FairDooz Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Science vs Religion? It's always fascinated me, and now it amuses me because the way I've come to see it they operate on different planes. When it comes to explaining the facts there seems to be no contest. The scientific method gets endlessly tested and just when it seems the truth has been discovered it gets tested some more, an inconsistent bit of data is discovered and a new theory is required. Science demands consistency. If the story is not consistent it needs to be updated until it is. When it comes to the facts of the observable universe, religious dogma falls a long way short of most people's expectations. Repetition of the same story until it is accepted is just well, I'll say it ... brainwashing. And yet although religion, in my view has lost the battle to explain how the world works and how we got here, many people still feel a spiritual vacuum or "god shaped hole" in their lives. Science seems incapable of filling this vacuum. It's not very satisfactory to live without purpose, meaning and a sense of connection with something beyond the here and now. As Einstein said ... knowledge of what is ... does not open the door directly to what should be. I think religion helps many to open the door to what should be - what we should value, how we can live together. There's a great TED talk on this issue - Aetheism 2.0 by Alain de Botton ... "Dismissing religion is as easy as shooting fish in a barrel ... It's about how we might move on from the Science vs Religion debate although the speaker doesn't seem to want to lead the movement himself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Science vs Religion? It's not very satisfactory to live without purpose, meaning and a sense of connection with something beyond the here and now. ! All of your post expressed my own view,but this part had a special significance!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryedo40 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 ...It's not very satisfactory to live without purpose, meaning and a sense of connection with something beyond the here and now. As far as I'm aware, there is no deity planned purpose or meaning behind my existence. Whether there is or not, it's something I couldn't careless about. Why you suggest it isn't satisfactory, I haven't a clue; unless, of course, you mean you aren't satisfied with that notion. I think religion helps many to open the door to what should be - what we should value, how we can live together. Yet the religious don't even agree with each other on what we should value and religion has, throughout history, caused a great deal of division. "how we can live together" for religion, usually means "believe what I do, do what I say - or else". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 It is said that God exists on the Metaphysical Plane which is why we can’t touch, see, smell, hear or taste God, if the [B]Metaphysical Plane exists it is also where our emotion exist.[/b] So again it doesn’t take much of a stretch to assume our emotions are the cause of God. in most sects of buddhism monks use meditation techniques to go beyond emotion ,emotion to them is just an distraction ,on their way to achiveing enlightenment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Science vs Religion? It's always fascinated me, and now it amuses me because the way I've come to see it they operate on different planes. When it comes to explaining the facts there seems to be no contest. The scientific method gets endlessly tested and just when it seems the truth has been discovered it gets tested some more, an inconsistent bit of data is discovered and a new theory is required. Science demands consistency. If the story is not consistent it needs to be updated until it is. When it comes to the facts of the observable universe, religious dogma falls a long way short of most people's expectations. Repetition of the same story until it is accepted is just well, I'll say it ... brainwashing. And yet although religion, in my view has lost the battle to explain how the world works and how we got here, many people still feel a spiritual vacuum or "god shaped hole" in their lives. Science seems incapable of filling this vacuum. It's not very satisfactory to live without purpose, meaning and a sense of connection with something beyond the here and now. As Einstein said ... knowledge of what is ... does not open the door directly to what should be. I think religion helps many to open the door to what should be - what we should value, how we can live together. There's a great TED talk on this issue - Aetheism 2.0 by Alain de Botton ... "Dismissing religion is as easy as shooting fish in a barrel ... It's about how we might move on from the Science vs Religion debate although the speaker doesn't seem to want to lead the movement himself! I think you and Tom have probably got close to hitting the nail on the head, if I have read your posts correctly I think you both believe in and have some emotional connection to God despite thinking much of the evidence would support the fact that God is unlikely to exist. You formed this emotional connection at a time when you thought God existed and turning it off would probably be no easier than turning the love off that would be felt for a lost family member. I have no idea what the love for God feels like but if it comes close to the love for my wife and children I couldn’t imagine life without that love. If someone took them away and proved they never existed the love would remain, and life without it would be unbearable. To me the belief in God isn’t the problem the problems come from the religions people believe because the religions were written by man, and were written for a purpose that isn’t relevant today. If the belief in God was as simple as when we die we will join the loved ones we have lost for the rest of eternity then God would have served the only purpose that is required, to make the death of a loved one a little more bearable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 !959 ford 100e popular Iv'e got a load of old cars and things I'm a car kleptomaniac. A kleptomaniac is someone who can't stop nicking things. As a man of god you should know of a commandment about stealing. The coppers will be round shortly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 in most sects of buddhism monks use meditation techniques to go beyond emotion ,emotion to them is just an distraction ,on their way to achiveing enlightenment Meditation can only focus the mind and to attain spiritual knowledge or insight, that knowledge and insight must already exist in their mind with their emotions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I think you and Tom have probably got close to hitting the nail on the head, if I have read your posts correctly I think you both believe in and have some emotional connection to God despite thinking much of the evidence would support the fact that God is unlikely to exist. You formed this emotional connection at a time when you thought God existed and turning it off would probably be no easier than turning the love off that would be felt for a lost family member. I have no idea what the love for God feels like but if it comes close to the love for my wife and children I couldn’t imagine life without that love. If someone took them away and proved they never existed the love would remain, and life without it would be unbearable. To me the belief in God isn’t the problem the problems come from the religions people believe because the religions were written by man, and were written for a purpose that isn’t relevant today. If the belief in God was as simple as when we die we will join the loved ones we have lost for the rest of eternity then God would have served the only purpose that is required, to make the death of a loved one a little more bearable. I didn't see anything in FairDoo'z post that would suggest he had made a decisive claim to a belief in God.I think you were reading the post wrongly.(post 91) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I didn't see anything in FairDoo'z post that would suggest he had made a decisive claim to a belief in God.I think you were reading the post wrongly. I agree, which is why there is nothing in my post which claims he has made a decisive claim to a belief in God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 It is said that God exists on the Metaphysical Plane which is why we can’t touch, see, smell, hear or taste God, if the Metaphysical Plane exists it is also where our emotion exist. So again it doesn’t take much of a stretch to assume our emotions are the cause of God. My emotions are the result of chemical reactions in my brain. No need for a metaphysical plane at all. Everything else in your post is gibberish. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.