Faith and Reason.

[_chuchu]

This thread makes me want a FSM sweater like my old roommate used to have because it's just so awesome

[Blubbartron]

This thread is highly disappointing so far. Scientists claiming it's possible to disprove a negative makes me die a little inside. People ignoring valid arguments and attacking the character of others simply because they can't form an intelligent counterargument is sad. Unfortunately, these things are to be expected in a thread like this. Religion is, quite simply, the embracing of ignorance. Anyone that willfully chooses to be ignorant will be unwilling, or unable, to conform to standard debate practices.

As militant as Neo may be, he has put forth basically all the best arguments so far. In particular, the line of thought about a religious person's beliefs being THE TRUTH, regardless of denomination. The simple fact that these people are extremely likely to have their beliefs change as a result of their overarching religion adapting to changing times, or an inner conflict being resolved, negates any possibility of their beliefs being "truth." There is only one reasonable way to contradict this point; claim that religion is fallible and is merely attempting to find the correct "way" through trial and error. But then religion falls under the same category of science. It becomes a self-correcting method of discovering truth. If only that was how more religions approached the big questions, instead of arrogantly assuming they have all the right answers. Obviously this isn't to say science does have the right answers, but they don't claim to have them all anyway. All it promises is to diligently search them out.

This comes from the perspective of an agnostic atheist. Yes, I'm one of the people that believe the two are not mutually exclusive. It is possible to think that there is no god and simultaneously understand that the concept of god can be neither proven nor disproven.

[_chuchu]

Not all religious people are completely ignorant though or wholly believe in all of the scriptures, it would just be stereotyping them. Some people believe in some things while not believing in other stuff. People will believe and interpret things that best suit them and tell themselves that they are good people just because.

[BadKarma]

i am agnostic, so fuck you people

[Psion]

I personally believe in the Great Crystal myself :s A giant beautiful jewel, enormous and beautiful, that banished the darkness, a jewel that originally was whole but eventually for some reason currently unknown broke apart, and from the fragments and their many colored light, mighty gods and life of all kinds was brought forth. While the actual existence of a giant crystal might not be real, i always was fascinated by the story of the Great Crystal and the Mothercrystals that brought life to many worlds.

It kind of makes me think that perhaps the great crystal was the original clump of matter that is now our universe, that one day it shattered (big bang?) sending forth light and pieces of itself out in all directions, forming the stars and planets, of which some would harbor life.

Even if the Great Crystal never existed, it is still a useful tool to use, as I can use it to guide my life. Just as the Crystals are made of many facets and colors, and because we are all made up of what was once the Great Crystal, so should I respect people of all natures(yes, even the emo kids, the furries, gay people {ok, I'm gay myself, so thats not hard to do lol}), as we are all part of a greater whole, and each person a different facet, a different ray of light to banish the darkness of the Void. Because we are all part of the Great Crystal, we should respect ourselves as well, making sure to keep our minds, bodies, and emotions all in healthy balance. Of course, not all of us can keep ourselves in perfect balance... some people have depression, or a physical disability, or some other problem that isn't (currently) curable, and some people are born with quirks that might seem disgusting to others, but as far as i'm concerned, so long as it does not threaten the great crystal(and everyone being part of the great crystal, that means so long as it doesn't harm another physically or mentally or emotionally) then it's A-OK. Naturally there's a difference between higher intelligences like those of human beings or any races that may come after, or be discovered on other planets than those of lesser creatures, like those of cattle or pigs. In this case, not having the higher intelligence means that so long as you aren't putting said creatures on the brink of extinction, or causing undue pain to them, it is fine to kill them for food or other resources, so long as it isn't wasted and they are treated with due respect.

Of course, those who don't follow this path and threaten the Great Crystal, now divided into a million shades of light, yet even Greater than it was at the beginning, as is the nature of life, should face the consequences of their actions, with punishment suitable to the disrespect they have wrought. Our judicial system handles it nicely most of the time, though a few things could use changing, but it will change for the better so long as people use logic to properly judge the condemned. Religions have NO place at all in influencing laws, whatsoever. A lot of the problems in our system are due to religions influence in our courts, or people who don't think in the long term the consequences of their rulings.

Sorry for the long post. Do I get credit for mixing religion and science without making a total abomination? Or did I not think something out well enough and living by this religion result in a disaster down the line? o,O

[Tristam]

Not all religious people are completely ignorant though or wholly believe in all of the scriptures, it would just be stereotyping them. Some people believe in some things while not believing in other stuff. People will believe and interpret things that best suit them and tell themselves that they are good people just because.

