Religion. The evolution, creation and everything in between megathread

[nick247]

yup actually forsaken puts it better

cept replace science with religion for me

I believe that it is a battle betwen religion and science to explain the things we do not understand and in terms of logical explanations...science is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo fucking far ahead of religion

actually can religion logically explain ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bell]

its explains everything nick.
Any time you wonder "How does that work?" The answer is god makes it work.
Any time you wonder "Why is it like that?" The answer is god knows best so he made it like that.

Any time you wonder "What is my purpose in life?" The answer is god has a purpose for everyone, a purpose you will never know because god will never tell you because gods says so.
Everyone has a purpose in gods great plan even those 100000 kids that got raped and killed in rwanda thier purpose was err  good  im sure, god is just smarter than us and knows what.

[[tsw].Forsaken]

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.

[KiLL3r]

as both tackle things of different essence.

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.

[Zarathrustra]

if all that happened I'd still be asking about the science behind it.

what allows you to be an inter dimensional being? is it objective or subjective? can it be achieved or even perceived by humans? how do you float? is it gravity bending, magnetic disruption or an ever last energy source feeding some sort of photon based mass? which is what also makes you so bright and shiny?

I'd also be asking why the hell I should live by his 'rules'.

[Tiwaking!]

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.

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.

[nick247]

At the same time, science can't explain absolutely anything from the religious point of view.

.

What is the religious point of view?

and in a world with multiple religious points of view which one is right?

and in a world where each religious view has TANGIBLE PRACTICES how do i know those PRACTICES are the right things to do?

and in a world where each religious view STATES that it is the ONLY CORRECT religious view how do i judge which one to believe?

Religion tries to explain something..........THAT IS A FACT
It tries to set out tangible rules .............FACT

unfortunatly its explaination is not based on what is logical and what is reasonable

So why is it a better explanation that those that ARE BASED ON LOGIC AND REASON


You see it doesnt matter that science cannot explain everything, becuase its still sooooo much closer to the truth than religion ever will be

does that bother you? that us non-religous ARE LOGICALLY AND REASONABLY closer to the truth about the things religion trys to explain than the religious?

[nick247]

actually heres another way of looking at it

You have to choose a between a range of methods for solving an engineering problem

How do you make that decision?

What process do you go through in order to reach your decision?

now consider this

there are a set of alternative beliefs in the world

You have to choose one

Applying the same process and thoughts that you used above what result would you arrive at?



In other words im asking you to use logic and reason in your choice of beliefs

Why would you use some different undefined set of reasoning for one thing and then use logic for EVERY OTHER DECISION IN YOUR LIFE

--BEGIN RANT--

WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY?

Because if you did use logic ORGANISED RELIGION FAILS MISERABLY as a method for explaining why and explaining how we should live our lives

-------------

btw if you hadnt noticed i actually really hate organised religion

i have nothing against believing in some sort of god character, i having nothing against having a set of morals to live your life by......but i do have something against organised religion spouting its crap as if it were FACT when it is not, it is not even close to fact

and then we have to put up with religious people saying that science fails because it cant explain everything, and that not every bit of science is 100% proven..........when by the EXACT SAME STANDARDS religion looks like a joke

you think religion comes close to proving anything, even explaining one single thing? saying it and explaining it are two different things!

----end rant...for now-------

[[tsw].Forsaken]

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

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.

[nick247]

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.
     

no your wrong, you might see it that way and i see it that way but YOUR religion and others like it DO believe in a tangible set of facts and try to pass them off as fact

    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.    

exactly and that basis is constantly being examined and critiqued AND is still FAR more solidly based than the base of religious beliefs

  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.
   

that argument works and is completely true, and then i turn it around and apply it to religion....................OH OH

and re:the bit at the end of foresakens post, i know how you would make your decisions, what im asking is why not apply that to your choice of organised religion

once again to reiterate, nothing wrong with belief/faith but there is with organised religion trying to make what is not tangible, tangible

[Bounty Hunter]

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.

chemical reactions inside the brain.

so welcome to science.

edit: ah fuck this thread and it's exponential growth pattern...got so much to read now.

[KiLL3r]

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.

negative. science will always seek the undiscovered.  i doubt we will ever get to a stage where we completely understand the universe and definitely not in my lifetime.

Religion on the other hand is the opposite because your essentially saying there is nothing to discover because god made it all and when you die god will have all the answers you want.

Id rather seek the truth than believe a lie

[Tiwaking!]

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.

W T F?

Maybe Im being abit rigid when I refer to the Laws of Physics. Oh wait: NO IM NOT!

The way it works is the way it works, not the way people THINK it works or the way it SHOULD work. No one has 'faith' that a ball you throw will drop, it DOES drop!

Who is closer to solving the problem of Gravity

a) A scientist working within the constraints of the reality we live in

b) A priest praying

Hmmm

This is EXACTLY why mentally ill people in Islamic countries are DENIED medical treatment. Sure Christianity and the other wacko religions might deign to allow their adherents the luxury of seeking professional medical advice, but overall its GODS BENEVOLENCE that allows anyone to get healed at all

The same is true with Gravity. When science explains it, because when it comes to science it is WHEN and not IF, religion(if it lasts that long) will sweep in with the 'God did it!' excuse before flying away again to rape peoples wallets for money.

I dont have faith that they will solve Gravity. I dont have faith that the world will achieve World Peace either, but the fact of the matter is EVENTUALLY it will happen, even if World Peace occurs because everyone dies

[nick247]

ive decided my new tactic is to say i support the bali bombers religious views and their faith

ok religious people show me why im wrong and your right?

oh and keep in mind if you mention the bible then i can counter straight away with i have the koran

oh and you cant use logic or reason because the minute you do you nullify all organised religion

[cobra]

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.

does religion explain this? and would you listen to scientific theories about the mind - would you except that love was an evolutionary product?

[Dr Woomanchu]

does religion explain this? and would you listen to scientific theories about the mind - would you except that love was an evolutionary product?

Love is an evolutionary product. Feeling love is a range of specific mind states that are measurable and repeatable.

I also think love is a thing of mystery and wonder. the emotion that makes it worth being alive, and a source of joy.

The 2 ideas aren't mutually exclusive.

[cobra]

Love is an evolutionary product. Feeling love is a range of specific mind states that are measurable and repeatable.

I also think love is a thing of mystery and wonder. the emotion that makes it worth being alive, and a source of joy.

The 2 ideas aren't mutually exclusive.

Science can explain electricty, but if you get struck by lighting, knowing the theory isn't going to change the experience.

Science can explain love, but if you get struck by love, knowing the theory isn't going to change the experience.

[EnjoyTheSauce]

"Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just,
then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome
you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but
unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no
gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones."
~ Marcus Aurelius

^ This is my take on the whole religion thing.

Im a strong atheist, havent believed in god since i reached the age of reasonable intelligence (7 or 8 ). I truly believe that religion is nothing but a means to earn money and a means to control the population cause basically its all about that top 0.1% of the population trying to control the rest of us.

My bad if I've just re-itterated previous thoughts but I only just found this thread and there 200 freaking pages of it.

[Dr Woomanchu]

Strangely enough I think it does change the experience.

For me anyway understanding what's going on enhances it.

[nick247]

A friend said to me that if us humans are depraved and at the mercy of our depravity then we need some sort of guidelines to live our life by.........this was his justification for following the christian religion

my argument was that if humans are so depraved then isnt it VERY likely that christianity came about as a method for suppressing a group of people and achieving power for another group.

Thus history is distorted in the bible which is nothing more than a group of depraved individuals perceptions of events........hardly something to base something as important as faith on

[Tiwaking!]

chemical reactions inside the brain.

A person who suffers damage to specific areas of their prefrontal cortex, either accidental or deliberate, will lose their sense of morality. In other words: If they had to sacrifice a baby, sibling or parent to save their lives then they would do so without hesitation. Or guilt

ive decided my new tactic is to say i support the bali bombers religious views and their faith

Its easier than that. Christians have been killing Christians for centuries. Best example is: Northern Ireland.

Just say "I support the Irish Catholics killing those filthy English protestants in Northern Ireland"

If anyone asks how you can justify that you just say "Protestants are not Christians"

[$inc3]

This is how i see it

Religion. The evolution, creation and everything in between megathread

If it has already been posted save the flaming, i wasnt in the mood to read 190 pages...

[UppityDuck]

religion or spirituality=methapysics

....with the accent on the 'meth' !
 

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.

It is testable and observable through testing, and the tests can be reproduced. Religion can't do this.

[ThaFleastyler]

I would become atheist if I was somehow convinced that my own experiences were a result of something else.

[cobra]

I would become atheist if I was somehow convinced that my own experiences were a result of something else.

but could you be convinced? - there are simple and natural reasons for your "spiritual experiences" - what we need is what would convince you that they were the result of something else