Scientism

Post Reply New Topic

I think there may be some confusion in this discussion of "religion", "spirituality", and "a specific dogmatic belief system". Specifically, "Christianity" seems to be used here as a shorthand tag for "anti-intellectual literalist Charismatic dogmatism", where it is held that unless something is specifically mentioned in the Bible, it isn't true, and that there's something blasphemous about searching for realities that aren't covered therein. Parakeet has mentioned a number of scientists who held Christian faiths, but obviously did not adhere to this incredibly ignorant viewpoint; this does not mean that, for instance, Clerk Maxwell wasn't a Christian, just that the so-called "Christian Right" in the United States would have pitched him out on his ear for daring to question The Book.

Part of the problem, of course, is that the Charismatic movement has made a powerful attempt to usurp the word "Christian" to describe their specific belief-set, rather leaving all the other varieties out in the cold. (For instance, if you ever tried to tell the Methodist minister in the church I was in as a child that the Book of Genesis was a literally accurate, historical depiction of events, she probably would have at least snickered before trying to set you straight about the difference between moral and historical truths.) This has in turn tended to poison any discussion of science as it pertains to matters that faith might touch on as well - as an example, the whole thing about "life beginning at conception" and the inviolability of the fetus is based primarily on old Catholic doctrine, not on anything from the Bible. (In point of fact, the only thing I can find in the Bible mentioning life's beginning was the bit from Genesis 2, in which YHVH breathed "the breath of life" into Adam's nostrils, thus implying that from a Biblical perspective life should be said to begin when the first breath is taken. There's nothing in there about a pre-quickening fetus being alive, although one of the 606 commandments in the Pentateuch can be interpreted as treating a fetus as a living being when it's far enough along to show significantly.)

On the other hand, Sand's point also stands, as JetLag had proposed an experimentalist mindset as being not only a complete "worldview", but also as being opposed to a Christian or other religionist worldview - Jet dubbed it "scientism", and framed his argument as one of two opposing worlds, not two coincident worlds. Assuming that the religionist worldview must of necessity reject a "scientist" viewpoint indeed leaves the "true believer" shivering in dark ignorance. Rejecting that assumption, however, can lead to a synthesis of viewpoints that is greater than either of its individual components.

I believe that scientism and the view that science is the best way to improve our physical lives here on earth.

People should learn and draw conclusions from their experiences and after spending enough time understanding how things work around them... When the first primitive men observed that when they rubbed things together it created heat , which in turn led to fire making, which pretty much led to everything else we have today over the span of tens of thousands of years. All of the things we have today are a result of human beings becing able to observe and learn .....to the point of where in Wester society we have conditioned ourselves to be rational and scientific because that is what helped people advance.

just as primitive man was afraid of thunder because they didnt understand it and didn't have the means to understand it, men of the modern era (in modernized nations at least) are afraid to beleive in religion because it has no "factual" basis. Well to those primitve men of old thunder and lightning had no "factual" basis either, they had no idea how to understand how nature worked....people of today have no way of believing in God because we cannot put any "factual" basis onto religion. ...well like those cavemen who had no idea about what nature really was, men of today are almost still as ignorant...we know virtually nothing of things outside our world and God very may well exist, although He might not be in our universe at all, he could operate in terms of different dimensions of different frequencies of existance...stuffwe cant really even begin to understand yet. With understanding comes acceptance...ultimately I believe that as humans get more advanced we get closer to realizing God, these hardships we've faced until now are all part of the test to strengthen us and learn.

however thats just my personal take on things!