Science 'versus' God?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

No, not a god, this just makes you stupid___and lonely...

Lloyd

Kill everyone and you're God.
- Anon

Regards,
- RP

[chazzysaw]

The title of this post says it all " Science vs God", like they they are at odds and they are, according to the scientist and theologians. Thats like a person running a race against them self. How can there be competition between the two when they are one and the same. God is science.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

The title of this post says it all " Science vs God", like they they are at odds and they are, according to the scientist and theologians. Thats like a person running a race against them self. How can there be competition between the two when they are one and the same. God is science.

Sorry Chazzy, but science becomes useless and senseless, the instant "god" is added... Science absolutely requires a "no-god" logic... Aristotle laid the laws of scientific logic out, quite clearly, some 2300 years ago. They still hold, today...

Lloyd

[r.p.bibra]

since there are quotes and quotes ( by the way this website is becoming a good index-book of information instead of creative contribution),ls too is following the same patter:
It is the view that this Universe breeds life and Consciousness because Consciousness is its source, because the Universe is ultimately made of this mind-stuff. What we recognise as the material Universe, the Universe of space-time and elementary particles and energies, is actually an Avatar, the materialisation of Primal Consciousness. In that case, there is no waiting for Consciousness to arise. It is always there, at the beginning and at the end. What we wait for in the evolution of life is only the culminating Avatar, the emergence of self-conscious bodies that can articulate Consciousness, that can give it a voice, a culture, literature and art and science.”
This is an amazing statement, coming from a Harvard Nobelist. Erwin Schrodinger, one of the founders of quantum mechanics, also finally ended up with Advaitam. So you see, Primal Consciousness that the ancient Rishis cognized in their meditations is where serious thinkers of modern times also end up. This is another way of saying that God is the Ultimate Reality, and that great thinkers of all ages have accepted that
Indeed, across the ages, seekers elsewhere too have been engaged in this very quest, though by different means. Einstein was one of them, and he gives expression to this beautifully. Explaining why he pursued Science, Einstein once said:
A knowledge of the existence of Something we cannot penetrate, which only in their most primitive forms are accessible to our Minds – it is this Knowledge and emotion that constitute true religiosity. In this sense, I am a deeply religious man.
Einstein tried to catch a glimpse of Cosmic Infinity through Science while the seekers of the Vedic age sought that very same ETERNITY via the path of devotion and Spiritual inquiry.love&regards.ls

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Sorry guys, but only a-theism has the true capacity to see the whole moral truth___Fact, not opinion... Fact, and not opinion, comes from one's natural moral innate sense of universal justice, by the aggregate of all statistical numbers' functions...

Beliefs/opinions can never be mathematically just, as they're always differentiations...

Lloyd

[chazzysaw]

Sorry Chazzy, but science becomes useless and senseless, the instant "god" is added... Science absolutely requires a "no-god" logic... Aristotle laid the laws of scientific logic out, quite clearly, some 2300 years ago. They still hold, today...

Lloyd

I agree somewhat. But...that depends on who or what you consider to be your God or not.

[chazzysaw]

Sorry guys, but only a-theism has the true capacity to see the whole moral truth___Fact, not opinion... Fact, and not opinion, comes from one's natural moral innate sense of universal justice, by the aggregate of all statistical numbers' functions...

Beliefs/opinions can never be mathematically just, as they're always differentiations...

Lloyd

I don't know about that because atheism can be just as close mined as some religious fanatics. Scientist also show ignorance when it comes to unexplained phenomenon. There are things that are fact but there are things that are unexplained. From what I understand about atheism is that they don't believe in anything that they can't see, smell, hear or touch. But there are things that are well beyond those senses. And that's a fact....

[Graybeard]

From what I understand about atheism is that they don't believe in anything that they can't See, Smell, Hear or Touch. But there are things that are well beyond those senses. And that's a fact....

Chazzysaw .. you forgot 'Taste' ...

.. from the WIKI ...

Many self-described atheists are skeptical of all supernatural beings and cite a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of deities. Others argue for atheism on philosophical, social or historical grounds. Although many self-described atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as humanism and naturalism, there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere.

The term atheism originated as a pejorative epithet applied to any person or belief in conflict with established religion. With the spread of freethought, scientific skepticism, and criticism of religion, the term began to gather a more specific meaning and was sometimes used as a self-description by atheists.

But we do use those 'five senses' in imaginative ways ie:

We can't See, Smell, Hear, Touch or Taste anything below the molecular level but we believe in Atoms. We can't see the Cosmos without radio telescopes. So Imagination, Logic, and Creativity are also the tools of the Athiests as well as Theists.

cool bananas ... greg

[Lloyd Gillespie]

I don't know about that because atheism can be just as close mined as some religious fanatics. Scientist also show ignorance when it comes to unexplained phenomenon. There are things that are fact but there are things that are unexplained. From what I understand about atheism is that they don't believe in anything that they can't see, smell, hear or touch. But there are things that are well beyond those senses. And that's a fact....

Sorry Chazzy, I don't agree at all. Yes, there is the fact of incomplete knowledge, but science clearly shows all so far known, to be scientific, and thus a correspondence logic would show the future holds no un-scientific surprises, when compared to the past, and that's the scientific facts. And furthermore, god has nothing to do with science, nor science with god...

Lloyd

[Infinite Consciousness]

Sorry Chazzy, I don't agree at all. Yes, there is the fact of incomplete knowledge, but science clearly shows all so far known, to be scientific, and thus a correspondence logic would show the future holds no un-scientific surprises, when compared to the past, and that's the scientific facts. And furthermore, god has nothing to do with science, nor science with god...

Lloyd

The base of modern science is "materialism" and "materialism" is proven to be pseudo science which has not been and cannot be tested to determine whether it is true or false. Therefore it is not science ! And that is a scientific fact !

See "Materialism as an Absolute" for proof of "materialism" as an pseudo science and those who promote it as true science are seen as pseudo scientists.