Christianity and science

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 817 times

Christianity and science

Post #1

Post by nobspeople »

Christians don't seem to have any problems believing in the science that created the computer they're typing on. Or phone they use. TV they watch. Yet some don't believe science that thwarts their understanding of, or causes issues with, their religion (evolution, abortion issues, homosexuality, etc).

It seems science is OK so long as it doesn't interfere with their beliefs that come from a book written by long, dead men, edited by other men (all of which were imperfect) about a perfect (many say) being.

For discussion:
Is this distrust of science stemming from the distrust of science itself, lack of faith in science and the flawed men that support said science (ironically they have no issues with the imperfect men that wrote and edited the bible but that's something for another topic), lack of faith in their holy book, or something else entirely (please submit YO on what the 'something else' is)?
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 817 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #121

Post by nobspeople »

[Replying to mgb in post #115]
I you were a car manufacturer and you want to bring out the next model you would not just change the headlights and release that model. You'd make many changes at the same time and release a new model far in advance of the old model. Makes sense that way.

Having worked in the auto industry for decades, from associate to corporate, I can tell you that's not true and thus, not a proper analogy. Just FYI
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
Difflugia
Guru
Posts: 2295
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1846 times
Been thanked: 1363 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #122

Post by Difflugia »

Purple Knight wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 9:06 amAssuming your post represents truth, I think this bit could be a minor error about why this particular error happens. It could be that intuition is actually making the right choice, and even that intuition is intuiting out even the complex math, but it's doing that error at the end because somebody deliberately juked some part of the input.
The situation you're describing is more-or-less how camouflage works. Our intuition is good at assimilating data from several sources at once and even really fast computers are just now approaching intuition in situations like driving, but it's still a suboptimal heuristic.
Purple Knight wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 9:06 amYou and Brunumb are talking about the "why risk it" and I think this has a huge impact. Add a devastating negative possibility to one side and people will avoid that side even if it isn't terribly likely to be true. The problem is that peoples' intuition is being deliberately manipulated not to assess that this could be a deliberate deception, and not think about the gains involved in perpetrating such a deception.
I'm pretty sure that it's not a coincidence that most religions have some variety of hell.
Purple Knight wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 9:06 amI don't think ad hominem is a fallacy, or should be a fallacy.
It's only a fallacy as such if it's used as part of a logical syllogism. "Your argument is flawed because you've been dishonest in the past," is a fallacy. "You're probably lying to me because you've been dishonest in the past," isn't.
Purple Knight wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 9:06 amI think we need it for properly assessing by our very well-honed intuition whether we might be getting tricked. We actually need this intuition to sort good evidence from bad in almost every situation. I think we need to include it as possibly valid evidence in everything but purely deductive syllogisms and studies which have been double-blinded and controlled, and sufficiently replicated by people motivated to discredit it.
You're absolutely right.
My preferred pronouns are he, him, and his.

User avatar
brunumb
Prodigy
Posts: 3938
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 3017 times
Been thanked: 1641 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #123

Post by brunumb »

mgb wrote: Fri Jan 21, 2022 4:27 am I suspect that the truth of the matter is somewhere the theory of evolution and Intelligent Design; nature goes forward in leaps and bounds which explains missing links.

I you were a car manufacturer and you want to bring out the next model you would not just change the headlights and release that model. You'd make many changes at the same time and release a new model far in advance of the old model. Makes sense that way.
"Wanting to bring out the next model" suggests that the evolutionary process is purposeful. It is not.
Christianty: 2000 years of making it up as you go along.

mgb
Guru
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Europe
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #124

Post by mgb »


User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 18697
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 1659 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #125

Post by JoeyKnothead »

mgb wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 7:11 am [Replying to flylikeabird20005 in post #124]

Well hello there...
Lol

Seems the thread has taken a turn :wave:
Discovery is finding things that exist.
Invention is using things discovered.

Create that path and engineer a metamorphosis.

- William

mgb
Guru
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Europe
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #126

Post by mgb »

JoeyKnothead wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 8:51 am
mgb wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 7:11 am [Replying to flylikeabird20005 in post #124]

Well hello there...
Lol

Seems the thread has taken a turn :wave:
That was a reply to flylikeabird20005's spam post which seems to have been removed.

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 18697
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 1659 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #127

Post by JoeyKnothead »

mgb wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 12:35 pm
JoeyKnothead wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 8:51 am
mgb wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 7:11 am [Replying to flylikeabird20005 in post #124]

Well hello there...
Lol

Seems the thread has taken a turn :wave:
That was a reply to flylikeabird20005's spam post which seems to have been removed.
I'm with ya. I was stricken by just how apt was your comment. Still making me laugh.
Discovery is finding things that exist.
Invention is using things discovered.

Create that path and engineer a metamorphosis.

- William

mgb
Guru
Posts: 1666
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:21 pm
Location: Europe
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #128

Post by mgb »


cms

Re: Christianity and science

Post #129

Post by cms »

It's the belief in a God who says: Love others as yourself, turn the other cheek, love those who hate you, etc. teaching peace and tolerance, that gave rise to the pursuit of science. Using this knowledge to try and prove that there is no God, rips down the very foundation of what allowed science to flourish. To me, it's not very wise, because if the foundation collapses, we all fall down.

User avatar
Difflugia
Guru
Posts: 2295
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1846 times
Been thanked: 1363 times

Re: Christianity and science

Post #130

Post by Difflugia »

cms wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:36 pmIt's the belief in a God who says: Love others as yourself, turn the other cheek, love those who hate you, etc. teaching peace and tolerance, that gave rise to the pursuit of science.
I think you misunderstand Aristotle's view of religion. He believed in a higher power, but was effectively deist in the sense that his conception of God wasn't personal.
cms wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:36 pmUsing this knowledge to try and prove that there is no God, rips down the very foundation of what allowed science to flourish.
Medieval Christianity is what ripped down the very foundation of what allowed science to flourish.
cms wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:36 pmTo me, it's not very wise, because if the foundation collapses, we all fall down.
Exactly. Once religion has undermined our progress, we can't always rely on a renaissance to begin the slow process of repairing and rebuilding what we once had.
My preferred pronouns are he, him, and his.

Post Reply