Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9181 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: steve austin
Post Volume: Total: 918,261 Year: 5,518/9,624 Month: 543/323 Week: 40/143 Day: 2/11 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is science a religion?
2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 44 of 295 (294270)
03-11-2006 11:11 AM


Wow.....y'all are not only away from the tree but in another town.
lol
Anywho...the question asked - Is science a religion?
The basic concept of science is not.
For those believe there is a meaningful scientific explanation to everything, it is.
This message has been edited by 2ice_baked_taters, 03-11-2006 11:11 AM

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by ReverendDG, posted 03-13-2006 6:31 PM 2ice_baked_taters has replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 46 of 295 (295104)
03-14-2006 4:35 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by ReverendDG
03-13-2006 6:31 PM


how do you mean? All things of the physical realm have a scientific explanation.
Is this your belief?
or
are you stating a provable fact?
Show me gravity. I wanna see it. Show me a picture.
the fact is religions have to do with things that are pretty much untestable, non physical and only exist subjectivly
Ah...yes...I have nothing to fear from Islamic jihadists
Funny how real those things can be.
if you argue spirits,souls or gods are objective please take a picture of one for me please.
Let me just say that your acknowledgment of "me" here, is evidence of: The iron shaving pattern you might attemt to argue my "show me gravity" request with.
How do you identify a muslim? Show me a muslim.
There is your evidence. You just identified the unidentifyable.
Amazing no?
Happens every day.
People who believe in science as a religion draw a line.
I say the line was never there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by ReverendDG, posted 03-13-2006 6:31 PM ReverendDG has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by PurpleYouko, posted 03-14-2006 11:59 AM 2ice_baked_taters has replied
 Message 48 by nwr, posted 03-14-2006 12:31 PM 2ice_baked_taters has replied
 Message 49 by ReverendDG, posted 03-14-2006 4:17 PM 2ice_baked_taters has replied
 Message 51 by sidelined, posted 03-15-2006 11:18 AM 2ice_baked_taters has replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 52 of 295 (295897)
03-16-2006 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by nwr
03-14-2006 12:31 PM


I'm wondering whether you are confused between gravity and magnetism.
We've already hashed this little problem out in another forum.
This message has been edited by 2ice_baked_taters, 03-16-2006 11:38 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by nwr, posted 03-14-2006 12:31 PM nwr has not replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 53 of 295 (295913)
03-16-2006 10:43 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by ReverendDG
03-14-2006 4:17 PM


did i say "everything can be seen even gravity?", no i said that there is a scientific explanation for evenything of the world around us, why the hell did you bring up seeing gravity? what relevence does asking for a picture of gravity have?
and yes we can show you gravity you are experancing it right now, just drop something
Gavity? Because you believe in something you say exists exclusively upon the "evidence" it leaves behind. The evidence is based on observations of a phenomenon "us" we cannot explain. One unexplained phenomenon defining another....ummm.......there you have science.
The question is....do you believe science has all the answers?
If that is the case....then It is your religion.
as for your "show me gravity" thing you are not even reading my post, or understanding what i said. anyway i would say the fact that we are standing on the earth not floating off into space shows gravity pretty well
The fact that you are comunicating to me abstractly not only through your body but twice removed is clear evidence to me of the force of you.
Ah but that is for my other topic.
wow that was the biggest non-answer i have ever read, did you even read what i wrote? i said have to with, the subjects of religious beliefs, not what people do in the name of them
you are commiting so many logical contortions i'm not even sure its worth answering this,but.
It is called a different perspective or point of view.
I am very familiar with a scientific point of view.
did i say you can't identify religious believers? no i said please show if spirits,gods or souls are objective
Tell me....is gravity objective or subjective?.... and why
when science deals with the spiritual, the non-testable, the nonphysical and the subjective, then yes it will be a religion, till
then its science.
The problem is that science originates from the "non physical" or definable" acording to science.
What you "are" is non testable in your box that is science.Yet the entire basis for "science" comes from the non testable or definable.
If you are saying that science can define "us" and everything around us then you might as well go the next step and have science define god or have science decide no god exists.
The idea of science now becomes the definer of all things.
That my friend is a religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by ReverendDG, posted 03-14-2006 4:17 PM ReverendDG has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by ReverendDG, posted 03-17-2006 10:42 PM 2ice_baked_taters has replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 54 of 295 (295923)
03-16-2006 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by sidelined
03-15-2006 11:18 AM


Sorry but pictures are a result of electromagnetic force and cannot show any force much less gravity . Gravity can merely be extrapolated as a force who's effects we can demonstrate and define.
I just love how people say "electromagnetic force" It is soooo revealing. But anywho
So you believe in something. Gravity. This gravity you believe in is defined and demonstrated by another undefinable source of which the existance is only acknowleded by the evidence it leaves behind....the force of you. Again...one undefinable defining another. Hmmm
Take a walk to the edge of a 12 story bulding. Step off and feel the acceleration as you fall towards the pavement. That acceleration is the result of gravity. It is determined to be due to local effects imposed by the mass of the earth. It is a very weak force the weakest of the four fundamental forces.
Now as you step off the acceleration of the force of gravity has boosted your contact velocity in measurable way to 9.8 m/s/s after the first second. You are then traveling at (9.8 meters per second or around 32 feet per second for the metric impaired} after the second second you are now moving at 19.6 meters per second or 64 feet per sec.
Ater the third second you would be travelling at 29.4 meters per second{96 feet per second} however this in an unecessary calculation for you have now encountered the second of the four known forces that include electomagnetism.The electromagetic force constitutes that sudden stop you would feel if you were to be foolish enough to perform this particular experment.
An interesting montra you all tend to fall into.
It prevents you from seeing my perspective.
The electromagnetic force is what gives you the abilty to move and think. It is ,in fact, the force by which your life hangs in the balance.All the biological processes within your body are attributable to this one force. Now perhaps you can show us what is meant by this "force of me" that is seperate from the electromagnetic and where you can provide evidence to show this force.
Sorry.....Gives "who?" the ability to move and "think"? What is "you"?
What is think?
Once you step outside this frame of mind there is no conflict.
My perspective includes most of yours.
Yours must deny mine until proven.
If you believe all the answers are in science...it is your religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by sidelined, posted 03-15-2006 11:18 AM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by ramoss, posted 03-16-2006 11:57 AM 2ice_baked_taters has replied
 Message 58 by Son Goku, posted 03-16-2006 12:01 PM 2ice_baked_taters has not replied
 Message 68 by sidelined, posted 03-16-2006 2:42 PM 2ice_baked_taters has not replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 55 of 295 (295932)
03-16-2006 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by PurpleYouko
03-14-2006 11:59 AM


Re: Requirements of religion
Doesn't a religion require some form of deity?
Doesn't it require some form of worship? Glorification?
I thought they did but what do I know? I have as little to do with religion as i can possibly manage.
Religions believe, to the best of my knowlegde, that all answers are found in or through thier deity. That through this deity they will come to know truth and be enlightened.
If you believe science explains everything it has become your deity.
Science has become this "thing" That many people view as above or outside themselve and look to it for answers. Many of them simply refuse to acknowledge that this is the case.
I see science as the bare search for facts without meaning.
How can we define all that is without meaning?
Just thinkin out loud here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by PurpleYouko, posted 03-14-2006 11:59 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Percy, posted 03-16-2006 11:57 AM 2ice_baked_taters has replied
 Message 59 by PurpleYouko, posted 03-16-2006 12:05 PM 2ice_baked_taters has not replied
 Message 60 by nwr, posted 03-16-2006 12:47 PM 2ice_baked_taters has not replied
 Message 62 by jar, posted 03-16-2006 1:10 PM 2ice_baked_taters has replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 61 of 295 (295961)
03-16-2006 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Percy
03-16-2006 11:57 AM


Re: Requirements of religion
I'm curious. If religion is religion and science is religion, then what's not religion?
Yes....that is a good question. It may require one to think of things differently all together to make sense of it all.
Just depends on what perspective works for you.
Of course it is not an issue if one sees science as a tool.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Percy, posted 03-16-2006 11:57 AM Percy has not replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 63 of 295 (295968)
03-16-2006 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by ramoss
03-16-2006 11:57 AM


Gravity is a description of how matter appears to react based on observations. The 'theory of Gravity' attempts to explain this observed behavior.
Yeah...I'm trying to get another one like that started in another forum. People are having a really hard time with it though.
As for believing 'science answers all questions'. I don't think of anybody who says that. Science is a tool that help attempt explain the natural world. It does not answer many philsophical questions, and anybody who is honest about it will admit that. It is geared to a very specific thing, and it does that specific thing very well.
Well I would not be too quick to assume knowing everyones beliefs. Depending upon how true to themselves they are or weather or not they argue for debates sake or other purpose.....there are those here who do seem to fall into this catagory.
And yes...science does what it does...or more precisely...we do what we do...very well
Now, 'Gravity' is just the description on how matter interacts with it comes to 'attraction' to each other. If someone comes up with more observations that contradict what we have thus far observed, then those new observations will have to be taken into account.
You mean one description and perspective. Someone may see another way of looking at it that does not exclude the original theory but encompasses it in a larger idea. We may only be seeing one aspect of a bigger more complicated thing and seeing it only in one way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by ramoss, posted 03-16-2006 11:57 AM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by ramoss, posted 03-16-2006 5:41 PM 2ice_baked_taters has not replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 64 of 295 (295973)
03-16-2006 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by jar
03-16-2006 1:10 PM


Re: Requirements of religion
Perhaps some religions believe that. Many do not. For example, as a Christian I believe I can learn about Faith, about morals, abou how I should behave from GOD. But I don't expect to learn history or engineering or aesthetics or physics or math or language or the laws of my area or how to dress or how to drive a car or which foods to eat from the diety.
Yes...this is what you believe then?
So...if this is what you believe..what gave you the tools?
what gave you the medium through which to explore?
What gave you the power of choice?
What gave you the ability to think?
Every time you use these you are finding answers through God.
It depends upon the perspective.
This brings into question what your definition of GOD is.
I am curious what your perspective is.
But so far you seem to be the only one saying that.
Yes....many are avoiding the topic aren't they? Perhaps they are on the fence.
A straight foreward yes or no, or, yes and no, with an explanation is all that is required. Then discussion follows

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by jar, posted 03-16-2006 1:10 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by jar, posted 03-16-2006 2:15 PM 2ice_baked_taters has not replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 80 of 295 (309560)
05-06-2006 1:09 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by jar
03-16-2006 7:32 PM


Re: "Is science a religion?"
You cannot verfiy that what happened was indeed supernatural? All you can do is say that the cause is uknown. If you can verify the cause, then the cause is not supernatural.
This statement is only true scientifically within set parameters.
Science has looked for causes of effects and still has no answers but only questions. The "if" in this case sounds supernatural to me...lol
It is the "belief" that one can find the cause that I find interesting.
There may in fact be no root cause...just and infinite number of ways that things will interact and the cause may forever remain "supernatural" at it's core.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by jar, posted 03-16-2006 7:32 PM jar has not replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 81 of 295 (309571)
05-06-2006 2:01 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by ReverendDG
03-17-2006 10:42 PM


Re: a late reply
no, you have a strange strawman of science, now if you want a less distorted version, we could go from there. I love this, "evidence" eh? i guess a person falling from the top of a building isn't evidence of gravity then?
No, you seem to not beable to explain it but science has an explaination, the mass of the earth produces the force of gravity. just like any large mass out in space
Exactly what "produces" "gravity" is as yet unknown. We do however see a direct relationship with measurements of what we have defined as mass to the effect we have named gravity.
As I said...show me gravity. You cannot...you can only show me it's effect.
that doesn't make any sense! are you redefining what a force is? through my body? what does that even mean?
To all,
The following paragraph is off-topic for this thread. 2ice_baked_taters ideas about force in science are already being discussed in his Do we affect the" physical " indepentent of the laws of physics thread. Please discuss this topic there.
--Admin
Bingo. Force is in sorry need of redefinement in science. Perhaps we should consider the merit of other meanings of the word.
I have applied force to you of a very different kind. One that physical science currently can describe only in a very unmeaningful mechanical way. But never the less you have experienced the force I have applied and understand it as more than mechanical.
no it can't be used to define things that can not be tested
There are a number of people here who have either said directly or given the definate impression that they believe anything is testable and completely understandable through science and that science will eventually be able to define everything.
This is a religous point of view.
This message has been edited by Admin, Sat, 05-06-2006 07:46 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by ReverendDG, posted 03-17-2006 10:42 PM ReverendDG has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by anglagard, posted 05-06-2006 4:25 AM 2ice_baked_taters has not replied
 Message 84 by anglagard, posted 05-06-2006 4:44 AM 2ice_baked_taters has not replied
 Message 85 by Admin, posted 05-06-2006 7:41 AM 2ice_baked_taters has replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 86 of 295 (309624)
05-06-2006 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Admin
05-06-2006 7:41 AM


Re: Topic Advisory
This is the same topic you introduced in the Do we affect the" physical " indepentent of the laws of physics thread. If you would like to discuss your "force of me" ideas please resume discussion in that thread rather than shifting the topic in this thread.
Yes, precisely. It directly relates to this topic. Why?
Because it all involves a search for understanding relating to religous beliefs. A continued observation of the many ways science often serves as just another religion. Somehow many people who follow science seem to believe that mechanical relationships related to "causal effects" will ultimately explain things. Many in science view "us" as a series of causal effects. That is thier approach and is only one view or belief.
Any belief relating to the origins of all that is or what we are is religious. Somehow many people have taken on the view that when asking these fundamental questions that science is above this nonsense of religion. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Hence this silly quibling about natural and supernatural. It's all the same crapola. Just very fundamentally different views or beliefs with very religious conotations.
This message has been edited by 2ice_baked_taters, 05-06-2006 10:55 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Admin, posted 05-06-2006 7:41 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Admin, posted 05-06-2006 1:16 PM 2ice_baked_taters has replied

2ice_baked_taters
Member (Idle past 5968 days)
Posts: 566
From: Boulder Junction WI.
Joined: 02-16-2006


Message 88 of 295 (309704)
05-06-2006 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Admin
05-06-2006 1:16 PM


Re: Topic Advisory
I do respect your difference of opinion and appreciate your noting that it is a difference of opinion by nature.
Someone must do the job in this format.
It does however illustrate to me the shortcomings of this format that I have mentioned on occasion.
The above statement is not directed at the administrator but rather at the inherant weakness in the pretense of the format. You all do as fine a job as you can under the pretense.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Admin, posted 05-06-2006 1:16 PM Admin has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024