised largely of present-day Germany, Austria, and the Czech Republic) with considerable opportunistic meddling by surrounding countries. The war ended with the Peace of Westphalia (1648), which required that all subjects follow their rulers’ faiths.

· Many Christians willingly joined the Nazis in trying to exterminate the Jews during World War II. Islamic fundamentalists have declared holy war on “infidel” nations, particularly on the powerful ones. Muslims, Jews, and Christians continue to kill each other today.

· On September 11, 2001, perceiving the U.S. to be anti-Islamic because of its support for the presumed anti-Islamic policies of Israel and other countries, Osama Bin Laden, an Islamic extremist headquartered in Afghanistan, directed coordinated suicide attacks by fanatical Muslims on the World Trade Center in New York City and on the Pentagon near Washington, D.C., killing nearly 3000 people. These attacks inspired the following exchange on September 13, 2001 between Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson (see above) on Pat Robertson’s cable television program, “The 700 Club” (as reported by various websites):

Falwell: “What we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact, God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.”
Robertson: “Well, Jerry, that’s my feeling. I think we’ve just seen the antechamber to terror, we haven’t begun to see what they can do to the major population.”
Falwell: “The ACLU has got to take a lot of blame for this. And I know I’ll hear from them for this, but throwing God…successfully with the help of the federal court system…throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools, the abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked and when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad…I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who try to secularize America…I point the thing in their face and say you helped this happen.”
Robertson: “I totally concur, and the problem is we’ve adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government, and so we’re responsible as a free society for what the top people do, and the top people, of course, is the court system.”
Falwell: “Pat, did you notice yesterday that the ACLU and all the Christ-haters, the People for the American Way, NOW, etc., were totally disregarded by the Democrats and the Republicans in both houses of Congress, as they went out on the steps and and called out to God in prayer and sang ‘God bless America’ and said, let the ACLU be hanged. In other words, when the nation is on its knees, the only normal and natural and spiritual thing to do is what we ought to be doing all the time, calling on God.”

· In late August 2005, hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast of the U.S. and caused more than 1300 confirmed deaths. On September 1, 2005, Pat Robertson (see above) proclaimed on “the 700 Club” that “New Orleans asked for this tragedy by advertising itself as a destination for jazz music. As every Christian knows, jazz music is sinful and lures people into eternal damnation. The connection is obvious” (from http://datelinehollywood.com/archives/2005/09/18/pat-roberston-corrects-dateline-hollywood-article/). Reverend Franklin Graham (see above), son of Reverend Billy Graham, suggests the city was targeted because of the city’s sinful reputation. At a speech in Virginia, he said, “This is one wicked city, OK? It’s known for Mardi Gras, for Satan worship. It’s known for sex perversion. It’s known for every type of drugs and alcohol and the orgies and all of these things that go on down there in New Orleans.” Reverend Graham continued, “There’s been a black spiritual cloud over New Orleans for years. They believe God is going to use that storm to bring revival” (from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9600878/).
· As a result of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the removal of Saddam Hussein as dictator, Shiite Muslims waged civil war against Sunni Muslims in revenge for the atrocities committed by the Sunnis under the leadership of Hussein.
• In Silent No More (2005), Rod Parsley (see above) says, “I cannot tell you how important it is that we understand the true nature of Islam, that we see it for what it really is. In fact, I will tell you this: I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam. I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore.”
· In Jerusalem Countdown (2006), John Hagee (see above) says, “The final battle for Jerusalem is about to begin. Every day in the media you are watching the gathering storm over the State of Israel. The winds of war are once again about to sweep through the sacred city of Jerusalem. The world is about to discover the power of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the Keeper of Israel, “who … shall neither slumber nor sleep” (Ps. 121:4). His righteous fury will be evident in the defense of Israel.”

http://faculty.virginia.edu/consciousness/

+
Avatar of Michelle
Michelle (@montelimart63)1 year, 8 months ago ago

@nobodylies, When I said oppressive, I was referring to olden times.. but I didn’t make that clear. Still, modern day Christianity definitely has that element of “Oh, my religion is the only right religion and everyone else is going to hell”. What’s wrong with the separation of church and state? You can still practice your religion in public and private… and plus it makes non-Christians feel more comfortable and less left out during Christmas ;D
Non-religious people are far more oppressive than the Christians could ever be? .. Are you assuming all Christians are morally just and treat everyone fairly?

+
Avatar of Ray Butler
Ray Butler (@trek79)1 year, 8 months ago ago

@montelimart63, @nobodylies, I don’t see the distinction of people as religious or non-religious, any person, regardless of belief, can be a judgemental twat. The distinction is: Those who misappropriate concept and those who don’t.

+
Avatar of Ray Butler
Ray Butler (@trek79)1 year, 8 months ago ago

@nobodylies, I was watching Breaking Bad and I noticed when people were saying “God” and “Jesus” in the “blasphemous” sense of the words, it was censored out. I thought of how touchy people are about irrelevant things such as words and concepts. But then I seen someone actually talk about God in the possitive sense, and there you have it, “God” was censored yet again. Funny how the U.S is so big on free speech, especially with the youtube Egypt incident, and then excessively defies that principle on their own grounds.

+
Avatar of carson
carson (@jamescarson)1 year, 8 months ago ago

People too often look for answers through science and religion.

We’ve forgotten our senses.

Both science and religion would be meaningless without our first han experience of life.

I think you have to know yourself to know the world.

+
Avatar of Ray Butler
Ray Butler (@trek79)1 year, 8 months ago ago

@alltoohuman, This is because you do not know how I think. You may have a journal where all your knowledge is written down but I am impulsive and improvisational, everything I write is on the spot. I work best with this method, not with any alternative you suggest. If you don’t like how I work then that is your issue that you have to get over, I am not obligated to get over your issues for you.
I never said you said science is a limitation of knowledge, I am saying that it is, and it is considering how much knowledge we have that is not classed as science.
But what points of mine a questionable? They are all opinions so technically every point is questionable.

+
Avatar of a Lotus Blossoms.
a Lotus Blossoms. (@ancientmystic)1 year, 8 months ago ago

Could religion have started as a means of explaining the unexplainable, but developed into a crutch through life for those who cannot accept the impermanent nature of all we know? A need to accept any sort of afterlife to sweeten the bland taste of naked reality?

+
Avatar of Ray Butler
Ray Butler (@trek79)1 year, 8 months ago ago

@alltoohuman, I don’t often thing about what I say, I just say. But I have thought about it and I have come to some kind of organization of my words, just for you.

What does science and religion have in common? How are they even comparable? The only real connection they have is divination of the Alpha and Omega of the universe. But where science deals in the sum of parts, religion deals in something that is considered more than the sum of parts.
Science is limited to the tangible, and yes the tangible is actually far more than what is immediately evident. Take art, you can scientifically disect techniques of production, and then you can explore psychological motivations behind both the artist and subject matter, as well as the psychological reaction of those who look at the art. But at some point a variable hits, something science cannot go into for one reason or another.
There is scientific facts like Phi, the Fibonacci sequence and the Golden ratio, all formulas that when combined produce an infinite variable, and so every asthetic phenomena of the universe is explained, all but beauty.
But the Alpha is unrepresentable, if you think of nothingness, how can you represent it because a representation is always somethingness. If you think about the Omega, it is everythingness, also unrepresentable, even the symbol for infinity does not do it justice. These are things you cannot manufactor any concept to describe, albeit you can develop mathematical formula to explain them but it is not translatable into human terms, it always falls short. At this point science becomes frustrated and settles for the only word they are allowed to use, the only word left available to them: God.
Religion has been way off, yet suprisingly accurate at the same time and everything in between Alpha and Omega, if it makes sense or not, is valid simply because it exists within.

+
Avatar of Ray Butler
Ray Butler (@trek79)1 year, 8 months ago ago

@alltoohuman, Yes, I don’t know details as far as anything, there is only the way I see it and that is limited by my mastery of language.
Basically what I mean is that to the Alpha and Omega there is no distinction between nothingness, somethingness and everythingness. I think the persuit of reasoning for these things is irrational on the part of both science and religion, as no reasoning can exist. We are beings within the “Somethingness” and we are trying to use somethingness to explain things that exist outside of the “somethingness” universe. We are linear beings and we are using linear reason and linear language to explain non-linear phenomena.
If the Alpha and Omega is relevant in some fashion as far as humanity, I don’t know, but I believe it is only relevant to us as far as curiosity. What is relevant is figuring out how to deal with immediate things as far as humanity is concerned. We have a crystal tower built on the sand, I think we should sort out our foundations.

+
Avatar of Tine
Tine (@tine)1 year, 7 months ago ago

@trek79,

well said

+
Avatar of DaDuke
DaDuke (@dukevonschmot)1 year, 7 months ago ago

Religion and Science seem to be two completely different things, when in fact they are both attempts to describe what is going on in the universe.

As for arguments? You do not have to know anything about a subject to have a good argument. Just look at politicians.

+