Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 157 (8161 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-23-2014 10:44 PM
60 online now:
Aurelia, Coyote, DrJones*, dwise1, jar (5 members, 55 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: NAME OF THE ROSE
Post Volume:
Total: 741,755 Year: 27,596/28,606 Month: 2,653/2,244 Week: 57/710 Day: 57/129 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does science ask and answer "why" questions?
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 5626
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 11 of 353 (646960)
01-07-2012 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by bluegenes
01-07-2012 10:59 AM


Why questions.
For example, we could ask: Why do birds sing

This is liable to produce "reason" answers. They sing to communicate. More specifically they mark territory, make mating calls etc. That's why they sing.

When we ask why a species of animals exhibits some feature, we might also give an answer based on the theory of evolution. I don't see any significant distinction in scope between that kind of "why" question and the question of why God might have done such a thing.

Perhaps a distinction is that only religion professes to provide answer ultimate why questions. Every answered scientific why question can be followed up with yet another question of why things should be as discussed in the answer.

The same is not true of the religious why questions. At some point after God is cited as the answer, the questions are cutoff arbitrarily as being beyond the ken of mortals or even blasphemous.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by bluegenes, posted 01-07-2012 10:59 AM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by bluegenes, posted 01-07-2012 1:56 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply
 Message 17 by kbertsche, posted 01-07-2012 7:05 PM NoNukes has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 5626
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 18 of 353 (647022)
01-07-2012 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by kbertsche
01-07-2012 7:05 PM


Re: Why questions.
It's interesting that some of the most prominent and strident atheists insist that evolution is dysteleological, having no goal and no purpose. They seem to realize that questions of purpose will open the door to religious answers, which they want to avoid at all costs.

Your proposition seems a bit silly to me. Why cannot the reason for rejecting a goal/purpose for evolution be that they don't accept or believe that there is any purpose?

I would think that an atheist would take the religious answers to be nonsensical and/or wrong.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by kbertsche, posted 01-07-2012 7:05 PM kbertsche has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by kbertsche, posted 01-07-2012 8:27 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 5626
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 242 of 353 (648183)
01-13-2012 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by Straggler
01-13-2012 7:34 AM


Re: God Given Preferences
Gosh Chuck why would anyone consider evidence based answers when we can invoke all sorts baselessly conceived purposes derived from equally baselessly conceived entities?

Some of Chuck77 answers in another thread have caused me to rethink my expectations. Surely we want creationists to participate in these threads. But when you don't know all that much science, how are you going to participate in science based discussions?

Perhaps calling science "mumbo jumbo" is the best we're going to get. At least it isn't his job five days a week.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by Straggler, posted 01-13-2012 7:34 AM Straggler has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by Straggler, posted 01-13-2012 5:13 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014