Science is a metaphysical party pooper.

Page 13 of 17 [ 259 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

02 Feb 2009, 11:41 pm

Sweet sweet cake? :scratch:

Eggman
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,676

03 Feb 2009, 1:05 am

Beer=learning juice!

_________________
Pwning the threads with my mad 1337 skillz.

greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

03 Feb 2009, 1:15 am

slowmutant wrote:

Quote:

If someone wants to shut himself in a closet and pray to his Father, Mother, Uncle or Aunt in Heaven no one should interfere.

How did you know I pray in a closet?

I don't know but I think it can be argued that to be somehow a supression of free speech or supression of freedom of religion. I mean, why someone would have to shut himself in a closet in order to pray, if his freedom of doing so is not being undermined?

_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 Feb 2009, 4:06 am

slowmutant wrote:

Science is astounded by metaphysics.

Science is also astounded by astrology, crystal ball reading, tea leaf predictions, religious miracles, scientology, life after death, and much of the other addictive nonsense supposedly the most intelligent creatures on Earth swallow enthusiastically.

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein

undefineable
Velociraptor

Joined: 13 May 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 402
Location: UK

03 Feb 2009, 6:45 am

ruveyn wrote:

Science is not any kind of religion. Why? Because it is empirical to the bone.

Well religions can be superstitious to the bone, faithful to the bone, or even introspective to the bone. Empiricism is just a particular charactersistic of science as an activity.

Sand wrote:

Science is also astounded by _ _ life after death, and much of the other addictive nonsense supposedly the most intelligent creatures on Earth swallow enthusiastically.

Are you arguing that there is no possibility of anything of us surviving death? That's a bold claim, and belongs to scientism (the belief that all truth is contained in current scientific conclusions) rather than science.

Sand wrote:

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former

That's a nod to religious teachings about our inherent 'sinfulness', not a scientific conclusion. It's also a problematic statement, since 'stupidity' implies failure to grasp the truth, whereas the word 'infinite' in this context implies a powerful imagination capable of creating its own pseudo-realities.

'Scientism is a religion, but it's the one true religion'. Where's the problem in saying that? I'm tempted to agree with the statement, but scientism seems too good to be true in some ways - No uncertainty as to the nature of reality; no demons; no after-death consequences for our s@*#tiness?!?

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 Feb 2009, 10:28 am

undefineable wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

Science is not any kind of religion. Why? Because it is empirical to the bone.

Well religions can be superstitious to the bone, faithful to the bone, or even introspective to the bone. Empiricism is just a particular charactersistic of science as an activity.

Sand wrote:

Science is also astounded by _ _ life after death, and much of the other addictive nonsense supposedly the most intelligent creatures on Earth swallow enthusiastically.

Sand wrote:

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former

Einstein strikes again!

Sand didn't write. Einstein wrote

Last edited by Sand on 03 Feb 2009, 11:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

03 Feb 2009, 10:45 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

slowmutant wrote:

Interesting. Can you elaborate?

Basically, it is because science is a theory of categorization(logic) which is what he takes religions to be, and it is because science is authoritative which entails faith. Durkheim didn't believe in logic the same way a lot of us see it, as he saw logic as socially created rather than inherent, as he saw the categories our logic uses to be social concepts. Essentially in Durkheim's view just about everything social was rooted in some totemic concept of something moral and beyond man.

The scientifically minded person asks "Why???", and he means from what cause. The religious person asks "Why???" and he means to what purpose or end. There is a major distinction between the scientific and religious mind set.

ruveyn

blackelk
Deinonychus

Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 308
Location: New York

03 Feb 2009, 12:24 pm

Scientific materialism requires faith. Objectivism requires faith.

"A world that was simple enough to be fully known would be too simple to contain conscious observers who might know it."

_________________
"Meaninglessness inhibits fullness of life and is therefore equivalent to illness. Meaning makes a great many things endurable ? perhaps everything.?

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 Feb 2009, 12:26 pm

blackelk wrote:

Scientific materialism requires faith. Objectivism requires faith.

"A world that was simple enough to be fully known would be too simple to contain conscious observers who might know it."

It is wise not to make claims you have no knowledge to substantiate.

blackelk
Deinonychus

Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 308
Location: New York

03 Feb 2009, 12:29 pm

Sand wrote:

blackelk wrote:

Scientific materialism requires faith. Objectivism requires faith.

"A world that was simple enough to be fully known would be too simple to contain conscious observers who might know it."

It is wise not to make claims you have no knowledge to substantiate.

To suggest science has all the answers and humans are totally capable of comprehending the universe is much less substantiated. It is similar to thinking we are at the center of the universe. We know nothing.

_________________
"Meaninglessness inhibits fullness of life and is therefore equivalent to illness. Meaning makes a great many things endurable ? perhaps everything.?

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 Feb 2009, 12:34 pm

blackelk wrote:

Sand wrote:

blackelk wrote:

Scientific materialism requires faith. Objectivism requires faith.

"A world that was simple enough to be fully known would be too simple to contain conscious observers who might know it."

It is wise not to make claims you have no knowledge to substantiate.

Nobody involved in science claims it has all the answers. But it does have viable methods for searching for them. Religion lacks those totally and merely substitutes pleasurable and unsubstantiated hopes. Through science we know a great deal more than we knew without it and have made good use of it. Religion meanders on and on and on into all sorts of hubristic nonsense.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

03 Feb 2009, 4:11 pm

ruveyn wrote:

Well, is the distinction really that major? I mean, the religious mindset dominated the scientific one at some point, the reason why science switched directions was because there were significant limits to what could be done. A major problem with Newton's framework is that it did not understand how the fundamental laws could be given, the Newtonian framework was accepted of course, but still, the switch was not overnight, and it was still a development from a theological mindset into a modern scientific mindset. Not only that, but for the most part, most people are as integrated into their religion as they are to science.

Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 03 Feb 2009, 7:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

undefineable
Velociraptor

Joined: 13 May 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 402
Location: UK

03 Feb 2009, 7:14 pm

Sand wrote:

Einstein strikes again!

Sand didn't write. Einstein wrote

It seems I sidetracked you with my deliberate mistake :lol:

ruveyn wrote:

The scientifically minded person asks "Why???", and he means from what cause. The religious person asks "Why???" and he means to what purpose or end.

The claim that purposes and ends cannot exist in reality requires philosophical substantiation. You can't prove that claim scientifically.

Sand wrote:

Nobody involved in science claims it has all the answers.

I notice you're not a scientist by profession :wink:

Sand wrote:

But it does have viable methods for searching for them.

Seriously now, are you suggesting that science may come to provide 'all the answers'? I can think of an infinite number of questions which could never be answered by the results of scientific experiment.

Sand wrote:

Religion lacks those totally and merely substitutes pleasurable and unsubstantiated hopes.

Would you call the eternal agony of hell a pleasureable hope? Call me inhuman, but I'd take everlasting non-existence over that any day

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 99
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 Feb 2009, 8:50 pm

undefineable wrote:

Sand wrote:

Einstein strikes again!

Sand didn't write. Einstein wrote

It seems I sidetracked you with my deliberate mistake :lol:

ruveyn wrote:

The scientifically minded person asks "Why???", and he means from what cause. The religious person asks "Why???" and he means to what purpose or end.

The claim that purposes and ends cannot exist in reality requires philosophical substantiation. You can't prove that claim scientifically.

Sand wrote:

Nobody involved in science claims it has all the answers.

I notice you're not a scientist by profession :wink:

Sand wrote:

But it does have viable methods for searching for them.

Sand wrote:

Religion lacks those totally and merely substitutes pleasurable and unsubstantiated hopes.

Would you call the eternal agony of hell a pleasureable hope? Call me inhuman, but I'd take everlasting non-existence over that any day

The maniacal demand that "all the answers" be available is a sure indication of a most peculiar attitude. Science is a working system that pursues understanding. Religion is a fantasy dreamed up by people who would prefer not to think and thereby provides no answers at all. If people prefer to torture themselves over imaginary post life horrors they are no more sane than people with no musical abilities who assure themselves they will spend eternity tickling a harp. All this crap about an afterlife is totally made up with no evidence whatsoever and no matter how many people subscribe to it it is still totally nuts.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:

03 Feb 2009, 9:02 pm

And yet it was through science that we learned that infectious diseases are caused by micro-organisms and not demons or evil spirits; and in doing so, have found cures and treatments.

And it will be through science that we learn how to regenerate lost limbs and organs, which is something that religious leaders, in their great wisdom, have chosen to not even attempt.

blackelk
Deinonychus

Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 308
Location: New York

03 Feb 2009, 10:14 pm

Fnord wrote:

Through accidents. Through strokes of genius. Through intuition. Through imagination. You are making it sound like all progress and technology has come from rational, linear thought and strict dogmatic scientism.

"Accident is the name of the greatest of all inventors." -Mark Twain

"There is no logical way to the discovery of these elemental laws. There is only the way of intuition, which is helped by a feeling for the order lying behind the appearance."

"The intellect has little to do on the road to discovery. There comes a leap in consciousness, call it intuition or what you will, the solution comes to you and you don't know how or why."

-Einstein

He sounds like a mystic.

_________________
"Meaninglessness inhibits fullness of life and is therefore equivalent to illness. Meaning makes a great many things endurable ? perhaps everything.?

Page 13 of 17 [ 259 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 Next

Jump to:

Science is a metaphysical party pooper. Post Reply New Topic

Science is a metaphysical party pooper.