What contributes more - science or religion???

[atanu]

Before my father passed away, he was given a diagnosis of terminal cancer. Still, the thoughts he expressed to us were of putting things in order and of his concern for the family he was leaving behind, not anything about God.

At his funeral (and to the consternation of the officiant who the funeral home brought in), there was no mention of God - my father had no use for God in life, so he had no use for God in death.

Hi 9-10ths

My father was an atheist and died of cancer too, on my hands. I was an atheist too, just following my father.

Two thoughts/questions, however, arose at that moment of my father passing away -- when a restless body in agony first gave way to a beatific smile on his face and then an inert body on my hand. No amount of glucose would make that body say "I" again. What was that which said "I" and which I considered to be my father? Where had that I gone? I surmised that the same "I" runs through my chidren and all. And now i consider the I as symptomatic of play of .......

...

 

[outhouse]

science does not drag humanity down

religion most certainly does.

 

[Breathe]

science does not drag humanity down

I agree.

Although I agree, I'm going to play playing Devil's Advocate here and bring up something: I'm surprised "scientific racism" hasn't been brought up yet. You know the kind, "Black people are inferior to white people because <insert stupid reasoning here>" nonsense, and/or eugenics. I get the feeling this is something Know it all has in mind.

Think it's worth discussing, or should it be in another thread?

 

[LuisDantas]

It is probably worth discussing, if only to clear up how real a problem it actually is.

When push comes to shove, I don't think science can be fairly blamed with that problem at all, and I don't even think it is much of a problem in actual practice. After all, it is best described as shameful lying - and science is still and ever the field that has the best defenses against shameful lying.

If anything, "science racism" is a direct consequence of the lack of proper scientific education. Many people unduly mistify science basically by being unaware of what it really is. That is why Creationism exists as an adversary to Evolution.

Of course, I can almost agree that proper religion is also free from drawbacks, but (1) that is not quite true; much of correctly practiced religion is dealing with harsh feelings and situations and (2) religion must still take the full responsibility for its correspondence to reality that science does, and the sad truth is that quite a few don't bother trying, while a sad number of others either delude themselves or arrogantly decides that they don't need to.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Although I agree, I'm going to play playing Devil's Advocate here and bring up something: I'm surprised "scientific racism" hasn't been brought up yet. You know the kind, "Black people are inferior to white people because <insert stupid reasoning here>" nonsense, and/or eugenics. I get the feeling this is something Know it all has in mind.

Think it's worth discussing, or should it be in another thread?

Alright. Let's play a little Devil's Avocate with this then.
Suppose we had solid findings both on a statistical scale and on a neurological scale that white people were less intelligent than, say, people of asian descent (Trying to switch it around a bit. The "black" vs "white" discussion gets old fast and some people have a lot of emotions invested in that).
Let's say that this, according all our data appeared to be true.

Would we not want to know?
Would we not want to know why?
Would we not want to know how to potentially remedy that problem?

I avoided the word "inferior" on purpose because it can contain so many different things depending on who you ask, and yes, I know that "intelligence" can mean many things as well but let's run with it and see where it leads.

 

[LuisDantas]

IMO we would want to know. And then, hopefully, we would go for social sciences to find out ways of dealing with the dangers of that finding.

 

[Bismillah]

Why would you try to compare two things which ultimately address two different problems and deal with two different goals?

 

[tumbleweed41]

... because Scientist believe in "mutual assured destruction" so Scientist remain non violent

Please provide sources for this statement.
I think you are confusing science with the cold war political thinking of the '80's.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Why would you try to compare two things which ultimately address two different problems and deal with two different goals?

No sure I catch your meaning here.
Could you elaborate somewhat please?

 

[tumbleweed41]

When you or anyone says as you do quoted above that something is a "natural occurrence" then that is giving "nature" a personality - a "personification".

As like saying an automobile is a mechanical process because in fact some mechanic did create the car and the process.

When one claims that a hurricane is a "natural process" or "natural occurrence" then that means there is some entity called "nature" doing a process which is giving "nature" a personality akin to a God.

If one truly wants to exclude any form of God then you have to stop personalizing events with such ambivalent terms such as "nature did it" because if nature is not a personality then nature can not do anything.

Call it mother-nature or father-earth or as a God but "nature" can not do anything unless you ascribe some intelligence or purpose in nature which thereby makes "nature" as a direct synonym to God.

Stephen Hawkins claimed that the Universe could create itself from nothing without God - but that too gives "the universe" as the creator as another synonym for a God thing.

If "nature" were not a scientific version of God then nature would not have processes or occurrences or purposes except that science treats it as a personality as you did in your quote above.

:clap

No.
A natural process is the result of unguided natural law.
Erosion occurs naturally, the boulder at the top of the cliff loses it's support due to the erosion. Eventually the boulder, without any support, succumbs to gravity and rolls down the cliff, killing an unwary hiker below.
Did "nature" do this, as in, the personification of nature, or as you have said, "God"?
Or was it the result of many naturally occurring events, unguided by any intelligence?

BTW, I would recommend reading the entirety of Hawkings new book, rather than pulling out a single statement, then you may understand the point that Hawkings was getting at.
It is not that God does not exist, it is that God cannot be show to be necessary for the Universe to exist.

 

[Know it all.]

I'm surprised "scientific racism" hasn't been brought up yet. You know the kind, "Black people are inferior to white people because <insert stupid reasoning here>" nonsense, and/or eugenics. I get the feeling this is something Know it all has in mind.

If anything, "science racism" is a direct consequence of the lack of proper scientific education. Many people unduly mistify science basically by being unaware of what it really is. That is why Creationism exists as an adversary to Evolution.

The lack of any education concerning the "scientific racism" is hardly done by accident.

People do not discuss it because it is the unsaid secret which most people know while being too timid to preach it.

Us white Caucasians use to get our feelings of white superiority and everyone else inferior from our Christian doctrines, but now many turn to the claims of science and its "evolution" to maintain the old Caucasian superiority complex.

Virtually everyone has to deny this since no one wants to be labeled as a "racist" and so any real discussion is only done in secret quarters and not in public.

I must say that I am surprised that others brought it up.

Cheers.

:clap

 

[LuisDantas]

It would take someone very ignorant of science to want to use science to support "white man's burden". So I guess you are agreeing with me, Know It All.

 

[Orias]

science does not drag humanity down

religion most certainly does.

I'd go as far to say that both drag humanity down if they are used in such a manner.

Just as they could both exhalt man if desired as well.

It's the constant race to try and prove each other wrong, instead of settling the obvious differences.

That's why some religions are more "preferable" than others, though ultimately most religions have a kind of deceitful and sad way of teaching narrowmindedness.

Some people are able to overcome this however, while most others stay in the black and white zones.

 

[Vendetta]

Scientific racism still exist hell didn't watson the one who along with crick who discovered the double helix and stuff believe blacks we're genetically inferior. This has nothing to do with the misunderstanding of science, rather using factual findings on genetics and attributing them to a specific ethnic group. SAT are culturally biased just as IQ test.

 

[Vendetta]

People say religion drags people down because they are.influenced by what they see.in the media. What about the devout who throw themselves in front of bullets to save loved ones. Or people who give out of their own because of the influence of spiritual charity.

 

[Orias]

People say religion drags people down because they are.influenced by what they see.in the media. What about the devout who throw themselves in front of bullets to save loved ones. Or people who give out of their own because of the influence of spiritual charity.

What about them?

 

[Know it all.]

Okay... let's get right to the meat of the matter: forget the dictionary. Forget religions and science. When you say "God", what do you mean?

I use the word "God" simply because of its popular (dictionary) usage even though I know that name is inaccurate and misleading and it is seldom that I find another person which can communicate with me on a higher level then the base necessities.

Even I am subject to peer pressure.

An example of what I mean can be described from "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" and its principle character of "V ger" link HERE.

The V-ger was hunting for its "creator" its God and had no idea of what the creator would look like or what the creator might be but it had to seek out its creator anyway.

Humanity can be viewed as a Vger and when we find our creator / God then I believe that we too will be pleasantly surprised at what we did not know.

Another analogy is in the US Space Shuttle program, in that the scientist and engineers are the creator of the best machine they could possibly create. As such the creators of the Space Shuttle did not want one to blow up and another to burn up and in such cases the creator(s) cried along with the dysfunctions of the created.

So now in our life the real thing "God" is really our "Father" / our Creator and humanity is its greatest creation of all. This God thing has extended itself to its maximum in creating humanity and we are separate as like the Space Shuttle is a separate entity from its creators and yet still connected anyway.

The Bible and other world scriptures are like instruction manuals for humanity which do give us insight as to what our creator really is but as yet we do not know it all.

And before some one declares that I am stuck in TV or in science fiction then I declare that I use these things to explain the points and they do seem to carry the message well.

:bow:

 

[Orias]

Okay... let's get right to the meat of the matter: forget the dictionary. Forget religions and science. When you say "God", what do you mean?

Everything within and beyond comprehension

 

[Genuine Realist]

Two different languages.

 

[Vendetta]

What about them?

It isn't dragging society down