| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/16/2008 04:06:07 PM · #1 |
It seems we aren't the only ones debating that point.
Linky |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 05:20:55 PM · #2 |
| It does not matter. Only faith matters. The debate of the existence or non-existence of "god" is irrelevant to the human condition. Believe in something greater than yourself and it will appear. |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 05:41:36 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by KaDi:
The debate of the existence or non-existence of "god" is irrelevant to the human condition. |
Actually, it's very relevant to the human condition, since blind faith in the supernatural has been an unambiguous source of misery throughout all recorded history.
Message edited by author 2008-05-16 17:55:08. |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 05:42:13 PM · #4 |
| Michael Shermer, the editor of the book mentioned in the article, is a former evangelical Christian (as am I). I look forward to reading this collection of essays. |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 05:44:16 PM · #5 |
| Is the Templeton Foundation a trusted source for true discourse on this subject? |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 05:46:05 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by strangeghost:
Michael Shermer, the editor of the book mentioned in the article, is a former evangelical Christian (as am I). I look forward to reading this collection of essays. |
Or you can just go here: Templeton Foundation: Does Science Make Belief in God Obsolete. |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 05:47:22 PM · #7 |
The Templeton Foundation has given its yearly award (a substantial sum) to many noted and respected scientists, who have explored the boundary between science and religion. I myself gained a healthy respect for them when they withdrew their funding from the Seattle-based Discovery Institute (the "intelligent design" think tank) because, in their words, the DI was basically a political organization and not a scientific one.
As for the collection of essays, here is the link to the full text of the whole thing.
Link
|
|
|
|
05/16/2008 05:48:25 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Is the Templeton Foundation a trusted source for true discourse on this subject? |
Templeton certainly does have a bias on this point. But I was impressed by the range of voices they solicited. True, they really only have a couple of nonbelievers in the responses, but the commentators do represent the spectrum of the debate well, I think. |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 05:54:24 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Is the Templeton Foundation a trusted source for true discourse on this subject? |
The Templeton Foundation has a track record of funding efforts to undermine actual scientific inquiry with pseudo-science and I don't trust anything that is tainted with their backing. |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 06:00:51 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by KaDi:
The debate of the existence or non-existence of "god" is irrelevant to the human condition. |
Actually, it's very relevant to the human condition, since blind faith in the supernatural has been an unambiguous source of misery in all recorded history. |
The existence of god is a condition which science cannot describe, define nor deny. By its very nature, science is inadequate.
The existence of religion plays a large factor in human existence and in its suffering, as you point out. But it can and has been a balm to those sufferings as much as a thorn.
But, still, the "debate" of the existence of god is irrelevant to the human condition. Faith in something beyond ourselves and our understanding is all that matters...and, if I could phrase it correctly (and I can't), belief in "nothing more" is also all that matters.
|
|
|
|
05/16/2008 06:02:58 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by strangeghost:
I myself gained a healthy respect for them when they withdrew their funding from the Seattle-based Discovery Institute (the "intelligent design" think tank) because, in their words, the DI was basically a political organization and not a scientific one.
Link |
Yes, this really was a problem for the Foundation since it is essential for them to appear non-political. That doesn't give me any more respect for the pseudo science they support. They still funded ID as a scientific inquiry when it clearly was not one.
Message edited by author 2008-05-16 18:04:11. |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 06:05:36 PM · #12 |
| BTW: I will read these as there are some great minds in that list. I'm just suspicious of the involvement of Templeton. |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 06:11:43 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by KaDi:
The existence of god is a condition which science cannot describe, define nor deny. By its very nature, science is inadequate. |
Depends on which scientist you ask. People like Richard Dawkins argue that the existence of God is a very scientific question unless you are talking about a God that does not interact with the universe. He argues that an interractive God must have some measurable impact on reality and that impact must be measurable if it exists. For example, if God interacts as a response to prayer there should be some measurable difference between the outcomes of tings prayed about versus things not prayed about. That is something that can be done through a scientific process. Of course, everyone knows that God just hides himself when he sees those atheist scientists around ;P |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 06:27:47 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by JMart:
Originally posted by KaDi:
The existence of god is a condition which science cannot describe, define nor deny. By its very nature, science is inadequate. |
Depends on which scientist you ask. People like Richard Dawkins argue that the existence of God is a very scientific question unless you are talking about a God that does not interact with the universe. He argues that an interractive God must have some measurable impact on reality and that impact must be measurable if it exists. For example, if God interacts as a response to prayer there should be some measurable difference between the outcomes of tings prayed about versus things not prayed about. That is something that can be done through a scientific process. Of course, everyone knows that God just hides himself when he sees those atheist scientists around ;P |
I'm not an atheist. I simply do not believe that "god" requires proof...after all, are we blind?
I do, however, believe that religion requires reason. (By "reason" I do not mean justification, by the way.) |
|
|
|
05/16/2008 07:08:00 PM · #15 |
Hey! This thread vanished from the front page :o (I totally understand why though). Still, I'll leave my 2 cents worth since I just went quickly through those essays. It didn't take long since there's not a new idea in the pack (not that some weren't original with the author).
A document like this is not meant to answer the question of course, and most people will be able to find parts to support their viewpoint. The real trouble I see with this particular document in conjunction with a group like Templeton is that it is the type of thing that will now be pulled out as evidence that there is real controversy in the scientific community about the existence of God when this is actually not the case.
Most scientists don't address the issue of course, but if the document actually reflected beliefs of the scientific community it should have been mostly against belief in a personal god given that 93% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences do not believe in a personal god.
-----
KaDi, I agree and disagree with you about the proof issue. Science can not disprove god anymore than it can disprove the existence of Zeuss or the toothfairy (I don't mean  timfythetoo) as it is fairy impossible to disprove the existence of things, still, logic along with science's contradictions/refutations of many religious claims has made the personal god of the major religions extremely unlikely in the minds of a growing number of people, particularly in the scientific community. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/26/2025 07:19:11 PM EDT.
