Why is spiritual knowledge seen as less correct then knowledge from science?

[mikkel_the_dane]

Scinetific knowledge is precise, consistent, and verifiable. Whereas "spiritual knowledge" can be whatever you pull out of your ***. For example, I can say that bananas are evil because their phallic shape can causes impure thoughts and lead people astray from the righteous path, and that could be regarded as "spiritual knowledge" even though it's actually silly nonsense in reality.

Correct, you have stated how a part of nature works and there is actually silly nonsense as a part of reality. Good observation. Now learn from that.

 

[Spirit of Light]

There's a good bit to unpack here first. You first have to define "spiritual wisdom". To me it's not a useful phrase, because it's way too vague with too many problematic connotations. If you're referring to religion and the associated beliefs, that's one thing, and it's pretty easy to determine why that's less valuable than scientific knowledge. If you're referring to thoughts and views on morality and how to interact with other people, especially in society, then I don't find the term "spiritual wisdom" helpful, as it implies too much more.

Second, you have to not use loaded phrased like "science believers" and "refuse to acknowledge". There's no such thing as a "science believer". There are people who understand science and realize what a great tool it is for us, and there are people who don't. "Science believers" is just an obvious attempt to discredit people who value science as no better than "religious believers" or other "believers", which is ironic, since it inherently means that "religious believers" are problematic.

Some teachings that date back thousands of years are useful. People have had a lot to say about the human condition for thousands of years, and many of those things are wise and helpful even today. They have their place, but not really because they're "spiritual". The "religious" and "spiritual" aspects are not useful only really the parts that inform our morality and ways of living together in society. Also being thousands of years old isn't inherently an advantage over being hundreds of years old.

Science is invaluable. It gives us an objective way to learn about the universe and understand it. It gave us medicine, cars, planes, space travel, and many, many other things, as well as just a better understanding of thing we all live in. That's why it's seen as so valuable by reasonable, rational people.

I trust spiritual teaching a thousand times more then science. Science only explain physical world whereas spiritual teaching teach us about spiritual realm.

It is not religion or spiritual teachings fault science and none spiritual people can not understand spiritual teachings.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I trust spiritual teaching a thousand times more then science. Science only explain physical world whereas spiritual teaching teach us about spiritual realm.

It is not religion or spiritual teachings fault science and none spiritual people can not understand spiritual teachings.

They do understand spiritual teachings. Their subjective spiritual teaching is that subjective is bad. They just don't get, that it is subjective.
The teaching that they have in common is that objectivity and rationality is better than anything else. The joke is that it is a subjective spiritual teaching.

 

[Spirit of Light]

The problem in this kind of OP I created is that there is nothing new to learn, I knew this from before. But I live in the hope that spiritual teachings once again get the respect it deserve. But I think it's no hope in it anymore.

Ps: I am not in a negative mood today. Just don't see any use of science vs spiritual discussion anymore.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Yeah, I know all that! Yet there is no scientific theory of everything and there is no objective "we" in humanity, so as long as you claim that science can do everything for a "we", you are up a creek without a paddle.

I never once stated that science can "do everything." Now did I? Dishonesty at its finest.

One final note - a "paddle" is an object with a specifically tailored shape, size, weight, and choice of materials, whose crafting was come to by observation and experimentation. So if anyone is going to have a paddle in this creek, it isn't going to be someone who eschews science.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I have noticed that often spiritual wisdom/knowledge is seen as less valuable then science knowledge and I wonder why it is so?

Why do science believers refuse to acknowledge that spiritual teachings, that can be found many thousands of year back is lesser the science that has only been around for a few hundreds years?

Something is not right.

Science is the study of how the physical world works and we have verifiable evidence that the physical world exists. There is no verifiable evidence that any kind of a spiritual world even exists, yet alone that there is any truth to any of the 'spiritual teachings'.

That sounds perfectly right to me.

 

[PureX]

I have noticed that often spiritual wisdom/knowledge is seen as less valuable then science knowledge and I wonder why it is so?

Why do science believers refuse to acknowledge that spiritual teachings, that can be found many thousands of year back is lesser the science that has only been around for a few hundreds years?

Something is not right.

Simple minds are biased toward simple answers.

 

[George-ananda]

I have noticed that often spiritual wisdom/knowledge is seen as less valuable then science knowledge and I wonder why it is so?

Why do science believers refuse to acknowledge that spiritual teachings, that can be found many thousands of year back is lesser the science that has only been around for a few hundreds years?

Something is not right.

Scientific knowledge is demonstrable by precise experimentation involving the physical senses and instruments.

Spiritual knowledge and wisdom involves human experiences and insight into things beyond the physical but can't be demonstrated by precise experimentation involving the physical senses and instruments.

Science is more precise but it doesn't tell us anything about the Big Questions which to me are more important than scientific knowledge of the physical. The Big Questions are what/if there is a purpose to life; am I a just a biological machine or something 'more'; and such questions. Those questions are in the domain of spiritual wisdom traditions.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I never once stated that science can "do everything." Now did I? Dishonesty at its finest.

...

Then accept subjectivity in other humans and not just yourself.

You can reason all you like about how your subjectivity makes sense to you. I accept that and I accept as it appears to me, that you don't accept some other forms of subjectivity. That is okay.
Now if I got that wrong, just tell me so, and I will admit that I am wrong.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I have noticed that often spiritual wisdom/knowledge is seen as less valuable then science knowledge and I wonder why it is so?

Why do science believers refuse to acknowledge that spiritual teachings, that can be found many thousands of year back is lesser the science that has only been around for a few hundreds years?

Something is not right.

I have noticed that often spiritual wisdom/knowledge is seen as less valuable then science knowledge and I wonder why it is so?

Why do science believers refuse to acknowledge that spiritual teachings, that can be found many thousands of year back is lesser the science that has only been around for a few hundreds years?

Something is not right.

There are some very spiritual scientists, and there are also some who aren't, but they are easily held to a standard. Spiritualists though generally are not easily held to a standard. There are few scientists that are not scientific, but there are many spritualists that betray the spiritual for money and prestige. Its not as easy (currently) for a scientist to get away with that. A scientist deals mostly with tedious effort and problem solving combined with skill and effort. A scientist risks career with everything they publish, not so a spiritualist.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

There are some very spiritual scientists, and there are also some who aren't, but they are easily held to a standard. Spiritualists though generally are not easily held to a standard. There are few scientists that are not scientific, but there are many spritualists that betray the spiritual for money and prestige. Its not as easy (currently) for a scientist to get away with that. A scientist deals mostly with tedious effort and problem solving combined with skill and effort. A scientist risks career with everything they publish, not so a spiritualist.

Well, not quite so. They can make a living going into philosophy and what not and claim they are rational and so on.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Yes, that is subjectivity. And you can't eliminate that, neither in you or me, because nature doesn't work like that.

You're the one trying to shake people's reliance on what is objective and can be relied upon to a very high degree. Like that assessment or not, that is what you keep trying to do. Yes, subjectivity is a thing! I never said it wasn't. But when subjectivity is used as an excuse to state that anything and everything you make up in your mind and go on to use to inform others is just fine and dandy YOU'RE GOING TO BE MET WITH RESISTANCE.

So that's what this is... my front of resistance. You are turning to the guy next to you asking the loaded question "Isn't the painting beautiful?" and I am on the other ear, telling that same guy he's under no obligation to humor you.

 

[ppp]

Spiritual knowledge and wisdom involves human experiences and insight into things beyond the physical but can't be demonstrated by precise experimentation involving the physical senses and instruments.

It is more fundamental than that. It's not that spiritual knowledge and wisdom precise experimentation. It is that spiritual cannot be demonstrated to be a phenomenon at all.

Science is more precise but it doesn't tell us anything about the Big Questions which to me are more important than scientific knowledge of the physical. The Big Questions are what/if there is a purpose to life; am I a just a biological machine or something 'more'; and such questions. Those questions are in the domain of spiritual wisdom traditions.

Since I am the only one that can provide the purpose to my life, I think that the big question is what purpose will I choose, how can I best pursue it. The better that I understand my physical environment, the better choices I can make to that end.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You're the one trying to shake people's reliance on what is objective and can be relied upon to a very high degree. Like that assessment or not, that is what you keep trying to do. Yes, subjectivity is a thing! I never said it wasn't. But when subjectivity is used as an excuse to state that anything and everything you make up in your mind and go on to use to inform others is just fine and dandy YOU'RE GOING TO BE MET WITH RESISTANCE.

So that's what this is... my front of resistance. You are turning to the guy next to you asking the loaded question "Isn't the painting beautiful?" and I am on the other ear, telling that same guy he's under no obligation to humor you.

Well, we end here: Everything is objective, intersubjective and subjective. And no, that is allowed under paraconsistent logic. Even logic changes.

 

[Magic Man]

I trust spiritual teaching a thousand times more then science. Science only explain physical world whereas spiritual teaching teach us about spiritual realm.

It is not religion or spiritual teachings fault science and none spiritual people can not understand spiritual teachings.

Yes, I already realize you are biased toward "spiritual teaching". You made the abundantly clear in the OP. Sadly there too many people like you who "trust" spirituality over science. I was just explaining the problem with your thinking. Also, science only explains the physical world, because that's all there is.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It is more fundamental than that. It's not that spiritual knowledge and wisdom precise experimentation. It is that spiritual cannot be demonstrated to be a phenomenon at all.
...

Well, no. You can do spiritual knowledge as long as you keep it subjective. I have just do so with this subjective "no".

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yes, I already realize you are biased toward "spiritual teaching". You made the abundantly clear in the OP. Sadly there too many people like you who "trust" spirituality over science. I was just explaining the problem with your thinking. Also, science only explains the physical world, because that's all there is.

No! The problem is that the meaning and referent to that "No!" is not physical in the reductive sense.

In short: Everything is X, is answered with "No!" regardless of what X stands for and that includes physical and from God.
Over-reduction, where everything is reduced down to one factor never works, because everything is not just X.

 

[Magic Man]

They do understand spiritual teachings. Their subjective spiritual teaching is that subjective is bad. They just don't get, that it is subjective.
The teaching that they have in common is that objectivity and rationality is better than anything else. The joke is that it is a subjective spiritual teaching.

I don't have a "subjective spiritual teaching", and I never said "subjective is bad". For most things, objectivity is rightfully prized. Occasionally you want subjectivity, which is fine. But when we're talking about how the universe works, I want as much objectivity as possible, which is the reason for science. If we're talking about how people should act in society, there is a large amount of subjectivity, but there always has to be agreement on some basic facts.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Yes, I already realize you are biased toward "spiritual teaching". You made the abundantly clear in the OP. Sadly there too many people like you who "trust" spirituality over science. I was just explaining the problem with your thinking. Also, science only explains the physical world, because that's all there is.

So you do not accept that some people believe in spiritual world, because you see it as bias and false? That is very scientific of you.
Why should I care about science vs spiritual wisdom discussion if your form of answer is what I can expect to get back?

 

[Magic Man]

No! The problem is that the meaning and referent to that "No!" is not physical in the reductive sense.

In short: Everything is X, is answered with "No!" regardless of what X stands for and that includes physical and from God.
Over-reduction, where everything is reduced down to one factor never works, because everything is not just X.

Regardless of your attempts to pretzel your way to sounding deep, the physical universe is all there is.