Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
The pope in this book (the one who died) was a big fan f tryiong to unite science and religion. The question is, will it ever happen? I mean, there are opposites, science requires proof, religion is based on the un-provable. SO, can these 2 coexist or someday synthesize?
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
nu11
stranger
Reged: 01/09/04
Posts: 1
|
|
You should take a look at the work of the famous psychologist, Abraham Maslow -- yes this is the guy who gave the field Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. His essay/book "Religions, Values, and Peak Experiences" directly addresses the need to unify religion and science for either/both to continue to be useful. He does a good job discussing how both science and religion have their strengths and weaknesses an convincingly proposes how they have the potential to compliment each other in our search for both truth and meaning. The book might be a bit frustrating if you're the type of person who defines "religion" as blind adherence to what others preach.
|
stegsaw
stranger
Reged: 12/28/03
Posts: 2
Loc: Virginia
|
|
Ian Barbour is another writer who addresses the religion/science debate. He's a physicist by trade who is also an ordained minister(Christian I think).
Earlier there was a post by Guinevere (I think - sorry if I'm wrong!) who said that science and religion are basically two different world views. Religion attempts to answer "why", science really answering "how". Barbour sort of agrees with this but attempts to show that the two fields can and should be complementary. As the previous poster mentions, religion in this context is NOT about adherence to a set of doctrine.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe the current pope issued a statement about science and religion not being contradictory. While it's not really an attempt at uniting the two, it's something.
--------------------
The heart has its reason that Reason cannot know. - Blaise Pascal
|
Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
What if someone wants to know the why and the how and the two answers contradict? that would make unifying the 2 difficult.
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
stegsaw
stranger
Reged: 12/28/03
Posts: 2
Loc: Virginia
|
|
Well, if one believes in both god and science, I don't think there can be a contradiction.
I'm more than a little out of my depth here, but the way I see it any contradictions that have arisen have more than likely come from those who speak for organized religions.
Of course, the alternative is that our perceptions are contradictory because chaos is the natural order! 
--------------------
The heart has its reason that Reason cannot know. - Blaise Pascal
|
NoLifeKing
stranger
Reged: 01/13/04
Posts: 3
Loc: Wichita, KS
|
|
I think of it this way... Science is the knowledge we use every day, Religion is the moral structure in which we use that knowledge. It seems kind of dangerous to have one without the other.
|
rayflit
stranger
Reged: 01/19/04
Posts: 7
Loc: Wichita, Kansas
|
|
Quote:
NoLifeKing said:
I think of it this way... Science is the knowledge we use every day, Religion is the moral structure in which we use that knowledge. It seems kind of dangerous to have one without the other.
As he said, they can coexist but they will probably never combine because one has people that are set out to disprove God while the other knows they can.
|
AAnnAArchy
Gifted Procrastinator
Reged: 10/20/03
Posts: 643
Loc: Las Vegas
|
|
Quote:
NoLifeKing said:
I think of it this way... Science is the knowledge we use every day, Religion is the moral structure in which we use that knowledge. It seems kind of dangerous to have one without the other.
Why does one need religion for moral structure? I have no use for religion, but my moral structure is pretty darned sound. 
|
truth
stranger
Reged: 02/16/04
Posts: 4
|
|
I get what you're saying AAnnAArchy, but ever wonder about that natural "Right and Wrong" we as humans just 'know'? I mean, it's not instinct because instinct comes as something we react with withouth thinking...it is very difficult and not our reaction most times to be in the 'right'; it seems we have to battle for it sometimes. It may have to do with environment, but throughout history, men from different religions, and no religion, in totally different places on earth all seem to talk about right and wrong as the same things. Sure, extremeists are a different story, but aren't they basically brain washed? I just find it interesting that as humans we all have this natural sense of right and wrong...just put in us. Common sense? Maybe, but isn't common sense just another word for it? Interesting. TRUTH
|
Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
I think it is environment. Yes, almost evey culture has similar rights and wrings, but then again, every culture is intrinsically similar. A group of people living in some sort of shelters, governed in some way by a group of people/1 person. And all of these cultures have "wrongs" such as stealing, murder, etc. If you visit a perfectly communist society (which has never existed), "stealing" will have become obsolete and therefore not a wrong. Similarly, if yo go to a hippie society somewhere, free sex is not a wrong, though it is looked down upon in other societies.
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
Zirias
stranger
Reged: 02/05/04
Posts: 9
Loc: south-west of Germany
|
|
I'm convinced that there is no place for religion in a world of science (but there IS a place for humanity and moral). Back in school I had to learn the theories about how one could accept this duality just like the duality of quanta and waves in the nature of light, and I succeeded reciting it to get my grades .... but I always found it ridiculous. I think religion was a very good tool to keep people under control. It's just deprecated.
Greets, Ziri
PS: I don't mean to annoy religious people, cause I think they do no bad nowadays, I just think religion has gotten completely unnecessary
|
Zirias
stranger
Reged: 02/05/04
Posts: 9
Loc: south-west of Germany
|
|
I just found this text on the web. I had to read it back at school, and thought it was really impressive and true. So I'll try to translate it. It's called "the great human" (Der tolle Mensch) and was published in the book "the happy science" (Die fröhliche Wissenschaft) in 1882.
Quote:
Didn't you hear about that great human, that lighted a latern at bright forenoon, went to the market und screamed continuously: "I'm looking for god! I'm looking for god!"? Since there were standing together many of those, who didn't believe in god, he caused a great laughter. Did he get lost? said the one. Did he lose his way like a child? said the other. Or does he hide? Does he fear us? Did he sail away? emigrate? - so they screamed an laughed mixed up.
The great human jumped straight between them and looked daggers at them. "Where has god gone?" he yelled, "I'll tell you! We killed him - you and I! We are his murderers! But how did we do? How could we possibly drink out the seas? Who gave us the sponge to erase the whole horizon? What did we do as we unchained this earth from its sun? Where does it move now?
Where do we move? Away from all suns? Don't we fall all the time? Backwards, sidewards, forwards, in all directions? Is there still an up and a down? Don't we wonder through an endless nothing? Doesn't the empty room breathe on us? Didn't it get colder? Doesn't continuously come the night and more night?
Don't laterns need to be lightet at forenoon? Don't we hear the noise of gravediggers burying god? Don't we smell the divine decay? - gods decay, too!
God is dead! God stays dead! And we killed him!
How do we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers?
The holiest and mightiest the world posessed until now, it bled to death under our knives - who wipes that blood off us? With which water we could clean ourselves? Which atonement celebrations, which holy games would we have to invent? Isn't the dimension of that act too big for us? Don't we need to become gods ourselves to be worthy having done that? There has never been a bigger act - and who ever will be born after us, belongs for the sake of that act to a higher-level history than all history before!"
Here the great human fell silent and looked at his audience again: They didn't talk, either, and looked bewildered at him. Finally he threw his latern on the ground, so it broke in pieces and extinguished. "I'm coming early", he said then, "it isn't my time yet. That formidable event is still on it's way and marching - it hasn't advanced to people's ears yet. Lightning and thunder need time, the light of the stars needs time, doings need time, also after they're done, to be seen and heard. This act is still farther from them than the most distant stars - and still they did it!" - It is also told that the great human invaded several churches the same day and intoned his requiem aeternam deo. Brought outside and interrogated, he always stated: "What are those churches now, if not graves and tombs of god?"
Here is the original text in case someone can translate better than me
Greets, Ziri
|
Tyren
stranger
Reged: 02/16/04
Posts: 12
|
|
Environment eh? Plenty of people would argue that one with you, Nature vs Nurture has always been a heated debate. Not that you're wrong Sephia, but i would say... half there. I think Nature, as one is born is given certain tendancies or abilities and from these the environment or culture they are put into will react with them and give them their morals and values. So the 'right and wrong' doesnt need to come from Religion. Perhaps thats amore scientific way to look at it, however, im not too fond of many religions out there. That's my 2 cents :-)
-Ty
|
Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
Personally, i am ore an advocate of "nurture", though you have some good points.
In response to Zirias: If killinga father is patricide and killing a king is regicide, what is the killing of God? Deiticide? lol.
"God is dead" ~Frederick Neitzsche
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
Zirias
stranger
Reged: 02/05/04
Posts: 9
Loc: south-west of Germany
|
|
Oh, shame on me, I named the book and the text and forgot to mention the author, Friedrich Nietzsche ...
I think you shouldn't understand the text that literally. People invented god, that's why it's kind of killing him when you don't need him any more. And look out in the world, who needs god? Who actually believes in him? There are believers ... but their number is getting smaller by the day ...
So my answer to your question ist: It doesn't ever NEED to happen. The catholic church is still mighty, but in process of being forgotten. One day, it will be gone. Science lasts.
Greets, Ziri
|
Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
Will it? I am sceptical. While i certainly understand Nietzsche's point, I think that people seek comfort in understanding their world, and for as long as science can't provide all the answers, there will be a god/ess/(s)(es) to answer the questions that science cannot.
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
Tyren
stranger
Reged: 02/16/04
Posts: 12
|
|
I agree with Sephia on this one. Religion, or perhaps anything like religion will always be there to fill the void and to comfort people with things they do not understand. Personally I feel much of the aspects of religion is for the weak willed, however i understand the reasoning for believing, whatever that may be.
|
Zirias
stranger
Reged: 02/05/04
Posts: 9
Loc: south-west of Germany
|
|
I disagree, because I think we experience a slow evolution where mankind more and more accepts that it's sometimes better, just not to know, than to believe something that later turns out as wrong. Consider the constantly decreasing number of really religious people, what else could that mean? Some day, the last human needing religion will be history.
Greets, Ziri
|
Tyren
stranger
Reged: 02/16/04
Posts: 12
|
|
The decreasing numbers of religion are only most prominent in the Christian and and Catholic churches. While it may also be decreasing in other religions, its less so. Taking into consideration the Great Awakenings and such, i wouldn't be surprised to see sometime in the future the next "mesiah" coming or another powerful prophet/spokesperson of 'God' to revive the falling numbers. It happened quite a few times in the past, what's to say it wont happen again?
|
TahoeT
journeyman
Reged: 10/20/03
Posts: 91
Loc: The Main Line
|
|
Quote:
Tyren said:
The decreasing numbers of religion are only most prominent in the Christian and and Catholic churches. While it may also be decreasing in other religions, its less so. Taking into consideration the Great Awakenings and such, i wouldn't be surprised to see sometime in the future the next "mesiah" coming or another powerful prophet/spokesperson of 'God' to revive the falling numbers. It happened quite a few times in the past, what's to say it wont happen again?
Methinks the vast majority of people want to be told what to do. It's easier for them than trying to figure out life by themselves. Religion and Politics both play into this very well.
If you put two toddlers and one toy in a room, generally, they will fight over the toy. Or, one will take the toy from the other and the other will sit there and cry. They have to learn to share.
Same holds true with right vs wrong. It is societal. We are taught it.
--------------------
Tim...
HB's B
http://www.timandvictor.com
|
Nichee
stranger
Reged: 05/25/04
Posts: 6
|
|
Quote:
Methinks the vast majority of people want to be told what to do. It's easier for them than trying to figure out life by themselves. Religion and Politics both play into this very well.
If you put two toddlers and one toy in a room, generally, they will fight over the toy. Or, one will take the toy from the other and the other will sit there and cry. They have to learn to share.
Same holds true with right vs wrong. It is societal. We are taught it.
I respectfully disagree with your assessment. In fact, I've been pondering whether good and bad (right/wrong) can even exist without religion. I tend to think not.
Societal right/wrong, it seems to me, would be nothing more than popular opinion and majority rule. Societal right/wrong lacks a definitive source.
In such a setting, I can't figure out how anything could be intrinsically good or bad.
|
Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
Personally, i do not believe that there are any absolute rights or wrongs. I think that all morals are relative and societal. In this case, each religion teaches its own morals, which may or may not overlap, but not absolutes, since these, at least in my worldview, do not exist.
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
Nichee
stranger
Reged: 05/25/04
Posts: 6
|
|
Sephia, first off, hello. It took me a while to digest your post. I have a question, and I don't mean it to come off as being cute, but I'd like to better understand your view.
If I may, does your worldview, without absolutes, contain guilt? And if so, why?
|
poia
The Modeleter
Reged: 01/25/04
Posts: 168
Loc: NJ
|
|
I probably don't get it... but why guilt?!? Is this the necessary ingredient?
--------------------
"OK, so what's the speed of dark?"S.W.
|
Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
Yes, there is guilt, but only on a personal level. If I do something that I (or the morals that I have chosen for myself) do not agree with, then, I may feel guilty about it. However, guilt is in no way a necessity.
What my view basically says if that morals are personal and/or societally taught prejudices. They are made by humans, and each person/group choses its own. Saying something is right, then, just means that I or my group agree with such an action, and nothing more.
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
Nichee
stranger
Reged: 05/25/04
Posts: 6
|
|
Sephia, that's a solid answer. Logical, makes sense with your previous post. Thanks.
I'm going to think about that for a while.
|
Nichee
stranger
Reged: 05/25/04
Posts: 6
|
|
I thought about your response for a while. After some reflection on it, I find myself with more questions.
I don’t see how one can claim to have a belief set while acknowledging that the belief set is nothing more than following society’s teachings. Does not rising to such knowledge belittle the belief set to the point of making it irrelevant?
And I fail to see why guilt would be present, even sometimes, in such a world. Why would anyone feel guilty about doing a bad deed when they’ve risen to the point of knowing it isn’t truly bad but only perceived to be bad? That knowledge, it seems, would cancel guilt.
|
Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
It is a bit two-sided, but I find that I can live with that. If I do something I think is bad, I feel guilty. Whether or not all of society thinks it's bad is irrelevant.
I think that I can choose my own morals and live with them, recognising that others in a different society may not reognise them as such.
For example, if person "A" says "Murder is always bad", he is expressing his view. But, that doesn't mean that the statement is always true. What of euthenasia? But, that person, recognising his own morals, does not murder.
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
1123581321
stranger
Reged: 06/12/04
Posts: 2
|
|
In certain situations, science and religion already co-exist. Hundreds of years ago, heliocentricity was an absurdity, but now every culture believes it-- including religions. I hope that made sense. Anyone got anybetter examples?
|
Zirias
stranger
Reged: 02/05/04
Posts: 9
Loc: south-west of Germany
|
|
Oh my. The rehabilitation of Galileo by the Vatican was off by centuries. They can simply no longer deny the facts, that's not what I would call coexistence.
In my religion course back at school, we had to learn a theory how religion and science could coexist. It was about duality. You say light consists of waves, you're right. Well, I tell you light consists of photons, I'm right, too. You can use the same principle for religion and science, assuming these were two ways telling the same truth. Two models of nature, to speak in more scientific terms.
Ok, that seems logical, but I, for myself, don't buy it. I just thing that humanity after Kant and Lessing don't NEED religion any more, and well, this is a slow process of dying 
Greets, Ziri
PS: Sorry for my bad English, I hope you understand my intentions anyway.
|
1123581321
stranger
Reged: 06/12/04
Posts: 2
|
|
Constructive criticism is always welcome
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 
