that looks good though the last "roar/scream" made me lol as it is the same one from that breakfast cereal TV ads. People must pay to access the same sound library hahaha
but how you define logic? is it "logical" for someone to sacrifice his life over a grenade to save your peeps on the humvee? is it logical for a group of guys to play with a baby and end up killing him/her? (just relating to what I saw on the news a while ago).
How do scientists go on about creating technology and scientific advances that might have an impact on how people kill themselves? Both in the cases when scientists actively work to create a weapon or just discover something that in the future is turned into something that kills people.
What kind of morals do apply to this? If you take a scientific approach you could end up saying that people might take a series of different moral approaches:
1) Utilitarian: maximize good minimize bad based on consequences 2) Divine Command: God tells you you shall not kill 3) Ethical relativism: good is defined by culture and history..eg cannibalism was good for the cultures that practiced it
etc etc
What happens is that all those moral approaches are not mutually exclusive and the decisions that people do will not follow a single string of theory but normally a complex combination of a lot of things coupled with stuff like "gut feeling", etc.
Some things in life don't follow a 100% scientific logical approach when done, even when the things itself are related to science.
Thats why you can't explain everything in life just with science.
Also, keep in mind that in all my posts I haven't gone saying BELIEVE IN CHRIST OR YOU SHALL GO TO HELL!!!!!! All I have said is that you need something else to fulfill a better understanding of your own, to meet the needs of your material self, your mind and spirit. Hence I have only quoted philosophers and scientists who reach the conclusion that there is "something" or "someone" else besides all the "science".
In this sense I'm not saying that you should all be catholic. I respect all religions and I think that if you were to choose one it would be something that just feels right with what you are and who you are.
I just find it really difficult to understand how people don't realize, from the beauty of nature to how life develops, that there is "more than meets the eye" in a way that everything does not exist and continues to exist and develop just based on random chance. If nothing existed before, how did randomness even managed to work.
Then, there comes the whole idea of you guys with the rules of different religions. Remember that:
a) In all religions, scientific communities, everywhere, you will find extremists. b) All things now are transmitted and explained by people, hence different understandings might arise.
So yeah, why so many religions? From my point of view simply because many people, with different approaches and cultures realized that "something else" that is beyond science and logical understanding. The forms might change but normally the essence stays the same.
Now, I'm not gonna explain other religions because I'm not extremely informed on them but I can tell you about catholicism. The 10 commandments and stuff...RULES!!!! OMG OH NO!!!! RLY??? YA RLY??? IMA CHARGIN MY LAZEEEERRRZZ!!!! SHOOP THA WOOOP!!!!
Those commandments can just be translated into general wellbeing stuff. Come on, don't kill (general human wellbeing), don't envy others (good communities), respect people and parents (family stuff), believe in God (OMG!!! RUN TO THE HILLS!!!!!) can actually be understood as have faith in what you believe, stand your ground and have an opinion. etc etc.
So yeah, I just ask you guys to take a step back and see the essence of some things and not just concentrate 100% on the form, and analyze the human being as a complete being, not just matter. Matter doesn't define the "I" when it comes to understanding who you are. You need to include at the same time your animal, conscience and metaphysical (YEAH, NO METH!!! lol that comment cracked me up ) natures into your understanding of your own self.
both seek to explain how we came about. why do some people struggle with this concept. The point of difference is how we go about it.
in plain words, yes, both try to see why we came about, but differ on the aspect of that question. In simple black and white, science=physics, religion or spirituality=methapysics
Quote from: Tiwaking!;830199
The day religion can properly give an ontological explanation of this god character, without resorting to equivalences, is the day I'll not be Atheistic.
Since that is a factual(FACTUAL) impossibility, I'll wait for the Higgs boson.
I can't really argue this point as you already constrain yourself to a set number of degrees of freedom on your approach. It feels like trying to see a rainbow as made of a few colors, rather than an infinite amount.
And the point here is that what make religious people believe is not a series of tangible facts that we can touch, see and measure. In fact is quite the opposite, the intangible that we can't really see or touch. Thats what is called faith.
