Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 10181 - 10200 of total 22747 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
WBraun

climber
Oct 21, 2012 - 11:36am PT
Modern Science or should I say Dr F "thinks" and "believe" that they are the only proprietors of all known reality .......
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 21, 2012 - 11:39am PT
I say Werner "thinks" and "believe" that they are the only proprietors of all known reality .......

or in other words
Werner has no answers
But he knows that those scientists are all wrong about God and the soul

That's what he thinks, that is his belief

Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Oct 21, 2012 - 11:52am PT
But he knows that those scientists are all wrong about God and the soul

Who are "those" scientists and why are they "all wrong about God"?


That's what he thinks, that is his belief

His beliefs, at this stage, in a strictly polemical sense, are at least directly equivalent to your own.... Unless you have stumbled upon a theorem that disproves the existence of a God.
Have you?
Studly

Trad climber
WA
Oct 21, 2012 - 11:54am PT
So you deny your own soul Dr F? and your purpose is to try to make sure that others deny theirs as well?

Beware my friend, you reap what you sow.
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Oct 21, 2012 - 12:01pm PT



the scientific consensus

Annnnnnnnnd....what is that?
Studly

Trad climber
WA
Oct 21, 2012 - 12:09pm PT
You advocate something you know nothing about Dr F. But all men choose the path they walk upon,.

"For to no other creature in the kingdom of the Earthly Mother is it given the power of thought, for all beasts that crawl and birds that fly, live not of their own thinking but of the one Law that governs all. Only to the Sons of Men is it given the power of thought, even that thought that can break the bonds of death. Do not think because it cannot be seen, that thought has no power. I tell you truly, the lightning that cleaves the mighty oak, or the quaking that opens up cracks in the earth, these are as the play of children compared with the power of thought. Truly each thought of darkness, whether it be of malice, or anger, or vengeance, these wreak destruction like that of fire sweeping through dry kindling under a windless sky. But man does not see the carnage, nor does he hear the piteous cries of his victims, for he is blind to the world of the spirit.

BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Oct 21, 2012 - 12:14pm PT
Biology class when they dissect the frog will not find the soul with their material senses because the soul is anti material.

Thus modern mechanistic material science has failed to find the soul due to only using their defective material senses.

This is a very good and precise description of faith vs. physics.

You can't cut open a frog and find its soul, because you say that science is using "defective" material senses.

Therefore the soul is immaterial and not observable with the physical senses (correct me. I don't want to put words into your mouth).

How do you observe the soul?

Everyone do their best to describe a soul for me. Treat me like a child and be very clear and simple.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Oct 21, 2012 - 12:21pm PT
Oops. I see that Jan picked up on this before me. I will post her thoughts again for us to see:

If you want to reconcile this factual evidence with traditional religious beliefs, then rather than arguing against evolution and the origin of species, ask the really interesting questions. What is a soul? Do animals have one too? If they don't when did we get one? How did life on earth originate? Did those four amino acids appear here through chance or did they catch a ride on meteors from somewhere else (we have found meteors fallen to earth that contained them). And the biggest questions of all - how did our universe originate, and what existed before that? And a few others like are there other universes existing at the same time as ours? There is no end to interesting questions with deep philosophical and religious implications, so it is a shame to get hung up on a well known phenomena like the origin of species and evolution.
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 21, 2012 - 12:30pm PT
I know just as much about the soul as any one else

So don't go judging me, when you have no idea what I know or don't know

If you want to have a soul, good, I never said you didn't have one

Science has not found a soul
The scientific consensus says that the so called "soul" does not exist"
That is my belief
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Oct 21, 2012 - 01:02pm PT
The scientific consensus says that the so called "soul" does not exist"

Could you provide a link to the published scientific paper that details either the alleged " consensus" and/or the discovery that the soul does not exist?
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Oct 21, 2012 - 01:13pm PT
Jennie

Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
Oct 21, 2012 - 01:21pm PT
The most bankrupt aspect of christianity and many other religions is the notion of 'original sin'



Thus, infants, infants I tell you, MUST be "baptized", and damn quickly because they might die if their father swings their head against a stone for crying too loud or whatever


I'm in sympathy with Healyje and Norton in their feelings about the doctrine of "original sin" and its corollary calling for infant baptism.

Certainly, Christ didn't call for the baptism of small children.

The doctrine of original sin derives from a questionable interpretation given to the writings of Paul, especially Romans 5:12-21,by some theologians of the second and third centuries. More than any, Augustine in the fifth century transformed Paul's teachings on the Fall into the doctrine of original sin. His views were adopted as doctrine and formally canonized by the decrees of the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century.

Protestantism largely accepts this false, and, I believe, unfounded in scriptural sources, doctrine. John Calvin stated: "We believe that all the posterity of Adam is in bondage to original sin, which is a hereditary evil"

Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 21, 2012 - 01:26pm PT
Largo
You still haven't proven your point that consciousness is not a product of a material brain, so your observation is that we don't agree with you, which is true.

We are comfortable with the scientific theory that the brain produces consciousness, since no other theory exists to explain it, so the gaps have been filled as far as we are concerned, making the big picture complete.


Complete? Really. So "science" is totally complete so far as explaining how experience is "created" from matter? Last time I heard, one of the leading neuroscientists said they "had no idea." What's the new data that's turned up in the last few weks.

Note that I'm not saying that brain and mind are not related - a ridiculous statement withal.

My "point" is that "creation" of anything, be it energy, the universe, mind, DNA, or your next thought, is a problematic theory when looked at in any ultimate (mechanical) kind of way. I fidd it more accurate to talk about the existence of infinite qualities that manifest in a continually morphing process.

Of course I'm talking more about the subjective than the objective realm. But since you consider both to qualitatively be the same things - for reasons I'd love to hear explained - you're stuck with the inconsistancies, and with gaps that can never be closed, even as people swear that they will. The reason they won't IMO is not that we won't get more data, but that if yo call your Uncle your Aunt, the model will eventually break down when you get up close.

JL
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 21, 2012 - 01:44pm PT
I know just as much about the soul as any one else


 Knowing nothing about what man calls "the soul" is the same as bing able to wax poetically and philosophically about it.
In the end the results are the same… 0. Mainly because what some term as "soul" is the same as what others term "god" and still other term as "a nonexistent person/place/thing that men and women continue to argue about to no resolve and with no real outcome from either side.

The ones claiming gods or souls are the ones intentionally making things up in their minds and feel completely comfortable with that and live their lives without any qualms.
The ones claiming no god/no soul are the ones living without the made up parts, without the imaginary and at last within reality.

Fortunately for the latter… they need not prove a thing, as it is all on the former (who claim there is a god, who claim there is a soul) have made the claim for there being something (this is a positive claim and would need to be proven).


I'll continue to sit back and watch the verbal contortionisms as they are presented


To be sure: When presented with an unknown and if given enough time to figure it out or get to the bottom of the unknown, your final judgement is "it must be god"?

You've not begun to think about it and at the very least will need to continue your thinking
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Oct 21, 2012 - 01:46pm PT
My "point" is that "creation" of anything, be it energy, the universe, mind, DNA, or your next thought, is a problematic theory when looked at in any ultimate (mechanical) kind of way. I fidd it more accurate to talk about the existence of infinite qualities that manifest in a continually morphing process.

The word "ultimate" is key in this paragraph, as I see it.
Science is an inductive process that can make no statements ,at the current time ,about the ultimate nature of anything, only the particular nature of things. Even the conclusions that sciences derives, i.e., general principles ,are only in reference to , and derived from ,the measurement and observation of particular constituents.
God is a general principle in which particulars are derived from this general tenet- a deductive process. God is what I term the prime deduction
Science, operating inductively , and is therefore in sore need of a prime induction to arrive at a scientific conclusion as to the ultimate nature of the universe, or the ultimate nature of anything,for that matter.
Until then science is in the yeoman business of testing and predicting particulars to arrive at general theories that relate to those particulars and only those particulars. Science is very good at this, and getting better. For instance the fact that neutrinos were predicted 20 years before their confirmed discovery is a specific example of this.
Perhaps one day a brilliant scientist, or more likely a series of brilliant scientists, will predict god in the same way , design a series of peer approved experiments and prove scientifically , inductively, that God exists. The prime induction. Oh yeah.
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 21, 2012 - 02:25pm PT
Could you provide a link to the published scientific paper that details either the alleged " consensus" and/or the discovery that the soul does not exist?

 The problem with finding a "link" to a page that discusses "the soul" and anything to do with science or scientists.. The pages become a bit personal/childish and eventually get into the Deepak Chopra area of the woo woo…

souls don't exist….


ypou can talk about it all you want…

It's still just made up...
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Oct 21, 2012 - 02:31pm PT
souls don't exist

Science does not know this. What science does know, Chopra notwithstanding, is there is no scientific consensus that a soul does not exist. There is only the information that the soul has not been hitherto observed or measured as a particular constituent of experimentation.
The same can be said for Mr. Largo's qualitative region of subjective experience.
The soul and Mr. Largo 's experienced qualities presently reside firmly outside of scientific measurement.
WBraun

climber
Oct 21, 2012 - 02:37pm PT
jingy --"soul" is the same as what others term "god"

Nope you're just making up sh!t again as you usually do including throwing some YouTube videos into the mix since you don't have anything of your own.

This means you have no clue.

The soul is not God but the individual of which is covered by the material body consisting of eight material elements, earth, water, fire, air, sky, mind, intelligence and false ego.

There's tons more .......
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 21, 2012 - 02:38pm PT
Science does not know this.

 and christianity cannot provide any empirical evidence neither…

as I've stated.. this discussion can continue until the end of time and reach the same outcome… 0.

but have your word play


Edit:
This means you have no clue.

 Werner - This means you must know everything!!! Where should we begin worshiping you?

Bwahaahah

More Werner Edits Needed:
Nope you're just making up sh!t again as you usually do including throwing some YouTube videos into the mix since you don't have anything of your own.

 Yes, I am just making sh#t up… and this is different than what and good christian/believer does every waking day of their lives once they have been made to believe? Huh?… You have the proof of your being right, or do you have the proof of my being wrong?

What a hypocrite… This is not to be taken as a bad thing for it is how I have come to see all christians.

BTW - Where did I post the you tube video?
Donald Thompson

Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
Oct 21, 2012 - 02:45pm PT
and christianity cannot provide any empirical evidence neither…

Christianity is not in the business of providing empirical evidence. I'll leave it to your imagination what they do rely on.
In the same way, science is not in the business of utilizing mystical or faith-based epiphanies to run experiments.
Nor is science in the business of disclaiming the soul's ultimate existence. Only that the soul does not appear to have anything to do with explaining boiling water or radioactivity , for instance.
Messages 10181 - 10200 of total 22747 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews