Science without religion is lame,

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24068
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 2 times

Science without religion is lame,

Post #1

Post by McCulloch »

JP Cusick wrote:What I said and what I meant was attached to this saying: "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

So if we take that saying literally as I did, then without religion one is handicapped as "lame" and without science those are handicapped by being "blind".
Does science benefit from the inclusion of religion? Which religion? How? Be specific. Do the benefits outweigh the difficulties?
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 18674
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 1629 times
Been thanked: 1118 times

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #221

Post by JoeyKnothead »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:50 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:54 am It's always good to get your take on things :wave:
Purple Knight wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:49 am ...
I often look to another person and say, "Aha, he sees the same as me," and become validated, but I also know there's a possibility I just made him up to validate myself.

One thing I will say though, is that regardless of if no reality without perception is correct, it isn't a very useful speculation.
Theory of mind

It's a nice notion, but reality doesn't rely on being perceived. It would just be an "unpercepted" form of it.
Does this forum offer me an option to ignore particular users?
Yes.

It allows ya to disregard anyone who questions your claims and unproven, unprovable beliefs.

However, it does seem to present your unproven, unprovable beliefs and claims to folks who have em the audacity to expect you'd have you the honor and integrity to support your claims.

"Does this site allow me to claim stuff, but not hafta see me no challanges to em?"
Yes. The mods just ain't got em enough time to tell em the lies from the truths.

"Does this site prevent me from folks thinking I ain't me a lying so and so?"
No.
Discovery is finding things that exist.
Invention is using things discovered.

Create that path and engineer a metamorphosis.

- William

Online
User avatar
Sherlock Holmes
Under Suspension
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:42 am
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #222

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:12 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:50 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:54 am It's always good to get your take on things :wave:
Purple Knight wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:49 am ...
I often look to another person and say, "Aha, he sees the same as me," and become validated, but I also know there's a possibility I just made him up to validate myself.

One thing I will say though, is that regardless of if no reality without perception is correct, it isn't a very useful speculation.
Theory of mind

It's a nice notion, but reality doesn't rely on being perceived. It would just be an "unpercepted" form of it.
Does this forum offer me an option to ignore particular users?
Yes.

It allows ya to disregard anyone who questions your claims and unproven, unprovable beliefs.

However, it does seem to present your unproven, unprovable beliefs and claims to folks who have em the audacity to expect you'd have you the honor and integrity to support your claims.

"Does this site allow me to claim stuff, but not hafta see me no challanges to em?"
Yes. The mods just ain't got em enough time to tell em the lies from the truths.

"Does this site prevent me from folks thinking I ain't me a lying so and so?"
No.
I think calling me or implying that I am a liar is a breach of forum rules by the way.
When one has eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 18674
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 1629 times
Been thanked: 1118 times

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #223

Post by JoeyKnothead »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:38 pm ...
...
I think calling me or implying that I am a liar is a breach of forum rules by the way.
We all risk folks thinking we lie when we make claims we can't show to be truth.

Like how the pretty thing claims I'm a "high functioning idiot". Okay, poor example.
Discovery is finding things that exist.
Invention is using things discovered.

Create that path and engineer a metamorphosis.

- William

User avatar
AgnosticBoy
Guru
Posts: 1332
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:44 pm
Has thanked: 148 times
Been thanked: 96 times
Contact:

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #224

Post by AgnosticBoy »

JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:54 am It's a nice notion, but reality doesn't rely on being perceived. It would just be an "unpercepted" form of it.
I'm by no means saying that all of reality is dependent on perception, but the conundrum we have is that we can't know about the "unpercepted" form of it because our knowing requires perception.

Even to DrNoGods point regarding people having different perceptions, but it's still all perception even if it's not my own.
- Proud forum owner ∣ The Agnostic Forum

- As a non-partisan, I like to be on the side of truth. - AB

Online
User avatar
Sherlock Holmes
Under Suspension
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:42 am
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #225

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:50 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:38 pm ...
...
I think calling me or implying that I am a liar is a breach of forum rules by the way.
We all risk folks thinking we lie when we make claims we can't show to be truth.
I care not what you think only what you write here in a public forum governed by basic rules of courtesy.
When one has eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #226

Post by William »

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #217]
One thing I will say though, is that regardless of if no reality without perception is correct, it isn't a very useful speculation.
I perceive this, differently. I agree that such observation may not be useful to materialism, BUT.

IF:

"There is no reality without perception", is correct

THEN:
This is a useful observation because it clearly proves that even given the hard problem of consciousness, the truth is that without consciousness, none of this would even be happening.

Since it is happening, it is useful speculation because it allows for consciousness to be examined as the primary reason that things are acknowledged as happening. The things happening are secondary to that matter of fact.

The hard problem of consciousness = 341
Who Knows What That Is Worth? = 341
Set the board up or put the game aside... = 341

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 18674
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 1629 times
Been thanked: 1118 times

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #227

Post by JoeyKnothead »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:18 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:50 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:38 pm ...
...
I think calling me or implying that I am a liar is a breach of forum rules by the way.
We all risk folks thinking we lie when we make claims we can't show to be truth.
I care not what you think only what you write here in a public forum governed by basic rules of courtesy.
It's my contention an inability to show one speaks truth does risk the observer thinking that'n there's a liar.

That such a comment causes you discomfort ain't my problem.
Discovery is finding things that exist.
Invention is using things discovered.

Create that path and engineer a metamorphosis.

- William

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 18674
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 1629 times
Been thanked: 1118 times

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #228

Post by JoeyKnothead »

AgnosticBoy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 12:45 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:54 am It's a nice notion, but reality doesn't rely on being perceived. It would just be an "unpercepted" form of it.
I'm by no means saying that all of reality is dependent on perception, but the conundrum we have is that we can't know about the "unpercepted" form of it because our knowing requires perception.

Even to DrNoGods point regarding people having different perceptions, but it's still all perception even if it's not my own.
I hear ya. I still maintain there's enough reason to conclude reality's there whether we like it or not.

I find the argument "reality only exists if perceived" most often comes from folks who think God's a reality.
Discovery is finding things that exist.
Invention is using things discovered.

Create that path and engineer a metamorphosis.

- William

Online
User avatar
Sherlock Holmes
Under Suspension
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:42 am
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #229

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

JoeyKnothead wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:19 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:18 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:50 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:38 pm ...
...
I think calling me or implying that I am a liar is a breach of forum rules by the way.
We all risk folks thinking we lie when we make claims we can't show to be truth.
I care not what you think only what you write here in a public forum governed by basic rules of courtesy.
It's my contention an inability to show one speaks truth does risk the observer thinking that'n there's a liar.

That such a comment causes you discomfort ain't my problem.
Lets be very clear then please, are you calling me a liar?
When one has eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 18674
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 1629 times
Been thanked: 1118 times

Re: Science without religion is lame,

Post #230

Post by JoeyKnothead »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:37 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:19 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:18 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:50 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:38 pm ...
...
I think calling me or implying that I am a liar is a breach of forum rules by the way.
We all risk folks thinking we lie when we make claims we can't show to be truth.
I care not what you think only what you write here in a public forum governed by basic rules of courtesy.
It's my contention an inability to show one speaks truth does risk the observer thinking that'n there's a liar.

That such a comment causes you discomfort ain't my problem.
Lets be very clear then please, are you calling me a liar?
My understanding is it's a violation of site rules to call someone a liar.
Discovery is finding things that exist.
Invention is using things discovered.

Create that path and engineer a metamorphosis.

- William

Post Reply