ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

"Science AND Religion" vs "Science OR Religion"

JunkmailforJohn

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 87

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 10:57 am

http://www.sfwriter.com/cgborder.htm

Please read these thoughts(its short about a page). My favorite writer weighs in on the debate.

As always I like to hear what you people think. So post away.

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 11:27 am

The problem is that Science and Religion went hand in hand. many scientist were and are deeply religion people and as Einstein would state that his work was an attempt the why and how god created the universe, but it is the fundamental who want to make it a battle of Science vs Religion.

Religion handle faith, which rules are totally different from science. While science deal with provable facts.
if the existant of God could be proven it would be simple, but it cannot.

some of the Greatest minds from Pascal to Kirkengard attempt to and both came to the conclusion that the existant of god was a matter of faith, a leap from logic.

As it stand Science demands more, it demands a provable, an observable that can be duplicated and analysis.

OneofOneof1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5162

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 12:41 pm

I haven't read the article, but my 2 cents about the whole matter is this....
I believe we are at an age where Science can meet Religion. It just takes both sides to clear their heads of what they 'think' they know and have an open mind.

For eg:If we could agree that when we pray, or think a thought, that prayer or thought is some form of energy being sent out into the space/dimensions around us which we can not visably see with our eyes. Now, if we had a machine that could detect and measure that energy...?
Perhaps we already do.

JunkmailforJohn

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 87

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 12:42 pm

Read the article

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 1:29 pm

Quote (OneofOneof1 @ Feb. 14 2006, 10:41 am)
I haven't read the article, but my 2 cents about the whole matter is this....
I believe we are at an age where Science can meet Religion. It just takes both sides to clear their heads of what they 'think' they know and have an open mind.

For eg:If we could agree that when we pray, or think a thought, that prayer or thought is some form of energy being sent out into the space/dimensions around us which we can not visably see with our eyes. Now, if we had a machine that could detect and measure that energy...?
Perhaps we already do.

hate to tell you that utter nonsense, it rate up there with the spiritual of the earily 1900's who hope to prove the existant of the spirit world by scientific methods...

Energy in any form can be measure,and if it was going to other dimension it would have been detected by now in particle physics research. Generally since this doesnot happen we known other dimension are small, smaller than a planck lenght...

Science is by the virtue of the scientific method clear headed, a scientist can think alot of things, but it experimental proof that mark whether his ideas are right.

Many a scientist have conducted experiments hoping to prove their theory and instead found the unexpected, as a matter of fact this is happening today in the fields of physics and astronomy.

The fact that the universe has been found to be expanding faster than it was assume to has cause many astronomer and astrophysicist to go back to the drawing board. Even quantum physicist have fail in predictions such as proton decay and Monopoles.

Science had met religion already, during the start of the "Age of Reason", and the many falling out between the two has been due to the fact that Logic, and Scientific method paints a different picture of the universe than the bibical tales.

As the author of the article point out, the origin of the physical constant are a mystery, but can be explain by many ways one that multiple universe exist or that the universe have undergone many birth and rebirth, each time taking on a random values, we are lucky cause this universe has what is needed for us to exist..

OneofOneof1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5162

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 1:33 pm

Quote (JunkmailforJohn @ Feb. 15 2006, 9:42 am)
Read the article

Read.
I'm not sure if he's trying to inject the "Alien" element into the equation, or if he's just "what-ifing"/Hypothesizing.
I stand by what I said above. The two can and , I believe, in the 'best of both worlds', hopefully one day meet in the middle.

OneofOneof1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5162

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 1:54 pm

Quote
hate to till you that utter nonsense, it rate up there with the spiritual of the earily 1900's who hope to prove the existant of the spirit world by scientific methods...


You don't have to hate to tell me anything.
I'm not coming at this from the angle of Science vs Religion. We already have a 4O something post covering that. I decided to give my input because I believed this thread was an opened minded discussion. Not another pedantic bashing of the 2 topics in mention. You don't have to recite to me all the scientific proof that you know. It is clear that you are well versed on the matter. And I respect you for that. But if you're going to bash/put down others ideas, than I take back that respect. Unless I'm reading you wrong. I came across my 'theory' through no reading of books or looking up early 1900's history. It just came to me one day. I still stand by it. Just expand upon the rather ..ahem...'simplistic view' if you will. I believe in Both. Science and Religion. That does not mean I take every word of the Bible as Gospel nor am I looking to witness the perfection in the "Omega Molecule". I just want to learn and am interested in what "Everybody" has to say. Whether I agree with it or not. We all can learn from each other.

Quote: "A Wise Man Knows He Knows Nothing"

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 3:13 pm

Quote (OneofOneof1 @ Feb. 14 2006, 11:54 am)
Quote
hate to till you that utter nonsense, it rate up there with the spiritual of the earily 1900's who hope to prove the existant of the spirit world by scientific methods...


You don't have to hate to tell me anything.
I'm not coming at this from the angle of Science vs Religion. We already have a 4O something post covering that. I decided to give my input because I believed this thread was an opened minded discussion. Not another pedantic bashing of the 2 topics in mention. You don't have to recite to me all the scientific proof that you know. It is clear that you are well versed on the matter. And I respect you for that. But if you're going to bash/put down others ideas, than I take back that respect. Unless I'm reading you wrong. I came across my 'theory' through no reading of books or looking up early 1900's history. It just came to me one day. I still stand by it. Just expand upon the rather ..ahem...'simplistic view' if you will. I believe in Both. Science and Religion. That does not mean I take every word of the Bible as Gospel nor am I looking to witness the perfection in the "Omega Molecule". I just want to learn and am interested in what "Everybody" has to say. Whether I agree with it or not. We all can learn from each other.

Quote: "A Wise Man Knows He Knows Nothing"

I sorry if I came on strong, but it irk me to hear poeple use the agruement that scientist have to be more open minded!!

The fact is few poeple even bother learning how scientists operate, the demands and proofs that must be look at before any scientific idea is even accepted.

A close minded scientist is treated by his fellow scientist as poor relation, he may in his earily day been a great man, but as his mind became less flexible he is left behind by his peers.

This has happen to many great scientists, Einstein and his railing against Quantum mechanics come to mind. The end of his career mark him as an outsider to other physicist in a field that he created with his photoelectric effect paper...

An open minded scientist explores possibilities never even image, if this was not the case we still be back in the days of newtonian mechanics, and being open minded is how scientist advance the field.

The major problem is that religion fevor trend to cloud one mind in the field of science cause instead of accepting the evident one begins to look for newer and newer ways to prove the standard theories wrong. Any crack pot idea is cling to no matter how far fretch it may seem.

God is not something one proves in the lab ( or even logic as Pascal finally concluded) but something that is felt in the heart.

and I find it sad that Religion can make some so isolated that they cannot grasp the basics laws that power our 21 century civilization, if you listen to creationist or fundamentalist the very agruements they propose would mean none of wonderful computer chips would operate due to fact that the science that created them was based on work done by einstein and his relativitic theory and how it applies to solid state matter, or that nuclear power plants ( or bombs) nonoperational since they depend on the Radioactive decay constants that seem to prove the universe a very anicent place.

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 3:31 pm

Quote (OneofOneof1 @ Feb. 14 2006, 11:54 am)
Quote
hate to till you that utter nonsense, it rate up there with the spiritual of the earily 1900's who hope to prove the existant of the spirit world by scientific methods...


You don't have to hate to tell me anything.
I'm not coming at this from the angle of Science vs Religion. We already have a 4O something post covering that. I decided to give my input because I believed this thread was an opened minded discussion. Not another pedantic bashing of the 2 topics in mention. You don't have to recite to me all the scientific proof that you know. It is clear that you are well versed on the matter. And I respect you for that. But if you're going to bash/put down others ideas, than I take back that respect. Unless I'm reading you wrong. I came across my 'theory' through no reading of books or looking up early 1900's history. It just came to me one day. I still stand by it. Just expand upon the rather ..ahem...'simplistic view' if you will. I believe in Both. Science and Religion. That does not mean I take every word of the Bible as Gospel nor am I looking to witness the perfection in the "Omega Molecule". I just want to learn and am interested in what "Everybody" has to say. Whether I agree with it or not. We all can learn from each other.

Quote: "A Wise Man Knows He Knows Nothing"

He attempting to see what if a more advance race could prove that god exist and provide mankind with the proof that hs long for.

