A new (heated?) discussion

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

I don't need to.

Then why do Christians?

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[shropshire 0]

Because they are the ones in general, stating that God did it, as if it was fact and it's far from it.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[billvon 2,406]

> My point is that all of the theories do not explain where we came from or
>how things really work.

Actually, a great many do - which is why we can design things like particle accelerators, and GPS satellites, and the Hubble telescope.

> I'm saying that it's constantly changing so I find it funny people put
>their beliefs into the truth of the moment . . .

So in other words, they're like fundamentalists, but more flexible.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

> I'm saying that it's constantly changing so I find it funny people put
>their beliefs into the truth of the moment . . .

So in other words, they're like fundamentalists, but more flexible.

Yeah, how long did it take the Catholic Church to decide that Galileo was actually an ok guy? just short of 400 years.

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

I was taught there were three subatomic particles.

The science you got/get taught in school bears no resemblance to the actual state of knowledge in the scientific community.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[maadmax 0]

But for those who want to understand what's really going on, religion doesn't compare to science.

Quote

How does science explain evil? Or scientificially speaking, does it even exist?

• Quote

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

But for those who want to understand what's really going on, religion doesn't compare to science.

Quote

How does science explain evil? Or scientificially speaking, does it even exist?

Game theory will attempt to explain 'evil,' at least the kind driven by self interest. Psychology attempts to explain irrational evil behavior. It's worth noting that organized religion throughout history is an exercise in evil - used to keep the little people down and maintain the wealth of the elite. Hence, the Karl Marx line.

• Quote

[billvon 2,406]

>How does science explain evil?

Depends on which branch of science! Game theory? Behavioral evolution? Sociology? (one of the 'softer' sciences) Take your pick. They all study different aspects of what you'd call good and evil behavior.

[maadmax 0]

How does science explain evil?

--Depends on which branch of science! Game theory? Behavioral evolution? Sociology? (one of the 'softer' sciences) Take your pick. They all study different aspects of what you'd call good and evil behavior.

[billvon 2,406]

>but they only explain evil in reference to a particular observers
>perspective.

Well, no, they explain it in reference to their area of study. One of the hallmarks of science is repeatability, so if an experiment cannot be repeated (or the data cannot be verified from multiple independent observations) it's not good science.

For example, dogs have a sense of fairness, and chimpanzees exhibit altruism. Experiments have been run to demonstrate this, and they return similar results each time they are run. Thus, a scientist can demonstrate those qualities (which I am sure you would consider "good" as opposed to "evil") in a repeatable and structured way. It does not depend on his perspective.

>None of them addresses the concept of an absolute universal evil.

Right, because there is no such thing. There are people (and animals) who are cruel, unjust and selfish. But the expression of evil (and the expression of good) is just that; the expression of those characteristics. You can't fill a beaker of evil and test it, and you can't dispel evil with chicken bones, incense or holy water. It is a verb, not a noun.

[maadmax 0]

.

>None of them addresses the concept of an absolute universal evil.

--Right, because there is no such thing. There are people (and animals) who are cruel, unjust and selfish. But the expression of evil (and the expression of good) is just that; the expression of those characteristics. You can't fill a beaker of evil and test it, and you can't dispel evil with chicken bones, incense or holy water. It is a verb, not a noun.

[Butters 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

None of them addresses the concept of an absolute universal evil.

Right, because there is no such thing. There are people (and animals) who are cruel, unjust and selfish. But the expression of evil (and the expression of good) is just that; the expression of those characteristics. You can't fill a beaker of evil and test it, and you can't dispel evil with chicken bones, incense or holy water. It is a verb, not a noun.

Your description explains why many people find science incomplete in its depiction of reality. Evil is both a noun and a verb. The inadequacy of science in this area, is why many people, with open minds, seek answers else where. If things were so clear cut we would be like the rest of the animal kingdom, totally unconcerned about the metaphysical nature of reality. We are products of our environment with just a dash of free will.

If your God created everything and evil is something than your God created evil ...

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[billvon 2,406]

>Evil is both a noun and a verb.

Then show me an evil rock!

Rocks can't be evil because they do not act independently. People can be evil because they _can_ act independently.

>The inadequacy of science in this area, is why many people, with open
>minds, seek answers else where.

?? Both science and religion are completely inadequate to describe things outside their magisteria. If you ask a religious type what happened in the first few nanoseconds of the Big Bang he's likely going to be pretty useless. Likewise, if you ask a physicist how to find inner peace, he may not be able to help you.

>We are products of our environment with just a dash of free will.

As are many animals.

[shropshire 0]

Quote

Then show me an evil rock!

Surely, in this case 'evil' is an adjective and 'rock' is the noun.

Also I don't think that 'evil' can be a verb (doing word) but it can be an adverb

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[LaRusic 0]

here is an interesting video

www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDHJ4ztnldQ&feature=related

The Altitude above you, the runway behind you, and the fuel not in the plane are totally worthless
Dudeist Skydiver # 10

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

So in other words, they're like fundamentalists, but more flexible.

Yes. That's what I said. People who believe in the science of today have faith, just in different places.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

Quote

I was taught there were three subatomic particles.

The science you got/get taught in school bears no resemblance to the actual state of knowledge in the scientific community.

And that right there proves my point exactly. The science we are taught bears no resemblance to other versions of science. That stands true on the general level as you have pointed out and on the literal level as in SR in relation to quantum mechanics.

Those who place their faith in science can't explain how it all fits together. Yet, they chastise the religious for believing in things with no physical proof.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[maadmax 0]

If your God created everything and evil is something than your God created evil ...

[billvon 2,406]

> People who believe in the science of today have faith, just in different places.

Not really. Scientists are basically "faithless" in terms of what they "believe" of science. Someone comes along who can prove that ether doesn't exist, they switch their fundamental understandings.

>The science we are taught bears no resemblance to other versions of
>science.

One of the really cool things about science is that once you go deep enough, you realize it really IS all connected.

Quantum effects, for example, are bizarre and counterintuitive. Heck, teleportation is possible if you delve into quantum mechanics deeply enough! But work in electronics enough and you will use a tunnel diode. And you'll discover that it operates faster than is possible - because the electrons/holes are going from one side of the device to the other without passing through the center. They are, effectively, teleported.

But if all you hear about is quarks and basic electronics, then it all seems to be completely disconnected. If all you learn about is the Bohr model of the atom, quantum mechanics won't make much sense. That's just because you haven't learned enough to understand what's really going on.

>Those who place their faith in science can't explain how it all fits together.

?? I can explain how quite a lot of it hangs together, and I'm not even a very good scientist. (In fact, just an engineer.) A better scientist can go to the quantum mechanical level to explain how it all fits together - and it fits together quite well.

>Yet, they chastise the religious for believing in things with no
>physical proof.

I don't care what you believe; believe whatever makes you happy. (Provided you're not burning witches or blowing up buildings, of course.) And as long as people can keep their beliefs and science separate - and do not, for example, bring their belief in creationism into public health policy - that's fine with me.

[JackC 0]

Quote

Those who place their faith in science can't explain how it all fits together.

That's not true. Science fits together very well. One of the main criterion for being accepted as a valid scientific theory is that it is self-consistent and fits in with everything else we know to be true. If it fails any of those tests, it gets dumped. Just because you can't explain how science fits it all together doesn't mean that others can't.

[shropshire 0]

Quote

If your God created everything and evil is something than your God created evil ...

The spiritual beings God created in His image can create reality like God. Evil is a reality created by free will beings. God's reality is incompatible with evil realities.

[Butters 0]

Quote

Quote

If your God created everything and evil is something than your God created evil ...

The spiritual beings God created in His image can create reality like God. Evil is a reality created by free will beings. God's reality is incompatible with evil realities.

If God's reality is incompatible with evil realities and we are living in a reality where evil exists then we're not living in God's reality, we're living in a spiritual being's reality who was created by God (or possibly another spiritual being who was created by God).

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

Quote

Those who place their faith in science can't explain how it all fits together.

That's not true. Science fits together very well. One of the main criterion for being accepted as a valid scientific theory is that it is self-consistent and fits in with everything else we know to be true. If it fails any of those tests, it gets dumped. Just because you can't explain how science fits it all together doesn't mean that others can't.

Stephen Hawking would disagree.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[Butters 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Those who place their faith in science can't explain how it all fits together.

That's not true. Science fits together very well. One of the main criterion for being accepted as a valid scientific theory is that it is self-consistent and fits in with everything else we know to be true. If it fails any of those tests, it gets dumped. Just because you can't explain how science fits it all together doesn't mean that others can't.

Stephen Hawking would disagree.

So would Albert Einstein.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[maadmax 0]

If God's reality is incompatible with evil realities and we are living in a reality where evil exists then we're not living in God's reality, we're living in an evil spiritual being's reality who was created by God (or another spiritual being who was created by God).