Science as Religion and Vice Versa *debate*

[Avatar]

...there is a scientific explanation for everything, even the paranormal, it is just our finite minds may not always understand or comprehend the explanations.

Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic? That I can certainly go with. But doesn't it then obviate the need for that god? If we can explain and understand everything scientifically, in terms of "laws" of physics, what is gods place?

--Avatar

[Ariadoss]

Well if you are of the belief that God created the Laws, how could God be constrained by them? Actually if you have ever taken a course in logic, they ask the question "Can God create a bolder that God can't lift?" that question represents a flawed logic. There is not just science in the world, there is a need for morality and compassion, could you imagine the utter chaos the world would be in if people were not restrained by a conscience? I’ll post something longer later, cause I’m at school right now, and I have to finish my Biology homework. Also yes I do believe things like telekinesis are scientifically explainable, the average person uses less than 10% of their brain.

[Fist and Faith]

I don't believe telekinesis exists at all, much less is scientifically explainable.

And regardless of what my future-ex says, 90% of my brain is not dormant!

[[Syl]]

Common misconception. It's not that we only use %10 of our brain, it's that we only use ten percent of it at any given time.

[Fist and Faith]

Yep. I was trying to establish a definition for the concept. (I was also going for a laugh. Thanks for nutin', Syl! )

Also, people sometimes figure we all have the same basic brain as Mozart, Einstein, and Gödel, but most of us don't have anything approaching the natural abilities those guys had in their respective fields. And, therefore, they used a greater percentage of at least some part(s) of their brains than the rest of us do.

I hope Loremaster is reading, and keeps us to whatever facts are known in this area.

[dennisrwood]

we all have different abilities. think about crossing a street. you have to judge the relative speed of at least one car and where it will intersect with the crosswalk. now multiply that by the number of cars.
an amazing thing that we do without spending too much time on it.

[Ariadoss]

Oh excuse me, haven't taken whatever science that is related to I guess, I misquote things a lot. Where would you learn about that stuff? Anyway, my field is anything creative or computer related though I've always done well in English and Science.
I'm not exactly that into religion right now, but I could ask someone who is to come post in here on my behalf, since I can't exactly find the information I want. As of now, I've read about 15 full-length books pertaining to my religion, The King James version of The Bible, the Qur'an, and the Bhagavad Gita, so my knowledge is rather limited in that I know very little about most other religions.
As for telekinesis, it is one of those things you have to experience to believe in. I believe some people really can do things that supposedly defy logic, like
Caroline Myss (www.myss.com/) and Uri Gellar. But I suppose they both have their skeptics, as do prophets like Christ who are alleged to have performed countless miraculous feats, I don't want to get into an argument of whether these things happen or not or if God exists, I just wanted to point out that it is my own conviction and the conviction of 6,000,000 or more others that there should be harmony between science and religion. Also if any of you heard of Christian Science they also share the belief in the harmony of science and religion, I can direct you all to various text, if you desire something specifically related to science and religion I know a great article about burial procedures and why Jews could only eat certain foods and the practical wisdom behind these teachings.

Alright if by now you think I'm insane I'll answer the obvious question (or at least I think it is). Yes, I do believe in aliens! Take probability into account, in the vastness of the multiverse (another concept I believe in) how can there be no other intelligent life. Another thing, many consider Confucius to be a philosopher well I believe he is a prophet, a lot of sources also call the founder of my religion a mere ideologue, but I guess it is all relative, I could make a good argument that Christ is a myth like Zeus, but of course I'd get my head chopped off, irregardless as to the fact I do believe he existed.

On science and religion:
www.stthomas.edu/cathstudies/science/harmony.htm
(I've seen better but I picked this one cause it is relatively short)
The article cites some works by Abdu’l-Bahá who is the son of the founder of my Faith, the website is that of a Catholic school.

[Fist and Faith]

Oh excuse me, haven't taken whatever science that is related to I guess, I misquote things a lot. Where would you learn about that stuff?

I'd pm Loremaster. He's taking lots of brain stuff in college.

I just wanted to point out that it is my own conviction and the conviction of 6,000,000 or more others that there should be harmony between science and religion.

Amen! They may not always support each other, but I sure don't see the need to try to use one to disprove the other. Actually, I don't think it can be done.

Alright if by now you think I'm insane I'll answer the obvious question (or at least I think it is). Yes, I do believe in aliens!

I don't have any idea how that got to be the obvious question, but I love your style! And I agree that there is probably life out there. As someone or other said, it's an awful waste of space otherwise.

[Avatar]

Well if you are of the belief that God created the Laws, how could God be constrained by them? Actually if you have ever taken a course in logic, they ask the question "Can God create a bolder that God can't lift?" that question represents a flawed logic.

Why is that flawed logic? If you substitute "man" for "god", then clearly the answer is yes, we can create things that we can't lift. Of course, I'm not of the opinion that god created those laws either.

While I certainly agree that there is a need for "morality", (for want of a better term), I see no reason that it has to arise from some source external to ourselves.

--Avatar

[Ariadoss]

Do you believe that the concept of morality comes from within? That is a very spiritual idea actually. That would mean that you are saying that humans have a spiritual or moral side separate from our animalistic tendencies. The world around us is what corrupts our inner sense of morality that we were born with. I meant there was a need for morality, not a need for religion, religion I believe can (not always) help us to get in touch with our inner self or higher consciousness, which is tune with our true or spiritual self. I know many who don’t practice a religion but are more spiritual than the most pious devotee of any faith, religion is not needed to be spiritual, and it can help or hinder a spiritual journey that I believe will lead you to your ultimate reality or your true self. It is my belief that we all have souls or a higher consciousness that is in tune with God, which many call our conscience it restrains us from doing things we find “immoral” or puts guilt upon us for doing these things, it is possible to not listen to your conscience or even not to hear it because your spiritual connection is severed or your soul is in a sickly condition. I don’t believe in heaven and hell as places I believe in them as conditions of your soul, when you are in heaven, you are happy and feel spiritually fulfilled, when you are in hell your soul is far detached from God because of your inability to recognize the presence of a higher self within you, and to understand that you are not the only one that matters, that compassion for others is necessary. Have you ever heard of the 21 grams you lose when you die? Some people believe this is the soul (I’m not saying I believe this, but it is an interesting fact). Does God have to be an external influence why can’t he be internal, why can’t he be in all of us, that little voice that tells us what is right and what is wrong, those strong emotions of love and selfless compassion that belie the corporeal world, that are more the stuff of the ephemeral, can we explain those, can we explain why we have them, in what part of our being do they arise? Could God possibly be in all of us, could the idea of a soul be the idea that God or some great spiritual power is alive in all of us? Could prophets and great theologians have a greater connection to God, does this divine spirit flow through them more strongly and with greater intensity? Is that is why they appear to be so “all-knowing” or omniscient? Maybe it is just our connection that is weaker and we could feel that connection if we just open our minds and our hearts and looked for ourselves without anyone telling us where to go or what to think or believe for our own spiritual path? I always have the same answers to my questions, it is to read the Holly texts, to choose what I believe in and what I don’t and find my own path, my own way of life that will help me to live harmoniously and happily with others no matter what convictions they may hold.

I pose many questions, so many questions, with so many answers, just not all the answers make sense, I’m 18, like I said before I’m not really “qualified” in any real sense to speak for my religion but I can speak for myself and my beliefs as long as people are willing to listen, you can tell me if you feel like I’m imposing anything or being too argumentative, I try not to, that is why I prefer to ask questions as opposed to give answers. Contemplation is far more revealing then arguments, Socrates was of the belief that through asking questions we can ascertain the truth for ourselves, that is what I believe, and that is even what detectives do, by questioning and using their own logic or discretion they find the truth (I’m not saying they can’t be mislead).

I don't have any idea how that got to be the obvious question, but I love your style! And I agree that there is probably life out there. As someone or other said, it's an awful waste of space otherwise.

Also I think it is highly improbable (from a mathematic point of view) that there is no other intelligent life in the vastness of just this particular galaxy. The prophet-founder of my religion, Baha'u'llah says that for every star there is a solar system. Just consider the mammoth size of just our solar system, how many trillions of stars are visible in the night sky?

[Avatar]

Do you believe that the concept of morality comes from within? That is a very spiritual idea actually. That would mean that you are saying that humans have a spiritual or moral side separate from our animalistic tendencies. The world around us is what corrupts our inner sense of morality that we were born with.

On the contrary, I don't believe that we have an "in-born" moral tendency, nor an in-born knowledge of god, or an in-bornanything for that matter. We develop them as we grow in reaction to the training and environment that we are subjected to.

...religion I believe can (not always) help us to get in touch with our inner self or higher consciousness, which is tune with our true or spiritual self. I know many who don’t practice a religion but are more spiritual than the most pious devotee of any faith, religion is not needed to be spiritual, and it can help or hinder a spiritual journey that I believe will lead you to your ultimate reality or your true self.

This I agree with though.

It is my belief that we all have souls or a higher consciousness that is in tune with God, which many call our conscience it restrains us from doing things we find “immoral” or puts guilt upon us for doing these things, it is possible to not listen to your conscience or even not to hear it because your spiritual connection is severed or your soul is in a sickly condition.

Again, I think our "consciences" are a reflection of our socialisation.

I don’t believe in heaven and hell as places I believe in them as conditions of your soul, when you are in heaven, you are happy and feel spiritually fulfilled, when you are in hell your soul is far detached from God because of your inability to recognize the presence of a higher self within you, and to understand that you are not the only one that matters, that compassion for others is necessary. Have you ever heard of the 21 grams you lose when you die? Some people believe this is the soul (I’m not saying I believe this, but it is an interesting fact).

Yes, I've heard of it. Is it a fact though? Some sort of reference would be appreciated, other than the movie.

Does God have to be an external influence why can’t he be internal, why can’t he be in all of us, that little voice that tells us what is right and what is wrong, those strong emotions of love and selfless compassion that belie the corporeal world, that are more the stuff of the ephemeral, can we explain those, can we explain why we have them, in what part of our being do they arise? Could God possibly be in all of us, could the idea of a soul be the idea that God or some great spiritual power is alive in all of us?

Certainly very buddhist, but I prefer to think of it in terms of us being god, rather than god being in us.

Could prophets and great theologians have a greater connection to God, does this divine spirit flow through them more strongly and with greater intensity? Is that is why they appear to be so “all-knowing” or omniscient?

I think that they're more in contact with themselves. What they choose to believe about that contact, and how they choose to excercse it, is a different question. "Omniscence" is in the eye of the beholder, and it's too easy to claim, manipulate etc.

...to choose what I believe in and what I don’t and find my own path, my own way of life that will help me to live harmoniously and happily with others no matter what convictions they may hold.

Finding your own way is whats important here, rather than just accepting the way that others tell you is the "one". Many ways, many "ones".

I pose many questions, so many questions, with so many answers, just not all the answers make sense, I’m 18, like I said before I’m not really “qualified” in any real sense to speak for my religion but I can speak for myself and my beliefs as long as people are willing to listen, you can tell me if you feel like I’m imposing anything or being too argumentative, I try not to, that is why I prefer to ask questions as opposed to give answers.

Considering you're discussing your beliefs, nobody is more qualified than yourself.

Also I think it is highly improbable (from a mathematic point of view) that there is no other intelligent life in the vastness of just this particular galaxy. The prophet-founder of my religion, Baha'u'llah says that for every star there is a solar system. Just consider the mammoth size of just our solar system, how many trillions of stars are visible in the night sky?

Visible from earth? About 8,000. Visible in the known universe? 70 sextillion - or 70 thousand million million. I certainly agree that the probability of other intelligent life must be huge, given those numbers. Even random chance would throw up the same result at least twice in that many attempts.

How does that tie in with the notion of a human god though?

--Avatar

[Ariadoss]

I had a conversation with my dad yesterday about religion, and he actually got mad at me for using the name “God” cause as a former Catholic he believes the word has a lot of negative connotations for people. So as of now I’ll refer to some creating force or power. My dad also said that the term “God” limits the concept of a Creator. He said to think of God like electricity, we know the different properties of electricity but we don’t really understand it in many ways.

About the “soul” and the 21 grams thing, we’ll the definition of the soul varies from person to person so you can really “prove” the existence of the soul, earlier I used the term “proofs” when I meant “signs”, there are signs I believe of some great spiritual force that has influence on our actions if we are in tune with it. I checked out various dictionaries they all have a load of possible definitions for the soul. The evidence to the whole 21 grams thing is questionable, you can see an article about it here: www.eagletribune.com/news/stories/20040202/LI_001.htm
Or www.snopes.com/religion/soulweight.asp both sources argue against the theory but I thought it was interesting.
“1. Souls are non-physical entities that cannot be observed directly
but that interacts with the universe using an unknown universal law.
2. The conditions required for this law to be potent are present
within the human nerve system.
3. Since the nerve system can amplify low-energy electrical signals
into macroscopical actions, the assumption is made that the souls
interact with the body using the smallest possible amount of energy
required to perform these actions.” –Unknown

Certainly very buddhist, but I prefer to think of it in terms of us being god, rather than god being in us.

I believe in Buddhism, I think I mentioned that as a Baha’i I acknowledge all the prophets as being inspired by the same divine source, though there teachings may have not been left entirely in tact by the onslaught of time and corruption.

I think that they're more in contact with themselves. What they choose to believe about that contact, and how they choose to excercse it, is a different question. "Omniscence" is in the eye of the beholder, and it's too easy to claim, manipulate etc.

If we assume that some great spirit or soul flows through all human beings and somehow connects us all to each other and our Creator could we in that sense we have God in ourselves the entire consciousness of the universe? I don’t know if this is appropriate but Carl Jung (you may have heard of him in English or in Psychology) believed in a collective unconsciousness (this idea is used in the Dune series) that connects every human on earth to one another and effects great events like natural catastrophes. He also believed in the power of the mind to manipulate the physical world (a form of telekinesis?).

Finding your own way is whats important here, rather than just accepting the way that others tell you is the "one". Many ways, many "ones".

Yes, Independent Investigation of the Truth is my favorite principle of my religion because it doesn’t limit me to someone else’s interpretations; I can form my own opinions and not be considered “sinful” or whatever.
From a Baha'i point of view (Shogi Effendi is the great grandson of the prohpet founder of the Baha'i Faith):
It is hoped that all the Baha'i students will ... be led to investigate and analyse the principles of the Faith and to correlate them with the modern aspects of philosophy and science. Every intelligent and thoughtful young Baha'i should always approach the Cause in this way, for therein lies the very essence of the principle of independent investigation of truth.
(6 August 1933, on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer)


I really need to brush up on my sciences, I’m getting rusty, haven’t taken science in a while… The alien stuff was kind of going off topic, I once said to a Christian (this was kind of mean, I’m sorry) that if you believe in God why don’t you believe in aliens, isn’t the same thing, you have proof of neither of them. That was very mean and I wish I could retract that statement but it is true and sad that some people just believe in God for no other reason then the fact that everyone else they know believes in God or that they are told to believe in God by their parents. The Creator has an impact on me and so does his teachings, I wouldn’t be so content with life if I didn’t have a sense of a greater purpose, to serve my Creator by serving humanity, to help make the world a better place (I don't need to name a Creator to believe in one, I just need to be in touch with myself and others).

The sciences are still in there infancy, we know so much yet so little.

From the Internation Administrative body of the Baha'i's of the world:
With regard to the harmony of science and religion, the Writings of the Central Figures and the commentaries of the Guardian make abundantly clear that the task of humanity, including the Baha'i community that serves as the "leaven" within it, is to create a global civilization which embodies both the spiritual and material dimensions of existence. The nature and scope of such a civilization are still beyond anything the present generation can conceive. The prosecution of this vast enterprise will depend on a progressive interaction between the truths and principles of religion and the discoveries and insights of scientific inquiry. This entails living with ambiguities as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality. It also requires us not to limit science to any particular school of thought or methodological approach postulated in the course of its development. The challenge facing Baha'i thinkers is to provide responsible leadership in this endeavour, since it is they who have both the priceless insights of the Revelation and the advantages conferred by scientific investigation. (19 May 1995, written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer)

For more on the Harmony of Science and Religion see below:
bahai-library.com/uhj/science.religion.html

[Avatar]

I've always though of the word "god" as a convenient, anglo-saxon monosyllable, representing something(s) that we don't understand. Which is why when people speak of god, I always ask for clarification.

It can have negative connotations to non-believers, but it has positive connotations to those that do believe.

And after all, you're use words that to me mean the same as god. Divine source, for example. Hell, I prefer Jung's collective unconscious to that, because "divine" implies "not human" doesn't it?

I don't feel that we need something greater than ourselves. If there is any spirit or soul, it is ours. It may connect us on some level, (which makes me, strongly individualistic, a little uncomfortable), and while the main point I'm differing on seems merely semantic, I think it is an important difference:

If we assume that some great spirit or soul flows through all human beings and somehow connects us all to each other and our Creator could we in that sense we have God in ourselves the entire consciousness of the universe?

It's not that we have god in ourselves, it's that in ourselves, we are God.

--Avatar

[Myste]

It's not that we have god in ourselves, it's that in ourselves, we are God.

--Avatar

That's lovely, Av. I tend to believe in the ineffable divinity theory, but anyway. I mean, if the Divine is ineffable, who's to say that It's not Us?

Poem

I am God

---Jack Kerouac

[Fist and Faith]

Or, once again:

Thou art God. That which groks.

[Avatar]

Got it in one Fist. If anybody wants to see the true face of god, look in a mirror.

--Avatar

[Ariadoss]

I went ahead and looked up some quotes since everyone else is doing it.

“He hath known God who hath known his own self.”
--Bahá'u'lláh (prophet-founder of the Bahá'í Faith)

“Turn thy sight unto thyself, that thou mayest find Me standing within thee; mighty, powerful, and self-subsisting.”
--Bahá'u'lláh

[Fist and Faith]

Cool

[Zarathustra]

Hmm . . . the topic is deviating quite a bit.

Science is NOT a religion. To compare these two is either disingenuous, or frankly, genuine ignorance. Either is disturbing when dealing with such important issues.

Sure, there are superficial similarities: people have "faith" in science, and people have faith in religion. But science produces tangible RESULTS, like computers and cell phones and satellites. It's not hard to have "faith,"--or better yet: confidence--in something that produces such real, useful results, even when you have no understanding of the underlying math and science. This is completely different from having faith in something super-natural, which requires no evidence whatsoever.

And the gulf between science and religion widens from there: in terms of methodology, science is tentative while religion is absolutist. Science is an example of a naturalistic philosophy, while religion presupposes SUPERnatural entities/realms. Science requires public confirmation in the form of repeatable results subject to peer review, while religion is based on a private experiences and one-time historical events (resurrection of Christ, etc.). Science requires a consensus, while religion is based on authority. Scientific claims are falsifiable (can be proven wrong with disconfirming evidence), while religious claims are not falsifiable (one can't disprove God's existence, even in principle).

Each of these differences are not differences of DEGREE, but rather differences of TYPE. There is no comparison.

(However, this isn't a criticism of either.)

[Ariadoss]

Again, I believe in the harmony of Religion with Science and Reason. I'm not saying religion is a science, but that religion should not conflict with science and reason (though as you mentioned science is fallible).