In inway it the opposite from what many Ufologists propose,which is that meeting an alien race would be a massive blow against religion..

captJMK

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 194

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 8:34 pm

look, religion at its core was mans attempt to explain the world around him. things that early man could not answer, like whay are we here, where did we come from, why does it thunder, why are there rainbows, etc. as civilation grew we see the various sciences take form by people who could sort of grasp the concept of what actually was occuring in nature and use it to an advantage, like early witch doctors, and what were called scorcerors, witches, warlocks, etc. Out of these groups came scientists, doctors, chemists, etc. as we learned more and more. As we continue to learn more, religion will fade out more and more. however there will ALWAYS be those things that we can never answer like, what happens after you die, that religion will still serve a useful and again its CORE purpose which is to comfort humanity with the notion that there is an answer for everthing. mankinds greatest fear is the unknown, however it is also mankinds greatest quality to seek out answers and we achieve that the best through science.

Rulerzigzag

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 285

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 10:32 pm

Quote (captJMK @ Feb. 14 2006, 8:34 pm)
look, religion at its core was mans attempt to explain the world around him. things that early man could not answer, like whay are we here, where did we come from, why does it thunder, why are there rainbows, etc. as civilation grew we see the various sciences take form by people who could sort of grasp the concept of what actually was occuring in nature and use it to an advantage, like early witch doctors, and what were called scorcerors, witches, warlocks, etc. Out of these groups came scientists, doctors, chemists, etc. as we learned more and more. As we continue to learn more, religion will fade out more and more. however there will ALWAYS be those things that we can never answer like, what happens after you die, that religion will still serve a useful and again its CORE purpose which is to comfort humanity with the notion that there is an answer for everthing. mankinds greatest fear is the unknown, however it is also mankinds greatest quality to seek out answers and we achieve that the best through science.

I just agree with you when you say religion will fade out.

You see, I always thought Religion provides more comfort and is far from a "leap from Logic" as Lanceromega stated above. Logic is math , proven facts that sometimes start out as theory. It's the infinite source of intelligence, to show and prove.

Religion also is mythical and usually represents science in a different perspective and entertaining way. But both are unique as well because they leave room for answers. Science is proven facts only after constant mistakes and assumptions and ideas.

To put a long story short RELIGION IS GOOD AND EVIL
                                 SCIENCE IS POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE

Religion will fade, because even the lesser fortunate people of the world who cannot understand science and instead focus on mythical stories will one day comprehend because science will put it out there right in front of their eyes.

Rulerzigzag

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 285

Report this Feb. 15 2006, 10:34 pm

Quote (captJMK @ Feb. 14 2006, 8:34 pm)
look, religion at its core was mans attempt to explain the world around him. things that early man could not answer, like whay are we here, where did we come from, why does it thunder, why are there rainbows, etc. as civilation grew we see the various sciences take form by people who could sort of grasp the concept of what actually was occuring in nature and use it to an advantage, like early witch doctors, and what were called scorcerors, witches, warlocks, etc. Out of these groups came scientists, doctors, chemists, etc. as we learned more and more. As we continue to learn more, religion will fade out more and more. however there will ALWAYS be those things that we can never answer like, what happens after you die, that religion will still serve a useful and again its CORE purpose which is to comfort humanity with the notion that there is an answer for everthing. mankinds greatest fear is the unknown, however it is also mankinds greatest quality to seek out answers and we achieve that the best through science.

I just agree with you when you say religion will fade out.

You see, I always thought Religion provides more comfort and is far from a "leap from Logic" as Lanceromega stated above. Logic is math , proven facts that sometimes start out as theory. It's the infinite source of intelligence, to show and prove.

Religion also is mythical and usually represents science in a different perspective and entertaining way. But both are unique as well because they leave room for answers. Science is proven facts only after constant mistakes and assumptions and ideas.

To put a long story short RELIGION IS GOOD AND EVIL
                                 SCIENCE IS POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE

Religion will fade, because even the lesser fortunate people of the world who cannot understand science and instead focus on mythical stories will one day comprehend because science will put it out there right in front of their eyes.

OneofOneof1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5162

Report this Feb. 16 2006, 2:36 am

Quote (lanceromega @ Feb. 15 2006, 12:13 pm)
I sorry if I came on strong, but it irk me to hear poeple use the agruement that scientist have to be more open minded!!

Appology accepted.
I believe I said both sides. But I can see how you might have selective sight/hearing if you've heard that arguement too many times too count.
I just believe that if one is confident in what they believe in, then they shouldn't get bent outta shape over alternative views.Our passion for things as humans can make us a bit short sighted. I'm not saying you. I mean people in general. Both sides waste so much time and energy trying to make the other side see, when both sides really only want to see what They see. See? :laugh:
"Drowning in the Sees of Love" not withstanding, as I said before, I believe we can all learn from each other. That's why I come to this end of the quadrant. To perhaps learn something. I never got into Science in school, but now that I'm older, and with the influence of ST, I find it fascinating.

Quote
The fact is few poeple even bother learning how scientists operate, the demands and proofs that must be look at before any scientific idea is even accepted.


I'm sure.
That must be very frustrating.
To spend so much time studying the 'facts' principals, laws and theories.
The evidence painstakingly and meticulously forming in front of your eyes, only to have it dismissed as "The Nutty Professor".
That's not where I'm coming from.

lanceromega

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3859

Report this Feb. 16 2006, 10:55 am

Quote (OneofOneof1 @ Feb. 15 2006, 12:36 am)
Quote (lanceromega @ Feb. 15 2006, 12:13 pm)
I sorry if I came on strong, but it irk me to hear poeple use the agruement that scientist have to be more open minded!!

Appology accepted.
I believe I said both sides. But I can see how you might have selective sight/hearing if you've heard that arguement too many times too count.
I just believe that if one is confident in what they believe in, then they shouldn't get bent outta shape over alternative views.Our passion for things as humans can make us a bit short sighted. I'm not saying you. I mean people in general. Both sides waste so much time and energy trying to make the other side see, when both sides really only want to see what They see. See? :laugh:
"Drowning in the Sees of Love" not withstanding, as I said before, I believe we can all learn from each other. That's why I come to this end of the quadrant. To perhaps learn something. I never got into Science in school, but now that I'm older, and with the influence of ST, I find it fascinating.

Quote
The fact is few poeple even bother learning how scientists operate, the demands and proofs that must be look at before any scientific idea is even accepted.


I'm sure.
That must be very frustrating.
To spend so much time studying the 'facts' principals, laws and theories.
The evidence painstakingly and meticulously forming in front of your eyes, only to have it dismissed as "The Nutty Professor".
That's not where I'm coming from.

That the Problem is that you said both side!! as it stand the're are scientists that easily accept the moral and mystical message that regilion offers.

While there many regilionist poeple that accept science, the Jesuist monks maintain many universities and Institutions that promote the sciences. Running their own Observatories and even research labs.

The problem is that a few individuals that donot understand science or have a distorted image of science and attempt to paint scientist as a secert cabal that refuse to study the Truth..

What Truth? well there are the UFOlogists that say scientists refuse to accept the truth of UFO, the Creationist with their idea of a bible base origin of the universe, and host of Pseudoscientist with their Einstein is wrong, or Telsa Scalar theory can provide unlimited cheap power.

If scientists don't take to an idea, it not that they have not bother to read or even investigate the other side opinion, but that they have and found no merit to it.

OneofOneof1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5162

Report this Feb. 16 2006, 1:20 pm

Quote
That the Problem is that you said both side!!


Well I'm sorry if your offended, but as I said, don't take it personally.
I'm not going to pt the finger at one side or the other. If both sides can't concede that there might, just might be some part of the puzzle they haven't figured out yet, then they will always remain at an impasse. When we were 17, we thought we had it all figured out. Now we look back and amuzingly chuckle at ourselves. Zap your self to the science department at UCLA 400 yrs from now. If it's not covered in fall out dust, see what they've learned. Are there any new elements to the equation that you never would have considered? Do you feel silly that you so passionately clinged to one theory or another? Oh no, it didn't stand the test of time! Of course you don't, because you were willing to concede that there is Always more we can learn. Same goes for religion. 4OO yrs from now some lost parts of the bible and the fact that many parts of it have been written by man, to serve man, without the intervention of God placing their writing tool to paper. It is a worldwide accepted and established fact at this pt in time, and everybody's "Oh, if we only knew then what we know now!"
See, here's the big thing about the bible...5OOO people can read it and have it mean 5000 different things. To them. But the heart of it is what will shine thru. If your open to it. That's why, I believe, it is one of the hardest books to read.

You've stated examples for both sides, that not everyone is as black and white on the issue. True. I myself obviously fall into that category. I'm Conservative about somethings, and Liberal on others. Life is a balance my friend. Peace.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum