I wouldn't say that, Dawud, because I don't really see a lot of clear meaning there. All that emphasis on supposed choices is a bit puzzling to me.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Are science and spirituality compatible?
- Thread starter Gambit
- Start date
DawudTalut
Peace be upon you.
In clear words, we may say:
We should use religion and science peacefully for peace, no more fights on the name of faith, no more fights on the name of science and tech.
It is wish and pray and aim.
We should use religion and science peacefully for peace, no more fights on the name of faith, no more fights on the name of science and tech.
It is wish and pray and aim.
Gambit
Well-Known Member
I do not believe science has the capacity to measure one's self-awareness.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
If I may be so bold as to add a single extra conditional to this statement:
"I do not believe science has the capacity to measure one's self-awareness yet."
Gambit
Well-Known Member
Your boldness has been noted.
Bobbyh
Infinite Nothingness
Okay. But belief is somewhat irrelevant to comprehending actuality and doesn't change the fact that by using science people can measure self awareness.
I assume I'm supposed to explain how...
Self awareness is an awareness of self. So first define the terms self and awareness.
Self is defined as the center of a specified perspective.
Awareness is defined as a range of accurate acknowledgments regarding a specified variable... in this case the variable is, one's self.
So "scientifically" measuring the frequency of successfully acknowledged accuracy relating to and comprehended by ones's self can be compared against relative data about any predictable circumstances. The measure of consistencies between the two then correlates to a measure of self-awareness.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Self-awareness
Self-awareness is the understanding that one exists.
Furthermore, it includes the concept that one exists as an individual, separate from other people, with private thoughts.
Self-awareness
Are Elephants Self Aware? | Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman
Self-awareness is the understanding that one exists.
Furthermore, it includes the concept that one exists as an individual, separate from other people, with private thoughts.
Self-awareness
Are Elephants Self Aware? | Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Mirror test
The mirror test is a measure of self-awareness developed by Gordon Gallup Jr in 1970.
The test gauges self-awareness by determining whether an animal can recognize its own reflection in a mirror as an image of itself.
This is accomplished by surreptitiously marking the animal with an odourless dye, and observing whether the animal reacts in a manner consistent with it being aware that the dye is located on its own body.
Such behaviour might include turning and adjusting of the body in order to better view the marking in the mirror, or poking at the marking on its own body with a finger while viewing the mirror.
Animals which have passed the mirror test are common chimpanzees, bonobos, orangutans, dolphins, elephants, humans and possibly pigeons.
Surprisingly, gorillas have not passed the test, although at least one specific gorilla, Koko, has passed the test; this is probably because gorillas consider eye contact an aggressive gesture and normally try to avoid looking each other in the face.
Human children tend to fail this test until they are at least 1.5 to 2 years old.
Dogs and 1 year old children, for example, usually react to a mirror in fear or curiosity, or simply ignore it, while birds often attack their own reflections.
Mirror test
The mirror test is a measure of self-awareness developed by Gordon Gallup Jr in 1970.
The test gauges self-awareness by determining whether an animal can recognize its own reflection in a mirror as an image of itself.
This is accomplished by surreptitiously marking the animal with an odourless dye, and observing whether the animal reacts in a manner consistent with it being aware that the dye is located on its own body.
Such behaviour might include turning and adjusting of the body in order to better view the marking in the mirror, or poking at the marking on its own body with a finger while viewing the mirror.
Animals which have passed the mirror test are common chimpanzees, bonobos, orangutans, dolphins, elephants, humans and possibly pigeons.
Surprisingly, gorillas have not passed the test, although at least one specific gorilla, Koko, has passed the test; this is probably because gorillas consider eye contact an aggressive gesture and normally try to avoid looking each other in the face.
Human children tend to fail this test until they are at least 1.5 to 2 years old.
Dogs and 1 year old children, for example, usually react to a mirror in fear or curiosity, or simply ignore it, while birds often attack their own reflections.
Mirror test
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
I have this vision of spirit flowing out of the brain like water....
That is just so silly shawn.....spirit is omnipresent and is not discontinuous with the physical,
There is no incompatibility, except in the minds of the ignorant who do not understand that religious understanding covers the underlying unity of all that exists, science deals with the attempt to understand the workings of physical nature.....in the minds of those who conflate the whole with the part (5%).... The fact is that the world has legions of people who have never submitted themselves to a lifetime of religious practice....yet claim this or that about the mysteries of spirit as if their opinion has equal worth of understanding of the subject as the truly religious souls who has submitted their whole life to the spirit.... Truly sane sane people would never do this....
shawn001
Well-Known Member
I have this vision of spirit flowing out of the brain like water....
That is just so silly shawn.....spirit is omnipresent and is not discontinuous with the physical,
There is no incompatibility, except in the minds of the ignorant who do not understand that religious understanding covers the underlying unity of all that exists, science deals with the attempt to understand the workings of physical nature.....in the minds of those who conflate the whole with the part (5%).... The fact is that the world has legions of people who have never submitted themselves to a lifetime of religious practice....yet claim this or that about the mysteries of spirit as if their opinion has equal worth of understanding of the subject as the truly religious souls who has submitted their whole life to the spirit.... Truly sane sane people would never do this....
Ben what's your definition of "spirit" your using?
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Religion, Morality, Evolution
Paul Bloom Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
http://www.yale.edu/minddevlab/papers/religion-morality-evolution.pdf
Paul Bloom Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
http://www.yale.edu/minddevlab/papers/religion-morality-evolution.pdf
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Spirit is that omnipresent medium in which the Cosmos exists.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
So...just a another flawed human point of view.....this is about what you think...
Vishvavajra
Active Member
This is the issue right here. If you accept that religious myths are just one way of conceptualizing reality and the human experience, and not the only way, then there should be no problem. Literalism mistakes the conceptual models themselves for objective reality, which is not a mistake scientists generally make, although laymen who read about scientific theories and don't understand them for what they are can often fall into the same error as religious literalists.
ScottySatan
Well-Known Member
In the past, Science didn't really distinguish itself from spirituality. Later, there came this war of empiricism vs. rationalism. Empiricism won and dominated science. More recently, science has accepted empiricism to the point of being indifferent/uncaring about spirituality. Currently, the science of spirituality is a thing that exists. It is studied with empirical rules, but the findings are surprisingly subjective, as in results are relative to what the observee believes.
A disproportionate number of scientists are athiests. The reason why will vary depending on your worldview. Which came first, the science education or the athiesm? Are they athiests because they're thinkers? I personally think it's because they became posessed by the devil when they first heard rock music.
A disproportionate number of scientists are athiests. The reason why will vary depending on your worldview. Which came first, the science education or the athiesm? Are they athiests because they're thinkers? I personally think it's because they became posessed by the devil when they first heard rock music.
Vishvavajra
Active Member
When was science not based on empirical methods? Before that you had various kinds of natural philosophy, but we wouldn't normally call that science.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Ben, you think every point of view from human's is flawed?
ScottySatan
Well-Known Member
Today we don't call anything not done by empirical methods science, because we empiricists have won and wrote the history books. I was talking more about what people called themselves. Isaac Newton lived before the divide. Ask Isaac why there are 7 colors in the rainbow. Indigo? really?
shawn001
Well-Known Member
We will have to agree to disagree.
It can be used with the supernatural in its meaning, although that is not the modern definition and again, what is supernatural? Every time we think something is supernatural it is later explain with natural explanations so far. There is no evidence of anything unnatural.
To me, I don't believe in organize religion and believe that all religion's are an attempt of humankind to explain things they can't, especially death. It comforts people there is an afterlife and their "self" will be preserved when they die. I believe religion evolved within humankind and you can actually see it in the evolution of religions.
I am still spiritual however. The wonder of the universe is not lost on me, in fact I think its more then spectacular and worth investigation.
"The lesson isn't in the victory, it's in the struggle."
Anonymous
." Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away."