• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Vatican hosts Darwin conference

Hatuey said:
The Catholic Church supports science that doesn't contradict what they believe. That is not supporting science. Supporting science is seeing the evidence, analyzing it and ignoring the religious dogma that it contradicts. The Catholic Church can not in ANY real sense of the word 'promote and support' 'science'. It can promote and support that which does not come into conflict with what it believes as a religious institution.
Click to expand...

This goes against the history of the Church which has sponsored and supported scientific inquiry for well over a thousand years. The Catholic Church is not some fundie Protestant sect now.
 
jfuh said:
As long as it doesn't get in the way of Church dogma - ie, what's the catholic church's position on stem cell research again? What did the Church say of Galileo? Why did Copernicus wait until his death bed to publish solar centricity?
Click to expand...

You know Copernicus was Catholic and his work was praised by the Church, right? You know that Galileo's work was supported and sponsored by the POPE before he went off and presented as fact what there was not yet enough evidence for? Of course, facts like this are ignored by those with an irrational hatred for the Church.
 
Orius said:
I don't know why modern evolutionary theory is still referred to as Darwinism. Many of Darwin's theories have been critiqued and refined over time, and many evolutionary biologists flat out disagree with him these days.
Click to expand...

Because it is easier for those who are ignorant of evolution to call it that and those who accept it that. Despite my opinion of Justone, he doesn't call it that and he does have a decent level of understanding of the theory. Now others...well, they couldn't tell the difference between an adenine molecule and a caterpillar.
 
ludahai said:
This goes against the history of the Church which has sponsored and supported scientific inquiry for well over a thousand years. The Catholic Church is not some fundie Protestant sect now.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry to butt into an argument between you and someone else, but I'd like you to prove this assertion with evidence. Given the number of people tried for heresey over the years by the Catholic Church, I don't think they harboured very much openness about scientific inquiry.
 
Orius said:
I'm sorry to butt into an argument between you and someone else, but I'd like you to prove this assertion with evidence. Given the number of people tried for heresey over the years by the Catholic Church, I don't think they harboured very much openness about scientific inquiry.
Click to expand...

There is a lot to prove it. Start by looking at the book "How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization" by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. Ph.D.
 
Orius said:
I'm sorry to butt into an argument between you and someone else, but I'd like you to prove this assertion with evidence. Given the number of people tried for heresey over the years by the Catholic Church, I don't think they harboured very much openness about scientific inquiry.
Click to expand...

You mean a figure that was rivalled by the Jacobins in a few years? And I suppose liberalism is still allowed to be open and "scientific"?
 
Ludahai said:
There is a lot to prove it. Start by looking at the book "How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization" by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. Ph.D.
Click to expand...

No. I won't read a book and make your argument for you. If there is such a wealth of evidence (as you claimed) to prove the Church did not conduct one-sided and brutal interrogations against scientists who challenged their views as well as political executions of heretics, then you should be able to find plenty of worthy citations online to bring here.

Wessexman said:
You mean a figure that was rivalled by the Jacobins in a few years? And I suppose liberalism is still allowed to be open and "scientific"?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what the Jacobins have to do with the atrocities of the Catholic Church along with its impedements against science? If you are trying to quantify atrocities in order to downplay the ones committed by the Church, I don't really see the point. Two wrongs don't make a right.
 
Orius said:
No. I won't read a book and make your argument for you. If there is such a wealth of evidence (as you claimed) to prove the Church did not conduct one-sided and brutal interrogations against scientists who challenged their views as well as political executions of heretics, then you should be able to find plenty of worthy citations online to bring here.

.
Click to expand...

I don't have the time right now. THis is the problem with the Internet. People get lazy and have forgotten that scholarly books are FAR superior as sources than the Internet. You are afraid because it will back up my point?
 
ludahai said:
I don't have the time right now. THis is the problem with the Internet. People get lazy and have forgotten that scholarly books are FAR superior as sources than the Internet. You are afraid because it will back up my point?
Click to expand...

Then you shouldn't log onto a debate forum and post assertions that you are unwilling to back up. It's not my problem, it's yours.

Proper citation requires you to cite a source as well as a page number and line. Citing an entire book whose materials and information you yourself cannot even quote is insufficient and poor debate style. No university would allow such citation methods, as no person in their right mind would read an entire book and validate your points for you.

In your original claim you said that there is a wealth of historical evidence to prove that the Catholic Church supported science. You have made this same assertion in other threads where the Catholich Church has come under attack. If the evidence is so obvious then you should have no problem taking 5 minutes to find a link. Otherwise, I will accept your assertion as an opinion and will thus dismiss it as unverifiable.
 
Orius said:
Then you shouldn't log onto a debate forum and post assertions that you are unwilling to back up. It's not my problem, it's yours.
Click to expand...

I did back it up. BOOKS are superior to Internet citations. You are not exactly backing up YOUR point in another thread, so this whole line you are pursuing is rather hypocritical.

Proper citation requires you to cite a source as well as a page number and line. Citing an entire book whose materials and information you yourself cannot even quote is insufficient and poor debate style. No university would allow such citation methods, as no person in their right mind would read an entire book and validate your points for you.
Click to expand...

Except that the ENTIRE book is about what we are talking about. The ENTIRE BOOK is full of instances where the Catholic Church supported science and learning. However, Chapters 4 and 5 are most relevant as they relate to science.

In your original claim you said that there is a wealth of historical evidence to prove that the Catholic Church supported science. You have made this same assertion in other threads where the Catholich Church has come under attack. If the evidence is so obvious then you should have no problem taking 5 minutes to find a link. Otherwise, I will accept your assertion as an opinion and will thus dismiss it as unverifiable.
Click to expand...

I have already offerred some proof. WHen and if I Have time, I will look up Internet references, but I have other priorities and only have a little time today due to inclimate weather. However, as the rain has just about ended, I will soon get back to my training program, which with the trials coming soon, preparing for them is far more important than a debate here.

BTW - ever heard of the Jesuits?
 
Last edited:
If the Church was against Copernicus and Science, why was he invited to participate in the calendar reform taken out by the Fifth Lateran Council?

In this same period, he (Copernicus) took part in the Fifth Lateran Council's commission on calendar reform in 1515; wrote a treatise on monetary reform; and shortly thereafter, began his major work, De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres).
Click to expand...

link
 
Catholic priests were instrumental in the development of the telescope.

The scientists who had the greatest influence on the future of optics and telescope construction from Galileo's day were Johannes Kepler, Rene Descartes, Wilebrord Snell, Father Marin Mersenne, Father Bonaventura Cavalieri, Father Christopher Scheiner and Father Christopher Grienberger. The first three developed a theoretical foundation for refraction and reflection that would be built upon in the following centuries. The four fathers made critical contributions to the technology of telescopes. All of their contributions are still in use today.
Click to expand...

link

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Christopher Clavius
 
In fact, the whole concept of the scientific method emerged from the West largely because of the CATHOLIC view of the world compared to what existed elsewhere. The Catholics were not only NOT anti-science, but the worldview of Catholicism ENCOURAGED its development

Read up on the writings of Father Stanley Jaki.

The Origin of Science
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom