Dolph 0
Recommended Posts
kallend 2,088
QuoteScience has brought us out of the dark yeas of superstition and rid us of many of the evils of those times. And it's still doing its job.
I'd rather have a surgeon fix a busted femur than having all the Christians in the world pray for me, asking for it to heal quickly and well.
Oh me too, I'm not into faith healing. But I wouldn't mind surgery AND prayer either.
Science has made a huge difference in our lives. We wouldn't even have our sport without it - science is what gets us up AND down. But it has its empirical limits and when it attempts to intrude into other realms of the spirit, it suddnely becomes inadequate.
The Greeks invented abstract logic (and mathematics as we know it ) some 2500 years ago, but organized religion (Islam and Christian) suppressed it for around 2,000 years. We now call that time the Dark Ages. It was re-"discovered" around the time of the reformation, when what we understand as science was invented by the likes of Galileo, Hooke and Newton - not without strong opposition from organized religion, especially in Galileo's case. Even today we have "Intelligent design" masquerading as science in a last ditch defense against objective inquiry.
Look around at the fabric of your civilization. How much is due to science, and how much to organized religion? If all the churches closed tomorrow, your lights would still come on and you'd still have clean water to drink. If the fruits of science failed tommorrow, we'd be instantly back in the Dark Ages, and I doubt many of us would last more than a month.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteThe Greeks invented abstract logic (and mathematics as we know it ) some 2500 years ago, but organized religion (Islam and Christian) suppressed it for around 2,000 years. We now call that time the Dark Ages. It was re-"discovered" around the time of the reformation, when what we understand as science was invented by the likes of Galileo, Hooke and Newton - not without strong opposition from organized religion, especially in Galileo's case. Even today we have "Intelligent design" masquerading as science in a last ditch defense against objective inquiry.
Look around at the fabric of your civilization. How much is due to science, and how much to organized religion? If all the churches closed tomorrow, your lights would still come on and you'd still have clean water to drink. If the fruits of science failed tommorrow, we'd be instantly back in the Dark Ages, and I doubt many of us would last more than a month.
Very well put.
Coreece: "You sound like some skinheads I know, but your prejudice is with Christians, not niggers..."
rhys 0
QuotePrayer is highly valued by many people, says Sloan, and there is no need for scientists to empirically prove whether or not it works. "It's demeaning of the religious experience."
this sis interesting because i do not belive in god as god is portrayed by many religons, but i am a strong believer in the power of positive thought, for instance the hypochondriac will remain ill but the person that belives they will get better stand a much better chance of gettting better. our minds are much more powerful than we are led to believe,
so in this study the people that knew they 'were' getting prayed for may have thought less about healing themselves than the others.
the power of positive thought works if you are praying or thinking positive as far as i am concerned.
if god existed as specified in the bible innocent children would not fall ill and evil people would not control the masses and live in luxury, while others suffer for no reason but the fact that they were born into poverty.
some god huh, what a wanker.
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix
rehmwa 2
QuoteOh me too, I'm not into faith healing. But I wouldn't mind surgery AND prayer either.
I think that way. I put people praying for me in one of two buckets. They are arrogant and feel superior (very small group) about their religion. Or they want to help (most).
I have no issue with those that want to 'think good thoughts about me'. I think it's great. I'm in no position to judge their good intentions from some self righteous pedestal. Instead, I'm grateful for those good intentions whether they do anything tangible for me or not.
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
QuoteSuperstition has made claims that things that are rooted in the physical world really were in the domain of the metaphysical and impossible to examine by any earthly methods. Time and time again, such claims have been found baseless - and each time, there's been opposition to the new findings initially.
So, skepticism definitely has a place - both with regard to science, which works with what it has now, the knowledge that currently exists, but also with metaphysical claims.
Your posts in this thread have been interesting, and coincide with my thoughts on the subject. However, I'm reading this really amazing book right now that gives a different perspective on ancient practices in magic and religion, and I think its worth considering.
I agree with your earlier post about "vibes" being a broader term than simple prayer (admitting that we are not in control, and beseeching a deity to have pity on us and grant our requests). However, I don't think that admitting a lack of control is necessary to the equation. Those who don't believe in the Christian deity, but a collective unconscious, may believe that their positive vibes actually translate into the results which follow.
This is the ancient misconception of control of the ancient cult pracititioners in Greece and elsewhere, and still practiced by primitive tribes in Australia and Africa. Their practices are really based on our societal ideas of magic, but their beliefs are based on a pseudo-science. For example, voodoo practitioners believe that plunging stones into water and sticking pins into dolls will produce an effect, whether it be rain or hurt to another person. When the desired result doesn't come into fruition, they don't assume that a deity is somewhere fuming because they have sinned and don't deserve to have their prayers answered. They assume that the ritual was not performed correctly. It's the same kind of belief that scientists today hold when their practices don't go as planned. I guess my point is that these kinds of people believed that they had control over the weather. If they were dependant on some deity to bring rain, they assumed that if the ritual was performed correctly, the deity was obligated to respond to their requests. In other words, they were in control.
Anyway, long explanation, but the book is great. The Golden Bough, by Frazer.
Brie
"Ive seen you hump air, hump the floor of the plane, and hump legs. You now have a new nickname: "Black Humper of Death"--yardhippie
AMax 0
Quote
Doesn't help, and may make them worse.
www.nature.com/news/2006/060327/full/060327-16.html
Just a side note. During last several years Nature published three papers that are closely related to my field. Later all three papers were proven to be wrong.
rasmack 0
QuoteJust a side note. During last several years Nature published three papers that are closely related to my field. Later all three papers were proven to wrong.
Hmm... that might say more about the state/pace of your field than about Nature. I have no reason to consider Nature's peer review procedures any better or worse than any other journal. I do consider it to be too broad in scope for my personal use, though, but that is another matter.
HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...
AMax 0
QuoteQuoteJust a side note. During last several years Nature published three papers that are closely related to my field. Later all three papers were proven to wrong.
Hmm... that might say more about the state/pace of your field than about Nature. I have no reason to consider Nature's peer review procedures any better or worse than any other journal. I do consider it to be too broad in scope for my personal use, though, but that is another matter.
You missed my point. The fact that the paper is published in a top peer reviewed scientific magazine, does not guarantee that the content of this paper is true.
rasmack 0
QuoteYou missed my point. The fact that the paper is published in a top peer reviewed scientific magazine, does not guarantee that the content of this paper is true.
Ahh, got ya. Agreed.
Side note: Should we agree to refrain from using the word "truth" in connection with science?.
HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...
AMax 0
e=mc^2 - true?
rasmack 0
Quotee=mc^2 - true?
"Not proven false" != "True".
HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...
Quote
The Greeks invented abstract logic (and mathematics as we know it ) some 2500 years ago, but organized religion (Islam and Christian) suppressed it for around 2,000 years. We now call that time the Dark Ages.
No, that's not quite right. The Church preserved that same corpus of knowledge through the Dark Ages, and eventually sponsored and unleashed it, so that it developed into what we benefit from today. Islam, for its part also contributed many of the things you take for granted. Which is not to say that their hands are clean or that they didn't also screw a lot of things up...
You owe your livelihood to organized religion more than you admit. It's hard to say how much was lost, and it is easy to see what was not.
My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?
QuoteWhen the desired result doesn't come into fruition, they don't assume that a deity is somewhere fuming because they have sinned and don't deserve to have their prayers answered. They assume that the ritual was not performed correctly. It's the same kind of belief that scientists today hold when their practices don't go as planned.
This doesn't apply to good scientists, who learned the lessons they were hopefully taught.
I made these sort of mistakes as an undergrad. And got a C in Organic Chemistry for it. Twice.
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
I certainly hope I've learned my lessons. *starts praying*
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. --Douglas Adams
kallend 2,088
QuoteQuote
The Greeks invented abstract logic (and mathematics as we know it ) some 2500 years ago, but organized religion (Islam and Christian) suppressed it for around 2,000 years. We now call that time the Dark Ages.
No, that's not quite right. The Church preserved that same corpus of knowledge through the Dark Ages, and eventually sponsored and unleashed it, so that it developed into what we benefit from today. .
The church preserved A corpus of knowledge, supressed a great deal, and supressed all efforts to enlarge that corpus, until its hand was forced during the reformation.
The heavy hand of organized religion delayed the enlightenment for 1500 years.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Has anyone thought the the "Big Guy" upstairs knew this was a study just see if he would intervene. In my opinion this study was just trying to tempt God. The people conducting the test were also probably non-believers. Why would he intervene? I have been a nurse for 10 years and have seen things that could only be described as miraculous and had nothing to do with modern science.
Wow, surely if there is an omnipotent, omnipresent being out there, us humans with puny brains can SURELY UNDERSTAND HIM AND ALL HIS WAYS. Afterall, we are great humans with great capabilites...of course we can understand God and all His ways and thoughts
. Why, we ourselves must be God-like if we can understand God! 
Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...
. Why, we ourselves must be God-like if we can understand God! Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...
kallend 2,088
Quote
Wow, surely if there is an omnipotent, omnipresent being out there, us humans with puny brains can SURELY UNDERSTAND HIM AND ALL HIS WAYS. Afterall, we are great humans with great capabilites...of course we can understand God and all His ways and thoughts
We should be able to - we invented God, after all.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
billvon 3,044
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>us humans with puny brains can SURELY UNDERSTAND HIM AND ALL HIS WAYS.
