Is Science Necessary...

[Audie]

All religions are not the same and, yes, there's been some really bad stuff done in the name of God(s) but there's also some really good stuff as well.

Unhelpful in different ways

 

[1213]

Ash from each volcano is as distinct as
a fingerprint.

How can you know that? can you show how that is?

 

[Audie]

How can you know that? can you show how that is?

Um, by being interested and educated?
I went to college, studied and remember?
Im a curious person who reads?

Of course the chemical composition of each
volcanos ash (powdered rock) is different!

You knew it too if you bothered to think.
What came out of St Helens?
What comes our of Hawaiian volcano?
Notice any difference?

Of course in the lab they are precisely analyzed.

And if you bother to google, you
can find it there.

Seems worth doing, ifn you really believe in
God.
Dont want be go slandering him as a drowner of worlds, do you? Not ifn its all some

 

[Sheldon]

Belief that science works or that
Paris is real is a wholly different thing from
Belief in something that takes Faith in
the supernatural.

Mixing them up is no help.

Bravo, all humans must form beliefs about the world they perceive, we could simply not function otherwise. However a belief can be based on vapid superstition or wishful thinking, or it can be based on overwhelming objective evidence, and of course, it can be anywhere in between. Thus to label something a belief, in order to draw an analogous comparison, is often used by theists in a disingenuous way.

I believe, as I imagine do most people nowadays, that the world is not flat. Some people however, do still believe the world is flat. Now is there anyone here, who is prepared to state that those beliefs are remotely comparable? Or that one is not pure fantasy, and the other objective fact?

 

[Sheldon]

All religions are not the same and, yes, there's been some really bad stuff done in the name of God(s) but there's also some really good stuff as well.

Hardly a compelling argument to accept the idea, that any of it comes from an infallible deity though. Quite the opposite in fact...

 

[Audie]

Bravo, all humans must form beliefs about the world they perceive, we could simply not function otherwise. However a belief can be based on vapid superstition or wishful thinking, or it can be based on overwhelming objective evidence, and of course, it can be anywhere in between. Thus to label something a belief, in order to draw an analogous comparison, is often used by theists in a disingenuous way.

I believe, as I imagine do most people nowadays, that the world is not flat. Some people however, do still believe the world is flat. Now is there anyone here, who is prepared to state that those beliefs are remotely comparable? Or that one is not pure fantasy, and the other objective fact?

I dont think its disingenuous.

Believers believe things like farmers farm.
They must thinkmeverybody isvsomevsort of Believer.
Diff is, theys right- believers, atheists is rong believers.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You've used up my willingness to answer your questions without you answering any of mine. Here it is again:

Why would ethics or morality "belong in the religious domain" when religion is largely silent on these issues?

I believe i answered this question. Now, please answer mine.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

We are social animals and the healthier and more stable our society is the better it is for us.

Begging the question. Why should you care about that?

 

[ppp]

Begging the question. Why should you care about that?

I am not sure what you mean by begging the question. I understand the term, but I am not sure why you think it applies in this particular case.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe i answered this question. Now, please answer mine.

I went back through the thread again; you didn't.

 

[metis]

Unhelpful in different ways

Not in my experience.

 

[metis]

Hardly a compelling argument to accept the idea, that any of it comes from an infallible deity though. Quite the opposite in fact...

I think a lot depends on the person and what their experiences may have been.

 

[Audie]

Not in my experience.

Never? Surely you are joking

 

[Audie]

I think a lot depends on the person and what their experiences may have been.

The person is probably is the sum of it.
Especially the standards for evidence.

 

[metis]

Never? Surely you are joking

The person is probably is the sum of it.
Especially the standards for evidence.

First of all, I wasn't joking, and, secondly, I don't know what you're referring to in the second sentence.

It seems to me that you're implying that I didn't experience something, or maybe that I misunderstood what I experienced, which begs the question how could you possibly know either?

 

[Audie]

First of all, I wasn't joking, and, secondly, I don't know what you're referring to in the second sentence.

It seems to me that you're implying that I didn't experience something, or maybe that I misunderstood what I experienced, which begs the question how could you possibly know either?

" seems to me" is your key phrase.
I dont foubt you and divers others experience "somethung(s)"

So have I.

What one makes of it, constructs around it,
varies.

 

[Sheldon]

I dont think its disingenuous.

Believers believe things like farmers farm.
They must thinkmeverybody isvsomevsort of Believer.
Diff is, theys right- believers, atheists is rong believers.

I meant the word belief, is often used by religious apologists in a disingenuous way, with a false equivalence of a belief for which no objective evidence can be demonstrated, and believing or accepting a well evidenced scientific theory, for example. By claiming they are both beliefs. To me that seems disingenuous.

 

[metis]

What one makes of it, constructs around it,
varies.

Yep, which is why it's quite subjective.

But let me just say that what I experienced was shocking, unexpected and, frankly, unwelcomed at first. As a scientist [anthropologist], now retired, I've long been trained to look at things objectively, thus "superstitious" is not a problem I have.

But my experiences are, mine, thus not necessarily what many or most others may have experienced. And trying to judge other people's experiences is probably not the best thing to do.

 

[ppp]

As a scientist [anthropologist], now retired, I've long been trained to look at things objectively, thus "superstitious" is not a problem I have.

Superstition is a problem that everyone has as part of the human condition. No one is immune. The best we can do is be vigilant, and to be ready to be skeptical of our own conclusions.

 

[Audie]

Yep, which is why it's quite subjective.

But let me just say that what I experienced was shocking, unexpected and, frankly, unwelcomed at first. As a scientist [anthropologist], now retired, I've long been trained to look at things objectively, thus "superstitious" is not a problem I have.

But my experiences are, mine, thus not necessarily what many or most others may have experienced. And trying to judge other people's experiences is probably not the best thing to do.

Not always the best. But we all do it.
And its very often a wise thing to do.

Good judgement, common sense
are not so common.