• 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!

If you love science, or you love your faith, how do you help set them free?

Manoah

Member
Aristotle, seeing the soul as composed of mind, will, and emotion, discussed modes of knowledge coming through each facet--logos (facts, reason, science), ethos (beliefs, trust, values), and pathos (emotion, love, imagination). <-- I paraphrase and adapt but the categories are good, I think.

If we ignore religion, then we basically give a lobotomy to part of humanity and individuals. If we ignore science, we do the same.

If humanity and individuals are created in God's image, then not only are we multifaceted but so is the divine, and I would expect one aspect of the divine to be as logos--complete atheistic, clockwork, naturalistic reason. Yes, I just stated that God has an atheistic aspect. However, I would expect other facets beyond that of a computer or an unfeeling, Spock-like Vulcan,
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Aristotle, seeing the soul as composed of mind, will, and emotion, discussed modes of knowledge coming through each facet--logos (facts, reason, science), ethos (beliefs, trust, values), and pathos (emotion, love, imagination). <-- I paraphrase and adapt but the categories are good, I think.

If we ignore religion, then we basically give a lobotomy to part of humanity and individuals. If we ignore science, we do the same.
But you're comparing apples and anvils, here. Science isn't a therapeutic modality, hobby or social club. It's not supposed to make you happy or give meaning to your life. It's an attempt to discern objective truth.

That's not to say religion can't be a good thing, ; it's just not a research or testing methodology. True, it often makes declarations of truth, but it doesn't often test them or discard them in the face of contravening evidence.

I think Aristotle is using a very broad concept of 'knowledge'.
 
Last edited:

Manoah

Member
But you're comparing apples and anvils, here.

Yes, the three modes appeal to three completely different aspects of a human being--mind, heart, and will. Instead of being a floating brain that only regards data and logic, we also consist of other functions and abilities. Aristotle claims that a persuasive argument must appeal to more than the brain alone.

Logos - Definition and Examples | LitCharts

Ethos - Definition and Examples | LitCharts

Pathos - Definition and Examples | LitCharts

I do admit I am stretching his application in my post, however!
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
First of all, you reconcile these two so that one does not take anything away from the other.....that is the beginning of true freedom IMO.
Do you have any ideas about what any of us here might be able to do in our everyday lives, to help reconcile them?
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
Well science can let the facts speak for themselves by honestly reporting facts without all the philosophical positioning.

Let the public make up their own minds when presented with factual knowledges.

All the religions of the past need to be approached with skepticism, and objectivity. To me the future of religion should be to question more than assume knowledge.

Science should discover and report facts, not interpret things for you otherwise.

Religion should be a branch of philosophy that is more investigative and far less dogmatic.

Humans can flourish and be better served to admit when they dont know, versus protecting their philosophies by cherry picking results.

Anyway how knowledge is presented to the public is the key to opening hearts and minds, and giving common people means to grow by learning genuine facts.

Its amazing that we have television, and how little of it is seriously educational. Instead people watch piles of entertainment garbage to pacify themselves.
Do you have any ideas about what any of us here might be able to do in our everyday lives, for all that?
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
Well, as a practicing Christian - which I used to be - and a practicing scientist - which I still am, I always used to a bit miffed that I often seemed to be required to choose one in favour and to the exclusion of the other. I searched for ways to reconcile them but always seemed to fail. I ended up writing these few paragraphs several years ago
Are you thinking of reconciling science and religion as a way of helping to set them free? Each person trying to do that in their own mind? Do you have any other ideas about what any of us here might be able to do in our everyday lives, to help reconcile them?
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
Offhand, I can't see any way of reconciling these two, diametrically opposed, approaches to knowledge.
My question is not how to reconcile them. My question is, if you see anything holding back science from doing all the good it can do, or if you see anything holding back the way of life that you believe in from doing all the good it can do, what do you think that any of us here might be able to do, in our everyday lives, to help free it from whatever is holding it back?
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
Aristotle, seeing the soul as composed of mind, will, and emotion, discussed modes of knowledge coming through each facet--logos (facts, reason, science), ethos (beliefs, trust, values), and pathos (emotion, love, imagination). <-- I paraphrase and adapt but the categories are good, I think.

If we ignore religion, then we basically give a lobotomy to part of humanity and individuals. If we ignore science, we do the same.

If humanity and individuals are created in God's image, then not only are we multifaceted but so is the divine, and I would expect one aspect of the divine to be as logos--complete atheistic, clockwork, naturalistic reason. Yes, I just stated that God has an atheistic aspect. However, I would expect other facets beyond that of a computer or an unfeeling, Spock-like Vulcan,
Do you see anything holding back science from doing all the good it can do, or do you see anything holding back the way of life that you believe in from doing all the good it can do? If so, what do you think that you or anyone else can do, in our everyday lives, to help free it from whatever is holding it back?
 
Last edited:

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Do you have any ideas about what any of us here might be able to do in our everyday lives, for all that?

That is a challenging question. Everyday people are fighting to make a living and survive. Who has the freedom, resources, motivation, and the time?

We should all be careful what we support, endorse, and give credence to.

Petitions, and writing people in power, leadership, and authority roles.

You would have to build a grass roots movement to do all that.

You have to make things known, get the word out about what you would like seen done about it.

If enough people are interested, then you could gain the ability to do something about it.

Make an internet poll, and let people vote their interests in these things.
 
Last edited:

Manoah

Member
Do you see anything holding back science from doing all the good it can do, or do you see anything holding back the way of life that you believe in from doing all the good it can do? If so, what do you think that you or anyone else can do, in our everyday lives, to help free it from whatever is holding it back?

As a college English instructor, I can encourage students to include ethics and emotions in their learning as well as factual information, philosophy and religion as well as good science, art and literature as well as the STEM (Science-Technology-Engineering-Math) subjects.
 
Top