HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Religion & Spirituality » Religion (Group) » Why not deal seriously wi...

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:09 PM

Why not deal seriously with those of us who see science and religion as equal?

The question was asked in another thread that I think deserves further discussion. The entire question is as follows...

Why not deal seriously with those of us who see science and religion as equal on the search for meaning?


For me, the answer is simple; Science is a search for knowledge, not a search for meaning. Science produces knowledge that is true for everyone. Science is self correcting. Religion does none of that and fails at every attempt to produce knowledge that is true for everyone.

And you?

95 replies, 5975 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 95 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why not deal seriously with those of us who see science and religion as equal? (Original post)
cleanhippie Jun 2013 OP
southernyankeebelle Jun 2013 #1
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #5
southernyankeebelle Jun 2013 #8
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #10
southernyankeebelle Jun 2013 #12
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #15
southernyankeebelle Jun 2013 #20
DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #78
DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #79
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #90
DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #95
skepticscott Jun 2013 #2
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #9
truebluegreen Jun 2013 #3
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #6
Warren Stupidity Jun 2013 #24
truebluegreen Jun 2013 #42
TygrBright Jun 2013 #4
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #7
TygrBright Jun 2013 #11
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #14
muriel_volestrangler Jun 2013 #17
madrchsod Jun 2013 #13
janlyn Jun 2013 #16
hrmjustin Jun 2013 #18
skepticscott Jun 2013 #19
hrmjustin Jun 2013 #23
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #31
hrmjustin Jun 2013 #48
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #53
hrmjustin Jun 2013 #54
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #55
hrmjustin Jun 2013 #57
WovenGems Jun 2013 #21
LTX Jun 2013 #32
WovenGems Jun 2013 #33
LTX Jun 2013 #34
WovenGems Jun 2013 #35
LTX Jun 2013 #37
WovenGems Jun 2013 #39
LTX Jun 2013 #40
WovenGems Jun 2013 #41
LTX Jun 2013 #43
Thats my opinion Jun 2013 #69
LTX Jun 2013 #70
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #74
trotsky Jun 2013 #45
rug Jun 2013 #22
Act_of_Reparation Jun 2013 #25
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #51
rug Jun 2013 #59
rug Jun 2013 #58
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #61
rug Jun 2013 #63
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #64
rug Jun 2013 #66
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #71
Act_of_Reparation Jun 2013 #65
rug Jun 2013 #67
Act_of_Reparation Jun 2013 #75
rug Jun 2013 #76
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #81
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #72
rug Jun 2013 #77
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #60
ZombieHorde Jun 2013 #26
Deep13 Jun 2013 #27
Warpy Jun 2013 #28
bowens43 Jun 2013 #29
Prophet 451 Jun 2013 #30
trotsky Jun 2013 #36
Warren Stupidity Jun 2013 #38
trotsky Jun 2013 #44
Bad Thoughts Jun 2013 #46
Warren Stupidity Jun 2013 #47
Phillip McCleod Jun 2013 #50
Thats my opinion Jun 2013 #68
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #73
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #89
Prophet 451 Jun 2013 #82
trotsky Jun 2013 #83
Prophet 451 Jun 2013 #84
trotsky Jun 2013 #85
Prophet 451 Jun 2013 #86
trotsky Jun 2013 #87
Prophet 451 Jun 2013 #91
trotsky Jun 2013 #92
Prophet 451 Jun 2013 #93
trotsky Jun 2013 #94
gcomeau Jun 2013 #88
moobu2 Jun 2013 #49
cleanhippie Jun 2013 #52
mike_c Jun 2013 #56
dimbear Jun 2013 #62
ladjf Jun 2013 #80

Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:11 PM

1. I have never had a problem with separating both. In fact I think the catholic church

 

would agree with you. I know they believe in evolution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #1)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:20 PM

5. That really doesn't answer the question.

Are science and religion equal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #5)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:24 PM

8. For me they are equal. But honestly I think people go bonkers over this issue. But you

 

are 100% right they are equal and I have no problem seeing them stand alone because both makes sense. I hope it answers your questions. To me it's simple but others will disagree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #8)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:27 PM

10. If one produces knowledge that is true for all and the other doesn't, how can they be equal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #10)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:28 PM

12. Your getting way to heavy for me. You tell me what you think.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #12)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:31 PM

15. I already did in the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #15)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:33 PM

20. Well you take care. Maybe the big thinkers can get more into then I. I'm not an expert in

 

either but the basics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 06:47 PM

78. religion and science are not equals

but art is, which is what religion would be without the claims of literal truth and political nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonCoquixote (Reply #78)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 06:49 PM

79. to explain

Art can make things that are not literally true, but nonetheless true for those that see them. To some Mozart is beautiful, to some Chinese opera is. To insist that the onyl things that are real are things that are emasured is also a flasehood, as people live and die for culture every day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonCoquixote (Reply #78)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 10:43 AM

90. So should we take seriously those who claim they are equal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #90)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 05:51 PM

95. no

it means that while we are railing against the religions, we do not smash the art and poetry in them, nor do we assume that all the knowledge we need is going to roll out into nice empirical data. I am not saying you did, but others like Dawkins do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:15 PM

2. One popular answer is

 

"Science answers the how questions and religion answers the why questions"

Leaving aside the idiocy of even assuming that "questions" can be divided so neatly into two types, and assuming that each type is only addressed by one of science and religion, religion does a really sucky job of answering even the questions it is claimed to have hegemony over, by comparison to science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to skepticscott (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:26 PM

9. And yet religion cannot even answer the "why" at all.

Religion offers mere speculation, nothing more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:15 PM

3. They have nothing to do with each other and should never be compared, contrasted or equated.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebluegreen (Reply #3)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:20 PM

6. Great answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebluegreen (Reply #3)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 09:59 PM

24. Unfortunately that is not true.

 

Religiosity intrudes into the scientific realm all over the place, and worse, in the political sphere religion based moral theories are used to push for repressive prejudicial and irrational legislation and the theoretical basis for those theories is held to be above questioning because it is "god's will". We as a society are hobbled by the intrusion of irrational magical thinking and theorizing, a morality based on flawed contradictory and nonsnsical Bronze and Iron Age sacred texts. We are diminshed by religion. Separate Magesteria is nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #24)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 10:33 AM

42. I get that it happens,

 

what I was saying was that it shouldn't. I agree with you completely regarding the detrimental results.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:18 PM

4. I don't think "equal" is a relevant metric here.

It's like saying "we need to treat fruit as equal to cats."

They're different things. You can say "peaches are fuzzy and so are most cat breeds," but...

confusedly,
Bright

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TygrBright (Reply #4)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:22 PM

7. I would agree. So should we take seriously those who assert their equality?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #7)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:27 PM

11. I imagine if they are serious, and you want to engage them fruitfully and respectfully...

... you have only two choices:

One would be to ask them to clarify what they mean by "equal" and the other would be to explain politely that you don't feel you can discuss the topics on that basis, and suggest a different and presumably neutral and respectful conceptual matrix for the discussion.

On the other hand, if you just want to point out how wrong they are, or validate your own point of view, you can expose them to ridicule.

Your time & effort, your choice.

helpfully,
Bright

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TygrBright (Reply #11)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:31 PM

14. If their entire premise is false yet they assert the opposite, how can try be taken seriously?

Science and religion are not equal. There is no dispute over that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TygrBright (Reply #4)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:43 PM

17. Perhaps we could class religion with patriotism?

If people take part in it with good intentions, then it can produce good outcomes. But it can be misdirected and abused.

Neither do anything like producing 'truth' or 'meaning'. They both give you a fairly arbitrary outlook on life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:30 PM

13. agree...

what i do find interesting in this so called debate is science is used to confirm or deny such things as the writings in the dead sea scrolls. i just read where they discovered new meaning of a very important text of the old testament using the latest imaging techology. i could go on but you get my drift.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:34 PM

16. Hard for me to marry the two subjects.

However, the belief in life after death fascinates me. I am not talking about the standard belief in a heaven so much, as the belief that something of us lives on where we cannot percieve.
I remember the first time I read about string theory that I thought that science might in the end provide proof of life after death.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 07:56 PM

18. I believe in both very much!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #18)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 08:05 PM

19. And?

 

What does that have to do with the issue at hand?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to skepticscott (Reply #19)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 09:55 PM

23. Just a statement my friend!

 

I think science and religion are not opposed to one another.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #23)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 08:41 AM

31. Are they equal?

Why or why not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #31)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:32 AM

48. Interesting question to with I do not know exactly how to respond. Science tells us how things work

 

and why. For me that is not against religion. If you are set in your ways and believe everything you have been taught and there is no wiggle room than science can be scary to you. But that is not the case for me. Science is what it is, and religion is what it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #48)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:15 PM

53. With respect, you are dodging the question with nonsense.

While I understand what you are saying, it has nothing to do with the question being asked.

Are science and religion equal? Why or why not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #53)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:16 PM

54. For me yes. In the end yes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #54)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:48 PM

55. Then as the original question posed, why should you be taken seriously?

If for you, science and religion are equal, why should you be taken seriously?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #55)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:54 PM

57. People can take me how they want. I don't claim to be an expert on anything.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 09:24 PM

21. Nope

One is liquid and the other is static. Thus it be a night and day thingy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WovenGems (Reply #21)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 09:07 AM

32. Which is liquid and which is static?

And what do you actually mean by those terms?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LTX (Reply #32)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 09:13 AM

33. Defined

static doesn't move while liquid flows. Religion has remained unchanged for hundreds of years while knowledge has expanded at an incredible rate. 60 years after the first human flies we land on the moon. We have discovered DNA, the Lego block of life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WovenGems (Reply #33)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 09:29 AM

34. Oh. Ok.

It is kind of odd, though, how an illiquid thing like religion can give rise to such an abundance of disparate beliefs. And how a liquid thing like science can be so difficult to budge at times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LTX (Reply #34)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 09:42 AM

35. Truth

Religion hasn't spawned a multitude of beliefs it has spawned a multitude of rituals. Science is driven by facts so as new facts are revealed more questions come into being based on the new facts. If it seems that a particular segment of science has stalled it is waiting for a new fact to be revealed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WovenGems (Reply #35)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 10:06 AM

37. I think your reference points may be a bit too narrow.

You may find the Oxford project of interest. http://evolution-of-religion.com/

Science and religion are both evolving products of an evolving human consciousness. As for science in particular, it evolves in ways much more complicated than mere fact-accumulation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LTX (Reply #37)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 10:16 AM

39. Oxford Group

They seem to be trying to prove that religion is tied to our DNA. I wish them luck in that. All ancient religions were a plea to the natural world to cut them some slack. And that is quite understandable. But to try and say that the God of the Gaps is in our DNA is bit of a stretch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WovenGems (Reply #39)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 10:22 AM

40. Now I know that your reference points are too narrow. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LTX (Reply #40)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 10:31 AM

41. And how does one expand the reference points?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WovenGems (Reply #41)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 10:34 AM

43. Well, a start would be questioning your own

facile summations of both religion and science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LTX (Reply #34)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 11:33 AM

69. Religion hasn't changed for hundreds of years??

It must change hour by hour!
"No one should put a period, where God has put a comma."
With every new thing science reveals, religion must celebrate it and adapt to this form of revelation.

Example, "Jesus said, 'You have heard it said of old......, but I now say to you......'"

The only way you could have made that statement is just not eohave the slightest knowledge of what religion is all about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thats my opinion (Reply #69)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 11:58 AM

70. I think you responded to the wrong post. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thats my opinion (Reply #69)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 05:04 PM

74. So tell us then, what IS religion all about?

You spend a lot of time telling people that, but refuse to explain yourself. Perhaps that conversation you want to have can begin here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WovenGems (Reply #33)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:12 AM

45. Religion has indeed changed.

But generally those changes have been the result of either scientific discovery (abandonment of special creation, the heliocentric model, etc.) or secular ethical progress. Not so much of this "change from within" stuff a lot of people think goes on. It changes very slowly, and there are sizable groups that will oppose the change for as long as they can, but it happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Sun Jun 9, 2013, 09:52 PM

22. They're different things entirely.

 

Would you say chemistry and physics are equal?

How about astronomy and music?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #22)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:01 AM

25. He didn't ask whether they were the same thing...

...he asked whether they were equally valid methodologies for understanding.

In that respect, I think we would all agree chemistry, physics, and astronomy stand on equal footing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #25)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:11 PM

51. I didn't expect any straightforward answers to this.

That response is a perfect example of the obfuscation usually seen when questions like this are asked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #51)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 02:36 PM

59. It's an appropriate answer to a poor question.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #25)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 02:35 PM

58. He asked if they were equal. Period.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #58)


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #61)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 04:25 PM

63. Of course you didn't.

 

Why not deal seriously with those of us who see science and religion as equal?


You used a question mark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #63)


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #64)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 10:59 AM

66. That's exactly what you wrote.

 

You then highlighted another poster's, more complete, question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #66)


Response to rug (Reply #63)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 10:06 AM

65. He also wrote half a dozen other sentences...

...one of which was this:

Why not deal seriously with those of us who see science and religion as equal on the search for meaning?


Far be it from me to judge, but you should consider reading the OP in its entirety before electing to respond. Just a thought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #65)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 11:00 AM

67. I did read the entire OP.

 

He asked the question in the headline.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #67)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 06:05 PM

75. Then you didn't read it very carefully

Because the context of the question was rather clearly presented.

But let's, for the sake of argument, just say you're correct. The question was worded poorly. Cleanhippie has since clarified specifically what was meant by the question. Do you have an answer, or is it your intent to prattle on about his skill at composition (or lack thereof)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #75)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 06:38 PM

76. Apparently I read it more clearly than you.

 

But let's not. I've heard enough prattle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #75)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 09:09 PM

81. He does not have an answer. He never does. Its always the same, day after day, post after post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #65)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 04:58 PM

72. Some are simply unable to accept that they may be wrong. This is an example.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #72)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 06:39 PM

77. Lol.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Act_of_Reparation (Reply #25)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 04:04 PM

60. See what I mean? More nonsensical bullshit. Always the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:10 AM

26. Outside of mathematics, is anything really equal?

I really doubt it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:26 AM

27. They really have completely different functions.

Religion is traditionally the lens by which people construct themselves, their culture, and their place in the world. Having said that, religion promises what it cannot deliver, frightens with powers it does not have, and falsely represents the universe as being divinely ordered, which it is not. It is far better to find "meaning" in the real world based on what we actually know than it is to continue to live according to pre-modern fantasies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:59 AM

28. They might be equivalent forces in some lives

but they can never be equal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 04:39 AM

29. Why not? Because that would be silly.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 05:54 AM

30. They ARE equal but their individual strengths are not

I'm a man of faith (an unusual faith but faith all the same) and the fact is that science and religion don't use the same tools or address the same questions. Science tells us what a human is, how we move, breathe, reproduce and, soon, how we think. Religion/philosophy tells us what it means to be human, what we should cherish and strive toward. Science, as you say, produces answers which are true for everyone, reproducable and reliable. Religion/philosophy is inherently personal and subjective and, to some extent, irrational. Science is about how, religion/philosophy is about why. Science looks for facts, religion/philosophy looks for truth.

They are equal as forces in the world and, in some cases, in a person's life but their individual strengths are not equal. Science should be taught in schools and universities. Religion should be taught in the home or the church or coven (or maybe a Comparative Religions class). When I commune with my chosen deity, I'm not engaging my science-brain and when I construct a correlational study or analyze a case report, I'm not engaging my faith-brain. While the two are equally strong forces in my life, they look at different questions in different ways and shouldn't be confused. In my life, science and faith are like a pair of shoes: You get further on both than you do hopping.

Quick note: That's not to disparage those who find meaning outside of faith. We each have our own path to walk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #30)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 10:02 AM

36. I would strongly disagree with this:

Religion/philosophy tells us what it means to be human, what we should cherish and strive toward.

Religion "tells" us nothing of the sort. It provides guesses. "Tell" implies some kind of authority or reliability, whereas religion ultimately has neither.

After all, Fred Phelps' religion "tells" him that homosexuality is evil and will bring his god's judgment down on our country. He therefore strives for its demonization and elimination. Is his just another "path to walk"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #36)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 10:12 AM

38. "Religion/philosophy tells us" - religion "tells", philosophy "discusses".

 

Almost all religions provide revealed wisdom that is beyond rational discussion: it in fact "tells" us what it is to be human and that is that. Philosophy, on the other hand is all about rational discussion and arriving at some understanding of what it is to be human, but in general everything in philosophy is up for debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #38)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:00 AM

44. Good distinction.

Or as the old joke goes, if you took all the philosophers in the world and laid them end to end, they still wouldn't reach a conclusion!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #38)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:13 AM

46. Philosophy does not research

Philosophy does not go out into the field. Philosophy does not encounter humanity as it exists and acts. It's all well to compare what religion and philosophy provide, but philosophy is itself a limited endeavor because it fails to gather evidence about what real human do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bad Thoughts (Reply #46)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 11:27 AM

47. talk to the theory of consciousness people about their lack of field research. nt.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bad Thoughts (Reply #46)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:09 PM

50. i think that definition of 'philosophy' is both overly restrictive..

 

..and inaccurate. there are philosophies.. formal and informal (ie, philosophies of life).. which are entirely concerned with humanity as it exists and acts, and which choose to ground their ideas in empirical analysis of behavior both gross and individual.

secular humanism springs to mind.

don't forget.. 'philosophy' includes 'ethics'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bad Thoughts (Reply #46)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 11:18 AM

68. I don't suppose you have done any research into what philophsers actually do.

You might just be surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thats my opinion (Reply #68)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 05:01 PM

73. That is YOUR question up there, TMO. Why won't you respond to it?



Why SHOULD those who believe science and religion are equal in the search for meaning be taken seriously. Since it was YOU who asked that to begin with, will you explain why anyone should take you seriously?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thats my opinion (Reply #68)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 10:41 AM

89. I guess the tough questions frighten you. And I can understand why.

Having one's beliefs and reasoning questioned is a brave, but difficult, test. Not all are up to the challenge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #36)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 02:43 AM

82. Phelps actually doesn't do that

As far as he has any coherent theology, it's some kind of hyper-Calvinism that supposes that the saved have already been selected, everyone else is damned and he's just pointing that out. Essentially, he's a scumbag gloating at the condemned. His path is one of hatred and bigotry that ignores the most basic principles of human compassion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #82)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 07:50 AM

83. You judge him,and he judges you.

If someone honestly believes that certain behavior is disapproved by their god, is it not moral to try and prevent that behavior?

Liberal believers think that poverty and discrimination are opposed by god, so they work to eliminate them. We're supposed to praise and encourage that, yet the justification and reasoning are exactly the same in Phelps' case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #83)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 08:02 AM

84. Morality is all about value judgements

Phelps can attack me because my reasoning is different to his and you can criticise me because I think my chosen deity opposes prejudice and discrimination (although, as an experiential faith, mine is based on personal gnosis rather than revelation) but let's be honest here, there is no scientific reason to oppose Phelps because science doesn't make value judgements at all. Presuming you're an atheist, you base your morality on compassion and human empathy. So why the fuss when I say that my chosen deity encourages me to base my morality on the same thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #84)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 08:17 AM

85. How can you possibly know whether or not Phelps ALSO thinks his faith is based on

"personal gnosis"? Are you able to read his mind?

You judge him based on your faith, he judges you based on his. Same thing. You haven't said anything to distinguish between them. There is an inherent problem in basing any kind of morals on religious faith - do you see it yet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #85)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 08:31 AM

86. No, but I can listen to his sermons

He posts them online. He's basing his theology on a (highly selective) reading on the Bible. Here's one major difference between us: My morality and theology encourage me to help people and show compassion to others, Phelps' encourages the exact opposite. By their fruit, shall ye judge them (to slightly mangle a scripture).

You also haven't said anything to distinguish between morality based on empathy and compassion and morality also based on empathy and compassion which happens to be encouraged by a deity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #86)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 08:56 AM

87. Again, how do you know?

If god really does oppose homosexuality, and will judge our nation if we allow it, and Phelps learned this through "personal gnosis," is he wrong to be doing what he does? In his own way, he is showing compassion to everyone in the country in order to spare us the wrath of god.

You are judging him based on your faith, he is judging you based on his. You've gotten nowhere.

Or perhaps are you claiming that YOUR "personal gnosis" give you the ability to tell everyone else what god wants us to do? That your faith is superior to everyone else's?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #87)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 11:03 AM

91. In order...

If god really does oppose homosexuality

Oh, I think he does oppose homosexuality. That's because god is an asshole looking for reasons to condemn people. Phelps and god think much the same way. That's why god is utterly unworthy of worship.

In his own way, he is showing compassion to everyone in the country in order to spare us the wrath of god.

Again, that's not why he does it. He does it to rub everyone's nose in them being condemned. He is, in effect, trolling everyone. We know this because he posts his sermons online.

You are judging him based on your faith, he is judging you based on his. You've gotten nowhere.

And you judge him based on your own morality so you've gotten nowhere as well. Your morality doesn't automatically become superior to mine just because your's doesn't have a deity in it.

Or perhaps are you claiming that YOUR "personal gnosis" give you the ability to tell everyone else what god wants us to do? That your faith is superior to everyone else's?

Nice try but I didn't say that or anything like it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #91)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 12:02 PM

92. As long as you think you can read Phelps' mind...

(you claim to know his true motivations and thoughts, after all) and that you know god better than Phelps (or anyone else, apparently - your "personal gnosis" factor), the trap you have fallen into is one that you will never get out of.

What everyone needs to realize - you and Phelps - is that there is no way this dilemma will be resolved through religion or religious faith. NO ONE has a hotline to god. NO ONE truly knows what a god (if it exists) wants from us. You don't know any more than Phelps does. But you both sure think you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trotsky (Reply #92)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 04:57 PM

93. *sigh* I give up

I have explained how I know Phelp's motivations three times now. You don't want to understand it and I lack teh patience to keep explaining it to you. Peace with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #93)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 05:33 PM

94. Yeah, I know.

You read some of his sermons online and decided that you know what his motivations are. An impressive skill, to be sure.

But you and he are still in the same spot, and neither of you knows any better than the other what your gods want.

I can understand why you'd rather give up than seriously analyze the problem here. Much easier to just go on being certain that you know better than anyone else what god wants. Just like Phelps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #30)

Wed Jun 12, 2013, 10:36 AM

88. Umm...

 

"Religion/philosophy tells us what it means to be human, what we should cherish and strive toward."

...

Science looks for facts, religion/philosophy looks for truth.



...no it does not.

Religion makes unsubstantiated and unsupported claims to that effect, but anyone can do that. My 5 year old nephew can do that. That is entirely different than telling us "what it means to be human" or telling us what "the truth" is. The only thing religion has ever told anyone is what religion wants them to think.

For some people that's enough. Those people make me depressed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:05 PM

49. I've thought for some time now that

religion functioned as a form of science for most of human civilization. I mean, for most of our existence as a species, anytime someone wanted to know why something was happening, like seasons changing, earthquakes shaking everything or rain falling or whatever, they always asked a priest. I think of religion in terms of a type of protoscience. Early people just didn't know what caused almost anything around them. They didn't know about plate tectonics for instance or planetary motion and Solar system physics, evolutionary biology or what caused anything really. People just made stuff up the best they could to explain physical phenomena and religion served that purpose and out of a very strong human need to have an explanation for everything it developed and evolved into what it is today.

To me religion is to science what alchemy was to chemistry or astrology was to astronomy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Reply #49)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:12 PM

52. I think you nailed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Reply #49)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 12:52 PM

56. ^^^^^

I agree. Religion is to science as witch doctoring is to medicine. The parallels could not be starker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Reply #49)

Mon Jun 10, 2013, 04:23 PM

62. Like the rough sketch that led to an important painting, worth the attention

of a few experts, kept in museums.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Original post)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 07:12 PM

80. Science is the application of physical processes to determine physical outcomes. Religion is the

application of superstitious notions to fill in answers about existence without the need of any concrete evidence. Science and Religion have notion in common are totally different sets of actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread