U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-11-2010, 04:54 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,038 posts, read 30,705,281 times
Reputation: 12220

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Wrong again. It is absolutely integral to the explanations except your preferred name for it all is "natural." That is bias NOT science.
So do you think that all the thousands of scientists are wrong, and you alone are correct?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-11-2010, 05:16 PM
 
37,573 posts, read 25,275,797 times
Reputation: 5860
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
So do you think that all the thousands of scientists are wrong, and you alone are correct?
Who was that who was touting the ad populum fallacy??? It is a deliberate bias . . . nothing more . . . predicated on the horrendous history of persecution of science by religious bigots and tyrants. Understandable . . . but bias nonetheless . . . NOT science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2010, 05:47 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,038 posts, read 30,705,281 times
Reputation: 12220
You didn't answer my question....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2010, 07:00 PM
 
14 posts, read 11,857 times
Reputation: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
By it's own definition though, "faith" is only necessary if there is no good proof or evidence. Thus one has faith in believing something that seems to have no rational explanation. The supernatural, for instance.
What may be 'rational' to one may not be to another. In other words the world of faith operates on altogether different principals than the world of the physical. Is it possible that the reason why some people seem to be 'genetically disposed', as you so elegantly put it, is because they have been given something others have not?

Quote:
If it's all been laid out irrefutably, then you don't need faith to believe in it do you?
Again, to one who is living in the world of faith concerning any certain subject, all may seem irrefutable.

My point is not to be argumentative but to say that the sphere of faith may be as real as the sphere of the physical. Why do many of us humans believe so much in the realm of the physical yet don't or can't believe in the faith world? Says much about our make-up and our definitions of faith.

Quote:
Certainly some people want to have that faith. Well, some specific types of thinkers at any rate. Others, including myself, have kind of abandoned the faith-based beliefs exactly because they so often disappoint. It's a statistical cr@p-shoot in all cases. The bad outcomes are summarily dismissed, the good ones acknowledged as inherently Godly.
I hear ya there. I don't like when people attribute the bad to people or a 'satan' and the good to God. This is so inconsistant to me. Either God is God of all or He is nothing.

Quote:
I've actually wondered if the faith-oriented folks aren't genetically pre-disposed to that perspective while the scientific types are not. It seems so impossible to get through to the "faith" types here, no matter how rational the discussion is.
My experience is we will rarely if ever convert another to our way of thinking, not really. Not fully anyway. I suppose an argument could be made for the masses though. Billy Graham crusades or the way some terrorist organizations tend to sway others to their beliefs. But are these swayed deeply or just a surface kind of thing?

Got to run.

cp
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2010, 07:44 PM
 
37,573 posts, read 25,275,797 times
Reputation: 5860
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
You didn't answer my question....
I did . . . but you were not perceptive enough to see it. You intended to imply that the scientists had some SCIENTIFIC basis for their disagreement with me and that they therefore represented some scientific evidentiary basis for invalidating my view. I pointed out that it is merely a bias . . . a justified one . . . but a bias nonetheless . . . NOT science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2010, 08:02 PM
 
1,883 posts, read 2,484,092 times
Reputation: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Wrong again. It is absolutely integral to the explanations except your preferred name for it all is "natural." That is bias NOT science.
How is God anymore necessary to scientific explanations about the universe than God would be to mathematics,or to medicine?

It is a fallacy of theists,of which I am one,especially fundamentalist theists,of which I am not one,to believe that science rejects God.It does not.Many scienTISTS do,but that is irrelevant to the issue.Science is nothing but an attempt to understand the way things work.It doesn't specifically deny a God,it just doesn't deal with God and whether God had any affect on the universe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2010, 08:13 PM
 
37,573 posts, read 25,275,797 times
Reputation: 5860
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
How is God anymore necessary to scientific explanations about the universe than God would be to mathematics,or to medicine?

It is a fallacy of theists,of which I am one,especially fundamentalist theists,of which I am not one,to believe that science rejects God.It does not.Many scienTISTS do,but that is irrelevant to the issue.Science is nothing but an attempt to understand the way things work.It doesn't specifically deny a God,it just doesn't deal with God and whether God had any affect on the universe.
Many have been beaten into submission and acceptance that there are two different Gods . . . Nature and God . . . and science only deals with the first. That is nonsense. There is only One and science deals with it all the time. Every time the words "natural process" are used in science . . . they could just as easily be replaced by "God's process" with no change in meaning or impact on the science or the results. I tire of this second class citizen status for God and believers in Him simply to assuage the fears and biases of scientists. The religious persecution was real, the threat remains a viable one with the assault on science curricula by the Creationists and ID frauds at the Discovery Institute. But the dual God approach to reality has to stop. My personal knowledge of the invalidity of it is what drives my tenacity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2010, 08:33 PM
 
1,883 posts, read 2,484,092 times
Reputation: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Many have been beaten into submission and acceptance that there are two different Gods . . . Nature and God . . . and science only deals with the first. That is nonsense. There is only One and science deals with it all the time. Every time the words "natural process" are used in science . . . they could just as easily be replaced by "God's process" with no change in meaning or impact on the science or the results. I tire of this second class citizen status for God and believers in Him simply to assuage the fears and biases of scientists. The religious persecution was real, the threat remains a viable one with the assault on science curricula by the Creationists and ID frauds at the Discovery Institute. But the dual God approach to reality has to stop. My personal knowledge of the invalidity of it is what drives my tenacity.

Nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2010, 08:39 PM
 
37,573 posts, read 25,275,797 times
Reputation: 5860
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifertexan View Post
Nonsense.
Very erudite.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2010, 09:39 PM
 
1,883 posts, read 2,484,092 times
Reputation: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Very erudite.

You went a long way to say basically nothing.It seemed to fit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top