Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Philosophy and Religion > Religion

Religion For discussion about belief systems, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to spirituality and moral values


Thanks Tree20Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 23rd, 2017, 07:57 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Nwolfe35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 15,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asimov View Post
Precisely. I don't think any rational person would deny the benefits of science in this regard.



Here where inquiry departs from the realm of pure science and enters into the realm of faith. No one has either observed OR tested the alleged "science" of the Big Bang OR of the origins of man. We are still searching. These are, as you say, theories. Like all theories they are based not upon proven facts but upon assumptions grounded in presuppositions and opinion. That is why they remain theory and not fact. The problem arises when one claims in the name of science to have solved what remains a mystery. They fall into the error of "I think/suppose/theorize, therefore I have attained a monopoly on all truth, and anyone who disagrees with me or points out the holes in my opinion/supposition/theory must therefore unscientific and stupid." And genuine learning runs up against a wall of subtle arrogance that leads to pointless and sometimes false conclusions.
Once again the non scientist does not understand the use of the word "theory" when used by the scientific community.

The "Theory of Evolution" will never become "fact" because that is not how science works. When the word "theory" is used in science it means:

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested, in accordance with the scientific method, using a predefined protocol of observation and experiment. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge

In other words when a scientist uses the word theory he is immediately telling you two things.

1. This idea is withstood RIGOROUS scrutiny.
2. This idea is a generally accepted explanation (in the scientific community) for a number of observed facts.

A theory does not become a fact. A theory EXPLAINS facts.

To write something off as "just a theory" shows that the person in question doesn't understand science in general and doesn't understand the specific topic being discussed.
Thanks from Neil
Nwolfe35 is offline  
Old November 23rd, 2017, 08:16 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Asimov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,881
It's a circular discussion for people who have faith in something greater than ourselves, AND for those who demand that there can't possibly BE anything greater than ourselves. Neither argument is grounded in scientific fact, but launches into the realm of quasi-evidenced opinion. Non-believers choose to define "theory" in a way that fits their agenda. Fine. Believers do the same thing with "evidence". Either way the reasoning is circular.

“Objects do NOT have a discoverable form of their own, rather our perceptions create a form in our minds that satisfies our preconceived expectations. Perception both creates and alters its own reality. Sensory experience alone is subjective without the application of pure reason. But reason alone without science leads to theoretical illusions.” Kant, 1781

IE. Faith and reason are not mutually exclusive (except in the closed mind of the atheist which denies the inquisitive value of faith while nevertheless applying it when convenient to support his thesis). Rather faith and reason are complementary sides of the same coin. Not everything needs to be, nor can be proven using science, to know with certainty that it is true. This is what Descartes and Kant were both trying to get across.
Asimov is offline  
Old November 23rd, 2017, 08:29 PM   #13
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 28,360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asimov View Post
It's a circular discussion for people who have faith in something greater than ourselves, AND for those who demand that there can't possibly BE anything greater than ourselves. Neither argument is grounded in scientific fact, but launches into the realm of quasi-evidenced opinion. Non-believers choose to define "theory" in a way that fits their agenda. Fine. Believers do the same thing with "evidence". Either way the reasoning is circular.

“Objects do NOT have a discoverable form of their own, rather our perceptions create a form in our minds that satisfies our preconceived expectations. Perception both creates and alters its own reality. Sensory experience alone is subjective without the application of pure reason. But reason alone without science leads to theoretical illusions.” Kant, 1781

IE. Faith and reason are not mutually exclusive (except in the closed mind of the atheist which denies the inquisitive value of faith while nevertheless applying it when convenient to support his thesis). Rather faith and reason are complementary sides of the same coin. Not everything needs to be, nor can be proven using science, to know with certainty that it is true. This is what Descartes and Kant were both trying to get across.
If a hundred scientists around the world carry out the same physical experiment they will get the same result. If a hundred philosophers around the world answer the same question will their answers be as homogeneous?
Thanks from Neil
RNG is offline  
Old November 23rd, 2017, 09:25 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 58,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asimov View Post
It's a circular discussion for people who have faith in something greater than ourselves, AND for those who demand that there can't possibly BE anything greater than ourselves. Neither argument is grounded in scientific fact, but launches into the realm of quasi-evidenced opinion. Non-believers choose to define "theory" in a way that fits their agenda. Fine. Believers do the same thing with "evidence". Either way the reasoning is circular.

“Objects do NOT have a discoverable form of their own, rather our perceptions create a form in our minds that satisfies our preconceived expectations. Perception both creates and alters its own reality. Sensory experience alone is subjective without the application of pure reason. But reason alone without science leads to theoretical illusions.” Kant, 1781

IE. Faith and reason are not mutually exclusive (except in the closed mind of the atheist which denies the inquisitive value of faith while nevertheless applying it when convenient to support his thesis). Rather faith and reason are complementary sides of the same coin. Not everything needs to be, nor can be proven using science, to know with certainty that it is true. This is what Descartes and Kant were both trying to get across.
Perception both creates and alters its own reality.

That claim fully agrees with quantum theory. Amazing.

Faith and reason are not mutually exclusive except in the closed minds of the atheist and certain "true believers."
Thanks from Sabcat and Neil
imaginethat is offline  
Old November 29th, 2017, 04:27 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
hot dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 9,417
the comparison to gravity is a good one.

gravity is an observed FACT. we know from observation, both on earth and observations of astronomical bodies, we can measure it and quantify it and use it to our advantage. denying the existence of gravity would be to ignore reality.

but we have no idea HOW it happens. why does one mass attract another? how does it do it? we dont know. we have a few THEORIES on how gravity operates, maybe gravity waves, propagated through quantum foam, maybe some residual energy from the big bang, we can make THEORIES about how and why the observed fact happens.

evolution is an observed FACT. we can see it in the fossil record, from comparative morphology of living species, from examining the DNA differences and similarities between species, we know that evolution happened. we can measure how fast it happened, we have observed it happening in real time in a few places.

but we dont know HOW it happens. we have a few THEORIES about evolution. natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, lamarkian, and there is debate and argument within the biological community about what THEORY is most accurate. but claiming evolution has not happened is simply to ignore reality. it happened. like president trump, deal with it.
hot dragon is offline  
Old November 29th, 2017, 05:40 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
When we go into the philosophical, semantics/interpretation, abstract, etc. direction, sure, we run into something like that. But when it comes to practical, real world situations, bringing home the bacon, getting results that bear fruit, we can reach a point where we can tell what works and what doesn't work. That's the point of science and engineering, to figure out how to make a better mousetrap, how to make this or that more efficient, etc.

We use science & engineering to put food on our plates, roofs over our heads, to make planes that can fly, vehicles that won't break down so easily, bridges and buildings that won't collapse (before their expiration date, or the right maintenance & repairs, etc.).

If scientists make discoveries that lead us to things like the theory of evolution, the same type of situation of questions, problems, and solutions applies. Does the theory of evolution help scientists & physicians discover or invent better medicines/treatments? Does it help biologists find better ways of producing food or protect the environment? If so it not only reaffirms the theory of evolution, but it also shows that it's useful, practical, and beneficial for us.

If you want to take the meaning of faith broadly to include this, that's fine; that's different from saying it's true because someone somewhere is interpreting some religious text to say so.


That's why science relies on something being tested many times rather than relying on just one test.
You base a theory of evolution on science? Where is the science? A man stepped foot on an island and saw animals he'd never seen before. His presumption was that life started as a single cell, then evolved into what we see today. Pretty ambiguous. But the self serving found this an easy escape from ridicule, judgment or guilt.
But i digress, there is no scientific proof of either. Evolution or Creation. So Faith must play a role in your question.
The Big Bang Theory, How about... Let there be light? Book 1 verse 3. Sounds ridiculous to put the two together, but.. what the heck.
That's my opinion, and that's all you'll get here, or anywhere. 'Opinion is the only truth to the universe'. My quote.
Thanks from imaginethat
Kate is offline  
Old November 29th, 2017, 05:46 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
When we go into the philosophical, semantics/interpretation, abstract, etc. direction, sure, we run into something like that. But when it comes to practical, real world situations, bringing home the bacon, getting results that bear fruit, we can reach a point where we can tell what works and what doesn't work. That's the point of science and engineering, to figure out how to make a better mousetrap, how to make this or that more efficient, etc.

We use science & engineering to put food on our plates, roofs over our heads, to make planes that can fly, vehicles that won't break down so easily, bridges and buildings that won't collapse (before their expiration date, or the right maintenance & repairs, etc.).

If scientists make discoveries that lead us to things like the theory of evolution, the same type of situation of questions, problems, and solutions applies. Does the theory of evolution help scientists & physicians discover or invent better medicines/treatments? Does it help biologists find better ways of producing food or protect the environment? If so it not only reaffirms the theory of evolution, but it also shows that it's useful, practical, and beneficial for us.

If you want to take the meaning of faith broadly to include this, that's fine; that's different from saying it's true because someone somewhere is interpreting some religious text to say so.


That's why science relies on something being tested many times rather than relying on just one test.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hot dragon View Post
the comparison to gravity is a good one.

gravity is an observed FACT. we know from observation, both on earth and observations of astronomical bodies, we can measure it and quantify it and use it to our advantage. denying the existence of gravity would be to ignore reality.

but we have no idea HOW it happens. why does one mass attract another? how does it do it? we dont know. we have a few THEORIES on how gravity operates, maybe gravity waves, propagated through quantum foam, maybe some residual energy from the big bang, we can make THEORIES about how and why the observed fact happens.

evolution is an observed FACT. we can see it in the fossil record, from comparative morphology of living species, from examining the DNA differences and similarities between species, we know that evolution happened. we can measure how fast it happened, we have observed it happening in real time in a few places.

but we dont know HOW it happens. we have a few THEORIES about evolution. natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, lamarkian, and there is debate and argument within the biological community about what THEORY is most accurate. but claiming evolution has not happened is simply to ignore reality. it happened. like president trump, deal with it.
Evolution and adaptivity are two different things, one is real the other a theory. We see adaptivity every day. No one has witnessed evolution. No one.
Kate is offline  
Old November 29th, 2017, 05:55 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 10,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Perception both creates and alters its own reality.

That claim fully agrees with quantum theory. Amazing.

Faith and reason are not mutually exclusive except in the closed minds of the atheist and certain "true believers."
"The closed minds of the atheist..."?

I would suggest that atheists possess the most open minds of anyone.
Nearly every atheist started out as a believer, because they had been told to believe in God by people they trusted.
But because their minds were open, they could reason out that the arguments for God were pretty weak, and the arguments for a natural world were much stronger, even though this went against what they had been taught.

Just sayin'
goober is offline  
Old November 29th, 2017, 09:04 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
hot dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 9,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate View Post
Evolution and adaptivity are two different things, one is real the other a theory. We see adaptivity every day. No one has witnessed evolution. No one.
yes we have. we have observed plants evolve into new species. we have observed moths and fruit fly evolve. we have observed bacteria evolve both in the wild and in a lab under experimental conditions.

Observed Instances of Speciation
Thanks from Neil
hot dragon is offline  
Old November 29th, 2017, 09:14 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
hot dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 9,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate View Post
You base a theory of evolution on science? Where is the science? A man stepped foot on an island and saw animals he'd never seen before. His presumption was that life started as a single cell, then evolved into what we see today. Pretty ambiguous. But the self serving found this an easy escape from ridicule, judgment or guilt.
nope, not even close.

evolution is the most rigorously tested theory in science. every single fact, in biology, chemistry, hell even astronomy, every single field of human endeavour supports it. it wasnt 'just one man', it is a theory that has grown over generations and has depended on the input from thousands of researchers. and it is nothing to do with escaping anything, its about understanding reality. evolution happened. deal with it. claiming there is no evidence for evolution is exactly comparable to claiming the earth is flat.

Quote:
But i digress, there is no scientific proof of either. Evolution or Creation. So Faith must play a role in your question.
nope, not even close. i guess there is no scientific 'proof' but thats a truism, science never 'proves' anything is true, it strives to prove things are untrue. i am going to say that again, because i want you to really understand that concept, and i know you dont. read this until you get it: science never proves things are true, it strives to prove that things are untrue.

Quote:
The Big Bang Theory, How about... Let there be light? Book 1 verse 3. Sounds ridiculous to put the two together, but.. what the heck.
That's my opinion, and that's all you'll get here, or anywhere. 'Opinion is the only truth to the universe'. My quote.
nope. there are things that are objectively true. and opinions are not all equal.
Thanks from Neil
hot dragon is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Philosophy and Religion > Religion

Tags
creationists, question



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
To Avoid Taxes Creationists Sell Ark Park To Themselves For $10 imaginethat Current Events 11 July 24th, 2017 12:46 PM
List of scientists who became creationists after studying the evidence. Nwolfe35 Atheism 95 December 14th, 2013 07:43 AM
Why People Laugh at Creationists... tadpole256 Religion 6 September 4th, 2009 06:50 PM
How to Shut-Up Creationists... tadpole256 Religion 5 August 31st, 2009 09:08 PM
Hey Creationists! Explain this... tadpole256 Religion 34 July 31st, 2007 08:32 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.