science, religion, and philosophy

Home | Community | Message Board

You are not signed in.
New Account

Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop:

Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Cultivation Supplies

APE Liquid Culture For Sale, Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale

Jump to first unread post

Pages: 1

Huehuecoyotl
Fading Slowly

Registered: 06/13/04
Posts: 10,699
Loc: On the Border

science, religion, and philosophy

#3684416 - 01/26/05 05:35 PM (21 years, 6 months ago)

I am a strong proponent of science and the scientific method. I am also a strong supporter of religion, and even though I have expressed these views in the past I perceive that I have been lumped into a group, here on the forum, called "the skeptics". There is a serious fallacy in creating such imaginary definitions. By defining one as a skeptic, to a community, one attempts unconsciously (or consciously) to set limits on the personality being defined as to how it behaves in said community. The same can be said of the definition that exists of the "believers". Laying out either definition in a community is illogical and unfair. I have, I admit, been guilty of this myself. Many people here on both sides of the science/religion debate tend to also apply these definitions to themselves therefore limiting their freedom to express themselves or change their minds. My thesis here is to demonstrate that such definitions can be transcended on a personal and community level. I also will propose that while religion and science should remain separate, for the mutual benefit of both, that they can be reconciled. Those who have read my posts may recall that I claim to have studied shamanism a great deal, and that I conceive of a thing called "the spirit"; a term that I use to describe a combination of God and the spiritual essence of man and nature. On the other hand I believe that when the scientific community has uncovered knowledge, that holds up under scrutiny, that it should not be rejected because it conflicts with our personal philosophies, which, by the way, should be dynamic...not static. This is the cause of many fallacious theories. A few examples would be (I am going to step on some toes here) creationism and aspects (not all) of the debate about alien life, as well as the "Mayan Calendar/2012" phenomenon. I include these examples because they currently ignore crucial bits of scientific knowledge while selectively using other bits of scientific knowledge as their basis, creating major inconsistencies in these concepts. Do I think that all religious and paranormal ideas should be cast out because science has not (and cannot) proved their existence? By my way of thinking this is a little like throwing out the baby with the bath water. The goals of science and religion are quite separate. Science seeks to understand how nature behaves. Religion and philosophy tend to want to address the question of the purpose of nature. To live devoid of any spiritual influence, by my thinking, makes one harsh and negatively inclined with a great rigidity of thought. A good example of this, often cited by Markosthegnostic, is that of the famous atheist Madeline Murray O'Hare. She was a bitter person who portrayed atheism with Nazi like fervor and was eventually murdered by her own family.
Albert Einstein once replied to a young girl's question about the usefulness of prayer with:

"Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe -- a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble."

A quote from Stephen Hawking:

"You don't need to appeal to God to set the initial conditions for the universe, but that doesn't prove that there is no God - only that he acts through the laws of physics."

Adopting the opposite view of religion over science often leads one to become an unquestioning moron blind in the face of truth. One need only to do a quick search of the net to find these people who in their search for spiritual truth have fallen off the edge of reality and embraced lunacy. The promotion of mass ignorance in this way does not advance our society, and does indelible harm by confusing people?s notions about the relationship between science and religion. True science becomes buried, in the collective conscious of our society, under the infertile soil of pseudoscience.
My secondary purpose here is to dispel the notion that myself, or any of us, can be defined. Like the Universe that surrounds us we are a mystery...to ourselves and others. Creating categories and generalizations to group objects is human nature, but humans are not objects alike in every way. Our varieties are endless and defining our nature just succeeds in defining our capabilities so as to limit them. Many of us feel that standing astraddle the science/religion fence is so uncomfortable that we must reside on one side or the other. I tell you that there is no fence...but there is a middle way.

--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras:

Similar Threads	Poster	Views	Replies	Last post
philosiphy of religion ( 1 2 3 4 all )	aluminum_can	10,475	77	08/10/01 03:58 AM by Zen Peddler
Science and Pseudoscience ( 1 2 3 all )	Huehuecoyotl	3,684	49	01/25/05 05:30 AM by oceansize
Eastern philosophies... ( 1 2 3 4 all )	UnenlightenedOne	8,731	65	02/29/16 07:09 PM by MarkostheGnostic
Absolute Truth vs. Science ( 1 2 all )	infidelGOD	2,578	20	01/14/04 01:27 PM by muhurgle
Why science is stupid ( 1 2 all )	Mixomatosis	2,279	36	11/13/03 05:45 PM by Strumpling
Is Science a form of Mythology? ( 1 2 3 all )	Adamist	4,691	52	01/23/03 01:21 PM by Anonymous
Isn't religion wierd? ( 1 2 all )	silversoul7	1,907	22	08/31/04 12:16 PM by BlueCoyote
A strawman in need of inoculation(mycelia please!) ( 1 2 3 all )	whiterasta	3,058	48	01/29/03 10:41 AM by falcon