Politics, God and Religion vs. Science

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 12261 - 12280 of total 23267 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 3, 2013 - 08:35pm PT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert_space

I bow to Ed and John Gill over this. It is wild.

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


Dr., There is so much to know. There are probably 50 different types of "geologist."

Each one has its own niche. The principles and discoveries can be shared, but you have to be a specialist instead of a generalist to get much done.

You still have to keep up with your reading or you will be left in the dust.

Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
Mar 3, 2013 - 08:41pm PT
"There can't be a practical value in believing in something that isn't true ..." - I understand what Bertrand Russell is saying, but I think its at least possible that believing in religions can motivate people and give them hope, however false, that gives them a survival advantage. Have you ever noticed how motivated born again believers are? It's hard to miss. That kind of motivation must be a good thing on many levels, in fact I am sure their lives are the better for it.

But is it really good to delude yourself like this? American society is fake enough as it is with most of the population staring at a TV for an average of something like 5 hours a day. Approaching the brave new world at lightspeed.
jogill

climber
Colorado
Mar 3, 2013 - 08:43pm PT
It appears that scientists are more interested in "weak" emergence, and have their doubts about "strong" emergence which would I suppose appeal to JL and his colleagues.


;>)
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 3, 2013 - 08:55pm PT
I'm professional Mineralogist, since I collect and sell Minerals, as my side business.
I get 4 different Mineralogy Journals, my favorite being the Mineralogical Record, me and my wife call it Rock Porn, and it is.

I collect in the field and buy at the shows, I have one of the top 5 collections in OC, and my cactus collection is top of the field.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Mar 3, 2013 - 09:24pm PT
well put Don Paul.

I'm still hoping that Jan would expand on this a bit. It is of course the nut of the problem on a number of counts. If religions certainty of authority is ever cast in doubt, its ability to contribute benefit to societal outcomes is compromised, and if there is no other force to replace it....

The most significant doubt is not the authenticity of various dieties, especially as any way of authentification isn't exactly handy any time soon. The real hazard is how increasingly the validity of various moral dogmas is being eroded by empirical proof that is resisted by nothing more than faith and meek deference to authority. Sure, most of this nonsense originates with the extreme fundamentalists but the rank and file typically facilitate with some form of tribal allegiance.

Its like what is happening with the modern day Republican Party. When your values and belief system are built on "creating your own reality" it can only travel so far on sheer certainty of faith.
The story they sold us on the american Dream is proving a fraud. Their real goal may still yet win but its going to take a whole new strategy - the old one has run its course under an onslaught of contrary evidence. If they can't reform then it becomes clear that allegiance to ideology is more important than societal outcomes - at least the ones that involve us.

BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 3, 2013 - 09:59pm PT
If there is an advantage to believing something that is false, then anything is up for grabs.

Some may be of help to humans, but there are many terrible alternatives.

I see no advantage in believing anything that is false unless it makes you, as an individual, happier, and you do no harm to others.

That is why I'm not as hard on religion as, say, HFCS was. I am surrounded by the faithful, and most of them are pretty decent people.

One guy I do some work with is big in the first baptist church, which is a pretty big church. They raised some money and bought all kinds of helpful things for a secret homeless community that was living along the banks of a river 2 miles from my house. I didn't even know they were there, and homeless people have a soft spot in my heart.

They took them all kinds of stuff. Food, fuel, shelter items, blankets, whatever they could think of.

This is called altruism. It can be observed in other primates and I'm aware of a recent paper that showed the evolution of altruism.

It is one of the finest qualities a human can have, IMO.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Mar 3, 2013 - 10:30pm PT
Drf
[quoteI'm with Base on this subject, I don't need to know everything, I would rather specialise on some subjects, and have a comfortable grasp on the rest (of what's available)][/quote]

That's a lot said!

But, Come-on; Can't you imagine there is a way, somewhere, something is keeping a talley
on everything going-on?

Some sort of memory of yesterday. That's here today. Thus able to predict things in tomorrow

Jan

Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
Mar 3, 2013 - 10:33pm PT
Interesting jogill mentioned emergence theory as I was all excited about it back in June of 2012 and was immediately shot down by Ed and others with talk of chaos and entropy. I thought it could well be the basis for a more biologically based understanding of the universe which would be inspirational to people, and what I got back was talk about the meaninglessness of it all.

To me, that response was one more illustration that science has its own dogmas, despite claims of total objectivity. Perhaps emergence theory as related to life and evolution will become the prevailing paradigm at some time in the future but not while mechanistic reductionists prevail. Then again, many think that we are indeed transitioning from the age of physics to the age of biology.

And finally, the easy dismissal of it showed one more time a lack of concern for the societal effects of belief systems.
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Mar 3, 2013 - 10:48pm PT

[quoteThere are eastern religions that will not eat meat. I think that the logic is, that that cow may indeed be a person's soul.][/quote]

So if you eat the meat, your eating the soul too?
Sounds materialistic to me...

I've NEVER heard God promoting reincarnation.
Who is THIS God?
Is this a "Wernerism"?

Jus Catch'in Up (I havnt had the intrnet)
BB
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Mar 3, 2013 - 10:57pm PT
To me, that response was one more illustration that science has its own dogmas


I think Dogma is endemic to all processes or systems don't you think? But wouldn't you say that the scientific process requires that no dogma is immune from destruction if evidence and theory supports it? I don't think dogma is a problem anywhere unless it cannot be justified. Moral Dogma for instance must be justified on moral terms using relevant knowledge we have. If morality is determined by severe limits set by some arbitrary book of rules written centuries ago you really gotta wonder - no?
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Mar 3, 2013 - 11:02pm PT
Ed, you said that in reference to my take on reductionism, I didn't understand the complexity of it and was instead offering a cartoon version of same.

Actually, I'm sticking to the basic definition when I said "a reductionist can never cotton to the idea that anything is ever more than it's component parts." Otherwise you couldn't "reduce" or reverse engineer the complex down to simpler, more fundamental parts = reductionism by any known definition.

If I am entirely wrong on this count, kindly offer an example illustrating something greater than it's parts which, if you had sufficient data, you could not, in theory, mechanically reverse engineer back to antecedent parts.

JL



Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 3, 2013 - 11:07pm PT
But, Come-on; Can't you imagine there is a way, somewhere, something is keeping a talley
on everything going-on?

Some sort of memory of yesterday. That's here today. Thus able to predict things in tomorrow

No, there is no Tally, none of any sort other than your own

and no memory, except what those with brains decide to memorize, or write down
which in turn means no predictions, other than those done at random that come true by chance

I can make predictions that will come true, only because they are so vague and bound to come true by just knowing that they are certain to happen, like earthquakes and volcanos will kill people!!!
and the clash of religions will escalate!!
and we're all going die!!!
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Mar 3, 2013 - 11:18pm PT

[quoNo, there is no Tally, none of any sort other than your ownte][/quote]

Well.. Even DNA has memory. My eyes are blue, not by chance.
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 3, 2013 - 11:18pm PT
DNA is not a tally, nor a memory

it is a genetic code that came from your parents
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Mar 3, 2013 - 11:21pm PT
Wiki;
[quotGod

The single deity of various monotheistic religions.
The single male deity of various duotheistic religions.
An impersonal and universal spiritual presence or force.
An omnipotent being, creator of the universe (as in deism).
The (personification of the) laws of nature.e][/quote]
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 3, 2013 - 11:23pm PT
BB
learn how to use the quote function
put the words inside the quote box

[qu_ote]words[/qu_ote]
words
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Mar 3, 2013 - 11:34pm PT
"DNA is not a tally, nor a memory

it is a genetic code that came from your parents"
_

Yea! A genetic code, made of blood and guts. That determined that my eyes are blue because my Great, great, great, great, great, great etc. Grandpas eyes were blue.

Isn't that memory?




Thanks! I'm just psyched I got my Internet back!
MH2

climber
Mar 3, 2013 - 11:46pm PT
Speaking of societal effects of belief systems, it is strange how scientists are often pictured as constrained by logic, like Spock of Star Trek. Scientists use logic as an aid but by no means do they use it alone.


Another (small) joke in physics is that theory is what lets you trust experiment, not the other way around. In the talk by Frank Wilczek that Ed led us to there was a pretty good theory for the unification of the fundamental forces. However, an extrapolation from experimental data, using calculations based on the theory, showed that the fundamental forces did not become equal at very short distances/high energies as they would be expected to in a unified theory.


Frank Wilczek reminded the audience that Karl Popper considered the goal of science to be to produce falsifiable hypotheses. The unified theory had provided a falsifiable hypothesis and a test had falsified the theory. "What more could you ask?"


However, science does not advance by logic alone. According to Frank Wilczek, the theory was too beautiful to abandon, but that may only be part of the story. Sometimes scientists just seem to sense that a certain idea is a good one. Calling it beautiful when it is incomplete may be seeing ahead to what it would look like if it were complete. Frank Wilczek opened his talk with an example of what a pattern may look like when it is incomplete.


The current Standard Model apparently does a reasonably good job of uniting all 4 fundamental forces, and everything we know of physics could be constructed from it, "if you were really good with calculation." It may leave out dark matter and energy for all I know but it is still an outstanding achievement of human understanding, close to the one page of equations which another physicist speculated that God used to make the Universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SO(10)_(physics);

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersymmetry



A couple excerpts from a short autobiography by Frank Wilczek:

Another thing that shaped my thinking was religious training. I was brought up as a Roman Catholic. I loved the idea that there was a great drama and a grand plan behind existence. Later, under the influence of Bertrand Russell's writings and my increasing awareness of scientific knowledge, I lost faith in conventional religion. A big part of my later quest has been trying to regain some of the sense of purpose and meaning that was lost. I'm still trying.

I flirted with brain science, but soon decided that the central questions were not ready for mathematical treatment

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2004/wilczek-autobio.html



BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Mar 3, 2013 - 11:52pm PT
Largo, go'in back..

What's the revelence of meditating, and a Zen-like state?

Is it in the concoredense of the "me-ism"?

Another words, does it correspond the "U" with yourself, or the "U" with the world,
Or the world with you?

Correspondence might not be the exact right meaning there, but do u get my drift?
BLUEBLOCR

Social climber
joshua tree
Mar 4, 2013 - 12:02am PT

" Frank Wilczek reminded the audience that Karl Popper considered the goal of science to be to produce falsifiable hypotheses."
__

Couldn't this be like the placebo effect?

You could give them medicine and they'll get well.
Or you could give them sugar and they'll get well anyway?
Messages 12261 - 12280 of total 23267 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