Thinking can undermine religious faith

[jclalor 12]

Science can be so inconvenient.




http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/26/science/la-sci-religion-analytical-thinking-20120427

[beowulf 1]

Duh!

They really needed a study to figure that out!

[lawrocket 3]

It seems that the roles of science and faith are confused equally by both the religious and the atheists.

There are plenty of religious scientists out there who understand that difference. Cosmology is around to help us understand the workings of the universe. Theology is there to discuss questions of why the universe was created, etc.

There's no room for religion in the former, nor is there much space for science in the latter. Just a wee bit of thought should make that obvious.

Too bad "thinking" just can't overcome "feeling" by either side.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

It seems that the roles of science and faith are confused equally by both the religious and the atheists.

There are plenty of religious scientists out there who understand that difference. Cosmology is around to help us understand the workings of the universe. Theology is there to discuss questions of why the universe was created, etc.

There's no room for religion in the former, nor is there much space for science in the latter. Just a wee bit of thought should make that obvious.

Too bad "thinking" just can't overcome "feeling" by either side.

Ah, the "separate magisteriums" of Stephen Jay Gould.

In principle, I agree with you. I know many religious scientists, and they almost all comfortably accommodate science and religion by partitioning them just the way you suggest.

However, there may come a point where there is no way to avoid a collision between the two realms, because they have to deal with the same topic. Many people accommodate a belief in Christianity with a recognition that evolution is an established fact of biology, by reasoning that evolution is just a process, one that God may have "invented" and used to create humans. This is called "theistic evolution". Since this is not a testable hypothesis, it doesn't conflict with science.

The problem comes when one examines the theological basis of the Book of Genesis, and so of the whole Judeo-Christian world view. The theistic evolutionary perspective is that humans were perfected from an imperfect animal origin by the will of God. However, the point of Genesis is that humans were initially created a perfect beings in God's image (Adam and Eve in the garden), were subsequently corrupted in the "Fall" when they were expelled from the garden, and ever since our purpose has been to try to return to that perfection we lost. If you take the "Fall" out of the picture (as theistic evolution does) then you stand the whole theological point of Genesis on its head, or strip it of meaning altogether. This is why evolution poses such a problem for those who believe in Biblical literalism.

Unfortunately, at some point there are real, theological conflicts between fundamentalist Christianity (and Judaism, and Islam, and for other reasons Hinduism) and a logical, science-based understanding of how the world works.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[devildog 0]

Quote

Science can be so inconvenient.




http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/26/science/la-sci-religion-analytical-thinking-20120427

Actually, the study says no such thing. Straight from the article as well: "So does this mean that religious faith can be undermined with just a little extra mental effort? Not really, said Nicholas Epley, a social psychologist at the University of Chicago who was not involved in the study."

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

There are plenty of religious scientists out there who understand that difference. Cosmology is around to help us understand the workings of the universe. Theology is there to discuss questions of why the universe was created, etc.

Only some of the wishy-washy, vague modern theology. Throughout most of history, and largely still today, theology is also concerned with discussing god periodically sticking his finger into the universe and whisking it around a bit. A wee bit of observation should make that obvious.

And besides, to discuss why the universe was created, theology would first have to show that it was created, and by a being with a purpose.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

[And besides, to discuss why the universe was created, theology would first have to show that it was created, and by a being with a purpose.

Why?
Please don't tell me you are going down the rabbit hole of "prove God exists"....are you?


Atheists...so irritating. Kinda like mosquitoes...constantly buzzing and doing no good at all. Reminds me of children throwing temper tantrums. The OP is one of the primes.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Meso 38]

It's the reason why Christians get so stressed out when others express the facts behind their lack of belief. If they see these facts they may have to think about them, and that may totally break their insecure faith and turn them to the 'dark side'.

There is a very blatant long standing idea by Christians that it is their faith and they should be free to speak about it how they will, billboards etc. Yet these are the same people who have again and again been outraged by any atheist making use of the same means of communication. The Christians like to go on about how the non-believers want to take away their rights to express their religion, which is simply ignorant.

Atheists long stood by while Christians used the means of billboards and public advertising, but now that the non-believers have seen that religion has become more of a marketing strategy than an honest belief system, they have decided to do the same thing the Christians have been doing for decades. Yet the Christians are the ones having the huge uproars over the evil non-believers trying to spread their vile lies!

I assure you vast majority of atheists don't care if you tell their child the story of the bible, they know that they can easily correct what may have been implanted in the kids ear with the idea of them burning in hell for eternity by telling them it's a book to make them scared. Yet on the other hand, Christians in general seem far more likely to want to keep their children away from facts of science, evolution etc. Because they know that they can only back up their religion against that by telling their child they have to have faith.

As mentioned above, there are very few atheists that want to turn all Christians into atheists. There is however a large amount that would like to have OTHERS religious views not effecting them and their lives. Which unfortunately is still a long way off, and many Christians fail to see their own hypocrisy. Claiming that their religion is a personal thing and that they are being persecuted by non-believers, when these same people completely support persecuting others who don't live by their religious ideals, by wanting laws made up from Christian based ideals.

Somewhere, in many Christians typically strange, strange minds - They think that allowing others to live lives their religion disagrees with, is completely justified and fail to see the complete irony in the fact that as a controlling religion is forcing others to live as though they feel they have the right to dictate.

With the Christians reactions to non-believers expressing their ideas and beliefs (or lack thereof) in the same sorts of ways they do. I can only conclude that those same ones are so insecure about their faith that they feel the need to make sure that it goes unopposed and that if Christianity had to revert back to really just being a personal decision that is made when both sides are examined, that the religion would not last much longer.

I think both science and the bible should be taught to children. But the both taught in a factual sense and not with the manipulative tactics usually employed when teaching the bible to kids.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

[And besides, to discuss why the universe was created, theology would first have to show that it was created, and by a being with a purpose.

Why?
Please don't tell me you are going down the rabbit hole of "prove God exists"....are you?


Atheists...so irritating. Kinda like mosquitoes...constantly buzzing and doing no good at all. Reminds me of children throwing temper tantrums. The OP is one of the primes.

***

Athiest doing no good? This just shows the ignorance of those who think only good can come from believers.

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

Why?

Because otherwise it's just as pointless as you claim the proof question to be.

Quote

Atheists...so irritating. Kinda like mosquitoes...constantly buzzing and doing no good at all.

As opposed to who?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[devildog 0]

Quote

It's the reason why atheists get so stressed out when others express the facts behind their lack of belief. If they see these facts they may have to think about them, and that may totally break their insecure faith and turn them to the 'dark side'.

ftfy

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[winsor 191]

Quote

Quote

Science can be so inconvenient.




http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/26/science/la-sci-religion-analytical-thinking-20120427

Actually, the study says no such thing. Straight from the article as well: "So does this mean that religious faith can be undermined with just a little extra mental effort? Not really, said Nicholas Epley, a social psychologist at the University of Chicago who was not involved in the study."

A) You make reference to the "soft" sciences (those that depend greatly upon hand-waving).

B) It takes more than "a little extra mental effort." One must have the abilty, capacity and willingness to put it together, then go over it back and forth - rephrasing and/or disassembling the basic questions and tenets - before it is likely to gel.

Don't worry about it. Right, wrong or indifferent, we're all doomed. If it makes you happy to buy into the neolithic claptrap in the meantime, knock yourself out.

BSBD,

Winsor

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

It seems that the roles of science and faith are confused equally by both the religious and the atheists.

There are plenty of religious scientists out there who understand that difference. Cosmology is around to help us understand the workings of the universe. Theology is there to discuss questions of why the universe was created, etc.

There's no room for religion in the former, nor is there much space for science in the latter. Just a wee bit of thought should make that obvious.

Too bad "thinking" just can't overcome "feeling" by either side.

Thank you for an intelligent unbiased response.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

It seems that the roles of science and faith are confused equally by both the religious and the atheists.

I'm not so sure that the atheists have reached the level of confusion that "intelligent design" is borne of.

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[RonD1120 58]

Oh, and there are those given over to a reprobate mind.

The mind is a useful tool only. When you make it your master you head down the path to destruction and spiritual death.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Athiest doing no good? This just shows the ignorance of those who think only good can come from believers.

Nice twist. This just shows the ignorance of atheists who can't read what's written and have to justify their stance by inserting idiotic, off-target thoughts into the conversation. Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Quote

Why?

Because otherwise it's just as pointless as you claim the proof question to be.

Quote

Atheists...so irritating. Kinda like mosquitoes...constantly buzzing and doing no good at all.

As opposed to who?

-You are right, it's just as pointless...so why make it a requirement?

-As opposed to those who would discuss the actual issues instead of argue from a foundation of hatred for others.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Why?

Quote

Because otherwise it's just as pointless as you claim the proof question to be.

Quote

Atheists...so irritating. Kinda like mosquitoes...constantly buzzing and doing no good at all.

As opposed to who?

-You are right, it's just as pointless...so why make it a requirement?

-As opposed to those who would discuss the actual issues instead of argue from a foundation of hatred for others.

It's funny how you think I hate, to kind of borrow from a popular Christian phrase " Hate the beliefs and not the believer" is my motto. Outside of this site, I rarely espouse my atheism to anyone, I think sitting behind a keyboard( Or standing over a phone) gives us a little more courage then we might normally muster.

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

-You are right, it's just as pointless...so why make it a requirement?

So you' agree that theology is pointless? So why is it only atheists you criticize for saying pointless things?

Quote

-As opposed to those who would discuss the actual issues instead of argue from a foundation of hatred for others.

So only agnostics and believers can discuss "the actual issues"? What are the "actual issues"?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[peregrinerose 0]

Quote

Quote

[And besides, to discuss why the universe was created, theology would first have to show that it was created, and by a being with a purpose.

Why?
Please don't tell me you are going down the rabbit hole of "prove God exists"....are you?


Atheists...so irritating. Kinda like mosquitoes...constantly buzzing and doing no good at all. Reminds me of children throwing temper tantrums. The OP is one of the primes.

Aww, Pops, you've met me. You know I have a heart of gold and am kind of cute to boot. I'm not buzzing no good doer. I'm an athiest.

Please don't lump all athiests together, just as all Christians, or any other group should be all lumped together. People are just people, ability to believe in the supernatural should have nothing to do with how we all get along. Of course, some of us are better at getting along with everyone than others.

Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda

[pirana 0]

Quote

Atheists...so irritating. Kinda like mosquitoes...constantly buzzing and doing no good at all. Reminds me of children throwing temper tantrums. The OP is one of the primes.

Almost as annoying as the idiots that want to include fundamentalist literal interpretation of the Bible into a science cirriculum.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

It seems that the roles of science and faith are confused equally by both the religious and the atheists.

I'm not so sure that the atheists have reached the level of confusion that "intelligent design" is borne of.

Absolutely. But what is, "Intelligent design?" Nothing more than another explanation of WHY the universe was created. Why are there symmetries, for example. The religious have moved themselves into the realm of science. Of course, the atheists don't just say, "You're speaking of the reasons why the universe is how it is. That's fine, because it doesn't involve science or testable ideas. Go ahead and used the science all you want. Let us stick to science and knock yourselves out with ideas of 'why is it like this?'"

Bu, no, the atheist isn't happy with that. The atheist is instead more intent on bashing the religious. And the religious is more intent on bashing the atheist. Agreeing to disagree isn't an easy thing to do, and by blurring the lines between science and philosophy it makes more to argue about.

I frequently go back and cite LeMaitre as the example of the religious scientist. He had to stamp out the fires the Vatican was trying to start by pointing to his primeval atom theory as proof of the Biblical creation. Meanwhile, he was roundly derided on the other side by cats such as Hoyle, who had developed their own Steady State theory and were horrified at the implication of a moment of creation BECAUSE of the religious overtones.

Science has a long history of philosophical and theological involvement. It took an ordained Catholic priest to examine Einstein's equations with an open mind. Meanwhile, established scientists went with a Steady State despite the flagrant violation of the well-established laws of thermodynamics.

But if you think about it, the fate of the universe has some religious issues. Michio Kaku described it as the Christian version of fate is of the Apocalypse being fire and brimstone, which tracked with the version of the end of the universe that was predicted up until the 1990's (gravity would eventually win and the universe would collapse in on itself). Meanwhile, Nordics had their version of the universe ending in a world of cold and ice, and considering thermodynamics and the acceleration of the expansion of the universe, it appears that the vision of the religions in the North is more accurate. The universe will indeed die very cold. It's not an opinion - it's the law.

Once the issues of theology and science are kept separate, with their implications to each other also being kept separate, then the conflict isn't so difficult.

Even Galileo's case has been spun in an anti-religious way. Galileo's discovery didn't bother the church at all. A Cardinal was asked and mentioned that the Bible tells us how to go to Heaven, not how the heavens go. So why did Galileo get in trouble? Because he started interpreting Scripture himself and making his own pronouncements. This stepped on the toes of the Vatican. Whether the Vatican was right or wrong is another issue, but heliocentrism was not the reason the church was pissed at him. What he was DOING with heliocentrism was seditious.

Science and theology are different things. Some people find science to be very interesting. But others are more interested in those things that science cannot answer. That the universe may have been created by a quantum fluctuation isn't juicy. That the universe may have been pinched off as just another piece of a multiverse is also not juicy.

Why was there a quantum fluctuation? Why the multiverse? These are questions for philosophy and theology. Why are there symmetries? To many, these are neat issues that science can't answer. So let's look at different ideas.

Thinking CAN undermine religious faith. Thinking can also reaffirm it. But it takes actual thought to separate philosophy from science. it takes thought to avoid selection bias.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Oh, and there are those given over to a reprobate mind.

The mind is a useful tool only. When you make it your master you head down the path to destruction and spiritual death.

Speaking of thinking, how can you reconcile voting for someone who denies the trinity, while voting against someone who has professed his faith in it?

How can one be a Christian when beleiving that Jesus and Satan were flesh and blood brothers on another planet?

[Marinus 0]

Quote

The mind is a useful tool only. When you make it your master you head down the path to destruction and spiritual death.

lolwut?

Could you elaborate a bit here? I'm not familiar with the teachings of what ever religious cult it is where you picked up these words of wisdom.

PS: If they offer you Cool-Aid Flavor-Aid, it's best to politely decline the offer, btw.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

But what is, "Intelligent design?" Nothing more than another explanation of WHY the universe was created.

It was not another explanation. It was a term invented by fundamentalist Christians, who were trying to get creationism to be re- introduced into public education under the guise of science.

The "Discovery institute" an ultra-conservative Christian think tank introduced the textbook "Of Panda's and People" that first used the term of ID, this book was the central focus of the landmark case against the Dover board of education, for attempting to teach ID in the local high school.

This was featured in a very well done "Nova" on PBS.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/intelligent-design-trial.html