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 Science ... NOT God ...

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by NewGuyOnTheBlock, Jul 31, 2019.

  1. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    932
    Ratings:
    +165
    Religion:
    Properly some form of non-revealed deism
    Yeah, you have it hard, right?

    There are more than one meaning to reality and it is out there recorded in a dictionary. Yet you don't confront that.
    Dictionary by Merriam-Webster: America's most-trusted online dictionary This time with the link, just to show you that I control the Internet. ;)

    So again:
     
  2. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    12,003
    Ratings:
    +11,639
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Well, the hugely significant leap made around 1600 is the idea that we need to be able to *test* our ideas via observation. That was a solid break from Greek philosophy, which believed you could arrive at truth by merely thinking about things and which was very dismissive of the value of observation (because of the faults of the senses).

    That idea, that ideas should be tested, was a wildly disruptive one. Yes, it flourished partly because of the interactions with the Reformation and was even possible because of prior philosophy stating that we expect natural laws to be understandable by humans. But to completely miss that crucial step means this speaker misses the whole point, at least as far as I can see. It devalues the advance by making it just another sociological phenomenon.

    Yes, the professionalization of science is an interesting phenomenon, and how the words 'religio' and 'scientia' evolved over time is amusing, but my feeling is that this series of lectures is largely missing the core point of what science *is* and thereby why it had the influence it did *even before it was professionalized*. The idea that we should be skeptical of claims and require procedures to test them is the core revolution. This was the fundamental break from the 'faith' based views prior. And we even see it in the Protestant revolution in how ideas were tested against the Biblical text.
     
  3. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    3,026
    Ratings:
    +2,141
    Religion:
    Atheist
    You should ask yourself why you are the only one having such a hard time figuring out which definition applies in which context.

    Like I already told you once, your "objections" amount to the equivalent of telling you "this is light reading" and you then starting to yap about how reading doesn't have any mass.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,385
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    Your missing my point. Im not arguing that NO ONE believed the earth was flat or was the center of the universe. Im arguing that the authors of the bible DID NOT believe that.
     
  5. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,385
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    You havent seen one? How would you? First, youd have to see someones cancer, then second youd have to see it go away.

    First youd have to see someones aids then second, see it go away. List goes on.

    How are you gonna see all that unless your studying these people directly?

    Get real man.

    Also, i had someone tell me they had aids and he was at church praying and he felt a warm heat come on him, he started speaking in tongues and then his aids got healed. He verified that with a specialist.

    He had nothing to gain in lying to me about that.
     
  6. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,385
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    Either or. A none religious person can be wise enough to spot religious propaganda and a true religious person also can be wise enough to spot religious propaganda.

    Some religious people and none religious people can be stupid to not spot it as well.
     
  7. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    9,850
    Ratings:
    +8,466
    Religion:
    none
    He does discuss that though: why was there a move to experimental science and why did this catch on. He talks about Jonathan Swift mocking experimental science in Gulliver's Travels, and how the experimental approach gained societal legitimacy due to it's links to theological concerns, etc.

    He wrote a whole book on the topic too.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    12,003
    Ratings:
    +11,639
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    I have not yet finished the lectures, so I may not have got to that point. Thanks.

    Which has been put on my (unfortunately too extensive) reading list.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  9. A Vestigial Mote

    A Vestigial Mote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    4,096
    Ratings:
    +2,600
    Religion:
    ?
    I didn't miss the point, trust me... it was you who missed mine. I responded in exactly the way I did BECAUSE you insisted that it was important to point out that the authors of The Bible did not believe that the Earth was the center of the universe. My point was that it takes exactly the same kind of thinking to believe that the Earth is the center of the universe without proper evidence, as it does to believe in a god without proper evidence. So, if there was any "missing of points" being done - it was by you.
     
    #109 A Vestigial Mote, Aug 1, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2019
  10. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    12,003
    Ratings:
    +11,639
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Can you support that statement? Given that it was the dominant view at the time, especially in that area, it would be remarkable if they *didn't* believe that. The Biblical writings certainly support that viewpoint.
     
  11. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    3,026
    Ratings:
    +2,141
    Religion:
    Atheist
    :rolleyes:
     
  12. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    9,850
    Ratings:
    +8,466
    Religion:
    none
    Do you know the idea of a round earth gained widespread acceptance among the educated classes of the classical world? (not when it was first proposed, but when it became the dominant view)

    *edit* should read: do you know when the idea...
     
    #112 Augustus, Aug 1, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2019
  13. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    12,003
    Ratings:
    +11,639
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Yes. But that wasn't when the relevant parts of the Bible were written. The OT actually shows a variety of different views of the nature of the Earth, from flat with a dome overhead, to later ones that show some awareness of the round Earth model.
     
  14. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    9,850
    Ratings:
    +8,466
    Religion:
    none
    Wasn't about the Bible, but a general question out of curiosity. I was just wondering if it is known when it became the dominant view and it would have been considered a bit strange to think the world was flat.
     
  15. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    12,003
    Ratings:
    +11,639
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    It didn't happen everywhere at once and was not accepted even by the intellectuals uniformly.

    Certainly Aristotle accepted the sphericity of the Earth. And Ptolemy built on that. I would bet that among educated Greeks and Romans it was widely accepted by the first century and probably before. I *think* I read that it was mentioned as early as the 7th century BCE (Pythagorus--who also thought the Earth orbited the sun), but I doubt it was common then.

    But IIRC, Isadore of Seville argued for a flat Earth as late as the 7th century AD.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. Windwalker

    Windwalker Integralist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    8,140
    Ratings:
    +4,068
    Religion:
    Love, Light, and Life
    Wow. How profoundly appropriate for today! In fact, it's these sorts of Christians Augustine rebukes here, who created Richard Dawkins, and flowing fountains of neo-atheists at the ready to call them out. :) Funny to imagine they lived back then to, your science-denying, evolution-denying Ken Ham's of the ancient world! Marvelous!
     
  17. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    12,003
    Ratings:
    +11,639
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    I misunderstood this at first because the word 'when' is missing in your first sentence.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  18. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    9,850
    Ratings:
    +8,466
    Religion:
    none
    So it is, my mistake :oops:
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  19. Jollybear

    Jollybear Hey

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,385
    Ratings:
    +552
    Religion:
    Christian/mystic
    No, you missed my point.

    Im arguing the bible authors did not believe the earth was flat or the center of the universe.

    I sure can support that statement!

    Isaiah 40:22

    "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

    Genesis 1:1-2

    "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

    Notice, the circle of the earth. It does not say its flat or square, it says circle.

    Also notice, God created the heavens and earth. Period. It dont say 'and God made the earth the center of the heavens'. It dont say that at all.
     
  20. Windwalker

    Windwalker Integralist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    8,140
    Ratings:
    +4,068
    Religion:
    Love, Light, and Life
    But here's the fascinating spin. That thought, while it may not reflect something real at the time, can of often does as a result of being believed to be true or real, will create that very reality it images to be true. It is already real to him, and through that, it can manifest in physical reality.

    Example, paranoid man believes his girlfriend is cheating on him. This belief changes how he sees and relates to his GF. GF withdraws from him and begins cheating on him before she leaves. His imagination created the reality. The same is true for positive things as well.

    This extends to pretty much everything we imagine is reality. It becomes reality for us, through what we imagine it is. If we see it as true, it becomes true. To put a term to this, these are self-reinforcing, self-amplifying feedback systems. Imagination becomes reality. See that city outside? Imagination brought that into existence.
     
Loading...