- Joined
- 7 September 2011
- Posts
- 356
- Reactions
- 1
Bollocks!
No one argues about maths 2 + 2 = 4 and no one should argue against science, not the basics anyway....organisms = evolution.
Its simple stuff...nothing philosophical about it, so no need to over think it, twist it to make yourself comfortable...it is what it is.
What's bollocks?
2 + 2 = 4 is a mathematical statement. Of-course, there is no scientific proof that 2+2 must equal 4. The proof is within the system of mathematics.
Yes, Organisms have been shows to abide by Darwins theory, but Natural selection is NOT Darwins theory. Natural selection is the result, as is multiverse theory, of Objectivist philosophy.
"There is nothing philosophical about it" - this is an odd statement. Of-course there is philosophy in it - science relies on a strong foundation of philosophy and cannot operate without it. Lennox also stressed that point quite well.
Science is NOT pure truth. That is positivism and it is well known that positivism is a dead and broken philosophy. Positivism, in a nutshell, means that all knowledge is scientific. It quite clearly is not. There is so much that the scientific method cannot explain, especially when it comes to subjectivity. This is not to denote science from it's place in investigation, but rather it is to show that Science has its place in the realm of investigation, and is a very well developed method. It's place is but a node of knowledge in the realm of knowledge.
Science is what it is, a from of pure truth... that's why religion hates science so much.
Science adjusts its views based on what's observed, faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved
Paradoxically, a lot of purported science is religious faith.
What a load of rubbish.
Science deals in the observable and therefore in verfiable facts.
Religion deals in realms of the mind on which nothing concrete can be made.
I was troubled with this as a young student 45 years ago when I studied metaphysics. One simple discussion was "the potential of a rock" to prove the potential of the mind. And that's okay in the concrete, a rock can become sand or soil to nurture life and of course it is said Peter placed his church on a rock. But to stretch beyond that effect is where theology breaks down.
No truck here Pal
"Science deals in the observable and therefore in verfiable facts."
Are you attempting to suggest that all facts are scientific?
Science, for the time being, deals mostly with the material, buy no will of its own. Until of-course when it comes down to attempting to discern the very fabric of reality. When it is deduced that the fundamental properties of all matter is indeed immaterial, then science will no longer have to constrict itself with the material.
There is no "Science Vs. Religion". As you said yourself that Science deals with the material (which is a generalization) and Religion, "matters of mind". What you are showing here (or at least what I'm hoping you are showing here) is merely the segregation of the objective and subjective, and not so much subjective and material. Without getting further into this - by your logic alone you have shown that there is an exclusivity between Science and Religion, and that they do not deal in aspects of one another.
The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I support Israel . First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz; second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.
This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam's territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines , Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan , Lebanon , and Aceh in Indonesia . Israel is simply in the way. The same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War.
Islam is an abhorrent religion, as are most. But so is Judaism, as practiced by the extremists. We must expose the wrongs perpetrated by both sides, if we want to see justice done.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...rms-iran-command/story-fnb64oi6-1226225213418ISRAEL has announced the formation of an "Iran command" to control special forces operations inside Iran amid growing speculation that a military attack on the Islamic republic is coming.
We should be thankful that Israel exists. Israel is the only country that has the guts to to take action to try to prevent Iran's nuclear proliferation and an inevitable nuclear holocaust. Israel is, of course, acting in its own interests, but these interests coincide with ours.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...rms-iran-command/story-fnb64oi6-1226225213418
It don't agree that it is in our interest to support those wrongdoings, but agree that it is in our interests to have a strong, but just, Israel.
In the Middle East "strong and just " is an oxymoron. Some states are strong and unjust. Some are weak and unjust. They all oppose the Israeli state, and Israel has to play by their rules or be obliterated. We have seen how their rules operate in Iran, Syria and Egypt.
She has also renewed very considerable funding for the Chaplains in Schools program.I do not prescribe to labor but I will say what Gillard is doing for fair education in Australia is on the right track.
I agree. Do you still think Ms Gillard is on the right track?Children need to be able to make their own choices and to do that they need to be impartialy and properly educated first so that they can decide without coercion. Religion if they chose it needs to be later in life.
Nice demonstration of the truth of this thread's title, LostMyShirt
There is no conflict between science and Religion. This is also philosophically sound, and a reasonable statement.
Lost. That is complete nonsense. The biblical account of creation conflicts with the scientific view of how the universe and planets were formed.
All miracles - changing water to wine, walking on water, raising the dead, etc etc - conflict completely with scientific knowledge of what is possible.
There may be areas - spirituality in particular - that science is only beginning to look at, and doesn't have explanations for (yet), that many religious people incorrectly regard as outside the realm of science, but where religion deals with the physical, the measurable, the observable, the testable, it is more often than not in conflict with science.
All miracles - changing water to wine, walking on water, raising the dead, etc etc - conflict completely with scientific knowledge of what is possible.
Science, or rather natural and material sciences cannot deal with spirituality. It IS outside the realm of science, as are many other aspects of life. To a subject more relevant - how does material science deal with immaterial mind? They can't, so they invoke that the mind is merely the sum of its parts, that being the brain. The mind, at the moment, is outside the realm of material sciences. They cannot deal with immateriality. Immateriality is not only an aspect of mind, but of the fundamental properties of the Universe.
1. Everything that had a beginning, had a cause.
2. The Universe has a cause.
Simple philosophy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?