Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   God vs. Science
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3736 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 8 of 164 (453540)
02-02-2008 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Crooked to what standard
02-01-2008 5:34 PM


I knew I was going to have trouble with this post only a few lines into it.
A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the students, "Let me explain the problem science has with religion." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.
Can we clarify if we're talking about a science professor or a philosophy professor because philosophy and science are two separate areas, although they can overlap a bit in the philosophy of science?
As a science professor, this imaginary individual really sucks at understanding what science is and does. As a philosophy professor he sucks as well.
I'd be asking for my money back as well and at the same time asking the institution to check the validity of the guy's qualifications.
The post is doing what is called arguing a straw man - i.e. it's setting up an incorrect view of science which it then demolishes with religious argument in order to "prove" religion.
Wouldn't it be so much better if when trying to criticise science, the post actually criticised science and not an intentionally warped version of it? All the post does is shoot down in flames the erroneous ideas of science which tend to be held by Creationists.
That's good for the evolutionists, since they don't then have to bother doing it themselves.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Crooked to what standard, posted 02-01-2008 5:34 PM Crooked to what standard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Rahvin, posted 02-02-2008 7:14 PM Trixie has not replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3736 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 18 of 164 (453591)
02-03-2008 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Crooked to what standard
02-01-2008 5:34 PM


Not exactly new, either
Can I point out that the views acsribed to our professor (existence of dark, cold etc) are actually ascribed to the Wizards in the Discworld novels of Terry Pratchett? There is also the absence of drunkness (sober), but there is also knurd which is out the other end of sober. Discworld operates on ideas like these, everything humming along nicely and the misconceptions of science which are found in Roundworld (ie us) are actually science in the workings of Discworld.
If anyone is interested, "The Science of Discword" is a fascinating book in which all the weird science of Discworld is used to explain basic scientific concepts of Roundworld.
Interestingly there are another two books "The Science of Discworld 2 - The Globe" and "The Science of Discworld 3 - Darwin's Watch" (according to hubby who is checking out the titles on his iPod Touch cos I'm hogging the puter). I read these books a while ago because I devour any Pratchett books and I was very impressed, not to say helpless with laughter at the very witty writing.
I'm sure that many of you are familiar with Pratchett's work and have read these books. The Globe is a wonderful look at evolution and the meddling of the wizards in trying to help the creatures evolve. Time and again the results of their "intelligent design" are thwarted by natural forces wiping out their pet civilisations and the creation of the three mile long limpet had me prostrate on the floor laughing.
The parallels with the OP and "The Science of Discworld" are so many that it's almost frightening. Next scientists will be accused of believing in the particle of magic called the thaum and trying to split it. As for the computer which helps the wizards run the whole thing (Hex) it keeps giving "Out of cheese" errors because that's what powers it's mouse (its a parody of the "AWK baling out at line..." which became so infamous in UNIX machines that there were T-shirts with a parachuting auk on the front).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Crooked to what standard, posted 02-01-2008 5:34 PM Crooked to what standard 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