Posts: 218
Threads: 7
Joined: September 28, 2009
Reputation:
1
RE: Which Comes First?
October 1, 2009 at 3:31 pm
(September 30, 2009 at 5:41 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Solarwave,
Nice, except all the results must be verifyable under peer review and your definitions need to be solid. "See what happens" needs to have a metric involved; for example you could use penny flips and pray for heads. If heads comes up more often than tails, in a statistically significant way, then you can publish your results and win a templeton award, maybe. It has been done before and there are even some studies on patients but the results were very slightly negatively correlated with prayer. I can't quote the study sorry, but I am sure if you google "scientific prayer test" you could find some interesting tests. Include Templeton to be more specific.
Rhizo
Well if I could be bothered to think of an more detailed description I would put something other than 'see what happens', but I'm feeling lazy at the moment lol.
To be honest I am very doubtful of testing God through prayer. Who do you think God is, what do you think prayer is? As I said prayer isn't a magic you can use to prove a point whenever you want. Pray for healings only happen if God says yes and from what I know of God He doesn't take well to being test on our terms normally.
I think it also has to be remembered that Gods goal isn't to make people believe He is real. His goal is to have a relationship with humans, and two are two very different things. This is mainly shown by what some atheists have said, like that even if there was a God they wouldn't worship Him, and a will not to want to believe. I think its possible to know there is a God and turn your back on Him, so maybe a prayer study wouldn't actually make a difference.
Mark Taylor: "Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not."
Einstein: “The most unintelligible thing about nature is that it is intelligible”
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Which Comes First?
October 1, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Well, it would for me. If God was shown to exist I would go back to worshiping him. He killed people in the past I wouldn't want to be the next target.  Ok, no, but really, the people chosen to die by the creator of the universe deserved it and were part of a perfect plan by virtue of God being the definition of perfect.
I of course don't see it that way now but I did back in the day.
Rhizo
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation:
145
RE: Which Comes First?
October 1, 2009 at 3:47 pm
(October 1, 2009 at 3:29 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Maybe little trancendental gnomes hold up the sky! I know I have seen them through my asshole when I wear it as a hat!
You can manufacture ideas while isolated in your room but trust me, knowledge is real and reality isn't refereed by a girl/woman sitting at a computer no matter what her age.
Who said the sky was made for us? The trancendental gnomes work for underpants not us! sheesh! 
Rhizo
Possibly You are getting it I think! ^_^ Knowledge is assuming that those gnomes do not exist o.o That is the entire point I am making here: that all of our knowledge is but the assumption that we are right. But are those Gnomes real? Of course! Is the sky real? Of course! Is God real? Of course!
I do not bend reality to make my statements... I discern what is probably true, beyond all reasonable doubt... but I am not so faithful to believe I am absolutely right. No... to believe one is right is called 'arrogance', which is something that the faithful must be.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Posts: 218
Threads: 7
Joined: September 28, 2009
Reputation:
1
RE: Which Comes First?
October 1, 2009 at 4:19 pm
(This post was last modified: October 1, 2009 at 4:19 pm by solarwave.)
Rhizo I have to say you come across as very reasonable in your responses
Can I ask, was it a very hard thing for you to stop beliving? Like losing an old friend?
Mark Taylor: "Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not."
Einstein: “The most unintelligible thing about nature is that it is intelligible”
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Which Comes First?
October 1, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Solarwave,
Yes, it was, my brain lept around in my head desperately trying to justify my life experience with my knowledge of the bible, science, the occult, and other religions. At first it felt terrible but as time goes on it just makes more sense and is very freeing.
Like I have said before, just keep seeking and you can't lose. It will edify you as a Christian to know more about the bible but don't stop there! Read about other religions, science, and plenty of fiction because it is awesome. I would say to avoid the occult though it is mostly a waste of time and will probably just confuse you. Wikipedia is plenty good enough if you want to know what people are talking about when they talk about "Astral Projection", "Demon summoning", or "Virgin Births" (Just kidding about that last one!).
Rhizo
Posts: 795
Threads: 27
Joined: July 1, 2009
Reputation:
27
RE: Which Comes First?
October 1, 2009 at 6:01 pm
(October 1, 2009 at 9:02 am)Eilonnwy Wrote: Things that significantly matter, or impact my life.
Things like theories of morality?
(October 1, 2009 at 9:02 am)Eilonnwy Wrote: ... but if you say you saw a ghost, I'll need substantial evidence before believing ...
It would seem that only matters if your belief is actually called for. Right? Just because I tell you that I saw a ghost, that doesn't mean you are required to believe ghosts exist (explicit). I am not even asking you to change your worldview (implicit). I am simply telling you something that happened. You may not believe ghosts exist yourself, but in the final analysis, what has that to do with my experience?
(October 1, 2009 at 10:47 am)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: If you look over the list again I'm pretty sure you will agree that, if you modified Step 4 to include the use of previously gathered data to arrive at a conclusion, then it will accomodate the other areas of science that you mentioned.
I understood that point you raised; however, the data gathered by previous sociologists was likewise not based on conducting human experiments. If a discipline must test hypotheses by doing experiments in order to be considered science, then the disciplines I mentioned cannot be considered scientific. So yeah, the problem is Step 4. The list is far too restrictive, as I said; "the arena of science has a larger scope than that narrow definition." Either lots of scientific disciplines are actually not science at all, or that list is a badly flawed explanation of what constitutes as science. If we agree that the latter is the case, then solarwave needs a better answer.
(And I agree with solarwave. You are among the few really decent members on these forums.)
(October 1, 2009 at 3:29 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Reality isn't refereed by a girl/woman sitting at a computer no matter what her age.
Quoted For Truth!
Man is a rational animal who always loses his temper when
called upon to act in accordance with the dictates of reason.
(Oscar Wilde)
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Which Comes First?
October 1, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Quote:Either lots of scientific disciplines are actually not science at all, or that list is a badly flawed explanation of what constitutes as science. If we agree that the latter is the case, then solarwave needs a better answer.
Good point, and I can't agree with either statement fully because it is a grey area. I don't know if you have heard of the concepts of "hard" and "soft' sciences but here is the wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_and_soft_science
I would lean towards a more inclusive definition because I value the study of economics, politics, psychology, and scociology which would be considered "soft." Even theology could be included in the list although it is really just a cross between sociology, politics, and psychology (From my worldview there is nothing to study). As you well know, I believe there is probably not a god but studying the phenomenon of the perception of god IS very interesting and necessary. "Why all this talk of god?" is a question that I think should NOT be brushed away. After all, the concept needs to be dealt with in manner that includes people in society while comprehending their needs.
Thanks for the compliments; I have my moments of lucidity
Rhizo
Posts: 15755
Threads: 194
Joined: May 15, 2009
Reputation:
145
RE: Which Comes First?
October 1, 2009 at 7:27 pm
[quote(Today 11:29)Rhizomorph13 Wrote:
Reality isn't refereed by a girl/woman sitting at a computer no matter what her age.[/quote]
Hmm, so reality is refereed by a boy/man sitting at a computer no matter his age? That's mighty sexist, I do think  Not only do you tell me I am not right... but you tell me it is because I'm a girl  You then fail to show how I am not right. >_<
If you think I am not right: stand up and prove it. Prove to me that knowledge is more than faith. Why all of these assertions of 'evidence', 'fact', and 'knowledge' if you cannot prove them? Isn't this exactly what you get onto theists all the time for doing?
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
Posts: 795
Threads: 27
Joined: July 1, 2009
Reputation:
27
RE: Which Comes First?
October 2, 2009 at 3:26 am
(October 1, 2009 at 6:22 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: I don't know if you have heard of the concepts of "hard" and "soft' sciences but ...
You could say I've heard of it, yeah. The philosophy of science is one of my favourite studies, which I still spend a lot of time reading about. I loves me some Thomas Kuhn. (Although more recently I've been introduced to the sociology of science and the Merton Thesis, q.v. Robert Merton.)
(October 1, 2009 at 6:22 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: As you well know, I believe there is probably not a God ...
And you're not alone. However, that is a metaphysical conclusion, not a scientific one.
Man is a rational animal who always loses his temper when
called upon to act in accordance with the dictates of reason.
(Oscar Wilde)
Posts: 218
Threads: 7
Joined: September 28, 2009
Reputation:
1
RE: Which Comes First?
October 2, 2009 at 4:10 am
(This post was last modified: October 2, 2009 at 4:10 am by solarwave.)
(October 1, 2009 at 4:49 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Solarwave,
Yes, it was, my brain lept around in my head desperately trying to justify my life experience with my knowledge of the bible, science, the occult, and other religions. At first it felt terrible but as time goes on it just makes more sense and is very freeing.
Like I have said before, just keep seeking and you can't lose. It will edify you as a Christian to know more about the bible but don't stop there! Read about other religions, science, and plenty of fiction because it is awesome. I would say to avoid the occult though it is mostly a waste of time and will probably just confuse you. Wikipedia is plenty good enough if you want to know what people are talking about when they talk about "Astral Projection", "Demon summoning", or "Virgin Births" (Just kidding about that last one!).
Rhizo
Thanks. Is the freedom worth the loss.....
Well i do plan to continue reading on these things
Mark Taylor: "Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not."
Einstein: “The most unintelligible thing about nature is that it is intelligible”
|
