View Poll Results: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

Voters
71. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    38 53.52%
  • No

    33 46.48%
Page 37 of 42 FirstFirst ... 273536373839 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 420

Thread: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

  1. #361
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by iamitter View Post
    That doesn't matter. The argument has absolutely no logical value. I put up a light example, but murdering half the world in the name of the FSM doesn't make him exist either. 1*0=10000*0
    The idea of god existed; the form of the FSM is purely aesthetic. You could have chosen any other form for your god and the idea would remain unchanged.

    That's all I've argued here.
    Last edited by Jerry; 03-22-11 at 08:22 PM.

  2. #362
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Manc Skipper View Post
    Greek would be monokeros, Unicornis is latin. The KJV translators translated "re'em", an animal famed for strength and agility, plus one or two horns, as "unicornis". "re'em"was most likely the auroch, a large bull...
    I don't see how this nullifies my point.

  3. #363
    User mgblack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    03-30-11 @ 12:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    32

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Do you claim to have evidence to show your god exists as well?
    A baby's laughter.
    "No particular results then, so far, but only an attitude of orientation, is what the pragmatic method means. The attitude of looking away from first things, principles, 'categories,' supposed necessities; and of looking towards last things, fruits, consequences, facts." - William James

  4. #364
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    This is actually an interesting notion, Jerry, and it intrigues me. To consider god, gods, or other spiritual beings as ideas, rather than actual sentient beings. Would you then say that a god is really a personification of a culture? It represents the ideals of the culture in which it exists. The nuances of the Norse pantheon gave strong indication of the ideas held within that culture. The importance of battle and struggling against a harsh world, the recognition that great wisdom was more powerful than strength of arms, understanding that virtue is a difficult path to walk. All of those lessons are taught by their gods.

    Would the point really be the lessons, then? And the characters in the stories (the gods) are there to illustrate those lessons? What does the Jewish/Christian/Muslim god have to teach us? Those ideas, collectively held, are what constitute a god, then. No entity with intelligence, but a viral idea. I'm comfortable with this notion because it appropriately places this collection of ideas as a tool for us to use, rather than something greater than us. These ideas are a part of us, and they are changeable. We can improve on them over time, grow beyond what we are now, and leave lesser ideas in the past.

    However, once we get to this point, I see no reason to continue with the notion of gods anymore. If we recognize them as a sort of cultural codex, we can simply call them what they actually are. The collection of our values and ideas... our culture.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  5. #365
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    This is actually an interesting notion, Jerry, and it intrigues me. To consider god, gods, or other spiritual beings as ideas, rather than actual sentient beings. Would you then say that a god is really a personification of a culture? It represents the ideals of the culture in which it exists. The nuances of the Norse pantheon gave strong indication of the ideas held within that culture. The importance of battle and struggling against a harsh world, the recognition that great wisdom was more powerful than strength of arms, understanding that virtue is a difficult path to walk. All of those lessons are taught by their gods.
    Indeed, the Greek and Egyptian pantheons would seem to reflect this as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Would the point really be the lessons, then? And the characters in the stories (the gods) are there to illustrate those lessons? What does the Jewish/Christian/Muslim god have to teach us? Those ideas, collectively held, are what constitute a god, then. No entity with intelligence, but a viral idea. I'm comfortable with this notion because it appropriately places this collection of ideas as a tool for us to use, rather than something greater than us. These ideas are a part of us, and they are changeable. We can improve on them over time, grow beyond what we are now, and leave lesser ideas in the past.
    Every pantheon has a figure at the top. The Abrihamaic tradition is so far the only faith which actively removes all the sub-gods which seem to naturally spring from the principal god in a belief structure. But even so, scripture shows a change over time in how God and man interact, so I think it's fair to say religion is changeable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    However, once we get to this point, I see no reason to continue with the notion of gods anymore. If we recognize them as a sort of cultural codex, we can simply call them what they actually are. The collection of our values and ideas... our culture.
    It would seem that Seth was correct, then.

  6. #366
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,613

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    This is actually an interesting notion, Jerry, and it intrigues me. To consider god, gods, or other spiritual beings as ideas, rather than actual sentient beings. Would you then say that a god is really a personification of a culture? It represents the ideals of the culture in which it exists. The nuances of the Norse pantheon gave strong indication of the ideas held within that culture. The importance of battle and struggling against a harsh world, the recognition that great wisdom was more powerful than strength of arms, understanding that virtue is a difficult path to walk. All of those lessons are taught by their gods.

    Would the point really be the lessons, then? And the characters in the stories (the gods) are there to illustrate those lessons? What does the Jewish/Christian/Muslim god have to teach us? Those ideas, collectively held, are what constitute a god, then. No entity with intelligence, but a viral idea. I'm comfortable with this notion because it appropriately places this collection of ideas as a tool for us to use, rather than something greater than us. These ideas are a part of us, and they are changeable. We can improve on them over time, grow beyond what we are now, and leave lesser ideas in the past.

    However, once we get to this point, I see no reason to continue with the notion of gods anymore. If we recognize them as a sort of cultural codex, we can simply call them what they actually are. The collection of our values and ideas... our culture.
    I agree, that is an interesting notion.
    It looks to me as if it is not god that is being discussed, but belief in god. It is the belief, not the reality, that inspires people to follow the cultural codex.

    Now, the real mystery is this:

    Why is it that any discussion of evolution, which is in the realm of science and logic, always seems to bring up a discussion of god, which is in the realm of philosophy and religion? There really is no connection that I can see.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  7. #367
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    I agree, that is an interesting notion.
    It looks to me as if it is not god that is being discussed, but belief in god. It is the belief, not the reality, that inspires people to follow the cultural codex.

    Now, the real mystery is this:

    Why is it that any discussion of evolution, which is in the realm of science and logic, always seems to bring up a discussion of god, which is in the realm of philosophy and religion? There really is no connection that I can see.
    Religion itself touches every aspect of life. It's not nearly as compartmentalized as one might think.

  8. #368
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,613

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Religion itself touches every aspect of life. It's not nearly as compartmentalized as one might think.
    Religion does not rely on observation and logic. Science relies totally on observation and logic. No, I think religion and science are quite different. The only time religion touches science is when science comes up with a theory that counters someon's religious dogmas.

    Now, if science could either prove or disprove the existence of god, then that would combine science and religion.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  9. #369
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Religion does not rely on observation and logic. Science relies totally on observation and logic. No, I think religion and science are quite different. The only time religion touches science is when science comes up with a theory that counters someon's religious dogmas.

    Now, if science could either prove or disprove the existence of god, then that would combine science and religion.
    "Science" doesn't come to a DP thread on evolution and post about religion.

    People do.

    I didn't say religion relied on observation and logic, as you claim. I said something different. I said religion touches every aspect of a person's life, and that it is the person, not "science" who posts on DP.

    Just as the sphere of science has ethical standards, so does the sphere of religion have ethical standards. A person who belongs to both spheres must resolve any ethical conflicts between religion and science for themselves so that the person can function. Attempting to resolve such a conflict, or perhaps attempting to correct what the person sees as an error in someone els's personal resolution of the same, are a couple reasons a person might post about religion in a scientific discussion.
    Last edited by Jerry; 03-23-11 at 01:44 PM.

  10. #370
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,613

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    "Science" doesn't come to a DP thread on evolution and post about religion.

    People do.

    I didn't say religion relied on observation and logic, as you claim. I said something different. I said religion touches every aspect of a person's life, and that it is the person, not "science" who posts on DP.
    OK, I can buy that. But, why is it that people seem to think that evolution somehow is related to the concept of god? There really is no conflict between the two.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

Page 37 of 42 FirstFirst ... 273536373839 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •