Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 7:12 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Science and religion
#31
RE: Science and religion
(March 18, 2013 at 3:06 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: strodel is a Fallacy Jack in the Box.

Of course he is, he's Christian, right?
"I trust my own reason and my own capacities to think and educate myself and to reach greater levels of knowlege and status through learning and work. To me, wishing for a god is like wishing to be a slave, it is like declaring that one is too incompetent to handle one's own affairs." - the germans are coming
Reply
#32
RE: Science and religion
(March 18, 2013 at 10:54 am)Cinjin Wrote: Life is so beautiful when you are finally free to enjoy it without guilt and self-loathing.

What you call "guilt" and "self loathing" I call spiritual growth, intentional living, consecration and being a consistent philosopher who cares about what I believe.

(March 18, 2013 at 3:06 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: strodel is a Fallacy Jack in the Box.

Then why do most of the people who respond to me typically respond in insults rather than tightly reasoned arguments?

What is a fallacy anyways? I bet you couldn't prove what a fallacy is, from sense perception to language to grounding your presuppositions. Prove me wrong.
Reply
#33
RE: Science and religion
(March 18, 2013 at 7:48 pm)jstrodel Wrote: Prove me wrong.

That's not how things work.
Reply
#34
RE: Science and religion
(March 18, 2013 at 8:00 pm)Persuade Me Wrote:
(March 18, 2013 at 7:48 pm)jstrodel Wrote: Prove me wrong.

That's not how things work.

You're right, in the world of the atheist critical thinker, you don't have to actually prove the logic or epistemology you use, you simply apply English language debate categories over non-specialized texts written by people who will not even read the opposing side before they write.

The atheist is a critical thinker, par excellence. (as I am writing, someone is going to cite me for an 'ad populum' or a 'no true scottsman' or even use m-w.com to prove how I was wrong because the dictionary said so, just like the pros, right?

Because in real academic journals, they don't make you prove the concepts you use, they let you just cite Anthony Flew as an absolute authority of discerning nuanced truth claims. They would never make you understand the opposing positions fully either - who cares? Make a dildo joke instead.
Reply
#35
RE: Science and religion
1) Christians are all about guilt and suffering as "character builders"

2) People do respond. You, like a lot of the theists here, deliberately ignore what you don't like.

3) I'm not proving shit to you. Especially since you don't even know what a fallacy is.

The atheist isn't anything. A critical thinker, rationalist or skeptic is the critical thinker. Again, you don't fucking listen.
[Image: Untitled2_zpswaosccbr.png]
Reply
#36
RE: Science and religion
(March 18, 2013 at 8:49 am)Tonus Wrote:
(March 17, 2013 at 6:57 pm)sarcasticface Wrote: So today the pastor was saying how science and the bible go hand in hand, but science hasn't yet caught up with the bible.

It sounds as if he's saying that one day, science will be sophisticated enough to prove the non-scientific and supernatural and mystical content of the Bible. I would say that where this is concerned, science will never "catch up with the Bible" because so much that is in the Bible is not scientific. After all, one of the rationalizations that I frequently hear from believers is that god exists on some plane that cannot be understood or explained by science.

I know that the JWs teach that some biblical references show that it's in harmony with science, by showing some texts that can be interpreted that way or compared with what are thought to be common ideas of the time (ie, that blood circulated through the body, or that ants stored up food). Assuming that this is true (that they held views that were contrary to common understanding, but scientifically accurate) does not change the fact that many of the things described in the Bible are unlikely to be confirmed by science because they are supernatural occurrences.


There is nothing unscientific about miracles. No one has ever disproved that miracles could happen and no one ever will. If you are talking about Young Earth Creationism or flood geology or something like that, that it is a different story.

There are so many books written about the relationship between science and the Bible. It is not as if the voices of hundreds of thousands or millions of scientists over the last few hundred years who were Christians around the world have failed to provide any rebuttal to the technocrats bid for power.

(March 18, 2013 at 8:12 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: 1) Christians are all about guilt and suffering as "character builders"

2) People do respond. You, like a lot of the theists here, deliberately ignore what you don't like.

3) I'm not proving shit to you. Especially since you don't even know what a fallacy is.

The atheist isn't anything. A critical thinker, rationalist or skeptic is the critical thinker. Again, you don't fucking listen.

A fallacy is like a rule that you can easily apply over English language texts that will automatically tell you if a statement is valid, you don't have to do anything, you just read up on what other people consider to be fallacies and then that makes you an intellectual. Just learn from them, that's all you have to do!
Reply
#37
RE: Science and religion
(March 18, 2013 at 8:11 pm)jstrodel Wrote:
(March 18, 2013 at 8:00 pm)Persuade Me Wrote: That's not how things work.

You're right, in the world of the atheist critical thinker, you don't have to actually prove the logic or epistemology you use, you simply apply English language debate categories over non-specialized texts written by people who will not even read the opposing side before they write.

The atheist is a critical thinker, par excellence. (as I am writing, someone is going to cite me for an 'ad populum' or a 'no true scottsman' or even use m-w.com to prove how I was wrong because the dictionary said so, just like the pros, right?

Because in real academic journals, they don't make you prove the concepts you use, they let you just cite Anthony Flew as an absolute authority of discerning nuanced truth claims. They would never make you understand the opposing positions fully either - who cares? Make a dildo joke instead.

So you understand how these things work, yet you ignore them and carry on your bullshit parade.
Reply
#38
RE: Science and religion
Your posts are trash Strodel, prove me wrong?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#39
RE: Science and religion
The conversational english language is the king of science and academic research. If you prove something in conversational english, man, that kills it!


Albert Einstein one day was writing in a physics journal and he turns around says, screw physics, I'm going for debate rules!
Reply
#40
RE: Science and religion
(March 18, 2013 at 8:17 pm)jstrodel Wrote: There is nothing unscientific about miracles. No one has ever disproved that miracles could happen and no one ever will. If you are talking about Young Earth Creationism or flood geology or something like that, that it is a different story.
Has science proven that miracles are possible? I mean the biblical ones. Has anyone turned water to wine? Walked on the surface of a lake or sea? Cured paralysis with a word? Cured blindness with spit and dirt? If miracles are scientific, then they can be reproduced and they can be verified.
jstrodel Wrote:There are so many books written about the relationship between science and the Bible. It is not as if the voices of hundreds of thousands or millions of scientists over the last few hundred years who were Christians around the world have failed to provide any rebuttal to the technocrats bid for power.
And what is the essence of those rebuttals? Scientific explanations that allow us to reproduce miracles, or perform them under conditions that allow us to test and verify? Science is pretty straightforward; if miracles are scientific, then science understands the mechanics behind them and can reproduce them, or predict their occurrence reliably and record them clearly.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."

-Stephen Jay Gould
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Proof and evidence will always equal Science zwanzig 103 6338 December 17, 2021 at 5:31 pm
Last Post: arewethereyet
  Religion and Science are 1000% Opposite causal code 497 104107 October 25, 2017 at 8:04 am
Last Post: I_am_not_mafia
  Religion and Science are 1000% Opposite causal code 0 444 September 13, 2017 at 1:48 am
Last Post: causal code
  Religion hurts homosexuality but homosexuality kills religion? RozKek 43 10597 March 30, 2016 at 2:46 am
Last Post: robvalue
  Terrorism has no religion but religion brings terrorism. Islam is NOT peaceful. bussta33 13 4868 January 16, 2016 at 8:25 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Religion's affect outside of religion Heat 67 19598 September 28, 2015 at 9:45 pm
Last Post: TheRocketSurgeon
  Disproving gods with history and science dyresand 10 3164 June 30, 2015 at 1:17 am
Last Post: Salacious B. Crumb
  No conflict between faith and science, eh? The Reality Salesman01 37 10095 May 22, 2015 at 12:14 pm
Last Post: The Reality Salesman01
Rainbow Gay rights within the template of religion proves flaws in "religion" CristW 288 48966 November 21, 2014 at 4:09 pm
Last Post: DramaQueen
  Bridging the Divide Between Science and Religion Mudhammam 3 1826 November 11, 2014 at 1:59 am
Last Post: Mudhammam



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)