RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

aviinterra -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 4:46:22 AM)

quote:

This is exactly why I champion science over faith. The more we take control of this place and try to turn it into a "paradise" of sorts the less likely we are to worry about an afterlife or to go to war over vague notions of salvation by committing acts of holy war.


This comment just makes me shake my head. This discussion, as many have pointed out, is completely silly and has no point.

But this notion of science over faith...you know that this is a notion that is the by product of the late enlightment era, yes? Think back, back, way back to the early medieval times and then look over all of history from then forwards and you shall see that almost all scientific, technological, etc. work was being done by monks, at the urging of the pope. It is not until the Renaissance that a turn in thought, sparked largly by the fall of Constantinople, goes against this. Here are a few shockers: people did not think the earth was flat back then, in fact they knew well it was round. We think they thought that because of a romantic notion of the medieval period handed over to us by the Victorians. The circulation of blood is a medieval arab discovery, in the name of Allah, and as are the very foundations of science.
Science is the search for God, or at least his shadow, here on earth and among us.
As for war. Anyone with a brain will know that war is ALWAYS for economic gains, not spiritual. The crusades were first and foremost economical wars instigated by a call for the pope for an army, which the emperor of Byzantium pleaded for order to get rid of his rival neighbors. The whole enterprise did not work out as both had hoped when giant armies ran over all the middle east, each lord plundering and starving at the same time. But it had to be in the name of God to get the people going. Just like today, nobody is going to sign up to the army to go fight for oil, which is what we are doing, so that we can continue to pollute our only home with the products of industrial science. They fight under the delusion of national security and a flag that means less and less each day that which it should.




atursvcMaam -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 4:56:12 AM)

Look for it in that enigmatic self satisfied smile, the tilt of one's head, or the unicorn on the dresser.  Explain each of those scientifically?   it is probably not easily explained, but readily observed.
No, i don't peek in windows, just look at profile pics.



fluffyswitch -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 5:00:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: joanus


Now other various religions like Paganism and Wicca are simply kids looking for either an excuse for how they live their lives or exeptance , usually to a gourp of similar misfits.




you know it's funny. my little misguided misfit self is reading through this thread back to where i posted last night. it's a thread about some level of spiritual acceptance, and there's a lot of people defending christianity and whatnot and i get to this. i might be a kid but after one degree and half of another i really don't need an excuse how to live thank you.

wicca is one of several pagan traditions, and for that matter, paganism is essentially a spirituality or faith and not a religion. do the reading before you start flaming other people's religions just because you're in the majority. what's even funnier? the same logic can be applied to ANY religion of ANY type or even any set of beliefs including traditional monotheism.

and what's even more ironic is that a lot of what you're saying in your post would fit in quite well with SEVERAL pagan paths.



Zensee -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 5:05:55 AM)

aviinterra - Holding the monopoly on knowledge is not the same as promoting it. Oppressive control of the human intellect simply complimented control of our spirit and our sexuality. The popes had no more motivation than that.

The builders of Stonehenge knew the earth was round - so what? Ignorance and knowledge have walked hand in hand throughout history. That doesn't make it OK to cultivate superstition.

Science is only the search for god if you define god as understanding and nothing more. You presume there is someone to find, science does not.


Z.



aviinterra -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 7:33:06 AM)

But there was no monopoly on knowledge then, just a promotion of it. It seems like there is a monopoly now- you can't get knowledge for free in this country, it is firmly in the grasp of those who have the economic means to attain it.
Oppressive control over human intellect and sexuality came later than you think, at the height of exploration and technological advancements- the Victorian era. With electricity and cars came a strict code of social norms- which had nothing to do with religion. And it was "science" that promoted circumsicion against masterbation, created the gas chambers during wwII on the behest of an atheist govt, and many other horrible things. So please spare us the "oppression" argument.
I think you have no good background on the Vatican to be judging the motivation of the popes, as you seem to want history to be a black and white story each time, leaning to your own personal views, which go against your stout admiration of the scientific process.
quote:

You presume there is someone to find, science does not.

The part I made bold is your personal opinion.
But if science does not presume that there is someone, or even something to find, then what is the point of science looking? Besides, having studied and worked with some brilliant biologists and biochemists, I can attest that many search for someone in their work.



joanus -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 7:36:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: aviinterra
created the gas chambers during wwII on the behest of an atheist govt,


Actually Hitler was Chatolic, so were most of the Nazis.



SubbieOnWheels -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 8:15:15 AM)

I keep seeing requests, even demands, that someone prove the existence of God.

I remember back to my science and math classes, where proving something always began with a "given." Given that parallel lines are equidistant at all points, prove ..." Now, you can say that "parallel" is merely a definition, but it is something that cannot be proven with any other method than actually measuring the distance at all points - difficult with theoretical or hypothetical lines. One must assume that these lines are equidistant.

