Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 187

Thread: The equivalence of religion and science?

  1. #41
    Registered User stewart38's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ambrosden it gets
    Posts
    7,480
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by RedFox View Post



    Whereas the idea that there is a god who created everything is believable? If so, how did He/She/It/Them get there? Was She/It/Them/He created, did It/Them/
    He/She evolve, or did They/He/She/It spontaneously come into existence?
    Some call it the 'big bang' some call it 'let there be light' same thing


    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post

    You know you want to post

  2. #42
    Commercial Operator Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,895
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Franklin View Post
    Unfortunately, he didn't win the Nobel prize.

    The Nobel Prize winners for 1998: Robert B. Laughlin, Horst L. Störmer, Daniel C. Tsui

    And in fact searching the entire list of Laureates doesn't give a single match for Chopra.

    But it gets worse, I'm afraid.

    Because it's actually an Ig Nobel prize that Deepak Chopra was awarded in 1998. Which is a parody award rather than something to be proud of.

    Sorry, Rocky, but you're not covering yourself with glory here.
    That is very funny! But then I did say that I hadn't got all the detail correct.. Looking at Wikepedia again I can see that it says ig Noble. My Mistake

    Shall we just concentrate on the metaphysical beliefs of just the following then?

    Max Planck - Nobel Prize in Physics 1918
    Albert Einstein - Nobel Prize in Physics 1921
    Louis de Broglie - Nobel Prize in Physics 1929
    Werner Heisenberg - Nobel Prize in Physics 1932
    Erwin Schrödinger - Nobel Prize in Physics 1933
    Wolfgang Pauli - Nobel Prize in Physics 1945

    To name but a few of the great physicists of our time who had slightly more open minds than... err... some people.

    AND

    Of course Deepak Chopra...


    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    ...I withdraw from this discussion.


    Obviously...


    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post

  3. #43
    Registered User David Franklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,426
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    Shall we just concentrate on the metaphysical beliefs of just the following then?

    Max Planck - Nobel Prize in Physics 1918
    Albert Einstein - Nobel Prize in Physics 1921
    Louis de Broglie - Nobel Prize in Physics 1929
    Werner Heisenberg - Nobel Prize in Physics 1932
    Erwin Schrödinger - Nobel Prize in Physics 1933
    Wolfgang Pauli - Nobel Prize in Physics 1945

    To name but a few of the great physicists of our time who had slightly more open minds than... err... some people.
    I don't really care what you want to say about metaphysical beliefs, to be honest. Feynman decided it was impossible for him to win these arguments, and I certainly don't expect I can do any better.

    So it's only when you start bring actual physics into the discussion (or talking about non-existent Nobel Prize winners ) that I might speak up.

    Though to be honest, even then it's unlikely. I was only skimming the thread, so it was mere chance I checked on Deepak's prize history.

    Much more amusingly: Check out the nobel prize winner (physics) in 1980 - none other than James Cronin!

  4. #44
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    bedford
    Posts
    4,899
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    ...
    Shall we just concentrate on the metaphysical beliefs of just the following then?

    Max Planck - Nobel Prize in Physics 1918
    Albert Einstein - Nobel Prize in Physics 1921
    Louis de Broglie - Nobel Prize in Physics 1929
    Werner Heisenberg - Nobel Prize in Physics 1932
    Erwin Schrödinger - Nobel Prize in Physics 1933
    Wolfgang Pauli - Nobel Prize in Physics 1945

    To name but a few of the great physicists of our time who had slightly more open minds than... err... some people...
    Are these examples of scientists responding to the pressures of the society about them?
    or perhaps scientists trying to get the religious to look at the scientific explanations?
    or of imperfect scientists?
    or you believing the scientists that agree with you whilst dismissing those that do not?

  5. #45
    Commercial Operator Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,895
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by bigdjiver View Post
    Are these examples of scientists responding to the pressures of the society about them?
    or perhaps scientists trying to get the religious to look at the scientific explanations?
    or of imperfect scientists?
    or you believing the scientists that agree with you whilst dismissing those that do not?
    Firstly, I've only given the names of Nobel Prize winners because it shows how most of the gifted scientists of the 20th century also had a belief that there was a metaphysical connection involved in our experience of science. There are of course many other well known mathematicians and physicists who feel the same way. Have I been selective in my choices? Of course! By definition, there are many more scientists that DON’T believe in a connection than do. Hence the list: It was to say, ‘Lots of scientists don’t believe in a connection – but why would you take them seriously? Why would you value their opinion over the opinion of these Giants?’

    Were they just being ‘metaphysical’ in their outlook because they were responding to the religious pressures around them at the time? Almost certainly the reverse is true. Based on what I have read, I can imagine that any top ranking physicist at the time who declared a belief in spiritual matters would have been thought of as a little weird. It’s important that we also understand that ‘metaphysical’ is not the same as ‘Christian’ . On this basis most of them kept their views very much to themselves: although their thoughts are often revealed in correspondence.

    It’s also important to remember at this stage, that all the names quoted were, more or less, THE architects involved in defining Quantum Mechanics in the early stages of its development. And that would have had a huge bearing on their outlook – and on our understanding of what that signifies. Quantum Physics is very specialized form of physics that is also incredibly counter intuitive. To FULLY understand it and to understand its implications about what it says about our perception of reality you have to be able to think in a way most trained scientific minds cannot begin to comprehend OR a willing to accept – because it tells you that reality is an illusion. Even Einstein could never really accept it.

    These people were, to all intents and purposes, looking for the very first time into an alien World, the sub-atomic, and what they saw frightened and confused them. When they came to terms with it, what they learned changed their view of the Universe forever. That’s why they achieved so much, and that’s why science has progressed at such a rapid pace over the first 80 years of the 20th century. This subject matter IS difficult and that’s why so many scientists involved in other areas of science DON’T see it – it’s not about intelligence, it’s about creative thought. Dawkin’s doesn’t see it, but he’s an evolutionary biologist, not a physicist – so why should he? However when, he denounces spiritual and metaphysical matters people listen to him… And my point is, why would anyone believe anything he says when the experience of the greatest minds of our time tells us that there IS something else going on here.

    Doesn’t that encourage you to make up your own mind by researching these areas a little more rather than just blindly accepting what you are being told?

  6. #46
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Worcester, UK
    Posts
    4,157
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by MartinHarper View Post
    It's too complicated because there's a much easier way of reconciling Genesis with scientific fact. This can be expressed in one sentence: "The creation stories in Genesis are poetic Truth, not literal truth.".
    Or, alternatively, "Both science and Genesis are True, despite being contradictory.".

    As a human, I can believe in multiple contradictory models and still function effectively. It'd be silly to arbitrarily deny myself that evolutionary advantage out of intellectual pride.

    (mind you, Genesis is a pretty dumb model, so I'll save my brain space for more useful "truths")

  7. #47
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sunny South Hampshire
    Posts
    873
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    I'm trying to have an open mind about this Creationism lark, but it still leaves me feeling slightly embarrassed that we're in the 21st century and religion is still polluting the waters in this way.

    I see it like this. Science is about understanding the world, religion is about finding meaning in the world (so I'm told, to me it seems more like hiding from the world, but that's another discussion). Religious dogma, when examined using scientific methods, usually appears untrue. Religion will tell you that's because humans are fallible, but since religion itself is a human construct, that's kinda self-defeating.

    However, science has successfully destroyed many religious beliefs. Amongst them, flat earth, sun goes round earth, bad weather caused by Satan, mental illness caused by demonic possession, and a slew of medical beliefs including that we should not vaccinate children because 'God expects a certain number to die young'.

    The bible itself supports genocide, slavery, sexism, and a whole host of generally unsaviour behaviours and some of us rationalise that by saying it's not to be taken literally, or it's 'symbolic'. Sorry, but the mind boggles at this selective blindness.

    There are major areas of difference, some are not absolute, but generally; science is egalitarian, religion is authoritarian. Science leads with evidence, interpreted more or less democratically. Religion leads with revelation, interpreted by an authoritarian hierachy(sp?). Science values skepticism, religion rejects it. Science values free thought, religion values obedience. Science values progress, religion values no change.

    Science and religion are not comparable or anywhere near equivalent, but.... as Richard Hawkins said, the best tactic is to acknowledge Science and Religion are the similar/the same, then demand equal time for science in RE lessons

    P.S. I'm agnostic when it comes to God or Gods, but resolute in my opinion of 'religion'. It is not favourable as you can prolly tell.

  8. #48
    Commercial Operator Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,895
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by TA Guy View Post
    as Richard Hawkins said, the best tactic is to acknowledge Science and Religion are the similar/the same, then demand equal time for science in RE lessons .
    Do you really believe that he would go with that...

    I can just see it now. The Government schools advisor rings up and says:

    'Hi, Richard, weve decided that was a really great idea of yours, so we are going to teach RE in science classes AND we are going to teach science in RE classes.'

    Someone would have to peel him off the ceiling! Would make a great spoof phone call - anyone got his number?

  9. #49
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Doolan View Post
    boring; this is the cerocscotland.com forum, it should be about DANCE related subjects

    Yeah, I've heard that theory too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Doolan View Post
    not about you or Barry trying to impress each other !!!!!
    What, you reckon this is a Brokeback Mountain thing? Well, could be, there's a lot of sexual chemistry between them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Doolan View Post
    Please join a simple chat room and practice your extensive vocabulary elsewhere and leave us to discuss dance, music and anything else related to cerocscotland.com.
    My standard answer to anyone saying that is "Well, go on then, start a dance-related thread..."

  10. #50
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    6,709
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by TA Guy View Post
    Science and religion are not comparable or anywhere near equivalent, but.... as Richard Hawkins said, the best tactic is to acknowledge Science and Religion are the similar/the same, then demand equal time for science in RE lessons

    P.S. I'm agnostic when it comes to God or Gods, but resolute in my opinion of 'religion'. It is not favourable as you can prolly tell.
    So, this Richard Hawkins bloke - can you tell us anything more about him?

  11. #51
    Commercial Operator Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,895
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    So, this Richard Hawkins bloke - can you tell us anything more about him?
    Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawkins.... Richard Hawkins... someone that talks out of his Black Hole?
    Last edited by Rocky; 23rd-January-2008 at 11:22 AM.

  12. #52
    Registered User stewart38's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ambrosden it gets
    Posts
    7,480
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by TA Guy View Post
    I'm trying to have an open mind about this Creationism lark,

    .
    It didn’t work did it

    A very closed mind

    This actually sums up many peoples thinking


    Quote Originally Posted by TA Guy View Post
    (so I'm told, to me it seems more like hiding from the world


    but since religion itself is a human construct, that's kinda self-defeating.

    'God expects a certain number to die young'.. Religious dogma
    bible itself supports genocide, slavery, sexism, and a whole host of generally unsaviour behaviours

    Sorry, but the mind boggles at this selective blindness.

    Science values progress, religion values no change.


    Science and religion are not comparable or anywhere near equivalent

    ps if God exist , humans didnt have to 'invent him', one small idea

  13. #53
    Papa Smurf
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Planet Scathe
    Posts
    12,528
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawkins.... Richard Hawkins... someone that talks out of his Black Hole?
    very funny

  14. #54
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sunny South Hampshire
    Posts
    873
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by stewart38 View Post
    It didn’t work did it

    A very closed mind

    This actually sums up many peoples thinking


    ps if God exist , humans didnt have to 'invent him', one small idea
    Just because someone disagrees with you does not automatically mean they have a closed mind. Perhaps they are just 'right' ?

    I have a very open mind when it comes to a God, or Gods. My view of religion comes from the evil that religion has performed in the name of God(s). My view of Creationism is tempered by my naturally scientific viewpoint, I admit that, but then, I would not attempt to validate science using religion!

    Which brings me to my last point, if God exists, yes, humans didn't have to invent him, but humans did invent religion-Unfortunately not everything humans do is worthy of, if one exists, a 'good' God.

  15. #55
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    6,709
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawkins.... Richard Hawkins... someone that talks out of his Black Hole?
    Have you ever heard of monomania?

  16. #56
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sunny South Hampshire
    Posts
    873
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    So, this Richard Hawkins bloke - can you tell us anything more about him?
    At least you have now got empirical evidence that I am not perfect

  17. #57
    Commercial Operator Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,895
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    Have you ever heard of monomania?
    I have Barry, but it's such a great line it is worth repeating, especially as many of the delicate flowers on the Forum may have not seen the 'black hole' jokey thing before as it was consigned to the 'outside'.

    You gotta admit tho, the connection with Dawkins and Hawkins re: talking out of a black hole is pretty good, especially as that's what they are both 'mostly' famous for.

  18. #58
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    6,709
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    I have Barry, but it's such a great line it is worth repeating, especially as many of the delicate flowers on the Forum may have not seen the 'black hole' jokey thing before as it was consigned to the 'outside'.

    You gotta admit tho, the connection with Dawkins and Hawkins re: talking out of a black hole is pretty good, especially as that's what they are both 'mostly' famous for.
    It was witty, but not funny. I'm puzzled by this drive you have to denigrate Richard Dawkins at every opportunity.

  19. #59
    Registered User stewart38's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ambrosden it gets
    Posts
    7,480
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by TA Guy View Post
    Just because someone disagrees with you does not automatically mean they have a closed mind. Perhaps they are just 'right' ?

    I have a very open mind when it comes to a God, or Gods. My view of religion comes from the evil that religion has performed in the name of God(s). My view of Creationism is tempered by my naturally scientific viewpoint, I admit that, but then, I would not attempt to validate science using religion!

    Which brings me to my last point, if God exists, yes, humans didn't have to invent him, but humans did invent religion-Unfortunately not everything humans do is worthy of, if one exists, a 'good' God.
    What’s agreeing got to do with anything?

    It’s like saying all science is evil because it gave us the nuclear bomb


    Did humans invent the nuclear bomb or discover it?

    Did man invent religion or discover it (via God)

  20. #60
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    You gotta admit tho, the connection with Dawkins and Hawkins re: talking out of a black hole is pretty good, especially as that's what they are both 'mostly' famous for.
    Yeah? Who's this "Hawkins" bloke then?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •