If Science Revealed God

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Purple Knight
Guru
Posts: 2117
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 671 times
Been thanked: 407 times

If Science Revealed God

Post #1

Post by Purple Knight »

Question for Debate: If science actually proved God, would you change the way you lived your life?

And if so, why? Also, what would it be based upon? If it just so happens that the person in front of the computer posting as Purple Knight created the universe, do I gain any special moral credibility from that action? The way I see it, no, I don't. If I created the universe, so what? Your parents created you, and if they're bad people who want you to do bad things, you can still (and should, to my mind) say no.

User avatar
Miles
Prodigy
Posts: 3394
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 266 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: If Science Revealed God

Post #2

Post by Miles »

.

Purple Knight wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:17 pm
Question for Debate: If science actually proved God, would you change the way you lived your life?

Answer: It would depend on which god science happened to prove.

If it's Athena, the Greek virgin goddess of intelligence, arts, wisdom and peace, I would likely be content and go on my merry way. As would I be okay with Odin, who's associated with death, healing, knowledge and poetry. But if it's Jehovah, the brutal, immoral, and inhumane god of Christianity, you'd probably find me cowering in a dark corner.



.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 7162
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 1292 times
Been thanked: 1516 times

Re: If Science Revealed God

Post #3

Post by Tcg »

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #1]

As Miles has said it would depend on which god science revealed. If it were one of the versions of god presented in the Bible, I don't think I'd need to change how I live. One exception would be eating shellfish. According to Christians it seems god no longer cares about our diets. If it were the Old Testament god, I suppose there are a great deal of laws I'd need to study up on.

The question then would be what are the consequences of disobedience. If I ate bacon would I be put out of the camp or stoned to death. I'd probably skip the bacon if it included a death sentence. We know that David got away with adultery and murder of a war hero by pretending to be sorry for what he did. If I could pretend to be sorry for eating bacon and get away with it I suppose I could put on a pretty good act. My empathy for others would stop me from committing murder or adultery so no change needed there.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

User avatar
Purple Knight
Guru
Posts: 2117
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 671 times
Been thanked: 407 times

Re: If Science Revealed God

Post #4

Post by Purple Knight »

Tcg wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:42 pmThe question then would be what are the consequences of disobedience. If I ate bacon would I be put out of the camp or stoned to death. I'd probably skip the bacon if it included a death sentence. We know that David got away with adultery and murder of a war hero by pretending to be sorry for what he did. If I could pretend to be sorry for eating bacon and get away with it I suppose I could put on a pretty good act. My empathy for others would stop me from committing murder or adultery so no change needed there.
For me it would depend not on the consequences, but on the reason for the prohibition in the first place. If it turns out pigs are the extradimensional protuberances of incredibly advanced beings into our reality, then I should probably refrain from their consumption. As long as there's a good reason, and that is explained to me (and yes, this includes, "there's a good reason, but you're too stupid to understand it") then I obey, but I'd do the same for anyone, not just God.

And yes, I'm aware that doing the same for anyone is not a desirable existence. Since I don't know morality on my own, it's just what I'm forced to do until (if ever) I understand morality naturally. And if two people say opposite things, I simply select the one with the best apparent reason.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 7162
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 1292 times
Been thanked: 1516 times

Re: If Science Revealed God

Post #5

Post by Tcg »

Purple Knight wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 8:26 pm
For me it would depend not on the consequences, but on the reason for the prohibition in the first place. If it turns out pigs are the extradimensional protuberances of incredibly advanced beings into our reality, then I should probably refrain from their consumption.
If pigs were indeed "extradimensional protuberances of incredibly advanced beings into our reality" then I'd have to reconsider the consumption of bacon. Any god's opinion at this point would be irrelevant. I'd have my own reasons to reconsider. Whether science detected a god or not would play no part in my decision.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Dimmesdale
Sage
Posts: 726
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 7:19 pm
Location: The Temple of Logic
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: If Science Revealed God

Post #6

Post by Dimmesdale »

Purple Knight wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:17 pm Question for Debate: If science actually proved God, would you change the way you lived your life?

And if so, why? Also, what would it be based upon? If it just so happens that the person in front of the computer posting as Purple Knight created the universe, do I gain any special moral credibility from that action? The way I see it, no, I don't. If I created the universe, so what? Your parents created you, and if they're bad people who want you to do bad things, you can still (and should, to my mind) say no.
A generic deity gives no real information of reality. Hence I consider that sort of God to be non-existent.

A God, if he truly exists, would necessarily say something about reality, because he is not different from that reality. He is at the least an integral part of it.

A God, if he exists, would relate to all things, given that he contains and is the source of all. Just like the acorn tree gives acorns, and acorns can be traced back to the original tree. If we found God scientifically, that would shed light on all of science as we know it.

So to answer your question, if God exists, then he must relate to ethics as well. We would necessarily uncover some necessary truths.

God is not isolated. He co-heres with all things in a wide net.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 819 times

Re: If Science Revealed God

Post #7

Post by nobspeople »

Purple Knight wrote: Mon Mar 08, 2021 6:17 pm Question for Debate: If science actually proved God, would you change the way you lived your life?
Proving something existed is, in itself, does nothing to prove who they are, what they've done or what their intent is.
It would go something like this:

me: Does God exist?
them: Yes.
me: Good. Now, what's for lunch?
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
Purple Knight
Guru
Posts: 2117
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 671 times
Been thanked: 407 times

Re: If Science Revealed God

Post #8

Post by Purple Knight »

I was getting at something with this thread and that's that atheists are atheists not primarily because god doesn't exist or is very unlikely to exist (though that is also a valid conclusion) but because god existing wouldn't really change things for them.

At least, this is true for me. Perhaps I'm projecting on others.

But if Q from Star Trek exists, I'm not going to fall to my knees and worship it, just because it happens to be omnipotent. I might do what it says if it threatens me but that's not the same thing.

This is connected to the thread, "Why is God Deified?"

It's deified because it helps people be good. Its commandments are not simply of the form, "Do this or I'll punish you," (though thy are that too, which confuses the matter) but they are also about teaching people how to be a good person in the world.

I just happen to disagree that Christianity (or any other religion) does that, so if one of their gods happens to exist, I won't deify it. I'll treat it exactly as I would treat Q if it pops up and just try to get through the encounter without getting killed or getting anyone else killed. If the encounter happens to teach me something, such as not being pompous and saying I don't need its help and me doing so ends up getting eighteen people killed by the Borg, then I learn from that, and if Q happened to intend that lesson so be it. I still won't be convinced that this entity is worthy of worship or is good incarnate or some other such nonsense, because I think the true lesson any such entity would want to teach me if it was really so inclined, would be that if I obey superbeings out of rote because they know best, I could very well be obeying an evil one.

emilynghiem
Student
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 2:33 pm
Location: Houston
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 6 times
Contact:

Re: If Science Revealed God

Post #9

Post by emilynghiem »

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #8]

Hi @Purple Knight
First of all let's distinguish which "atheists" you are talking about and what is influencing perception
1. Nontheists whose brains and personality do not think in terms of a personified God
but process information and experiences in secular/nontheistic terms, regardless of beliefs
(it's a factor of verbal expression and perceptions tied to language)
2. Anti-theists who are opposed to the RELIGION of theists especially Christians
and are reacting and expressing beliefs based on that
3. true atheists who do not believe there is either a God or the equivalent of any such meaning or concept God is used to represent
such as not having faith in good will, or truth overcoming falsehood, or love and positive forces overcoming negative
Some people can be lacking in FAITH in God, yet express themselves EITHER in theistic/religious or nontheistic/secular terms

Now, to explore WHY people think the way they do,
I find the issue of FORGIVENESS affects 2 and 3.
(people who cannot forgive things in their own past or experiences
can lose faith to varying degrees; while people who cannot forgive
other people or groups can reject whole groups or ideologies)

But changing these influences under 2 and 3 may still not change 1.
We can tolerate differences between theistic and nontheist expression/perception (as in 1)
by addressing 2 and 3, and resolving the conflicts blocking faith and reconciliation.

But that doesn't mean people will change their preference of expression
from secular to Christian, etc.

If people's spirit, personality or brains are conditioned to think in nontheistic terms (or Christian or Buddhist)
I don't believe that changes any more than trying to change someone's
*native language and how they think naturally*.
My mother is Vietnamese Buddhist, and has to process information in that language
or culture, or she doesn't relate. I've had to go through monks to facilitate and communicate
in ways that make sense to her from her personal and cultural experiences and ways of understanding these.

When trying to catch spies, authorities will have people do math verbally so they revert back to their native language.
The brains of Japanese speakers are DIFFERENT in patterns of operation and function
than English speakers. So the language and perception and how we process information
may not be something that can necessarily change
just because we resolve issues with people fighting or rejecting concepts as in 2 and 3 above.

I find that resolving the CONFLICTS and problems between people and groups,
the rest will take care of itself. We may not change our language and expression,
but we can agree what we are talking ABOUT, and agree to solve problems
and stop abuses in general. Without judging or rejecting people by affiliation.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 7162
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 1292 times
Been thanked: 1516 times

Re: If Science Revealed God

Post #10

Post by Tcg »

[Replying to emilynghiem in post #9]

Atheists lack belief in god/gods. That's all. Non-theist is a synonym of atheist used by some to avoid the bias and hatred directed at atheists.

Anti-theist is a term that includes those who have negative attitudes towards religion. One need not be an atheist to have this attitude. It is therefore clearly not a category or sub-type of atheist.

The reason/s people lack belief in god/gods varies as widely, or even more widely, than the reason/s some people don't golf.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

Post Reply