So, those who believe in a Higher Power begin with, "Given that there is a god ..."

The atrocities committed in the name of any religion or church are the result of the church's involvement in politics. hence the wisdom of the framers of our Constitution in including the Amendment barring the government from establishing a state religion (something that is, IMO, frighteningly close to happening).



meatcleaver -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 8:56:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: aviinterra

And it was "science" that promoted circumsicion against masterbation, created the gas chambers during wwII on the behest of an atheist govt, and many other horrible things. So please spare us the "oppression" argument.
I think you have no good background on the Vatican to be judging the motivation of the popes, as you seem to want history to be a black and white story each time, leaning to your own personal views, which go against your stout admiration of the scientific process.


I don't know what circumcision and masturbation has to do with it but......
HITLER WAS A CATHOLIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ANTI-SEMITICISM IS A CHRISTIAN PHENOMENON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



luckydog1 -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 10:10:43 AM)

Actually anti semitism is a view held by many different culturesm, and originated in Pagan Rome.  Modern Anti Semitism was created in hte culture of Christianity, as was modern Science, which replaced alchemy.    I didn't cite the nazis as an officially athiestic state, I cited (someof) the Socialists of the 20th century. 

Circumsision was certainly developed through random trial and error, which is what some of you keep arguing science is.  Leaving out the forming and testing of hypothesis part, which really would get you an F in a science class. 

I don't know what circumsion has to do with mastrubation, Jonanus is on his own there.

Keeping on with my constant noting of people misstating my argument.  I am in no way attempting to proove that there is a divine.  Just pointing out that it has not been disproven by science, and the 2 can very easily co exist.

And way back to a point I missed responding to,  Galileo was indeed a Chirstian, and was a product of the Christian culture.

Science is a paticular way of observing and thinking about the world.  It is a (in the existance of man)  very recent and usefull phenomena.



Alumbrado -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 10:26:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Alambrado.  Where did I say that? 

Archimedes was an Alchemist, probably the greatest of them all.  And Alchemy does produce some valid results.  So does religous ritual, but neither is science.  Later Scientists have learned much from examining the "Why" of Archimedes work.



Archimedes was every bit as much a scientist as anyone born after the onset of Christian era.

sci·ence  
1.
a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.
2.systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
3.any of the branches of natural or physical science.
4.systematized knowledge in general.
5.knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study.
6.a particular branch of knowledge.
7.skill, esp. reflecting a precise application of facts or principles; proficiency.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/science

Archimedes performed numerous geometric proofs using the rigid geometric formalism outlined by Euclid, excelling especially at computing areas and volumes using the method of exhaustion.  He was especially proud of his discovery for finding the volume of a sphere, showing that it is two thirds the volume of the smallest cylinder  that can contain it. At his request, the figure of a sphere and cylinder  was engraved on his tombstone.
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Archimedes.html

Archimedes was the greatest mathematician of his age. His contributions in geometry revolutionised the subject and his methods anticipated the integral calculus 2,000 years before Newton and Leibniz. He was also a thoroughly practical man who invented a wide variety of machines including pulleys and the Archimidean screw pumping device.
http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Mathematicians/Archimedes.html

http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Archimedes_on_statics.html



None of the above fit into the definition of alchemy (which by the way, was a product of the time of Christian dominion over scholarship). ).
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/alchemy

And while we are at it:

Aristotle (Stagira, 390-330 B.C.). Considered the father of life sciences
Callippus (Cyzicus, 370-300 B.C.). Greek astronomer, student of Eudoxus. Showed that at least 34 spheres are needed to account for the movement of the moon, planets, and stars.
Eratosthenes of Cyrene (276-200 B.C.).. Greek astronomer and mathematician. Calculated the circumference of the Earth and finds a figure of 46,000 km which is close to the present measured value. Also lays down the first lines of longitude on a map of Earth. He also developed a method for calculating all prime numbers: the sieve of Eratosthenes.
Seleucus (Seleucia, 190-??? B.C.). Last known astronomer to champion the heliocentric theory of the solar system until Copernicus
http://www.ics.forth.gr/~vsiris/other_info/ancient_greece_periods.html





So yes, if you are going to redefine 'science' to mean anything that supports your incorrect claim, and 'alchemy' as any science before Christianity, you are of course, absolutely correct...[8|]







philosophy -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 10:55:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Galileo was indeed a Chirstian, and was a product of the Christian culture.



...whose work was suppressed by the church. Seems to me you are defining anyone born after a certain date in specific countries as a christian. You also conflate christian with church. Neither point is necessarily true.
There has been a conflict between science and religion for a long time, just because someone is born into a christian culture does not mean that they are christian.



luckydog1 -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 11:05:56 AM)

I do consider that science requires using the sceintific method, as opposed to other method.  Like method of exhaustion which is what your quote says archimedes used.

Now I do agree and conceed that science can be used in a variety of ways, other than the one I am asserting is correct. 

For instance Ad Rock from the Beastie Boys drops 'science' on us with his mad beats, but that is not what we are talking about. 

Does anyone seriously think a Political 'Scientist' is actually a  scientist?

I can go buy a book on the 'Science' of Crystal magic.

But you are not trying to play a silly game like that. 

Interestingly using your definition list, numbers 4-7 can be applied to Religion and the Catholic Church in paticular.

I assert that without using the Scientific Method you are not doing science.

You are way off on the meaning of Alchemy also, the dictionary page you gave was piss poor.  Alchemy did not come from Christian Europe, (I suppose the spelling alchemy didn't come around untill the development of the Modern English Language).  Khem goes back to Egypt, then to the Greeks/Romans  who said Khemia, then the Muslims took over, Al-Khemia, from muslims into Spain then Christian Europe, Germanise it and you get Alchemy.  It is a system of ancient religous science.  Some of it works, mathmatics for example.  They had a very different concept for what numbers were though.  And the practical parts of Alchemy were adopted by science.  Alchemy was one precursor to science, but not the same thing.

http://www.chemsoc.org/ExemplarChem/entries/2002/crabb/history.html

Wikipedia also has nice article on it.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy



Alumbrado -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 11:20:55 AM)

Well,if Wikipedia said, that settles it.  Screw the dictionary, encyclopedia, and all those silly textbooks on science and the history of science, what do they know? Higher mathematics and physics,  and astronomy, and following the scientific method can't possibly be anything other than alchemy...[8|][8|][8|]

Do you have a clue how foolish (not to mention dishonest)you make yourself look?



luckydog1 -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 11:21:40 AM)

Philosphy, but Galileo was a Roman Catholic, and he first attended the University of Piza, created by Pope Clemet the VI in 1343, then latter attended the University of Padua, which was founded as a theological school in the 1200s.  He was most certainly a product of the Christian Culture.  He seriously considered joining the Priesthood as a young man.  There really was a huge influence in the Catholic Church cultivating knowledge.  What he learned contradicted cannon and caused a reaction.

Galileo was an amazing man.   "Galileo Galilei pioneered the use of quantitative experiments whose results could be analyzed with mathematical precision (More typical of science at the time were the qualitative studies of William Gilbert, on magnetism and electricity).   .....Galileo is perhaps the first to clearly state that the laws of nature are mathematical. In The Assayer he wrote "Philosophy is written in this grand book, the universe ... It is written in the language of mathematics, and its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometric figures; ....Although he tried to remain loyal to the Catholic Church, his adherence to experimental results, and their most honest interpretation, led to a rejection of blind allegiance to authority, both philosophical and religious, in matters of science. In broader terms, this aided to separate science from both philosophy and religion; a major development in human thought.

Galileo's empirical work was a significant break from the abstract Aristotelian approach of his time. Galileo has been called the "father of modern observational astronomy",[4] the "father of modern physics",[5] the "father of science",[5] and “the Father of Modern Science.”[6]

All of which seems to indicate that I am right



luckydog1 -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 11:27:39 AM)

Well Alumbrado, you pretending that I only gave one source, and ignoring my other points makes one of us look foolish and dishonest.

There was some very intersting Astrology and Mathmatics, even some proto chemistry done using the Alchemic Method   It just so happens that the Scientific Method (try putting that into your dictionary, you will find it has more components than experimentation) is more accurate and replaced Alchemy.




CuriousLord -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 12:03:54 PM)

The Chemical Revolution started a change from the spirtually based Alchemy to the scientifically based Chemistry.

quote:

We must clean house thoroughly, for they have made use of an enigmatical language peculiar to themselves, which in general presents one meaning for the adepts and another meaning for the vulgar, and at the same time contains nothing that is rationally intelligible for the one or for the other.

-Lavousier, "father of modern Chemistry", on the change from Alchemy to Chemistry


Wikipedia is a marvelous resource, by the way.  I tend to perfer it over the relatively skimpy classical encyclopedias.



Alumbrado -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 12:36:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Well Alumbrado, you pretending that I only gave one source, and ignoring my other points makes one of us look foolish and dishonest.

There was some very intersting Astrology and Mathmatics, even some proto chemistry done using the Alchemic Method   It just so happens that the Scientific Method (try putting that into your dictionary, you will find it has more components than experimentation) is more accurate and replaced Alchemy.




You have climbed out on the limb based on one ridiculous point, which is that there was no science, only alchemy (clearly defined and generally understood as the search for transmutation to precious substances)  until Christianity created science.

quote:

Science only came into existance through Christianity...


You are on record as saying that references which show that science as we understand it today was not only developed, but extant B.C.E., were 'piss poor'...which in your bizzarre dictionary means any facts that proves you wrong.

All of your tapdancing since then has been your usual tactic of lying about definitions, cherry-picking out of context trivia, straw argumentation, and trying to move the goal posts to the place where you reverse your claim...as you have done so often in the past with your 'expert' assertions.

Now you could have just come out and said the truth, which was that the development of Modern scientific era coincides with the rise of the Church...but you can't do that, can you?



Rule -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 2:07:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
Hitler was a Catholic!!!!!!!!!
Didn't help then that the twentieth century popes were utterly evil psychopaths.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
Anti-semitism in Europe was a Christian phenomenon!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It wouldn't have existed without the Christian church and Christian myth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is well known that the holocaust was financed by jewish bankers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
Jeez, even Stalin was educated in a seminary!!!!

Well , when the pope is a minion of Satan, what do you expect he will teach in exclusive seminaries to other minions of Satan?



Rule -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 2:37:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy
This is where your belief stems? That God set everything in motion and then just walked away? Please tell me that when you both raise your voices in song you aren't singing to the praises of a God that abandoned you back when the first inkling of life was dropped unto this planet. How spiritually rewarding that must be...What comfort you can derive from such a belief in your hour of need.

I call bullshit. This is not your belief. I can believe in a God that is non-evasive...That doesn't give a rats-ass to the day to day activities of man or to the final outcome of what was started. CAN YOU?
Egyptian mythology clearly states that the Creator created the gods and men in order not to be alone. We may extrapolate this motivation from the Creator - a human incarnation of an aspect of the Divine - to the Divine itself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy
By the way, there is not one sane person alive that actually believes that someone, today, will be able to fly, walk through a wall or arise from the dead.
Or walk on water. (There is a report in ufology of an alien walking through a wall; I do not know what to think about that - may be a quantum jump, theoretically possible.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy
I am the second coming, when I die I shall arise.....You should check the odds in Vegas. Would you actually bet that the second coming would arise? It's laughable. Yea of little faith.
I have died - and yet I live, reborn in a manner of speaking.



Zensee -> RE: Faith to the faithless, a perspective (2/6/2008 3:01:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: aviinterra

But there was no monopoly on knowledge then, just a promotion of it. It seems like there is a monopoly now- you can't get knowledge for free in this country, it is firmly in the grasp of those who have the economic means to attain it.
Oppressive control over human intellect and sexuality came later than you think, at the height of exploration and technological advancements- the Victorian era. With electricity and cars came a strict code of social norms- which had nothing to do with religion. And it was "science" that promoted circumsicion against masterbation, created the gas chambers during wwII on the behest of an atheist govt, and many other horrible things. So please spare us the "oppression" argument.
I think you have no good background on the Vatican to be judging the motivation of the popes, as you seem to want history to be a black and white story each time, leaning to your own personal views, which go against your stout admiration of the scientific process.
quote:

You presume there is someone to find, science does not.

The part I made bold is your personal opinion.
But if science does not presume that there is someone, or even something to find, then what is the point of science looking? Besides, having studied and worked with some brilliant biologists and biochemists, I can attest that many search for someone in their work.



Actually the church pretty much had it sewn up as far as education and research went. If you werern't clergy or very wealthy or poor and drafted into the clergy, no book learning for you, not even primary school. And if you got an education it would be steeped in church lore and  superstition. Education these days is free for the first 12 years and expensive but accessible after that. Hardly equates to the strangle-hold of the church.

While the Victorians took repression of sexuality to new, post renaissance heights, they hardly invented it, just revived it for their generation. Controlling sexuality is stock in trade for organised religions as is control in general. Again your grasp of history seems selective.

"Science" did not promote circumcision. Science is not a club, it's a method. Some people, claiming scientific credibility, made a bundle lopping off foreskins. Others ate radium or had themselves electrified in search of eternal youth. People do strange things with little justification. End of story.

Some scientists may hope to find god under the microscope but if they expect to find god they have already compromised their research. "Science" (the process not the club) is only trying to find the best explanation for given phenomena, it is NOT looking for god. Anyone who tells you it is is misinformed. Searching for knowledge is the point, why does it have to be something more? The search for "someone" out there is a human obsession which, thankfully, the scientific method gives us the discipline to overcome.

Why do we have to be here for a purpose, especially someone else's purpose (first son to the government, second son to the military, third son to the clergy...)? Why can't we simply be here? Why can't the universe just be? Why does it need employment and why would it's only job be looking after made-in-the-image-of, super special, ultra wonderful, irreplaceable us?


Z.



Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875