CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: The "Science -vs- Religion" debate...

[DoggyDaddy]

I may have induldged in a bit of anthropomorphism. The Earth is not intelligently directing experiments following the Scientific Method. The Earth is the environment in which these chemical and biological processes are given free reign.

Correct. The Earth is the laboratory. Who is/are the scientist(s)?

ETA: I really shouldn't have said, "Correct." A more accurate statement would be "Agreed."

 

[CathyInBlue]

When your push came to shove and I dropped the metaphor, I no longer likened the Earth to a laboratory, for your benefit. The Earth is the environment and there are no scientists directing the chemical and biologic processes. Natural law is doing that mechanisticly.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

When your push came to shove and I dropped the metaphor, I no longer likened the Earth to a laboratory, for your benefit. The Earth is the environment and there are no scientists directing the chemical and biologic processes. Natural law is doing that mechanisticly.

Really? Where did the law come from?

Look, what I'm getting at is, there are things that cannot be explained scientifically. Saying "This works that way because that's the way it works" is circular logic, and is in essence no different than a person of faith saying, "This works that way because God makes it work that way."

 

[steveh_131]

On average, I believe it does. I believe there have been studies of popular science literacy showing that those taught religion as science have less of it than those taught science as science and religion as religion.

I'd like to see these studies. I guarantee there are other variables at play.

That said, this is a different argument. You posited a theory that a belief in God or the Bible causes one to avoid scientific education. That's ridiculous. Do you even know any Christians? There is not a single one that I have ever met who ignores the fundamentals of physics and instead prays that things will happen.

You can find backward, ignorant Christians just like you can find backward, ignorant atheists. That does not mean that one causes the other.

 

[CathyInBlue]

I'd like to see these studies. I guarantee there are other variables at play.

That said, this is a different argument. You posited a theory that a belief in God or the Bible causes one to avoid scientific education. That's ridiculous. Do you even know any Christians? There is not a single one that I have ever met who ignores the fundamentals of physics and instead prays that things will happen.

You can find backward, ignorant Christians just like you can find backward, ignorant atheists. That does not mean that one causes the other.

No, I put forward a belief that teaching children that <science topic> works the way it does because <religious tenet> does violence to popular science literacy. Given a religious person educated about science in a science classroom that teaches science as science, science, science can and usually does result in a religious person with high science literacy. But to do this regularly and repeatably, you can't be having religious dogma sneaking into the science curriculum under a thin veil of scientific language.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Really? Where did the law come from?

Look, what I'm getting at is, there are things that cannot be explained scientifically. Saying "This works that way because that's the way it works" is circular logic, and is in essence no different than a person of faith saying, "This works that way because God makes it work that way."

Are you talking about reduction to axioms?

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Are you talking about reduction to axioms?

If by that you mean, once you drill down deep enough, you reach a point where you no longer know "why" something is the way it is, then yes. Science has gone a long way in explaining things that once were explained by mythology. It has not explained them all, nor do I suspect it ever will. It's like a parabolic curve that approaches vertical (or horizontal), but never quite gets there. In my opinion of course.

 

[Cygnus]

Religion and Science are NOT mutually exclusive....

Carry on folks.

 

[ViperJock]

I do agree that some religious people ignore some science because of their beliefs. I do not believe this is the norm. Nor is it even common. Having lived in both worlds for most of my life. You just hear the vocal minority.

 

[hoosierdoc]

we'll agree to disagree.

Life as a chemical process is explicitly using energy collected from the environment to decrease the entropy of the organism itself, and thereby of the organism's species and all species descended from that organism. This is not a violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. If you could find a giant rock floating in deep space with no source of energy, no radioactive element decay, no solar radiation, just a solid mass of elemental matter, and yet, life evolved in its outer crust to wiggle and squirm across its surface, then I would grant you something that looks exactly like a violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics will have occurred.

 

[CathyInBlue]

If by that you mean, once you drill down deep enough, you reach a point where you no longer know "why" something is the way it is, then yes. Science has gone a long way in explaining things that once were explained by mythology. It has not explained them all, nor do I suspect it ever will. It's like a parabolic curve that approaches vertical (or horizontal), but never quite gets there. In my opinion of course.

Yes. That is essentially what it means to be an axiom. The "Why?" becomes, "Because if it were not that way, weird happens in the foundational physics." Things like "Natural laws are uniform across all space and time." Can we prove that the laws of physics have always been as we see them today and will always be this way? No. But one of the hallmarks of science is the ability to make predictions. If the laws of nature that we base our predictions on can change "just because", then the laws of nature can be different later than those we based our predictions on, making scientific prediction impossible.

 

[CathyInBlue]

we'll agree to disagree.

One of the great things about science, as opposed to religion, is it doesn't care if you agree with it or not, its laws will still continue to be enforced, just the same.

I like the saying, "Reality is that which, even when you cease to believe in it, continues to exist."

 

[hoosierdoc]

"I'm right, no matter what you think."

got it.

One of the great things about science, as opposed to religion, is it doesn't care if you agree with it or not, its laws will still continue to be enforced, just the same.

I like the saying, "Reality is that which, even when you cease to believe in it, continues to exist."

 

[D-Ric902]

"I'm right, no matter what you believe."

got it.

FIFY

 

[CathyInBlue]

More like science works no matter what your religion tells you to believe.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

One of the great things about science, as opposed to religion, is it doesn't care if you agree with it or not, its laws will still continue to be enforced, just the same.

I like the saying, "Reality is that which, even when you cease to believe in it, continues to exist."

Same is true of God. He exists. Always has. Always will. Entirely independent of human acceptance.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Science doesn't explain the origin of the eye. We're agreeing to disagree. Just because science has laws doesn't mean you can scream "science" and use it to vaguely explain anything you want.

More like science works no matter what your religion tells you to believe.

 

[ATM]

..."Reality is that which, even when you cease to believe in it, continues to exist."

And the scientific method is somewhat capable of discovering and refining our understanding of a very insignificant subset of that reality.

The vast part of reality doesn't care about the limitations of "science" and, of course, continues to exist and be discovered via other means.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Science doesn't explain the origin of the eye. We're agreeing to disagree. Just because science has laws doesn't mean you can scream "science" and use it to vaguely explain anything you want.

I just used science to explain the origin of the eye to you. The fact that you were incapable of processing the explanation is a failing you'll have to learn to live with.

 

[TopDog]

I am so glad we got the go ahead to do this again...