mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
So publish a refutation of solipsism.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Can Science be Used to say.?....God is NOT Life
- Thread starter Thief
- Start date
So publish a refutation of solipsism.
I think science is busy with other matters at the moment...
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Yes, it is just meaningless denialism no matter what label one puts on it. Abusing terms does not make your beliefs skepticism. And you would still be refuted by a slap to the face.
Audie
Veteran Member
Well, yeah, seriously.
Many religionists seem obsessed with
their beliefs about science messing
with their "god". They are thick as hairs
on a dogs back on forums.
Of course, there are those such as myself
who will respond.
That has zero to do with what science
is doing.
" Science" concerns itself with regressive
religious nonsense like a lion notes a flea biting at it.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
That, it is meaningless, is without evidence, because meaningless has no objective referent and is without evidence. You are in effect subjective and explain how you subjectively believe.
As for the slap, you haven't rules out that reality is not real and that you are a Boltzmann Brain or any other non-real variant. Try harder. Your belief system rests on naïve realism and subjectivism in the end. You just don't realize that, because you don't doubt your own beliefs.
Here is an example:
Simulation hypothesis - Wikipedia
"...
Origins[edit]
There is a long philosophical and scientific history to the underlying thesis that reality is an illusion. This skeptical hypothesis can be traced back to antiquity; for example, to the "Butterfly Dream" of Zhuangzi,[1] or the Indian philosophy of Maya, or in Ancient Greek philosophy Anaxarchus and Monimus likened existing things to a scene-painting and supposed them to resemble the impressions experienced in sleep or madness.[2]
A version of the hypothesis was also theorised as a part of a philosophical argument by René Descartes.
..."
That you are subjective without being aware of it and in effect apparently uneducated, is on you.
I have many feelings about science, mostly very positive and I've never had the impression that science "messes" with my God. But that's me, can't speak for others.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Here is no science. That is a human social and cultural behavior. It is not a thing.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
I don't think so.
Being a Deist I do believe that all life is Nature, and everything about nature is science ....
Therefore:-
Science is God.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, that is one version. There are other versions and not just yours of what science is.
In the end we end in part here:
Of all things the measure is Man, of the things that are, that they are, and of the things that are not, that they are not" Protagoras.
You believe in one version of science and I believe in another. They are both non-religious, yet they are different to the point of being contradictory. So at least one is wrong, yet we are still both here.
That is no different that contradictory beliefs in gods.
Audie
Veteran Member
So..l
Scirnce is love.
Love is just a four letter word.
God is a three letter word
Where does that leave YOUR theory?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
What about your theory?
Those people need serious help... But no worries, most of us are reasonably sane.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Separate from yours, I guess.
MonkeyFire
Well-Known Member
God is the fundamental metabolism to nature, and nature is the same as Heaven.
Suave
Simulated character
I'm unaware of any scientific consensus regarding the definition of life. I'd consider life as being organisms living in open systems that maintain homeostasis, being composed of cells, having a life cycle, undergoing metabolism, capable of growth, adapting to their environment, responding to stimuli, reproducing and evolving. I'm also unaware of any consensus defining God. I'd define God as being an intelligent being capable of having created the universe.
How do you define life? How do you define God?
Well, "life", is a bit tricky to define. For more complex critters it centers around their capacity to grow, reproduce and adapt using their own metabolism.
What does "God" refer to?
Audie
Veteran Member
Hope so