In some sense, science is not that far away from religious faith. Stuff like gravity for example, we can all explain what it is but in reality is something that acts through unknown mediums. In fact, some scientists argue that science itself is not "free" as everyone thinks, but rather a constrained approach that has been creating a path for scientists to follow given the inherent laws, theories and constraints that past discoveries and studies have created. Also, science itself works towards a purpose, not just for the pure existence of it.
Going back to the gravity example, scientists worked until they got a set of equations that fitted with the ones they already had, in order to explain this phenomena. What does actually tell us that the way they shaped their understanding to fit set constraints of scientific thinking is the optimal or the real one, yet everyone believes it; eg have faith in it.
From another point of view, all scientific stuff that you guys know has to some degree been imposed on you by peers, teachers, experience and history. In that sense, science is just a series of rules that govern nature that has been crafted by some "elite" people since some time ago and has been passed down to everyone through educational institutions.
Oh well, I know I'm gonna get all sort of bad reactions for this message as everyone here thinks religious people are just some idiots that believe in the spaghetti monster. Also most people here are really focused in just trashing everything out without changing filters in the way they actually interpret other's opinions.
AND!!!! gotta big exam tomorrow so wtf am I doing here? no idea, so reply to comments might come kinda late :p...might not even come at all.
kthxbai wish me luck for tomorrow morning!
Edit: Nick, just saw your post....sorry but I don't have the time to answer it fully. But just to tell you, as an engineer, you can't model factors such as beliefs, moods, and metaphysical stuff in your approaches. Science just doesn't work with that, so we just constrain ourselves to use scientific approaches that allow us to incorporate stuff we can work with from a scientifical point of view, which in every situation, gets really simplified from the actual reality, regardless of the complexity of the project.
If we apply scientific approach to everything, life fails miserably as well, as life itself would be 100% predictable, modeled and understood. That would in exchange mean that following a scientific approach we would not have individuals, but rather a mass of bodies following set rules of nature.
religion can't explain anything in the sense you guys are promoting logical explanation.
At the same time, science can't explain absolutely anything from the religious point of view.
This is a huge dichotomy that most of the people around here have. In essence, everyone is trying to fight for their points of views while being on two completely ontologically different grounds.
As an analogy, imagine atheists in the first floor of a house while religious guys on the second floor. You are just throwing arguments that can't really contradict nor even be put to the same level.
From my point of view, what atheists or extreme scientists here need to do is try to get closer to the ceiling and just listen....and ultra religious guys to put your ear on the floor and just listen...in that "sound of silence" you will find the answer.
I'm both catholic and an engineer (yeah, a guy who actually APPLIES science, not just think about it), and I believe both things, religion and science have different purposes in life and can't really be compared on the same level, as both tackle things of different essence.
I would become an atheist if science itself could explain everything...from spirit to freedom, from love to hate, from soul to conscience, from life and enjoyment, to death and sorrow....etc.
I mean, some of the most scientific minds of human history have reached the conclusion that there is something "else", call him God, the Force or the architect. Einstein said Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind, which I agree. Also, Aristotle reached a similar conclusion, where he stated that he believed in something else.
I have always wondered if it would be possible to have a strategy game such as World in Conflict that would allow you to switch to a FPS ina split second to the action going on on the ground....kinda like being a BF2 commander and then jsut selecting a unit and choosing to control it from 1st person....while the rest of the battlefield is controlled by the AI
Just as everything has a beginning everything has a ending. Why should god be any different?
well, in essence, from a "scientific point of view", we can say that matter does not get created or destroyed, just changes form, style, whatever you wanna call it. So it is tacitly implied that matter is a given that will not end (and has been "here" from...ever)....since everything is made of matter (material things for that matter :p hahaha love how I end up confused with the words lol) we can imply that everything has no beginning or end....only forms, or stages have some sort of "cycle" though not sure if that would classify as a definite end/beginning.
omg....I'm so tripping right now and I haven't had anything!!!!! I can get a high from air alone!!!!
ok ok link removed, guess working for an emergency room at a hospital made me a little bit immune to some things...I see them from a "wow, thats a medical miracle" point of view.
I guess people here are more comfortable with something like this..