Here's what I don't understand though, if people get to pick and choose what they believe and disbelieve and everyone's equally "good", dosen't that make the whole thing seem a bit... bogus?

[Alleya]

Here's what I don't understand though, if people get to pick and choose what they believe and disbelieve and everyone's equally "good", dosen't that make the whole thing seem a bit... bogus?

^^^^ This is the point I was trying to make earlier (too far gone to try to pick up again I think). If you don't need or don't accept religious text, which insists upon itself being the ultimate and only truth, then why do you need religion period?

[MarkM.]

So I got to page 5 before I had to post quick before going into work. I have 2 questions and I will respond later when I get a chance.

Question 1: For the people that are saying they don't support religion, how do you decide what is right and what is wrong?

Question 2: If you must see something to believe in it, do you believe there is such thing as the wind? The quote that goes along with why I ask this is by Billy Graham, he was asked how he can believe in God and he respond (paraphrased), "I've never seen the wind, but I've seen the effects of the wind, just like I've never seen God, I've seen the effects of God."

[Neosutra]

Good morning. About to head off to work, but wanted to address one main point that Kuro stated:

You stated that religion has caused people to do more right than "25 to life" has. This is a claim that I believe you need to back up, because I would state this is FAR from the truth. When robbing a bank, people dont wear masks to prevent "god" from seeing them, they do it so the cameras wont. When slowing down in your car, you dont do it because "god is angry at your traffic violation", you do it because that hiway patrolman on the side of the road. You can go to any prison and see that most of the people there are religious. People will commit crimes regardless of their religion (some in fact in the name of religion), however it is the societal bounds that keep these crimes in check and it is those societal laws that keep us from anarchy. If we removed all of our police/army/rules/laws, makind would not simply live in some utopian state of bliss where we all did they right thing due to "gods will". As we brought up before, reall world foundations will ALWAYS be a better motivator than fictitious repricutions.

Also, I forgot who mentioned it, and have to run out the door soon but: Emotion isnt some mystical force that science cant measure. If your teacher told you that, Id start questioning some of the other things he/she told you. High school teachers are great for inspiring and teaching the basics, but rarely have expertise in their field. Emotions and social structures are very intensely researched in a miriad of fields, not to mention being a measurable chemical reaction. Philosophy, sociology, psychology, these are all tools we use to understand ourselves and our society. It doesnt always have to be a math equation to be good science, it just requires a system of study, and a standard for what you hold to be fact.

[Alleya]

Question 1: For the people that are saying they don't support religion, how do you decide what is right and what is wrong?

Question 2: If you must see something to believe in it, do you believe there is such thing as the wind? The quote that goes along with why I ask this is by Billy Graham, he was asked how he can believe in God and he respond (paraphrased), "I've never seen the wind, but I've seen the effects of the wind, just like I've never seen God, I've seen the effects of God."

Classic questions.

1. I ask a counter question. When religious people who claim to draw all their values from religion reject parts of the bible (eg, slavery, genocide, etc), how do they decide it's wrong? The answer is, the same way as everyone else. It's the values of the culture in which they live. Same reason most Muslim women in Afghanistan wear burkas and enter into arranged marriages, and most muslim women in the UK do not.

2. The wind can be measured. You can prove that the wind exists and that it is finite, and others who attempt to replicate your proofs will consistently do so accurately. You can break it down into component parts, analyze its various facets. You can describe, model, and predict the gravitational and tidal forces that causes it to move and behave the way it does. You can do none of those things with the concept of God.

[Neosutra]

So I got to page 5 before I had to post quick before going into work. I have 2 questions and I will respond later when I get a chance.

Question 1: For the people that are saying they don't support religion, how do you decide what is right and what is wrong?

The same place you get yours, from our societal laws and structures. The golden rule, the constitution, state/federal laws, and good parenting. We dont get morality from religion, people just use religion as a motivating force to follow those moral codes (which I showed was not needed in my last post)

Question 2: If you must see something to believe in it, do you believe there is such thing as the wind? The quote that goes along with why I ask this is by Billy Graham, he was asked how he can believe in God and he respond (paraphrased), "I've never seen the wind, but I've seen the effects of the wind, just like I've never seen God, I've seen the effects of God."

Air is a compound of testable chemicals, wind is a biproduct of the earth's endothermic reactions, both are very much measurable and very much observable. The wind argument is one designed to influence those with the minimalist of education, and should be dismissed as ignorance the next time you hear it. When your mother talks to you on the phone, do you not believe she exists? You cant see her, thus she doesnt exist right? There is more to observation than light waves. I cant physically see atoms, but I can detect them with an electron microscope, measure them with various techniques, and solve their states with the proper tools.

[MarkM.]

Classic questions.

1. I ask a counter question. When religious people who claim to draw all their values from religion reject parts of the bible (eg, slavery, genocide, etc), how do they decide it's wrong? The answer is, the same way as everyone else. It's the values of the culture in which they live. Same reason most Muslim women in Afghanistan wear burkas and enter into arranged marriages, and most muslim women in the UK do not.

What you are saying is you subscribe to the school of thought known as "cultural relativism", and although I agree with you and this somewhat, it's severely flawed. Ex: Nazi German. And the people that did what you posted, were also doing this.

(Sorry I didn't bold stuff, I fail at posting on forums on the world wide internet network of computer webs).

[Acturus]

On the topic of religion, I was curious if some of the theists here could detail a few of their reasons for believing. Not looking for overreaching "because I feel its the right answer", but more of a "well I dont think X could have happened without a god". One of the reasons I talk about religion alot is because it facinates me what makes various people believe. Ive talked with trailer trash theists and quantum physicist theist, and oddly enough they both believe for the same reason "I just believe". The ability to apply such arduous methodology to your physical work and suspend that system for your religious beliefs blows me away.

I abandoned traditional religion long ago. However, I have a deep-rooted belief that there is a higher power out there that, for lack of a better word, institutes a level of harmony (or balance... or equity) in all things.

Honestly, I could probably affix my change in views to where I am today on when I first read God's Debris.

There is an aspect of my life that is just driven by non-analytical sense. Gut feelings, romanticism, pursuit of happiness, whatever you want to call it, and as long as I cannot define that part of my life through logic, or reason, or science, or however you choose to define it, I hold that part away from the rest of me and attempt to nurture it in its own way. That is the basis of my "religion".

Through this, I have come to recognize "church" and "worship" as a means to an end, as a practical application of belief. Similar to turning on a TV in order to be entertained, or looking through a telescope to see farther away, formal, structured, religious worship is a tool that is used to focus one's own spirituality. I have no problem continuing to attend Catholic service (I was raised Catholic) because I hold a filter up to everything I'm subjected to. There is belief in Catholicism, and there is business, same as any other organized system devoted to human improvement. I pay attention to the belief that is preached, digest it through my own norms, and come to a conclusion at my own pace. I recognize the business for what it is and what it wants to accomplish, and if it furthers my own beliefs, then I contribute.

But stuff like Noah's Ark doesn't have to be historically accurate to deliver the message that it does. In fact, Jesus set up that filter for every Christian to take advantage of by the virtue of the fact that he preached in parable. If you believe the Bible to be accurate in some form, then this guy always told fables, never recounted history, when he made his points. It's not hard to extend that view to the words of the Old Testament.

The problem with "religion," as I see it, is that it more often than not becomes less of a telescope, and more of a crutch. Most people choose to remain blissfully content in their own set of beliefs and refuse to challenge them. It's both perfectly acceptable human nature, and incredibly narrowminded at the same time.

But, by that same token, religious skeptics end up relying on their skepticism, deluded by their own arrogance, and they are given crutches of their own. I love the blurb about Skeptics in God's Debris.

And I'm rambling, and more interested in reading others' thoughts, so I'll stop here.

[Alleya]

What you are saying is you subscribe to the school of thought known as "cultural relativism", and although I agree with you and this somewhat, it's severely flawed. Ex: Nazi German. And the people that did what you posted, were also doing this.

(Sorry I didn't bold stuff, I fail at posting on forums on the world wide internet network of computer webs).

Hitler was a roman catholic. What's your point? Hell, you don't even have to go Godwin to make this point. Just look at Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Somolia, etc, in present day. All of them contain huge swaths of what we would call morally bankrupt behavior that's seemingly accepted by a large portion of the populace.

Except wait...all of those states are either theocracies or have all the power in the hands of religious fanatics.

[Lordwafik]

Hitler was a roman catholic. What's your point? Hell, you don't even have to go Godwin to make this point. Just look at Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Somolia, etc, in present day. All of them contain huge swaths of what we would call morally bankrupt behavior that's seemingly accepted by a large portion of the populace.

Except wait...all of those states are either theocracies or have all the power in the hands of religious fanatics.

You forgot another country in that pile you made, bush era USA!

[thatwasnifty]

I don't know why it's so hard to understand that faith and reason are inherently incompatible. Faith means belief without any justification. Reason demands observation and justification. End of story. Religion is about faith, about accepting the truth or existence of something just because. Science is a way of asking and answering questions by experimentation and logic. Religion is unfalsifiable, science must be. Those theistic scientists like Ken Miller and Francis Collins possess cognitive dissonance to an amazing degree; while on the one hand they devote their lives to questioning, observing, manipulating, predicting, and questioning some more, they also shrug their shoulders and say that some things defy rationality and don't explain why. That's a cop out. If something exists, then it must be observable, otherwise it doesn't exist. It's poor critical thinking to proclaim otherwise.

[Mizango]

Here is what I love and find totally fascinating about Science, unless you go out and look you would have never ever known of this or any other scientific findings? For instance, for people that don't regularly follow Science like some of us?

What do you say when Science discovers and releases photos and a story on how we have found a Tropical plants, Tropical trees and tropical animals under thousands upon thousands of feet of solid ice and glaciers?

How is Science so bogus? I have not once read anything in the bible once about Dinos, a tropical arctic or any such things of that nature. Article below related...

Ancient Turtle Migrated From Asia To America Over Tropical Arctic

Not shitting on anyone belief system here, just curious as to why we talk Science everyone pulls the Atomic weapons card. I could post a new mind blowing discovery every day for a single year that would astound you. Can religion do the same accompanied by anything other than "word of mouf" ? (Sorry I had to)

I am trying to steer clear of the religion and politics theme a bit and hopefully get some answers into why Science is so hard to believe for most?

[kuronosan]

Good morning. About to head off to work, but wanted to address one main point that Kuro stated:

You stated that religion has caused people to do more right than "25 to life" has. This is a claim that I believe you need to back up, because I would state this is FAR from the truth. When robbing a bank, people dont wear masks to prevent "god" from seeing them, they do it so the cameras wont. When slowing down in your car, you dont do it because "god is angry at your traffic violation", you do it because that hiway patrolman on the side of the road. You can go to any prison and see that most of the people there are religious. People will commit crimes regardless of their religion (some in fact in the name of religion), however it is the societal bounds that keep these crimes in check and it is those societal laws that keep us from anarchy. If we removed all of our police/army/rules/laws, makind would not simply live in some utopian state of bliss where we all did they right thing due to "gods will". As we brought up before, reall world foundations will ALWAYS be a better motivator than fictitious repricutions.

Also, I forgot who mentioned it, and have to run out the door soon but: Emotion isnt some mystical force that science cant measure. If your teacher told you that, Id start questioning some of the other things he/she told you. High school teachers are great for inspiring and teaching the basics, but rarely have expertise in their field. Emotions and social structures are very intensely researched in a miriad of fields, not to mention being a measurable chemical reaction. Philosophy, sociology, psychology, these are all tools we use to understand ourselves and our society. It doesnt always have to be a math equation to be good science, it just requires a system of study, and a standard for what you hold to be fact.

I have to work a long shift today Neo so it looks like you've caught me with my pants down as I need some time to actually get some facts. The second half of your statement, however, I totally agree with.

Whoever made the metaphor of Billy Graham and the wind sort of hit it head on as well. It's not about measuring the wind and/or measuring windspeed. You don't have to be able to measure something to see the effect it has on people.

The idea behind his statement was that if you can't see something with your own eyes it doesn't mean its existence doesn't have an effect on you. It was supposed to be a philosophical statement. You're taking it too literally if you start talking about measuring wind dynamics and pressure differentials. It's diluting the point.

[Alleya]

Re: Miz

Science created atomic weapons.

Faith that it would work dropped them on Japan.

The idea behind his statement was that if you can't see something with your own eyes it doesn't mean its existence doesn't have an effect on you. It was supposed to be a philosophical statement. You're taking it too literally if you start talking about measuring wind dynamics and pressure differentials. It's diluting the point.

Right now ghosts are anally raping you. In 20 years you will get prostate cancer due to the constant ghost anal rape.

I have faith that this is true.

How is what I've said any different from any other supernatural belief, IE God?

[kuronosan]

That is some very terrific logic and expresses in two sentences what I said in twenty.

If something exists, then it must be observable, otherwise it doesn't exist. It's poor critical thinking to proclaim otherwise.

That is just bad logic, unfortunately. You can measure the wind and observe its effects. Just because you can't "measure" God or any god does not mean you cannot observe his effects. That, my friend, is poor critical thinking to think otherwise.