Your statement was sarcastic, but a great many people here are positive that they alone know what God wants, and other people/religions are wrong. (i.e. "the only way to God is through Jesus.") I think C.S. Lewis had the right idea.
Your statement was sarcastic, but a great many people here are positive that they alone know what God wants, and other people/religions are wrong. (i.e. "the only way to God is through Jesus.") I think C.S. Lewis had the right idea.
kallend 2,088
Quote>us humans with puny brains can SURELY UNDERSTAND HIM AND ALL HIS WAYS.
Your statement was sarcastic, but a great many people here are positive that they alone know what God wants, and other people/religions are wrong. (i.e. "the only way to God is through Jesus.") I think C.S. Lewis had the right idea.
The way to God is though a wardrobe?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
I think the problem might be trying to quantify 'God'. Isn't that kinda like an ant trying to understand a human?
If God were simply an energy (rather than a person or being) that we are not even capable of truly understanding yet, then that might explain why it would prayer seems to depend on faith. If your personal energy doesn't embrace it (faith it will work), then it can't work.
If we support activities that require negative energies, then this would naturally cause us to polarize away from positive energy. (negative energy being defined as anything that would go against the 10 commandments, positive being anything supporting them)
The experiments in Washington DC (that I mentioned earlier), were group meditations (not prayer gatherings) involving 4000 participants from around the world that converged on DC, to reduce crime in the city. As I understand it, the participants were all very spiritual individuals that meditated frequently. At the end of the experiment a 25% reduction in crime occured. I still cannot find links to the study itself, only discussions about it.
If God were simply an energy (rather than a person or being) that we are not even capable of truly understanding yet, then that might explain why it would prayer seems to depend on faith. If your personal energy doesn't embrace it (faith it will work), then it can't work.
If we support activities that require negative energies, then this would naturally cause us to polarize away from positive energy. (negative energy being defined as anything that would go against the 10 commandments, positive being anything supporting them)
The experiments in Washington DC (that I mentioned earlier), were group meditations (not prayer gatherings) involving 4000 participants from around the world that converged on DC, to reduce crime in the city. As I understand it, the participants were all very spiritual individuals that meditated frequently. At the end of the experiment a 25% reduction in crime occured. I still cannot find links to the study itself, only discussions about it.
Quote
The heavy hand of organized religion delayed the enlightenment for 1500 years.
It's inaccurate to purport that the Church caused the Dark Ages, although it's probably true that it contributed. There wouldn't have been an enlightenment at all if the Church hadn't gone off founding and funding universities. What if Galileo hadn't gone to school at all?
This is one of those half full / half empty situations...
My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?
QuoteIt's inaccurate to purport that the Church caused the Dark Ages, although it's probably true that it contributed. There wouldn't have been an enlightenment at all if the Church hadn't gone off founding and funding universities. What if Galileo hadn't gone to school at all?
uh...Pope Paul V excommunicated Galileo in 1606....for saying that the Earth revolves around the sun.
So how does the Church support science again?
Brie
"Ive seen you hump air, hump the floor of the plane, and hump legs. You now have a new nickname: "Black Humper of Death"--yardhippie
Yeah, that's the half empty part. The half full part is the part about him receiving his education at a university that was founded by the same Church.
It's not black and white. The Church screwed up a whole lot, but the Church is largely responsible for the scholastic systems that developed into our contemporary education systems.
It was not all smooth sailing, but without the Church we would probably not have modern universities. So in that way, it has made contributions to science that are immensely significant, if indirect.
It's not black and white. The Church screwed up a whole lot, but the Church is largely responsible for the scholastic systems that developed into our contemporary education systems.
It was not all smooth sailing, but without the Church we would probably not have modern universities. So in that way, it has made contributions to science that are immensely significant, if indirect.
My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?
We know that diseases are biological matters now - not sorcery. There aren't many educated people who believe in witches not talking about the modern Wiccan types).
My favourite gods have pretty much been shunned. Primarily due to aggressive Christian exploitation, but even so with todays religious freedom, only a few Danes elect to believe in Thor, God of thunder and lightning. Or my favourite: Freya, Goddess of fertility.
Superstition has made claims that things that are rooted in the physical world really were in the domain of the metaphysical and impossible to examine by any earthly methods. Time and time again, such claims have been found baseless - and each time, there's been opposition to the new findings initially.
So, skepticism definitely has a place - both with regard to science, which works with what it has now, the knowledge that currently exists, but also with metaphysical claims.
It is, to me at least, fascinating to see the breakthroughs in understanding we as humans are making. There is nothing higher than knowledge. When the quest for more of that is tamed by ethics, morality and compassion, it far beats any claim of absolutism regarding just about anything.
Just my take on it, your mileage may vary.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites