A general topic on "what started it all..."

[leo-rcc]

Leo,

I'm not certain that religion does 'know', but it seems that (at least some) seekers among many creeds are actively searching for an answer- by quantitative, qualitative or anecdotal means.

And of course they can do that, but in that way you are not going to get any further then a hypothesis at best. As long as my hypothesis that Gus the magic Hippo farted the universe into existence is just as valid as any other hypothesis brought forward by any other religion, I will not accept there is any merit to their claim. Find the evidence for it, then we will talk.

Conversely, natural scientists often appear content to avoid the subject as if future knowledge cant exist because it hasnt previously been demonstrated.

Nonsense. They have plenty of questions they have a better chance of answering which some day may lead to a better insight into the singularity in a later stage. Just because science doesn't have an answer yet doesn't mean it has given up on it.

Microbes existed, and had profound effects on human life, long before fleming discovered them. Does anything exist today that hasnt yet been discovered?

Yes there is plenty we do not know yet and have not been discovered yet, and science is looking for those answers. What makes you think they don't? If anything it is the scientists are the ones saying "We don't know everything, we need to find that out".

I fear science may have given up too early, and relgated these questions to the religious proponents who may not be trained to provide the kind of evidence scientists would respect.

That fear has no valid basis whatsoever. Name one field where science has "given up".

[Purple Rabbit]

There is much in the way of metaphysical speculation, but none of it is based on science. If you want a scientific answer, you will have to be content with "we don't know" because science is predicated on phenomena of our space-time manifold. Science cannot be done where there is no space-time manifold, i.e., at the singularity or any transcendent reality (whether gods or multiverses, et cetera).

This is a rather suggestive answer in that it introduces existence of some transcendental reality. In practice science can study anything that exists that somehow has impact on perceived reality. This includes a supposedly transcendant reality if that reality has any impact whatsoever on perceived reality. Of course it is plain to see that things might exist that have no impact on our reality whatsoever. Although much speculation has been about this (this phenomenon in itself is accessible with science) no-one has ever been able to explain what relevance transcendental realities have when there's no shred of impact on our reality. This is the realm of sheer speculation.

One could argue however that science has effectively opened up some transcendental realities, i.e. realities that before transcended our everyday experience of it. Examples are the world of the quantum, cosmology and mathematics. Though prior to the development of these areas of knowledge no-one perceived any of its content, science has brought all of this within reach of human perception and perceived reality. It has shown its profound impact on our reality even, someting that speculation is not capable of. Naturalism is devouring all kinds of transcendental realities right now. The existence of some unknown transcendental reality is easy to speculate about. It will always have some mystical power over many of us and indeed drives a part of human endeavour, science included. Laborious scientific work is what really opens up unknown realities to us.

@ Dharan
So ask yourself, do you wanna dream, do you wanna know or do you perhaps want both.

[Faith Tester]

[quote='Dharan' pid='22455' dateline='1247208713']

If science doesnt know, then why arent scientists more open minded toward religion? Is it easier to not know? than to go down the path of learning to 'know'?


Dharan, you are claiming that the religion is the path of learning. I think all religion has done is that religion has provided non-scientific answers to scientific questions and proclaimed them as universal facts.

[LEDO]

An invisible Jew said, "let there be light" and then it all began. No wait. That would violate the second law of thermodynamics.

[fr0d0]

If science doesnt know, then why arent scientists more open minded toward religion? Is it easier to not know? than to go down the path of learning to 'know'?

Dharan, you are claiming that the religion is the path of learning. I think all religion has done is that religion has provided non-scientific answers to scientific questions and proclaimed them as universal facts.

Correction: Religion provides no answers to scientific questions and never ever has. People down the ages have tried to prove otherwise but all have failed.

[Faith Tester]

If science doesnt know, then why arent scientists more open minded toward religion? Is it easier to not know? than to go down the path of learning to 'know'?

Dharan, you are claiming that the religion is the path of learning. I think all religion has done is that religion has provided non-scientific answers to scientific questions and proclaimed them as universal facts.

Correction: Religion provides no answers to scientific questions and never ever has. People down the ages have tried to prove otherwise but all have failed.

I could not agree more, what I meant was that in a bid to answer scientific questions, all religion has done is that it has fed us with some bullock stories.

[fr0d0]

I could not agree more, what I meant was that in a bid to answer scientific questions, all religion has done is that it has fed us with some bullock stories.

I disagree. People have tried to make religion answer scientific questions when it can't. Literally interpret stories that always were allegorical.

[Faith Tester]

I believe that it were these very people who actually started religion. It were these very people who came up with a bunch of myths and legends, named it religion. They were the so-called chosen ones, the people talking to an All-Knowing God. These people whenever confronted with a scientific question will use their limited knowledge and ability to com eup with an answer. This is what I think.

[fr0d0]

If those were the people that started the Christian religion then why does the book say the opposite? That doesn't make any sense. I think you unfairly judge.

Theology isn't science.

[Edwardo Piet]

It certainly isn't! One of those is rational anyway

EvF