Underlying Philosophy

quote:

---

If your words really are capable of bringing deities into existence, then could I please ask you to speak some different words and make us a better deity.

---

LOL You think your words could kill such a diety if one you do not like DOES exist?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Of course not. As all my theistic evolutionist scientist friends will tell you. But I was not arguing for no god. My story was simply illustrating that "deep" philosophical pondering inspired by some divinely-imbued "natural law" was not required for the scientific method.

quote:

---

Of course not. As all my theistic evolutionist scientist friends will tell you. But I was not arguing for no god. My story was simply illustrating that "deep" philosophical pondering inspired by some divinely-imbued "natural law" was not required for the scientific method.

---

You do however have to have a question before you can apply the scientific method.The deeper the pondering, the deeper the question. Asking the right question is important in science because otherwise you'll waste alot of time hitting the same rock over and over and over and over.....

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

All you need is a persistent curiosity.

Very true, as evidenced again and again through-out history. One could even suggest that Christianity robbed us of, say, 1500 years of potential progress...Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

No, of course not.Why do you ask such a bizarre question?

How about:"Did God create man or did man create god?"As the question to consider?

quote:

---

"Did God create man or did man create god?"

---

Isn't this a question we have all asked? This question was THE question that brought me to science. however, it was asked : "IS God, or is God NOT?Most of my education in religions and science and life and philosophy all started because of that question. Had i not asked it, i would have remained happy just hanging out getting drunk being a general dick to everyone i know and a violent crap of a man useless to society.So looking at the difference of more educated now, vs ignorant, and starting at that question, I would say it is relevent.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

My apologies, i misinterpreted the point of your post concerning the individual you were debating with. you were telling him he needed proof not assertion. And i cannot argue against that.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

quote:

---

Very true, as evidenced again and again through-out history. One could even suggest that Christianity robbed us of, say, 1500 years of potential progress...

---

Christianity was not the robber. The greed of mankind is. In science and religion Greed has been the determining factor in what is accepted or not. IE: whoever gets the funding, MUST be right. WRONG!!!We still have to overcome that same hurdle today.We having some intelligence should always question what we do not understand and not take someones word for it. in science it took how many years before scientists went on TV and said " evolution of man showing a modern ape becoming a man is wrong because the said apes have been evolving the same time as man." ? too many for me. Science should be more careful.Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

It seems to me that most never get beyond asking whether or not science can disprove the existence of god rather than considering any evidence that the concept of god was invented by humanity. Well that may be your experience. But I suggest that there are plenty of dicks who have asked that question and plenty of decent people who think such questions rather pointless. I don't think you will find much correlation between the two. I would further sugggest you are extrapolating your personal experience unjustifiably. I personally think it is an intellectually interesting and socially relevant question. But again I think you are extrapolating your own highly subjective experience as to the personal effects of asking such questions too far.

quote:

---

It seems to me that most never get beyond asking whether or not science can disprove the existence of god rather than considering any evidence that the concept of god was invented by humanity.

---

I don't Know a single christian who has not questioned their faith. Not if they are honest. The question your wanting people to ask is one they already have asked in most cases. So they answered it for themselves. Some to faith. Some to loss of faith.Its not a scientific question.

quote:

---

I don't think you will find much correlation between the two. I would further suggest you are extrapolating your personal experience unjustifiably.

---

You are suggesting wrong. But are entitled to your opinion. but consider, the deeper the thoughts the deeper the discoveries. so...why?

quote:

---

So looking at the difference of more educated now, vs ignorant, and starting at that question, I would say it is relevent.

​

I personally think it is an intellectually interesting and socially relevant question. But again I think you are extrapolating your own highly subjective experience as to the personal effects of asking such questions too far.

---

You cannot begin to understand or even guess how many in the history of science were led to discoveries that changed science forever that started their science from the church or from another religious establishment with only proof of God on their agenda. The truth is, neither can i.However, I do believe that question has been a deciding factor in the discoveries of science and the choice of men to become scientists. It is arrogant to assume otherwise and speculative at best. Its a good question.Why should it NOT be asked?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

quote:

---

All you need is a persistent curiosity.

---

Undirected curiosity leads to minimal discovery.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Whether or not there is scientific evidence favouring god as a human invention is of course a scientific question. Why wouldn't it be? People may choose to ignore or deny that evidence because it conflicts with their faith. They may even assert that science can say nothing at all on this question because they fear the answers. Bot none of this means there isn't an evidence based answer to be had. Why should what "NOT be asked"?

quote:

---

Whether or not there is scientific evidence favouring god as a human invention is of course a scientific question. Why wouldn't it be?

---

The argument will end in a tie between, God was with man in the beginning until man messed up, and those who say man was amazed at the heavens and made God up. It's not provable Where the concept started.We CAN examine the concept from now with the agenda to be "knowing the truth".

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides