1. 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!

Featured Faith in science?

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by Jaiket, Jan 11, 2021.

  1. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,569
    Ratings:
    +7,865
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Worse 'arguing from ignorance' than the opening post. Your reference conclusions agree with me.
     
  2. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,586
    Ratings:
    +9,115
    Religion:
    Humanist
    But the evidence tends to show that science will eventually solve the problem; is there an alternative to science to solve problems?
     
  3. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    8,444
    Ratings:
    +6,647
    Religion:
    Atheist
    That's quite unfair. You make it seems as if we know virtually nothing at all. While many questions remain unanswered, lets not pretend as if we know nothing at all.

    We know a lot of things. We know about brain chemistry, we know about neural networks,... we know quite some stuff from neurology etc.

    So let's not pretend as if we are a bunch of drooling apes who don't even know what a brain is.

    Does it? It's not clear to me at all how you concluded that this gets us nowhere.
    It seems to me that it gets us quite a long way already.

    You just explained it. The "feels" is in the neurons firing away and activating pain receptors.

    That seems quite likely, yes.

    No. You are excercising trust in a method of inquiry that has earned that trust with its immens and impressive track record of solving riddles that were once deemed unsolvable by many.

    I am very confident in stating that IF one day we figure out consciousness, it will be figured out by a (or more) scientist(s) through science and not by some priest or monk or circus artist.

    This is not "faith". This is trust based on an impressive track record of scientific success in doing exactly that: finding solutions to problems / answers to questions pertaining to nature.
     
  4. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    10,736
    Ratings:
    +9,674
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    That depends on the problem. There are plenty of problem science is not equipped to solve. And in fact, the so-called "hard problem" of consciousness may be one of them, if only because science may claim there is no such problem to solve.
     
  5. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,569
    Ratings:
    +7,865
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Your posts are getting worse concerning how science deals with consciousness. Science DOES NOT claim there is no such problem.

    You have not responded to the fact that the source you cited agrees with me.
     
  6. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    8,444
    Ratings:
    +6,647
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Yes, but in context of discussion on a religious forum, one must be careful with the words "belief" and "faith".
    In religious context, these words have specific connotations.

    Having "faith in god", is not at all the same thing as having "faith in science".

    In the first, it concerns (superstitious) belief without evidence.
    In the latter, it concerns trust of a methodology which has a proven track record.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    10,736
    Ratings:
    +9,674
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    I am speaking of faith in the sense it seems to me it is being used in the OP.
     
  8. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    10,736
    Ratings:
    +9,674
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    Eh? Your hovercraft appears to be full of eels.:D
     
  9. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    8,444
    Ratings:
    +6,647
    Religion:
    Atheist
    The evidence is the track record of success of the scientific method, which outclasses all other methods of inquiry that have been tried / proposed in the history of mankind.

    8000 years of relying on "visions" and "dreams" and ancient stories of supernatural stuff, lead to combatting desease with bloodletting and exorcisms.

    While just 200 years of scientific inquiry landed man on the moon.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    8,444
    Ratings:
    +6,647
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Science has a track record of successfully solving such problems.
    That's the evidence that supports trust that science might be able to tackle this one as well.

    Is it a guarantee? Off course not.
    But the track record, and history in general, tells us that IF we tackle it, chances are rather humongous that it will be solved through science.


    And we don't express that trust out of the blue. We base it on an impressive track record that shows that science is very much capable of solving hard problems.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    8,444
    Ratings:
    +6,647
    Religion:
    Atheist
    It is not really that clear to me how it is being used in the OP as it is not defined.

    And as I stated, one must be careful with such words on a religious forum.

    In fact, it seems to me that in the OP, it is being used in the sense of "religious faith". Since it is being presented as the thread topic in the religious forum context of "science and religion".


    So my answer to the OP is "no, you are not exercising faith in science. Instead, you are merely putting your trust in a methodology which has earned that trust through a proven track record of doing exactly the kind of things you 'trust' it will continue to do in the future."
     
  12. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    18,425
    Ratings:
    +21,457
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Well, think of it like this. The pattern is *me smelling the coffee*. Whenever I smell coffee, that pattern (or one similar) occurs and whenever that pattern occurs, I smell coffee.

    Consciousness is always *of* something and *by* someone. It is a type of information processing by someone about something. The someone is the person whose brain it is. And the processing is done by the brain. It is the *pattern* or *process* of that analysis that is consciousness.

    At least, that's how I see it.
     
  13. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    18,425
    Ratings:
    +21,457
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    And, I think that exactly *what* is required for consciousness may profitably be analyzed by considering which things that are alive we would consider to be conscious.

    For example, there seems to be agreement that jellyfish are not conscious. I would bet there is a similar consensus that dogs and cats are conscious. I am personally less certain as we go further towards baseline animals. Octopi seem to have some sort of consciousness, but probably of a quite different sort than humans. Some insects seem to be conscious (bees?) and others not so much (the programmed patterns of some wasps, for example).

    Are all vertebrates conscious? I'm inclined to say yes, but I am not absolutely convinced.

    Anyway, it seems to me that one way to proceed is to figure out some clear examples of conscious beings and ones that are NOT conscious and figure out what the differences are.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    18,425
    Ratings:
    +21,457
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    I am not so sure of this last part.

    For example, by studying the brain of a bat, we might see that it is excited while pursuing a bug, that it feels affection towards those who nest close by, that it focuses its attention on its child as it lands, etc.

    What else is required to know 'what it is like to be a bat'?
     
  15. Altfish

    Altfish Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,586
    Ratings:
    +9,115
    Religion:
    Humanist
    There are lots of 'Ifs and Mays' in that statement
    OK, If science can't solve it - I won't have 'faith' that it will - but if science can't solve it nothing else can.
     
  16. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    10,736
    Ratings:
    +9,674
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    Knowing it is excited doesn't tell you what it feels like, from the bat's point of view, though.

    Though I must say this feels like a slightly ridiculous conversation to be having....:D
     
  17. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    10,736
    Ratings:
    +9,674
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    Well I think the solution lies in philosophy rather than science. Pigliucci thinks the question only arises, at all, as a result of a category mistake by the questioner;).
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    5,440
    Ratings:
    +1,195
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    What is that supposed to mean?
     
  19. Brian2

    Brian2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    1,712
    Ratings:
    +241
    Religion:
    Christian
    Science might use evidence but that does not mean that there is evidence for the belief that science will one day find the answers or the belief that the answers are in the realms that science is stuck in.
    Science is a tool for physical answers.
    Many people may not necessarily think that science will definitely find answers to everything, but that does not stop those people from seeing the answers as lying in physics and chemistry etc somewhere.
    It may not be a faith in science as such but it is a lack of faith in other possibilities, even if that may be the direction that some problems in science point to.
    For some people it is a rejection of other possibilities.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    18,425
    Ratings:
    +21,457
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    I have to admit that I have never quite understood what the 'hard' part of the question of consciousness is. But, I also disagree with Chalmers about the coherency of p-zombies.

    Saying something is physically identical to a conscious being but not conscious sounds like saying one system is physically identical to another but has a different temperature. It seems to me that both the temperature and the conscious state are determined by the physical situation, if known in detail.

    But, I have to admit a similar difficulty understanding the meaning of the term 'qualia'. Does the quale of 'seeing red' also encompass the emotional response (in which case it is NOT indecomposable) or is it merely the sensation of the redness itself (in which case, what is the difference with sensory detection)?
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...