Religion

cbayer

(146,218 posts)

12. This is a site primarily for millenials and, at least in this case,

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 12:24 PM

Jul 2012

they seem to have more interest in building bridges than burning them on a whole host of issues.

They feel that the MSM is too invested in division and are committed to open debate that leads to greater understanding.

Interesting, Condoleeza Rice is one of their "thought leaders", as well as a GLBT activist, a peace activist and others. They represent a really eclectic group and many of the articles are really well done.

Sometimes people that feel they are being talked down to are actually being talked down to. When religious believers are called delusional and their beliefs mocked, there is a good chance that their perception is reality.

At any rate, the conclusion of the article is this:

"I don't know what future generations will believe about the Bible and science, but it seems clear that both faith and science are going to have deep roots in American life for the foreseeable future. The two had better learn to get along."

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

155 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Science and Religion Need to Take Each Other Seriously [View all] cbayer Jul 2012 OP

I don't agree. Science does NOT have to take religion seriously. Religion has never had to open still_one Jul 2012 #1

Are you just responding to the headline or the article itself? cbayer Jul 2012 #3

Didn't read the full link, but what I read, it discusses civility, which is fine, but I still stand still_one Jul 2012 #5

There's not much more if you click the link. Cary Jul 2012 #7

Why, exactly, do scientists need to take religionists seriously? Cary Jul 2012 #2

You also seem to be responding to the headline and not the article. cbayer Jul 2012 #4

As best as I can tell the author is claiming that scientists should respect religionists because Cary Jul 2012 #6

That's not what it says. cbayer Jul 2012 #9

I think there is a place in science to try to understand why some people don't accept Cary Jul 2012 #13

Because just dismissing them as psych cases or animals who could be studied is weak cbayer Jul 2012 #16

That's a leap. Cary Jul 2012 #19

Is your question, "Why should science and religion take each other seriously"? cbayer Jul 2012 #20

No. Cary Jul 2012 #24

Again, taken from your perspective, the answer would be that scientists don't need to cbayer Jul 2012 #25

What data? Cary Jul 2012 #35

You also seem to be responding to the headline and not the article. AlbertCat Jul 2012 #74

You can assume that, but a lot, perhaps way too many, take them very seriously. cbayer Jul 2012 #75

perhaps way too many, take them very seriously. AlbertCat Jul 2012 #79

Religious people are not children and scientists are not all adults in many ways. cbayer Jul 2012 #82

No Confusious Jul 2012 #8

This is a site primarily for millenials and, at least in this case, cbayer Jul 2012 #12

Youth does not equal smart Confusious Jul 2012 #37

Religion has also led to discovery, including evolution. cbayer Jul 2012 #38

It's hositility Confusious Jul 2012 #43

I don't blame science for anything. I love science. cbayer Jul 2012 #44

please, name the part science Confusious Jul 2012 #46

I'm not here to win the game, Confusious. cbayer Jul 2012 #49

And if we want to end world hunger, we just have to feed everybody Scootaloo Jul 2012 #60

Ah, did you have to put up my super secret boyfriend, NDT? cbayer Jul 2012 #62

Oh HELL no Scootaloo Jul 2012 #65

Ha! I'll pray that you lose, lol!! cbayer Jul 2012 #68

Religion has also led to discovery, including evolution. AlbertCat Jul 2012 #80

If anything... rexcat Jul 2012 #122

Mendacity? cbayer Jul 2012 #124

Your comment... rexcat Jul 2012 #137

Darwin was raised as a Unitarian RainDog Jul 2012 #145

This message was self-deleted by its author cbayer Jul 2012 #147

Millenial here, and i'm seconding the "no" Scootaloo Jul 2012 #51

I don't think there is any plea for you to take their beliefs seriously, just cbayer Jul 2012 #52

Sure they have the right to be offended Scootaloo Jul 2012 #58

Again, we seem to be at the team sport part of this kind of debate where there must cbayer Jul 2012 #61

Sure they can co-exist Scootaloo Jul 2012 #63

Agree. Melding is not an option, but co-existence might be achievable. cbayer Jul 2012 #69

but they're far removed from one another, AlbertCat Jul 2012 #84

So, shoo religion the hell away from science Scootaloo Jul 2012 #102

and hear why they believe what they do. AlbertCat Jul 2012 #81

"The two had better learn to get along." pinto Jul 2012 #64

Sir, if you don't mind, I'd like you to elaborate on the great detriment science... deucemagnet Jul 2012 #123

If I might offer one or two? On edit - three. cbayer Jul 2012 #125

And it was scientists who dropped the bomb? deucemagnet Jul 2012 #127

Correct, but scintists developed them clearly. cbayer Jul 2012 #129

Yet no scientist has taken up sword and shield, deucemagnet Jul 2012 #130

more interest in building bridges than burning them AlbertCat Jul 2012 #76

Ignore them at our own peril. Look where it got us the last 10 years. cbayer Jul 2012 #77

Ignore them at our own peril AlbertCat Jul 2012 #86

Both Evolution and Creationism are Wrong hzcummi Jul 2012 #10

Right. Cary Jul 2012 #15

Welcome to DU! rrneck Jul 2012 #21

C'mon kumbaya fans - listen to this respectfully and begin your dialog ^^ dmallind Jul 2012 #23

Poe's Law.... n/t xocet Jul 2012 #29

He's been doing this for at least 5 years muriel_volestrangler Jul 2012 #100

complete and utter nonsense. bowens43 Jul 2012 #54

Personally, science does not have to take religious belief seriously. rexcat Jul 2012 #11

Does taking something seriously rrneck Jul 2012 #14

You don't need more coffee. As you often do, you have made some interesting points. cbayer Jul 2012 #17

I am conflicted about this article longship Jul 2012 #18

I think there is value in trying to understand why someone would hold something cbayer Jul 2012 #22

Definition of truth? longship Jul 2012 #30

I realize that my experience is greatly skewed by having been raised in some cbayer Jul 2012 #31

You are now preaching to the choir, so to speak. longship Jul 2012 #33

trying to understand why someone would hold something true that has been scientifically proven. AlbertCat Jul 2012 #88

Perhaps parents tell their children stories and present them as facts. PassingFair Jul 2012 #148

Religious Belief Interferes with understanding evolution RainDog Jul 2012 #149

No - we do need a dialogue between theists and atheists Taverner Jul 2012 #26

Sure it does, otherwise there would be no theories or hypotheses. cbayer Jul 2012 #27

Theories and hypotheses are based on evidence. nt Confusious Jul 2012 #45

I am responding to this statement: cbayer Jul 2012 #47

I know what you were responding to Confusious Jul 2012 #53

Point taken. cbayer Jul 2012 #55

Right... xocet Jul 2012 #28

So they really do not want a meaningful discussion longship Jul 2012 #36

You're welcome.... xocet Jul 2012 #57

Damn! This has been a good thread. longship Jul 2012 #71

I can understand your objection to their opening statement. cbayer Jul 2012 #40

They too would object if the roles were reversed. xocet Jul 2012 #70

You just presented a great argument that supports exactly what you are saying. cbayer Jul 2012 #73

Maybe... xocet Jul 2012 #133

The use of "Darwinism" and "Evolutionism" RainDog Jul 2012 #150

Ridicule is not a tool of science, that's why. rug Jul 2012 #32

Science is insightful in order to understand religion. Democracyinkind Jul 2012 #34

Too broad brush. The organization discussed in this article refutes your premise. cbayer Jul 2012 #39

How? dmallind Jul 2012 #41

They are promoting evolution as not inconsistent with religious beliefs. cbayer Jul 2012 #42

No it does not dmallind Jul 2012 #56

I take it, then, that you will not be a part of the conversation. cbayer Jul 2012 #59

I'm sure you are. Cary Jul 2012 #66

You, like many others, make an incorrect assumption about my *faith* or lack thereof, but cbayer Jul 2012 #72

Except for the fact that I have made no assumption about your faith Cary Jul 2012 #109

What is my faith? cbayer Jul 2012 #111

Didn't I just say that I didn't care? Cary Jul 2012 #113

I've answered it to the best of my ability. Sorry. cbayer Jul 2012 #115

So your best answer is that scientists need to take religionists seriously because there are Cary Jul 2012 #142

I think your exchange reinforces the point I made. Democracyinkind Jul 2012 #151

I agree with you, of course Cary Jul 2012 #154

Some other religions viewed this god as a lesser god in the pantheon RainDog Jul 2012 #155

I'd love to hear what they have actually added to understanding yes dmallind Jul 2012 #67

That pretty much hit the nail on the head skepticscott Jul 2012 #139

Look at where the 'conversation' is stuck: were Adam and Eve a real couple? muriel_volestrangler Jul 2012 #103

No one said it would be easy, lol. cbayer Jul 2012 #104

What exactly does this mean: trotsky Jul 2012 #141

Science entirely upends fundamentalist religion RainDog Jul 2012 #143

They are promoting evolution as not inconsistent with religious beliefs. AlbertCat Jul 2012 #91

Even if it where consistent Democracyinkind Jul 2012 #152

which particular religion should be taken seriously? rurallib Jul 2012 #48

Great quote by the incomparable Twain. cbayer Jul 2012 #50

This was one of my very first insights 99th_Monkey Jul 2012 #78

This made me smile. cbayer Jul 2012 #83

Ha...the scientist part of me wants even less to do with religionistas than the atheist part. Evoman Jul 2012 #85

Have I ever read any scientific journals? Are you posing this question cbayer Jul 2012 #87

It's more a general outburst to religious people. But if you like, you can answer the question. Evoman Jul 2012 #89

I have read, oh I'd say, 7 or 8 cbayer Jul 2012 #93

And what is your scientific expertise... rexcat Jul 2012 #95

I have been extensively involved in the peer review process, though I am no longer involved. cbayer Jul 2012 #96

Just asking... rexcat Jul 2012 #97

That's because I have not shared it. I learned the hard way that it's a mistake cbayer Jul 2012 #98

This message was self-deleted by its author rexcat Jul 2012 #108

Are there that many journals out there? Ha.....I used to follow only about 9 or 10, and then Evoman Jul 2012 #112

You wouldn't believe how many there are. cbayer Jul 2012 #116

I've taught a lot, but mostly people who wanted to learn. Evoman Jul 2012 #119

What method do you use to discern the good from the crap in the bible? Evoman Jul 2012 #117

Another glaring difference between science and religion. cbayer Jul 2012 #120

Actually, the bible is subject to paleology, just as with any other old text RainDog Jul 2012 #153

What guys? rug Jul 2012 #101

Vatican observatory: dimbear Jul 2012 #90

Vatican observatory: AlbertCat Jul 2012 #92

It's my nature to side with the underdog, and in fact religion hasn't done exactly nothing. dimbear Jul 2012 #94

That explains why it is hard to pin you down, dimbear! cbayer Jul 2012 #99

I also tend to root for the underdog. AlbertCat Jul 2012 #128

Within the confines of this thread religion is having a hard time. n/t dimbear Jul 2012 #136

Why would he feel like scientists 'talk down' to Christians? Tikki Jul 2012 #105

Well, we could start with things like "magical sky demon" and "delusional". cbayer Jul 2012 #107

Which scientist said that? Just curious? Tikki Jul 2012 #114

No, its like some responses in this thread and other thread like it. cbayer Jul 2012 #118

How about scientists and religionistas skepticscott Jul 2012 #140

Some scientists are sick of religions that undermine reality RainDog Jul 2012 #144

We do often talk down to them. Sometimes it can't be helped....when you know so much, Evoman Jul 2012 #121

"to acquiesce to the authority of modern scientists" xfundy Jul 2012 #106

I hope you will check back in. This has been a fun thread and you have cbayer Jul 2012 #110

Wrong. Science is under no obligation to take mythology of any kind into consideration. kestrel91316 Jul 2012 #126

Tell it to Schliemann. rug Jul 2012 #134

I do take religion seriously. A lot. 2ndAmForComputers Jul 2012 #131

well lowell is a real optimist is`t he... madrchsod Jul 2012 #132

It might help skepticscott Jul 2012 #146

Apples and Oranges BlueinOhio Jul 2012 #135

Er, BioLogos is NOT a community of scientists. They're a community of Xians stopbush Jul 2012 #138