|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,838 Year: 4,095/9,624 Month: 966/974 Week: 293/286 Day: 14/40 Hour: 3/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Christianity, Knowledge and Science | |||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5980 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Cocytus writes: More importantly, you are explicitly stating that "life" means anything that has a cell in it. What I am saying is that 'life' is anything which has an immortal soul in it. Don't pick my usage of 'life' apart...I am very aware that there are animating forces within all life forms. But you know that 'thou shalt not kill' does not apply to such life forms as mice or cockroaches. In some religions it does...wonder how they view science? So since a fetus or an embryo MIGHT have an immortal soul, some christians feel justified in trying to have the fetus treated with the dignity that all human life deserves. Once again, I am not a scientist, I have taken no steps to speak out or become active in any protest against sten cell research, and until I might be better versed in the details, I will not make a case for or against it. What this thread is about is whether christianity is fearful of knowledge and science. I am only saying that striving to preserve human life, even if there is a mistake and there IS no human life, DOES NOT prove that christians resent knowledge, but only that some of them disagree on what life is.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
In the wider context any willingness to accept the notion that God is responsible for any natural phenomenon, from the beginning of the universe, the evolution of the eye, the motion of the planets, the nature of consciousness etc. etc. is a potential barrier to scientific progress. To seek to understand such phenomenon necessarily presumes that there is a natural explanation to be had so invoking God is a barrier to progress in that sense. Again, that is not something related to Religion but only certain cults within Religion. Look at the following sources.
Pastoral Letter from the Rt. Rev. Bennett J. Sims, Episcopal Bishop of Atlanta.
The Clergy Project which is an open letter signed by over 10,000 US Christian Clergy on teaching the Theory of Evolution and the relationship of Science and Theology.
A Catechism of Creation: An Episcopal Understanding which was prepared by the Committee on Science, Technology and Faith.
Vatican response on the possibility of stem cells from amniotic fluid. Religious convictions in the US are not monolithic. There is vast variety in the positions held and many religious folk in the US fully support stem cell research, even supporting fetal tissue stem cell research. As I said back in Message 12 I would agree that today, as has been the case throughout history, there is a struggle between knowledge and ignorance, and that the side of ignorance has a a vested interest in keeping their flock ignorant. But do not be surprised if you find that some of your supporters in the fight against ignorance turn out to be Theist and even Christians. The issue is not religion versus science, but rather some sects versus the rest of the world, scientists and theists alike. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cocytus Junior Member (Idle past 6314 days) Posts: 19 From: Kansas Joined: |
I'll respond to other posts later, but I want to address this comment now:
The issue is not religion versus science, but rather some sects versus the rest of the world, scientists and theists alike.
On the contrary, I think it IS an issue of religion v. science. It is an issue of where people put their "faith" with regard to the channels through which they recieve knowledge. Here's what I'm talking about: Scientists state that, through further study of the properties of stem cells, certain diseases and injuries might become curable or treatable. Scientists further explain what stem cells are (various types, but some come from gametes). That's about it from scientists. I, as an atheist, have no reason to think that there SHOULDN'T be research in this field. Sounds like a winner to me. Now, for the religious, other types of information enter the equation. Somehow the idea that the gamete is a full human being, or might (MIGHT!) have a soul (a SOUL, btw, is improvable, invisisble, and for all intents and purposes, NON EXISTANT) so there is a reason to think that maybe research in this field is immoral. From whence the difference? And please, do not go down the road that religion somehow makes people more morally strident. Edited by Cocytus, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Scientists state that, through further study of the properties of stem cells, certain diseases and injuries might become curable or treatable. Scientists further explain what stem cells are (various types, but some come from gametes). That's about it from scientists. I, as an atheist, have no reason to think that there SHOULDN'T be research in this field. Sounds like a winner to me. But I as a Christian agree with you. So where is the problem? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 439 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Cocytus writes: Scientists state that, through further study of the properties of stem cells, certain diseases and injuries might become curable or treatable. Suppose:
quote: The "scientists" who made statements similar to that did not base their ideas on religion. You are making a false dichotomy of religion versus science. There is a continuum - scientists who don't believe in God, scientists who do believe in God, believers who accept science, believers who don't accept science... and every nuance in between. Your conclusion about "the channels through which they recieve knowledge" is quite wrong. The same person can receive one kind of knowledge through one channel and another kind of knowledge through a different channel. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cocytus Junior Member (Idle past 6314 days) Posts: 19 From: Kansas Joined: |
Scientists state that, through further study of the properties of stem cells, certain diseases and injuries might become curable or treatable. Scientists further explain what stem cells are (various types, but some come from gametes). That's about it from scientists. I, as an atheist, have no reason to think that there SHOULDN'T be research in this field. Sounds like a winner to me. But I as a Christian agree with you. So where is the problem? Would that you were representative of the entire religious community throughout the world! Edited by Cocytus, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cocytus Junior Member (Idle past 6314 days) Posts: 19 From: Kansas Joined: |
Scientists state that, through further study of the properties of [Jews], certain diseases and injuries might become curable or treatable. Why resort to this? That isn't an argument. Even if it was, I've never stated that science was INFALLABLE. Take this elsewhere... away from me.
You are making a false dichotomy of religion versus science. There is a continuum - scientists who don't believe in God, scientists who do believe in God, believers who accept science, believers who don't accept science... and every nuance in between.
No, I'm not. Here's your dichotomy: X = The best result that can be hoped for Y = Some not-so-good result A = Scientific Knowledge B = Religious knowledge If either A or B cannot come to the conclusion, either X or Y, then one of them HAS to be different. It is my contention that A is superior to B because it aims for X. A does not self-define Y and aim for it at all cost, regardless of evidence stacked against it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 93 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
The problem is that this research is banned in the US for irrational religious reasons.
I fully accept what you say regards not all, or even most, of those of religious conviction sharing that view but it is a religious view and it is a problem. Also in the wider sense historically speaking faith and the reliance on God for explanations has acted as a barrier to scientific understanding. I fully reccommend the Beyond Belief lectures Percy has links to in the Evolution Podcast thread. Session 2 is the main one on this topic (how do I link to this..?) if you are interested.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cocytus Junior Member (Idle past 6314 days) Posts: 19 From: Kansas Joined: |
I linked to the Beyond Belief lectures (and pointed to session 2 in particular) in an earlier post in this thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 439 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Cocytus writes: That isn't an argument. It's the same argument to some people because experimenting on live humans is the same as experimenting on stem cells to some people. Who those people are is not necessarily based on religion.
It is my contention that A is superior to B because it aims for X. But B also aims for X.
A does not self-define Y and aim for it at all cost, regardless of evidence stacked against it. Neither does B, necessarily. You're creating a strawman to go with your false dilemna. False dilemna: A and B. Strawman: B disregards evidence. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The problem is that this research is banned in the US for irrational religious reasons. But that is simply not true. Even fetal stem cell research is not banned in the US. The only restriction right now is that Federal Funds cannot be used for Fetal Stem Cell Research. As I pointed out back in Message 12 one of the major stem cell research centers in the US is St, Luke's Episcopal Hospital, both a US research institution and a religious one.
Also in the wider sense historically speaking faith and the reliance on God for explanations has acted as a barrier to scientific understanding. I fully reccommend the Beyond Belief lectures Percy has links to in the Evolution Podcast thread. Session 2 is the main one on this topic (how do I link to this..?) if you are interested. But I have listened to them, even before it came up here. The fact is that not all religious folk oppose science. We have many scientists here at EvC that are also Theists, many Christian Theists. There has always been opposition to science. There were those who opposed trains because man could not breath going 60 MPH. There were those who opposed the Theory of Gravity and I remember a wonderful cartoon from the period. Let me see if I can find a link to it. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 93 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
I understand all that you are saying and I am not accusing all those of faith of putting up barriers to stem cell research. As you point out there is at least one religious institution aiding that research.
However it is undeniable that a barrier to stem cell research has been put in place by the US government on irrational religious grounds. That is the sort of the problem that the OP I think was referring to. The difference with people saying that humans cannot breathe at speeds of 60MPH is that this can be tested. The religious basis for the stem cell research objections are not testable. There is a problem and simply stating that it is not a problem for all those of faith does not change the fact that there is definitely a problem which has resulted in barriers to scientific progress (or at least the rate of said progress) in this area.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
However it is undeniable that a barrier to stem cell research has been put in place by the US government on irrational religious grounds. That is the sort of the problem that the OP I think was referring to. Again, the barrier is Only on Federal Funding of Fetal Cell Research.
There is a problem and simply stating that it is not a problem for all those of faith does not change the fact that there is definitely a problem which has resulted in barriers to scientific progress (or at least the rate of said progress) in this area. Again, that is not what I said. I agree that the Bush Administrations position is irrational and VERY much anti-science and even anti-humanity. My point is that you seem to not realize that there are very religious people standing beside you agreeing with you about the threat posed by the religious conservative fundamentalists. The issue though is not religion versus science but rather Cultures of Ignorance versus everyone else. In the US there is a vast movement encouraging Cultures of Ignorance. That includes all of the Young Earth Creationists, most of the Intelligent Design folk and many major political figures including the President of the US. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cocytus Junior Member (Idle past 6314 days) Posts: 19 From: Kansas Joined: |
In the US there is a vast movement encouraging Cultures of Ignorance. That includes all of the Young Earth Creationists, most of the Intelligent Design folk and many major political figures including the President of the US.
There is a vast movement of a culture of ignorance in the Islamic faith as well. The question might be asked: is it religion itself that causes these phenomena? Edited by Cocytus, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
anastasia Member (Idle past 5980 days) Posts: 1857 From: Bucks County, PA Joined: |
Straggler writes: There is a problem and simply stating that it is not a problem for all those of faith does not change the fact that there is definitely a problem which has resulted in barriers to scientific progress (or at least the rate of said progress) in this area. There IS a problem, and as I see it is not likely to be resolved very soon, precisely because the idea of a soul is untestable. To further what Ringo said, at one time it was moral to use Jews or African Americans as guinea pigs. Growing up near the infamous Byberry Mental Hospital I have heard much about the deplorable conditions that the mentally impaired were subjected to. These situations came from a false idea that certain people were somehow less than human, or that mere cognizance was what determined being 'human'. I can only say that if science were to discover the existance of a pre-natal 'soul' which made even tiny cells completely human long before any awareness, many people of many faiths might change positions. It won't happen. We are left to go with our gut feeling...and that ultimately has nothing to do with any church or any notion of God or even of atheism.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024