Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does Peer Pressure stifle the acceptance of the obvious?
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 445 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 136 of 268 (257691)
11-08-2005 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Nighttrain
11-07-2005 8:25 PM


Re: peer pressure
If you wander the world and ask a question of the laws of science, you get the same result. No exceptions.
Ok, lets go ask the people of Hiroshima what they think of the atom bomb, then go ask an American.
Its not the laws of science I have the problem with, its what we do with them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Nighttrain, posted 11-07-2005 8:25 PM Nighttrain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by nator, posted 11-08-2005 10:02 AM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 161 by Nighttrain, posted 11-09-2005 2:42 AM riVeRraT has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 445 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 137 of 268 (257694)
11-08-2005 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by nwr
11-07-2005 8:38 PM


Re: peer pressure
Maybe you should do a little study on this.
No need to, you just proved my point. Fingerprinting was all fine and good, until we found it to be flawed. But hey, no big deal, its science, it can be wrong, until its right! WooHooo!
Its not science, its what we do with it, that is the problem.
Just like its not God, its what we do with it (religion) that is the problem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by nwr, posted 11-07-2005 8:38 PM nwr has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by nator, posted 11-08-2005 10:06 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 445 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 138 of 268 (257695)
11-08-2005 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by jar
11-07-2005 12:39 PM


Re: peer pressure
We thought that no two fingerprints were the same because manual observation of fingerprints had shown no examples of two identical prints from different people. The argument was thst X number of prints have been examined and no two identical prints found. It never said that "we would not find two identical prints, only that so far we had not".
Right, lol, this brings me back to the big debate I had with schraf about odds, and probability. Science is based on that, and I feel it is a big mistake, but a necessary one I guess.
I will ask you, if the odds of winning the lotto are 17 million to 1, and you win on your first play, then your personal odds for that play are 1 to 1. What did we learn from that?
Knowing the odds, means you have to know all the variables, and possibilties, and we will never really know all that. Especially now, we are finding out that yes, some things can happen by mere chance, well until we find out that we were wrong, at aleast.
With the advent of computers and the combinination of the many fingerprint databases into one unified database, it then became possible to make such comaprisions.
Right, we are limited.
Science is self correcting.When evidence is found that overturns a supposition, then science does just that. It says "What we believed was wrong and we can no longer support that belief."
Otherwise known as the back peddle claus.
For a bunch of people who claim to know so much, they really don't do they.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by jar, posted 11-07-2005 12:39 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by nator, posted 11-08-2005 10:11 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 445 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 139 of 268 (257696)
11-08-2005 8:45 AM


General question
Does anyone know in here how science and religion can get along?

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by nator, posted 11-08-2005 10:12 AM riVeRraT has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 140 of 268 (257708)
11-08-2005 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by riVeRraT
11-06-2005 6:04 PM


Re: peer pressure
What makes you think I fear death?
quote:
Isn't that what you said? We all fear death, and you don't expect me to expect you to ignore that fact?
What I actually said was that fearing the unknown, including death, is part of the human condition and I implied that this is why many of us tend to cling to belief systems which give us "ultimate absolute answers" reagardless of that belief having no rational basis in facts.
I do not particularly fear death, personally, as an individual.
That's why the entire scientific method and peer-review system is designed to be a powerful, sophisticated, illogic and bias detection system.
quote:
Then why did we think no 2 finger prints are the same for so long?
Because science, being a human-run endeavor, is not perfect.
But we did, eventually, correct ourselves, right? It was continued application of the scientific method, and nothing else, which led to the correction of this error, right?
..and that strongly suppors my claim that science is a very good tool to use to detect bias and illogic. Sometimes it takes a while (because humans are using the tool) but it can get us closer to the truth about natural phenomena if we use it properly.
quote:
Maybe its the other way around. It's not we believe in fairy tales to satisfy our fears of reality. It's we believe in reality to satisfy our fears of the unkown and spiritual.
Well, I do believe that some people are addicted to drama in their lives and the spikes in adrenaline that come with it.
You DON'T think skeptically nor scientifically about your religious experiences, rat, that much is clear.
quote:
How so?
You immediately jumped to the "Godidit" conclusion WRT your laughing incident.
What happened, and what you interpreted and perceived about what happened are two different things, rat.
quote:
It was unexplanable, regardless of what I think it was.
Ooooh, spooky! It must feel pretty exciting to have all of these "unexplainable" things happen around you, eh rat? Makes your heart beat a little faster, doesn't it? Feels pretty powerfully emotional and special, right?
Did it ever ocur to you that just because YOU are not able to come up with a mundane explanation, doesn't mean that there isn't one?
quote:
We can examine it if you like. Go ahead, ask me a million questions about it. It either was God, or it wasn't. I remain open to an explanantion, what's not scientific about that? For now my theory is that it was God. You can't prove a theory right? What am I doing wrong?
You have been given several alternate explanations, but you have rejected all of them. I strongly suspect that you are going to reject any and all alternate explanations.
You experienced the situations through the misty cloud of emotion and personal bias. There was nothing that anyone could even remotely call "objective" in your recording of the event.
quote:
Emotion had nothing to do with the unexplanable. You obviously didn't read the story right, or gather the facts correctly. go back and read, and lets make a list of the facts, and why they can't be explained.
So, people rolling on the floor, laughing, has nothing to do with emotion?
Your just having had a spiritual experience with your fellow believers had nothing to do with emotion?
There are no emotions connected to your spiritual beliefs or faith at all?
The fact that you think you are somehow immune from your biases just shows how deeply devoted you are to keeping hold of them.
quote:
Thats not a fact, you just made that up, because if you go back and read, you will find out, that I am asking for an explanantion. Even a hypothesis will do, or a theory as to what happened.
Group spiritual experiences greatly heighten emotions.
Laughter is infectious.
You are jumping to the wrong conclusions about causes.
You are indulging in post hoc reasoning and confirmation bias.
quote:
Our ability to determine things is based on how we gather facts, and from the looks of it, your not doing a good job.
Well, MY point is that you, due to your bias, did a poor job of gathering facts, and you are do determined that God HAD TO be the explanation that you are blind to any other explanation.
See, YOU were the one that was there, rat. YOU are the one who should be trying really hard to come up with any other explanation than Godidit if you want to show that you are thinking about this objectively and not just jumping immediately to Godidit.
But you aren't trying. You have already made up your mind, and then you have the gall to expect US to explain to you how God wasn't making everybody laugh.
That's how you don't think about these things objectively, rat.
quote:
Maybe your perception isn't what it should be, and you are clouded with preconcieved notions of God's existance. The devil is a liar, and there are layers of deception in our minds Schraf. You will have to start uncovering those to get to the truth.
Oh please, you get backed into a corner and now you drag out the Devil?
quote:
I am not immune from my own biases. I have figured that out already about myself many years ago. Everything you think to be right can in fact be wrong, I don't have a problem with that.
Well, that's not entirely true.
Bias can be corrected for to a great extent. You can test for bias.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by riVeRraT, posted 11-06-2005 6:04 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 7:59 PM nator has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 445 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 141 of 268 (257711)
11-08-2005 9:08 AM


And in closing
Well, I am going summerize what I am trying to say here, and I'll give everyone the last reponse. I think we got off the topic too much.
I agree with the OP completely, and was just tryng to help break it down a little. To show just what peer pressure in a church can do to a person.
Science can be good, and religion can be good, but they also can both be bad.
You may choose to devote yourself to science because you like the method, but you will live your whole life, and never know the answers to most questions. Plus there are some questions that science may never be able to answer, because of the limitations of the universe we live in. This is a possibility.
Religion may also never be able to answer your questions either, but I believe if you keep searching, that God will point you in the right direction. Follow your heart, God put directions there.
I love science, and I love my religion. But even more, I love God, and I love you guys.

  
ohnhai
Member (Idle past 5192 days)
Posts: 649
From: Melbourne, Australia
Joined: 11-17-2004


Message 142 of 268 (257715)
11-08-2005 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by mike the wiz
11-07-2005 9:43 AM


Re: peer pressure
Soz but doesn’t this Beg the question?
Every observed raven is black
Pete has a raven
Pete's raven is black
.
Doesn’t this implicitly assume that Pete’s raven has been observed, as the second condition only states he owns a raven but mentions nothing as to it’s observed status?
surely it should be.
Every observed raven is black
Pete has observed his raven
Pete's raven is black
.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by mike the wiz, posted 11-07-2005 9:43 AM mike the wiz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by ohnhai, posted 11-09-2005 4:35 AM ohnhai has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 143 of 268 (257717)
11-08-2005 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by riVeRraT
11-07-2005 8:47 AM


Re: peer pressure
quote:
Science is only the study of what is absolutly true and real.
Incorrect.
Science is a method of inquiry used to discover and understand natural phenomena. It is the most reliable one we have found thus far.
quote:
It's only man's best interpretation of what God created. we tend to argue in here, and many people state that science is non-biased,
Science, as a method, is biased in favor of the evidence, it's true.
quote:
but that is BS, science is absolutly biased, and subject to every mistake of man, just like religion.
No, religion, being non-testable and relevatory in nature, is fraught with far, far more potential for error than science.
Science is self-correcting, religion is dogmatic.
quote:
It may not happen as much as religion, but it still exists. Science and religion, the same thing.
Rat, are you really going to say stupid things such as the above this late in the game?
Come on, now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by riVeRraT, posted 11-07-2005 8:47 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:05 PM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 144 of 268 (257719)
11-08-2005 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by riVeRraT
11-07-2005 10:34 AM


Re: peer pressure
quote:
First off, would you agree that both science and religion are trying to either uphold the truth, or find the truth?
In other words its all about truth?
Well, it depends what you mean by "truth".
If you are referring to some Ultimate Absolute Truth, deep with meaning and Irrefutable, then no, science has nothing to do with finding that. That is religion's claim; that it has The Ultimale Absolute Truth that is Irrefutable.
Science is the search for truth regarding natural phenomena, but it is also understood that we will never have perfect knowledge. That is the scientific tenet of tentativity.
quote:
The scientific method in itself is not an absolute, so it is an idea. Mans best idea so far as to how to obtain the truth.
"truth", with a small "t". Science is a method, a tool.
quote:
Then there is scientific dogma: An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine.
That is a poor definition. There is nothing in science which is considered to be absolutely true.
quote:
It is that Spirit that we try to learn about, and the way we should go about it, is similar to the scientific method.
But don't you always say that you cannot show any evidence to anyone else for God, and that it is an individual thing?
That is not how the scientific method works at all. The scientific method requires constant verification from outside sorces and parties. It is the opposite of what you describe, in fact.
quote:
You can study religon, or the bible, or pray to God your whole life, and never know everything. Same is true for science.
The same is true for every possible subject of study. How does it follow that science and religion are the same just because it's impossible to know everything about either in a lifetime?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by riVeRraT, posted 11-07-2005 10:34 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:14 PM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 145 of 268 (257727)
11-08-2005 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by riVeRraT
11-08-2005 8:27 AM


Re: Science and Religion, two ways of cracking the nut
quote:
If science was truely non-biased, then we would all be working towards righteous goals.
How on earth does this follow?
Please explain to me how the fact that we are not all working towards "righteous goals" (whatever that means) shows that the scientific method is biased in favor of anything other than the evidence?
Remember, you have to show that the METHOD is biased, because that is the claim you just made.
quote:
But almost all science is driven by one thing, and that is money. When money is involved, then it is corrupt.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*Wipes tear from eye, gasping from laughing so hard*
Almost all science is money driven, riverrat?
Can you point to all of those wealthy scientists living it up in their vacation homes in Maui and in their penthouses in Manhattan?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:27 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:18 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 146 of 268 (257730)
11-08-2005 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by riVeRraT
11-08-2005 8:33 AM


Re: peer pressure
If you wander the world and ask a question of the laws of science, you get the same result. No exceptions.
quote:
Ok, lets go ask the people of Hiroshima what they think of the atom bomb, then go ask an American.
Its not the laws of science I have the problem with, its what we do with them.
This is a dishonest debate tactic, rat.
You know very well that the question you asked and was answered had nothing at all to do with "what we do with the laws of science" and everything to do with your claim that religion and science were very similar.
The truth is, if you went to Japan and asked Japanese Nulear Physicists about how an atomic bomb works, they would give you the exact same answer as an American Physicist's would give.
And that is the great, great difference between religion and science.
Don't you agree?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:33 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:20 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 147 of 268 (257732)
11-08-2005 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by riVeRraT
11-08-2005 8:36 AM


Re: peer pressure
Maybe you should do a little study on this.
quote:
No need to, you just proved my point. Fingerprinting was all fine and good, until we found it to be flawed. But hey, no big deal, its science, it can be wrong, until its right! WooHooo!
OK, now you're just behaving like a child.
Science is self-correcting.
Religion has no means to correct itself; instead, it just sends off splinter groups and spawns new religions, each of which hold to it's new doctrine as the Absolute Truth.
Don't you agree that this is a fundamental difference between science and religion?
quote:
Its not science, its what we do with it, that is the problem.
That's not what you were saying before.
You were saying that the scientific method itself was biased and flawed.
Are you backing away from that now?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:36 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 148 of 268 (257734)
11-08-2005 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 138 by riVeRraT
11-08-2005 8:43 AM


Re: peer pressure
Science is self correcting.When evidence is found that overturns a supposition, then science does just that. It says "What we believed was wrong and we can no longer support that belief."
quote:
Otherwise known as the back peddle claus.
Call it what you want.
It is better to be able to admit a mistake and work to correct it when the error comes to light than forever cling to error with no desire or hope of correcting it.
quote:
For a bunch of people who claim to know so much, they really don't do they.
I think that if you think that scientists claim to "know so much", you havn't spoken to many scientists.
On the other hand, you claim to know that God exists, and all of these things that you, personally can't think of any explanation for, just HAVE to be caused by God.
Seem to me that you are the one claiming to "know so much."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:43 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 149 of 268 (257735)
11-08-2005 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by riVeRraT
11-08-2005 8:45 AM


Re: General question
quote:
Does anyone know in here how science and religion can get along?
Religion needs to stop meddling and interfering with science and then all will be well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:45 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by riVeRraT, posted 11-08-2005 8:22 PM nator has replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3976
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 150 of 268 (257747)
11-08-2005 10:34 AM


Seem to have a bad topic drift problem - Topic temporarally close
It seems that a lot of what's being posted does not belong in this topic. Topic turning into a babble fest, which may be fun times but is not the way things are intended to operate around here.
Will probably reopen in an hour or two.
Adminnemooseus

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024