Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheists control science
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2096 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 38 of 124 (671255)
08-23-2012 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Taq
08-23-2012 1:31 PM


Re: Atheists? control science
None of what you have posted deals with preventing people from praticing religious traditions. NONE!! No scientist is shutting down churches or dragging people out of mosques. No scientist I am aware of is calling for a constitutional ammendment or law that would prevent people from participating in religious beliefs, ceremonies, or rites.
The contrary is not true, however.
Fundamentalists have been trying to shut down the teaching of evolution in schools through a variety of means.
Edited by Coyote, : Speeling

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Taq, posted 08-23-2012 1:31 PM Taq has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2096 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 51 of 124 (671514)
08-26-2012 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by marc9000
08-26-2012 7:22 PM


The cat is out of the bag...
That’s the new atheist philosophy, and that’s the crux of the issue. It used to be that those in the scientific community recognized science for what it was, only a part, often a small part, of a complete understanding of the world in which we live. It used to know its limits — it used to know that science had nothing to say about the never ending questions of life, death, love, and meaning. The scientific community used to know that religious traditions of mankind have significant things to say about things that science does not. That was a time when there was no real conflict between religion and science.
Now the scientific community is advanced enough to think that anything other than naturalistic science is nothing but superstition. Other significant things now mean nothing — they must be removed. Now science is in conflict with religion. And it’s religion’s fault, for not bending and shaping itself enough to conform to the latest atheistic proclamations about all of reality.
...
What bothers me is that it’s no longer controlled by people who know what its limits should be. It used to be that scientists were reluctant to give offence to religion. Why make trouble, why offend people who largely make the scientists livelihood possible? Today, they’re offended by those very people, the ones who get in their way concerning new abortion techniques, cloning, or many big government mandates that give science more and more political power and money.
I think the real problem is that religion used to control science in the western world, and that control is increasingly slipping away.
The fundamentalism we are seeing this past century seems to have developed as a result of this loss of control.
But the Enlightenment and other events occurred, and there is no going back to rule by religion in the western world (although some might think otherwise).

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by marc9000, posted 08-26-2012 7:22 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2096 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(2)
Message 85 of 124 (671670)
08-29-2012 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by dwise1
08-29-2012 12:19 AM


Re: Scientists control science
So what's so wrong with Republicans that they are incapable of becoming scientists?
You are painting with a pretty broad brush.
But there is some truth in it. I'm both a scientist and a libertarian, and when I am at some specific scientific gatherings it is not unusual for many academics to bash anyone and anything to the right of Lenin. That gets pretty old after a while, and can be a real turn-off for students who otherwise might make good scientists.
What does someone who disagrees do? We generally remain silent so as not to start a fight, as there is nothing more intolerant than a leftie who has been disagreed with when he expected his ideas to meet with universal agreement. Diversity does not apply to ideas in our modern academic world.
Fundamentalists are about as bad, having an equal lack of tolerance for ideas outside of their ken.
The following might apply to both:
Forgive him, Caesar — he is a barbarian and considers that the customs of his tribe are the laws of nature.
G.B.Shaw, Caesar and Cleopatra

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by dwise1, posted 08-29-2012 12:19 AM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by crashfrog, posted 08-29-2012 6:42 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 87 by Theodoric, posted 08-29-2012 8:50 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 88 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-29-2012 10:02 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 92 by Jazzns, posted 08-29-2012 12:22 PM Coyote has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024