Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationism/ID as Science
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 82 of 249 (327654)
06-30-2006 12:43 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Athansor
08-16-2005 11:55 PM


Obviously creationism gets largely misrepresented by die-hard religious fanatics. The science gets lost to faith and faith isn't science.
Thought I'd chime in on some of your comments... Actually all belief is faith (see quote below). The question is, who can present the most coherent interpretaion of the evidence?
At the extremes of the debate, it gets a little fuzzy. Eventually, philosophy comes into play as a method of interpreting the evidence because the facts are easily interpreted through different worldviews. For example, dissagreements as to what 'information is' become essential to the discussion. These are philosophical disagreements and many keep the subject strictly on the emperical as a way to evade other issues that are considered less 'scientific.
I believe creationism is definately science. But the assumed philosophical framework of contemporary science would disagree. Even pinning that down proves difficult, as many 'ontological naturalists', call themselves 'methodological'. There's more than enough dishonesty to go around...
As for all science being faith, listen to Paul Davies, theoretical physicist / Australian Centre for Astrobiology:
”The worldview of a scientist, even the most atheistic scientist, is that essentially of Monotheism. It is a belief, which is accepted as an article of faith, that the universe is ordered in an intelligible way.
Now, you couldn’t be a scientist if you didn’t believe these two things. If you didn’t think there was an underlying order in nature, you wouldn’t bother to do it, because there is nothing to be found. And if you didn’t believe it was intelligible, you’d give up because there is no point if human beings can’t come to understand it.
But scientists do, as a matter of faith, accept that the universe is ordered and at least partially intelligible to human beings. And that is what underpins the entire scientific enterprise. And that is a theological position. It is absolutely ”theo’ when you look at history. It comes from a theological worldview.
That doesn’t mean you have to buy into the religion, or buy into the theology, but it is very, very significant in historical terms; that that is where it comes from and that scientists today, unshakably retain that worldview, as an act of faith. You cannot prove it logically has to be the case, that the universe is rational and intelligible. It could easily have been otherwise. It could have been arbitrary, it could have been absurd, it could have been utterly beyond human comprehension. It’s not! And scientists just take this for granted for the most part, and I think it’s a really important point that needs to be made.’
That is not a quote from a book. Instead, you can actually watch him say this by viewing 'The Privilaged Planet'; a DVD documentary available from many sources online. His quote is in the bonus material as question #1.
Don't let these boys here at EvC bother you Athansor. If you do, they will win every time. It's that kind of unreasonable resistance that leads very intelligent creationists to get impatient and prideful, and offer less than credible offerings. This debate is not a matter of proof, but of honesty. In that sense, it is very personal and individual. Long suffering is the path. Patience, and a realization that we do not change hearts. That is God's job. I've learned that lesson the hard way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Athansor, posted 08-16-2005 11:55 PM Athansor has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by nwr, posted 06-30-2006 1:17 AM Rob has replied
 Message 113 by inkorrekt, posted 07-08-2006 1:57 AM Rob has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 83 of 249 (327657)
06-30-2006 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by 2ice_baked_taters
02-20-2006 1:19 AM


Science does not deal with intent or meaning ...only the physical details. Nothing of science has ever implied intent or purpose.
The minute it does it is no longer science but becomes religion.
I'm afraid your wrong about that 2ice... you may wish to read the quote from Davies in the preceeding message (#82).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by 2ice_baked_taters, posted 02-20-2006 1:19 AM 2ice_baked_taters has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 85 of 249 (327665)
06-30-2006 1:54 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by nwr
06-30-2006 1:17 AM


You have posted that elsewhere. However, it is just the opinion of one scientist. It is not, in any sense, a defining characterization of science.
Actually yes it is. And any honest individual can see that when hearing Davies quote, irrespective of whatever proclamations you wish to lob against it. It is a powerful point and that is why it is so disturbing to you.
But he does not speak for all scientists, and scientists would not all agree with him.
Thanks for that enlightenment... No Duh! I suppose you would like to see them all in lock-step?
It is not part of a peer reviewed scientific paper. It is not something that has been peer reviewed by philosophers of science. Rather, it is a marketing blurb that is being used in the selling of religion. It carries exactly as much weight in science as do the statements Dawkin's makes promoting atheism. That is to say, it carries no weight at all.
Now don't cry... You are as predictable as Mon, Tues, Wed, Thurs, Fri, Sat... (notice I left out Sunday).
The truth is not determined by convention nwr... That is why Winston Churchill said, 'Democracy is the worst form of government; except for all the others.' The average joe could care less if something is peer reviewed. We don't trust people just becasue they have a title. We listen to what they say...
The truth speaks for itself, and rings loudly with those who seek it. It does not need your support. You need it's support, lest you fall down,
Paul Davies might well be deeply religious, and may prefer to describe science in a manner that he can integrate into his religious views.
For the record, Paul Davies is not known to be, or support, the Christian apologist. He states plainly in another place in the documentary, that you don't have to buy into the theology, but that science has originated as 'theo' because it begins with assumptions that cannot be proven. Open-shut case... Science is faith! He is simply an honest scientist. Which means he will likely become a christian.
If he is already, then he is as yet unwilling to face the ridicule of those in the field who eagerly 'crucify' the truth and it's reflectors! Or, it may be he is far wiser than us bold resistance fighters. If so, I applaud his attack as he keeps you totally off-gaurd by not admitting his faith. A tactic ussually left to naturalists who pretend to be unbiased.
Anyone who holds an opinion is not unbiased!
Don't forget that science 'of the day back' in 'BC'(whenever?), thought the earth to be supported on the back of a tortoise! At the roughly the same time, the Torah (Bible/Old Testament) was showing the earth to hang upon nothing! The only difference, as is the case today, is that many scientists look for any evidence to deny the moral implications of theology. And in the market for scientific ideas, evolution sells because people don't want to know the truth. I have seen that for myself when attempting to share the information. Many of them believe me when I explain the implications and offer a free copy of the DvD, but they don't want to think about it 'right now'...
What is the truth??? We are sinners. And as a result are lost to our imaginations in a search to escape the truth...
That goes for creationists too! But we should all know better.
It was nice to talk to you again 'nwr'...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by nwr, posted 06-30-2006 1:17 AM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by cavediver, posted 06-30-2006 4:40 AM Rob has replied
 Message 87 by nwr, posted 06-30-2006 8:54 AM Rob has not replied
 Message 89 by jar, posted 06-30-2006 10:09 AM Rob has not replied
 Message 94 by Discreet Label, posted 06-30-2006 9:11 PM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 88 of 249 (327724)
06-30-2006 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by cavediver
06-30-2006 4:40 AM


It is not a matter of faith. It is a matter of the fact that science WORKS!!! The universe daily demonstrates its ordered nature, its intelligibility everytime you switch on your PC to take part at EvC. Everytime you get in your truck and drive. Everytime you (or your wife) cooks a meal. No faith is required becasue the universe keeps reminding us how understandable it is. We have evidence. That is how science is constructed. It is the antithesis of faith. We only move forward in science when we see that something works.
Yes, I understand. Order is the ruling power, not chaos! But is that belief ultimately proveable? Is this universe absolute in anything less than a metaphysical sense? I think not! For at one time (that is to say, before time) it did not exist. And in that way, it was actually more absolute that it could ever be with imperfect beings like ourselves running rampant by our own whims.
It seems to me that within a naturalist framework, and within time (as we are) that the predictability of order falls short of the proof that contemporary science assumes to imply. It's determinist assumption is accepted, and as such, has a form of Godliness, yet it denies that power.
Although the quantum seems (to me) to show how elusive determinsm is, at the same time it points to a determinism that is far more concrete within the infinite nature of God.
Perhaps you could say these things better than I. It sounds like you know what I mean and I appriciate your support and kind words. Perhaps I am attempting to say it from a sophomoric level of understanding. As C.S. Lewis said, 'I am doing the best I can.'
I am sorry about the pride. It never seems to die. There are a couple folks here that I continue to allow to get under my skin. I take responsibility for that.
It's a good thing that I am not God, for my justice fails miserably. God says 'an eye for an eye', and in so doing is far more merciful and patient that I. In my corrupted heart, I naturally think, 'an eye for an ear-ring'. I must forgive them instead because they do not know...
The opposition seems to have no respect for the implications (philosophically) of their worldviews. I worry too much that the fear and hostility they engender may scare off the truth seeker who may conclude that the persecution is warranted. But I recognise that this is self defeating to my own belief. As I eluded to in a previous post, the truth rings loud and clear to those who hear it. And ultimatley, the the trial of our faith is more treasured than gold and silver, and is tried by fire. So, we need these detractors.
I just have a hard time letting go of my 'good name'. And that is the most self-defeating of all, considering what it is I preach.
I think you understand. With God's help, I will endeavor to do better in the future...
Rob

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by cavediver, posted 06-30-2006 4:40 AM cavediver has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 95 of 249 (327913)
06-30-2006 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Discreet Label
06-30-2006 9:11 PM


So I ask the question why do you try to support your faith through these science forums?
That is an excellent question...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Discreet Label, posted 06-30-2006 9:11 PM Discreet Label has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Discreet Label, posted 06-30-2006 9:36 PM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 97 of 249 (327990)
07-01-2006 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Discreet Label
06-30-2006 9:36 PM


I am curious as how you find the question to be excellent? Mostly I am interested in how you are thinking about the question, how you interpret it, and perhaps what it means to you in a broader context?
My initial reason was that it seems to be a waste of time. I do not get the sense that many 'scientific' people are using science to find the truth, but rather to debunk religion. That is called 'bias'. It is like I told a friend of mine... 'Evolution dosen't sell because it is true, but because it is what the market wants.'
I say that because even though I think irreducible complexity and other issues are cut and dry, I have seen for myself how a person can deny that interpretation of the evidence by getting into minutia that totally clouds the issues, such as the definition of information and probability theory.
Those are not fully mathematical and testable issues, and are instead left to the individual to 'choose'. The convention may insist on a definition, but that is ultimately irrelevant as many an empiricist will deny morality as convention, and therefore not true.
The other reason I thought it was an excellent question, is that I thought I was more clever than I have turned out to be. I operate under the same conditions as many others. I tend to project my own interpretation onto others, and I consider myself to be an honest individual. Others may view all people as manipulative because they are themselves manipulative. It is simple transference.
I have found that my education in the terminology and facts within the body of science is far less than adequate to change the hearts of many in this forum. However, even if it were adequate, I do not suppose it would matter for the crusade in question. You cannot defeat a person that refuses to admit defeat.
I for one admit defeat, in as much as I do not posses the power to change anyones heart on these matters. I came into this forum with a partial understanding and appriciation of the fact that only God has that power. I think I have a greater uppriciation for that fact now.
I am just a man, and as such do not create reality (other than whatever evils I can perform to corrupt the reality that already exists), so my proclaimations of truth are rejected without thought by many as a rejection of me. Fruit is born when an individual looks past the prophet and his faults.
This entire excersize has revealed more of my own wickedness and pride to me than I thought existed. My quickness to defend my good name has made me realize that too often I have not sought to glorify our Lord, but myself.
The truth is all that matters, no matter where it is ultimately found. That has always been, and will always be, our redeemer. We are lost, and seek to understand why we are here. But we can never posess such knowledge, without accepting the fact that to be lost, means to not recognize the way, though it is right in front of you in the form of a fork in the road.
Many do not take the fork I preach because of the moral implications. Our Lord has hidden all of reality behind our ablity to be honest to the point of rejecting one's self and his/her sinful desires.
Since our desires are natural, then I ask you, what is wrong with anything?
Perhaps it is the attempt to control ourselves that is our disfunction. Maybe we should simply be who we really are. No hang-ups man!
If we do that, then we will be closer to repentance than pretending our hearts are pure. God only asks that we be honest with Him. Take off the fig leaves and tremble before His holiness. If we ask Him, he will forgive all sin and reveal Himself and mysteries we never thought we'd know. You can know!
But if we insist on our fig leaves, then He cannot forgive and open our eye's because we refuse to see. He is not a fascist, and will not force His reality upon us. The irony, is that that is the only thing we were made for, but we want our sin too. We can't have reality and our sin, because God's reality is perfect.
We set our bar too low and underestimate the relativism of our relativism. We rationalize and obfuscate, searching desperately to have it both ways. When He finally defeats us (sometimes by using very imperfect men), then our eye's begin to open. And reality is so shocking and wonderful...
...that our view of science is skewed in the rush to reconcile things which will not be reconciled with any simple clarity.
What is the definition of science?
Well, appearently it is whatever you want it to be...
Rob

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Discreet Label, posted 06-30-2006 9:36 PM Discreet Label has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by ramoss, posted 07-01-2006 1:00 PM Rob has replied
 Message 99 by anglagard, posted 07-01-2006 1:34 PM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 100 of 249 (328010)
07-01-2006 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by ramoss
07-01-2006 1:00 PM


Thank you for sharing... It is nice of you to show that fundamentalism works both ways. Your bold, black and white reasoning is very entertaining to me personally.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by ramoss, posted 07-01-2006 1:00 PM ramoss has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 101 of 249 (328013)
07-01-2006 1:48 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by anglagard
07-01-2006 1:34 PM


You seem to imply that one must support your beliefs concerning creationism/ID to be considered religious. Is that true?
Not at all. I believed in evolution myself as well as God at one time.
And I am not religious! Religion is mans attempt to be good. If Christianity is not true... then I have no interest in it. But it is true because it is not mans attempt to be good, it is man's admission that he is not good, and a realization that 'good' = 'God'.
Also, I must ask, how many practicing scientists have you known in your life?
None! I reside with the little people... The unimportant and the working class. We don't have the fortune and honor of being able to hobnob with the important and smart! The righteous and the proud!
The movers and shakers... The string pullers... the political...
Those above the fray... The distinguished!
If only I had such connections... Then what?
Then nothing!
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by anglagard, posted 07-01-2006 1:34 PM anglagard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by anglagard, posted 07-01-2006 2:23 PM Rob has replied
 Message 110 by Discreet Label, posted 07-03-2006 3:31 PM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 103 of 249 (328042)
07-01-2006 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by anglagard
07-01-2006 2:23 PM


You sure seem to have a lot of personal vitrol for a group of people that, by your own admission, you don't even know.
Not in all cases mind you, but in general, yes, you are right!
No-one likes to see in someone else, the qualities they most hate in themsleves...
I hate pride, mostly becasue I am prideful myself, and understadn how destructive it is.
Rob

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by anglagard, posted 07-01-2006 2:23 PM anglagard has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 104 of 249 (328048)
07-01-2006 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by anglagard
07-01-2006 2:23 PM


Just to clarify what it is I am trying to point out; that is, this issue of pride (the root of sin). Let me address another point of yours:
You sure seem to have a lot of personal vitrol for a group of people that, by your own admission, you don't even know.
what I want to point out is that I do know them...
Let me explain by quoting C.S. Lewis:
There is one thing, and only one, in the whole universe which we know more about than we could learn from external observation. That one thing is Man. We do not merely observe men, we are men.
Mere Christianity
Not only are our fig leaves invisible to God. But even to men, the emperor wears no clothes (or is that empericist?).
Proclaming that is meaningless to the individual, until the individual admits his part in that play...
Rob

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by anglagard, posted 07-01-2006 2:23 PM anglagard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by nwr, posted 07-01-2006 5:13 PM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 106 of 249 (328090)
07-01-2006 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by nwr
07-01-2006 5:13 PM


By the way, C.S. Lewis was a theistic evolutionist.
Yes, that is the impression I got from his writing as well.
Just goes to show that scientific beliefs are really irrelevant to faith in Christ. As I have said before, I was a theistic evolutionist myself at one time.
It is helpful to see that Genesis is true, but it is not a prerequisite to salvation. All that is needed is to see that we are sinners in need of a savior, and the belief that Jesus really was God's son. That He died for our sins, and rose on the third day.
If one can believe those things, by way of conviction by the Holy Spirit, then one can repent without need of the full understanding of where science and it's definition begins and ends...
As so often happens, you are way off topic.
In your opinion nwr... in your opinion...
Like many in this forum, you would have me talk only about water in spite of the earth and skies.
I will not comply, but also do my best to explain why.
With God's grace, you will come to see, in spite of my failings...
OFF TOPIC,Rob. Take it back to whether creationism and ID are science or not.
Edited by AdminFaith, : No reason given.

Any biters in the stream?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by nwr, posted 07-01-2006 5:13 PM nwr has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by ramoss, posted 07-01-2006 7:52 PM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 108 of 249 (328135)
07-01-2006 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by ramoss
07-01-2006 7:52 PM


Tell me.
If someone is trying to lead you to the 'truth'... and you find that they continually lie, distort things, make assertions you know are wrong, and refuse to listen to what you have to say, would you accept anything they say as 'truth'?
Sounds a little dramatized to me Ramoss, but certainly the answer is no!
That is why the words of Jesus are so profound. I find no fault in Him and neither do you...
It is nice to see you moralizing with such vigor. You are closer to the truth than you realize by invoking such a true standard as honesty.
How about you Ramoss?
How convoluted and deep can a lie be?
How legalistic and evasive can a liar be?
How genuinely deceptive for the defense of his prize?
How can he, a mere man, turn reality on it's head, morphing truth into sophistry, and sophistry into truth?
How cunning, how breeding of death are his heart's intentions?
How does he crucify the truth without end or pause?
Do you know the human heart Ramoss?
Do you exclude yourself from the fray?
Are you above it all on you pedestal?
Are you a God?
Yes Ramoss. Hang me and twist my words. Cover my intentions. Bury me in the sands of confusion. Remove my good name. Distort character and turn conviction to accusation.
Perhaps if I were perfect, you would listen to my words...
No! You would nail me to a tree, and call me a blasphemer!
What is science Ramoss?
The observer is given tremendous power to define truth.
What he does with that power will show who he really is.
Will he keep it as his own or give it back to it's rightful owner?
As God said to Adam, where are you Ramoss?
What will you do with your power?
Certainly you would not crucify a mere mortal such as me to justify yourself?
No, not you...
OFF TOPIC. PLEASE RETURN TO TOPIC.
Edited by AdminFaith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by ramoss, posted 07-01-2006 7:52 PM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by MUTTY6969, posted 07-02-2006 3:00 AM Rob has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5849 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 111 of 249 (328683)
07-03-2006 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Discreet Label
07-03-2006 3:31 PM


Do you know how to diagram a sentance?
As the goat reverend said at the end of his message: http://EvC Forum: Induction and Science -->EvC Forum: Induction and Science
it seems harder for you to understand that people don't want to hear
If the mind is closed, then the light goes out...
Edited by AdminJar, : off topic pointless post hidden

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Discreet Label, posted 07-03-2006 3:31 PM Discreet Label has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by AdminNosy, posted 07-03-2006 9:00 PM Rob 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