What do you think about peaceful coexistence between those who study our material world (scientists) and those who study our spiritual world (theologians)? My attempt to write an essay on that subject failed, as you can see at:
The webpage was prepared to generate a discussion. Those who post comments should refer to specific “contributions,” as numbered (or to specific persons, as numbered at the beginning). This will simplify the discussion.
And let us keep in mind that the main topic is peaceful coexistence. Is it possible? Is it desirable? What should we do promote it? etc. . .
Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia) .
Ludwik Kowalski, a retired nuclear scientist and the author of a free ON-LINE book entitled “Diary of a Former Communist: Thoughts, Feelings, Reality.”
It is an autobiography illustrating my evolution from one extreme to another--from a devoted Stalinist to an active anti-communist. This testimony is based on a diary I kept between 1946 and 2004 (in the USSR, Poland, France and the USA).
Why am I distributing these books on-line, instead of selling them for profit? Because I want to share what I know and think about communism. The more people know about proletarian dictatorship less likely will they experience is. Please share the above link with those who might be interested, especially with young people, and with potential reviewers. Thank you in advance.
And let us keep in mind that the main topic is peaceful coexistence. Is it possible? Is it desirable? What should we do promote it? etc. .
I am of the mind that it is neither possible nor desirable. In science there are no sacred cows. There are no subjects that are off limits, and this includes religious belief. On the other side, how compelling is theology if it has no bearing on the world around us, the world that science is trying to describe?
The two can not peacefully coexist. Toes will always be stepped on. You can not have some people describing the world as they wish it were and those who describe the world as it really is without the two conflicting.
Science is the study of the natural world in an effort to learn about it: find out what the nature of the world is, what has happened, and what is likely to happen in the future. Science is tentative. Science depends on repeatable observations. Science changes as the evidence changes. If religion is willing to adopt these same practices, the two can peacefully coexist. Of course, I suppose if religion did adopt those practices, it would no longer be religion.
In the absence of that, religion needs to stop making factual claims about the real world that science can challenge, or at least be willing to accept what science says when it addresses such claims.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist
Well I'd like to know what constitutes "peaceful coexistence."
If it means can we live together without killing each other? Of course we can. If it means can we live together without arguing each position? Not likely -- for reasons clearly exemplified in this forum.
What do you think about peaceful coexistence between those who study our material world (scientists) and those who study our spiritual world (theologians)?
If by "peaceful coexistence" you mean that they should stop disagreeing with one another, then I would point out that there is no peaceful coexistence between theologians and other theologians; and that any professional godbotherer who suggests that religious folks should stop spouting antiscientific nonsense will inevitably be denounced by a large proportion of his coreligionists as a godless tool of Satan.
Is it possible?
Not in the forseeable future.
Is it desirable?
Perhaps. But then again it might hasten the decline of religion if it was as silly as possible; and that prospect also has its attractions.