QuoteSteve, I almost weighed-in to respond to BB's post #19, but I decided that it was directed to you, so I'd sit back and let you reply first. FWIW (if anything), you responded to each point virtually identically to how I would have.
To BB: I mean you no disrespect; you certainly have the right to have the personal faith that you do. But belief in the supernatural, in any form, by any semantic description, is what it is: pure faith. Please do not conflab it with science.
Humans tend to believe in the supernatural (no matter how it's labeled or rationalized) partly because the species' brain seems to be hard-wired to do so, and partly because a presumption of the existence of the supernatural is part of the social environment that indoctrinates virtually all children (even those raised by atheist parents) in their psychologically most formative and impressionable years; and that indoctrination tends to have a lasting effect into adulthood, and transcends even some peoples' advanced educations, so that, as adults, even though they're comfortable no longer believing in Santa Claus, they still maintain some religious or quasi-religious ("spiritual"? what's in a name?) belief in some form of supernatural. That is the reason, with all due respect, why some people with advanced educations (even in the hard sciences) are able to reconcile their educations with their personal religious beliefs.
you are both misrepresenting or misinterpreting what I am saying.
Faith is faith.
Rationality is rationality. Note: I am using the definition of the word "rational" here that pertains to the ability to reason using logical facts and premises, not the connotative "smart" or "sane".
I do not have a conflict here because i understand that I cannot apply rational thought to matters of faith because faith is, by definition, "irrational". Unfortunately, the term "irrational" has a negative connotation, so that instead of just the basic definition of "not rational" it becomes "crazy" or "stupid" or all other manner of bad things.
Emotion is also irrational. Are emotions, therefore, invalid? You cannot apply rational thought or logic to emotions, yet I do not see people in this forum arguing that we should all become Vulcans. What makes emotion valid and spirituality invalid?
Science, therefore, falls into the realm of rational thought. my personal faith, therefore, falls outside the realm of rational thought. my personal love for my husband, or the tears in my eyes at the end of a sad movie, or the giddy glee i feel when nailing a 4-way exit, also ALL fall outside the realm of rational thought.
The "debate over evolution vs. creation" is EXACTLY what i'm talking about, as people are trying to mix science (rational or logical discourse) with faith (not rational). I don't do this. It is just not necessary.
QuoteThe "debate over evolution vs. creation" is EXACTLY what i'm talking about, as people are trying to mix science (rational or logical discourse) with faith (not rational). I don't do this. It is just not necessary.
Evolution and creation (as written in the bible)are mutually exclusive ideas. They can't both be right, which is why we have the fundie nutters fighting so hard against science on this issue. It is yet one more thing that shows belief in the supernatural(god, spirits, whatever) is ridiculous.
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."
wolfriverjoe 1,456
QuoteI don't think emotion is irrational. Can you explain why you think it is?
QuoteThe "debate over evolution vs. creation" is EXACTLY what i'm talking about, as people are trying to mix science (rational or logical discourse) with faith (not rational). I don't do this. It is just not necessary.
Evolution and creation (as written in the bible)are mutually exclusive ideas. They can't both be right, which is why we have the fundie nutters fighting so hard against science on this issue. It is yet one more thing that shows belief in the supernatural(god, spirits, whatever) is ridiculous.
Huge difference between the "fundie nutters" and those on a quest for faith.
As someone who considers myself spritual, I find the fundie nutters as objectionable as you do. Their blind following of obviously false beliefs is idiotic. Their attempts to justify, explain and rationalize them are insulting. Look at some of the back and forth Jaybird and I had.
Lots of spirtual folk don't believe that the bible is historically accurate. My dad was a devout Catholic, and a respected scientist. He knew perfectly well that the biblical accounts were myth. That didn't stop him from believing in God. Nor did his belief in God interfere with his scientific quests. Like BikerBabe, he kept them seperate.
Did you read the NPR story I linked?
"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
I understand what you and BB are saying about keeping the two (religion/faith and rationality) seperate. I cannot do that and maintain a sense of intellectual honesty. Yes, it's the fundamentalists that frustrate me the most, because their beliefs are directly opposed to things we know to be as fact, but even the "casual" believer faces the same contradictory issues.
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."
QuoteI don't think emotion is irrational. Can you explain why you think it is?
QuoteThe "debate over evolution vs. creation" is EXACTLY what i'm talking about, as people are trying to mix science (rational or logical discourse) with faith (not rational). I don't do this. It is just not necessary.
Evolution and creation (as written in the bible)are mutually exclusive ideas. They can't both be right, which is why we have the fundie nutters fighting so hard against science on this issue. It is yet one more thing that shows belief in the supernatural(god, spirits, whatever) is ridiculous.
I did explain. the explanation is in the use of the true definition of rational vs, the connotation of rational that you are applying. when i say emotion is not rational, i mean that emotion does not follow the rules of reason and logic. What you may be reading is me saying emotion is crazy or odd not normal or some other connotation that "irrational" has come to mean.
Emotion does not follow the rules of reason and logic. neither does faith. that's why it's called faith.
Faith(the suspension of rational thought) should not be required to believe something that is true.
If what the religious (or "spiritual") would have you believe were the truth, why is faith a prerequisite?
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."
Coreece 190
QuoteEvolution and creation (as written in the bible)are mutually exclusive ideas. They can't both be right
You shouldn't be so sure of yourself...
If a 30 year old man was created ex nihilo 30 minutes ago, how old is he?
Quotewhich is why we have the fundie nutters fighting so hard against science on this issue. It is yet one more thing that shows belief in the supernatural(god, spirits, whatever) is ridiculous.
Then why fight so hard against something so "ridiculous."
Coreece 190
QuoteFor me, emotion does follow logic and reason...
I guess you never heard of buyer's remorse...
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."
QuoteFor me, emotion does follow logic and reason...
Faith(the suspension of rational thought) should not be required to believe something that is true.
If what the religious (or "spiritual") would have you believe were the truth, why is faith a prerequisite?
you claim to bow at the throne of science, logic and reason (as per your signature) yet, it seems as if you don't really understand the true definition of the terms.
objectively speaking, emotion is NOT a logical system. meaning, it cannot be explained or rationalized by the methods and discipline laid out by aristotle and still used today. It does not exhibit consistency, soundness, validity, and completeness, all of which are required by logical systems.
this is the basis of what I am saying in my posts. Pure logic and reasoning cannot explain faith or emotions. All other inferences made by you regarding the terms "rational" or "logical" are entirely connotative and are NOT what I am talking about.
Yet pure logical reasoning is the basis of the scientific method. science is a logical system.
This is why they are NOT mutually exclusive.
here, an easy to understand refresher (or primer, i don't know your educational background. This is basic philosophy course stuff though, so any philosophy 101 book would have a nice description, too)
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-logic/
wikipedia also has a decent article, but no one here trusts it, so meh.
QuoteQuoteFor me, emotion does follow logic and reason...
Faith(the suspension of rational thought) should not be required to believe something that is true.
If what the religious (or "spiritual") would have you believe were the truth, why is faith a prerequisite?
you claim to bow at the throne of science, logic and reason (as per your signature) yet, it seems as if you don't really understand the true definition of the terms.
objectively speaking, emotion is NOT a logical system. meaning, it cannot be explained or rationalized by the methods and discipline laid out by aristotle and still used today. It does not exhibit consistency, soundness, validity, and completeness, all of which are required by logical systems.
this is the basis of what I am saying in my posts. Pure logic and reasoning cannot explain faith or emotions. All other inferences made by you regarding the terms "rational" or "logical" are entirely connotative and are NOT what I am talking about.
Yet pure logical reasoning is the basis of the scientific method. science is a logical system.
This is why they are NOT mutually exclusive.
here, an easy to understand refresher (or primer, i don't know your educational background. This is basic philosophy course stuff though, so any philosophy 101 book would have a nice description, too)
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-logic/
wikipedia also has a decent article, but no one here trusts it, so meh.
Thanks for helping me understand your position, BB.
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."
I really think if more people read and understood aristote's science of logic, this world would be a lot better place.
SC would, for sure
skybill 22
QuoteFor years, I have been studying religions of the world. A way of trying to find that emotional connection to God that I remember as a young Roman Catholic altar boy singing the Latin mass. Over time and particularly from 9/11 have been questioning, "How did all this "Holy War" shit start thousands of years ago? How can people of God have crusades and wars and so much strife when there HAS to be a common thread among all three religions. What is that thread and is there a way to educate people that our religions may not be that different? The beginning of my journey began some years ago when I heard Whitney Houston at an award show say
"Music is the most important thing to me, because if we have music, then we have love, and if we give the children music; they too will have love."
The music of the Latin Mass:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9sIcQ5MAeM&feature=related
The music of the Torah:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfF6-TkAnBM&feature=related
The music of the Q'uran:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jivNz_i9QTU&feature=related
While trying to interlace the three religions together myself recently came across the following dissertation/explanation of the three that I found quite profound. Now, I don't think we're ever going to sway one from their roots; but wonder how few know that all the roots tie back to a single point in time. If you're interested... have a cup of coffee and check it out:
http://explore.org/#!/videos/player/middle-east-traveling-with-jihad
Hi Keith!,
As far as a "connection" goes, forget it. The Christians and Jews have the best connect and as far as either of those two and the is-salami-icks, Hahahahahahahaha~~ya' gotta be kidding. Just remember that "joining" the Christians or Jews is "Voluntary!!" Remember this bud, islam is such a "Gutter Religion" that the only way that they can get people to join is to kill them if they don't!!!!!!!!!!!! Got That??!!!
III%,
Deli-out
Kennedy 0
QuoteI really think if more people read and understood aristote's science of logic, this world would be a lot better place.
SC would, for sure
Agreed. Three concerns, however.
(A) Aristotle's logic is not infallible, but it is the most effective way to make an support a given argument.
(B) Emotion can be explained in terms of evolutionary psychology. More importantly, emotion is specific to a person. While we can all accept that emotions exist, no one is out there saying there is only one true emotion for a situation and all others are wrong. No one says their emotion is fact or truth. It is how they feel.
(C) How do you reconcile the parts of religion that specifically contradict science, or vice versa?
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*
beowulf 1
QuoteQuoteThere is no more evidence for disorganized religion than there is for organized religion. I always laugh when I hear the declaration "I'm spiritual, not religious".
So are you denying the irrational side of the human spirit, if you want to call it that? The side of humans that do not adhere to laws of logic or reason? I'm seriously asking, because it seems like you are, in order to scoff at the concept of spirituality as you do.
Note: spirituality doesn't have to mean "believe in god". Hell, I would consider a majority of the field of psychology to be dwelling on spirituality
*sigh* this is what I do when my pastime is unavailable...i get into pointless discussions on SC.
As for the original topic, of course there is. All you have to do is read the bible, or even a second-source book discussing the history of the Middle East region, to know. I mean, aside from all three springing from the same dude. Allah, Jehovah, and the Christian God are, of course, one and the same.
Yes, I am Christian. I am an engineer with the ability and training to think logically and rationally. I do not believe these things are mutually exclusive, and I do believe there is no conflict between religion and science. Rather, the conflict is between small-minded people unwilling to use the rational brain given to us by God. On both sides.
Bikerbabe,
You seem to be saying that since humans have an irrational emotional side that spirtualism is real.
That doesn't make any sense. Just because humans are often emotiona and irrational doesn't mean their irrational and emotional beliefs are real.
Faith is an irrational and emotional belief in something that is often not based on any evidence at all.
There is no logical reason to believe there is any god or that spirtualism is real. Just because people believe in it doesn't mean it exists.
I really don't see how any logically thinking person can reconcile the belief in the supernatural. Whether that be a belief in god or just spiritualism either way it's an emotional belief not based in reality.
The answer ultimately can only be found in God.
Nonsense.
"Because figuring things out is always better than making shit up."