Is There Any Room For God In Modern Science?

There are no systems of atheism. Atheism is a lack of belief in a diety. There is nothing to believe, no dogma to profess.

Do you conceded all my points then? You have nothing else to say?

Noxious, you provided an argument that evolution is incorrect based on the 2nd law of thermodynamics, myself and several other posters pointed out that you are incorrect, for a variety of reasons. You completely ignored those rebuttals and said something about knowing much more science than we think (more than Bill Nye in fact, quite a claim!). Now you are taking potshots against at my attitude and offering nothing substantive except "youre a jerk and you're mean".

Can you not do better? Can you not simply engage with the conversation that you yourself started?

These conversations seem to drift off after a while with those arguing for the "spooky" side of reality eventually just sulking and refusing to participate in defending the points they brought up, arguing that defense is impossible in the light of my attitude.

I think it's sadly obvious that defense is not possible because they are indefensible points. But I know you can't admit that here, and say you're wrong in your beliefs.

I know that even if you had a peak experience in which your theological beliefs were totally dismantled, you would need to protect your ego and deny such an event and write it off as an anomaly.

I am 100% open to evidence of any kind, for any phenomenon; god, jesus, kundalini, etc.

The issue is that I don't think that same openness is shared across the floor here.

Take a minute and really ask yourself, "What would it look like if I were to come across evidence that conclussively convinced me that these things do not exist? What would it take for me to say Wow, turns out I was profoundly mistaken about this stuff the whole time"?

I know what it would take for ME to say that. My mind literally bursts with examples of things that would prove to me that god is real, that jesus is god, that kundalini and magick exist, etc etc.

Does the same truth hold in you? Are you even POTENTIALLY open to admitting that you've got things backwards? I don't think so. And I think we're seeing the Concorde Fallacy here, which is where someone will not admit they are mistaken because they have invested too much into their position. They will rationalize it any way they can in order to preserve continuity of their "story", because it takes a pair of balls to admit that you're wrong, and to admit that you've been wrong for DECADES about the DEEPEST questions youve ever asked . . . perhaps that is really asking too much from people and these things can never be productive. I choose to hope against hope.

There is a profound chasm to be addressed in all these debates; a different view on the merits of evidence and reason.

If you don't value evidence and reason, and will not budge your position when they arrive to show you that you are mistaken, then all you're doing is being a sound byte.

Prove me wrong or step up and admit that the position you've been arguing for this whole time now appears less obvious than you thought coming into this thread. Admitting that you have budged even 1% is to admit that you are intelligent, reasonable, and are paying attention.

To deny this means we are all wasting our time and this is not real dialogue, real debate, real philosophy.

 

Lack of system then if you prefer. However it's no use being dogmatic whilst saying atheism is non dogmatic. Something to which I've noticed many of the current crop of atheists are prone. The belief that there is no God is in effect a dogma.

I don't see much point in going through your points. But I'll mention 2 of them. First my own healing experience. Since you don't know the details and I'm not willing to talk about it in detail, I think your conclusions are presumptuous, and largely irrelevant.Probably it would be better if I had kept my personal experiences to myself in this context.

Buddhism without re-incarnation? Like Christianity without sin. Vedanta without ignorance.

 

God will always be the god of the gaps. Science is about observations. God is about faith. We will continue to slowly conquer areas of mystery, and there will continue to be those who label the unexplored territory god. Humans crave an answer, so much so that many people will prefer a bad answer to no answer.

 

Definition of dogma: A principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true

So now you can either try and explain to me how atheism, the lack of belief in god, is a dogma, or you can admit that you are mistaken on this point, and drop it. I'm interested to see which you choose, because intellectual honesty is very important to me, and to discourse.

Christianity without sin makes no sense because then Jesus didn't save us from anything.

Buddhism without re-incarnation makes perfect sense because you can realize that your suffering in life is caused by clinging to temporary conditions, without ever once mentioning whether or not you happen to be reborn or not when you die. The concept of Karma can be completely extracted from buddhism, leaving a much more streamlined and effective system

It's more akin to the belief in the trinity; plenty of christians do not believe in the trinity, and think it extraneous to the central message, and point.

 

That's a narrow definition of dogma, so let's say the belief there is no god is held by atheists in an inflexible way, and they regard it as a given fact. So it seems to me.

A watered down version of Buddhism is what you end up with in my opinion,given the central role given to karma and re-incarnation is most Buddhist schools. but again, your choice.

 

Mr. Writer, considering that pretty much the entirety of your reply are assumptions concerning me and my beliefs, it really isn't worth going into to try and defend myself against your assumptions.

if you recall, I never said that entropy disproves evolution or any such thing, I merely presented it as a niggly little bit of stuff to be rectified, which apparently I'm not mistaken about considering the articles and such presented dealing with that very point.
so am I to assume by your responses concerning it that we may as well worship the sun as that is the source of all energy and life itself?
Maybe you could resurrect the old Egyptian sun worship and be Ra's appointed spokesman on Earth.
(I can be ridiculously ludicrous and juvenile as well. )

honestly, I challenge you to find anywhere where I have proclaimed what I believe in regards to all this crap, I have at most only related personal experiences and opinions/corrections whenever someone erroneously represents Biblical crap.

I did present you with a bit of compelling science, the brain activity of individuals speaking in tongues and you just basically said " yeah, whatever" failing to recognize it for what it is, a wholly unique experience in the world of religious or meditative practices that negates all the assumptions about speaking in tongues being faked, meditation, chanting or any of the other numerous things that are offered as an explanation for the phenomena.
I honestly thought that your scientific curiosity would have at least picked up on that, but it appears your prejudice and bias took the day instead.
There is some of that evidence or "proof" you are looking for, but I guess it is hard for you to honestly consider it because it may lead to a point where you are questioning what you believe to be true.
Is that the case?

I'm not asking you to accept any of what I may think or believe, just asking you to acknowledge you do not posses the knowledge you profess when it specifically comes to Christianity.

Nor did I ever claim any superiority over you, Bill Nye or anyone, simply that the Nye video was cute and something more suited to 4th grade kids.

It seems to me Mr. Writer, it is you, not I, that is being rather closed minded.
I would ask you to pose all those same questions to yourself, are you even potentially capable of accepting you may be wrong?

Did it ever occur to you that yes, I do always take into consideration stuff that may cause me to question shit, but whenever the whole gestalt of my life experience is considered, I still hold to my position.
Maybe you just need to have more life experiences, I am after all twice your age and that is not meant in any derogatory fashion whatsoever, simply a fact of life on this planet.

I love yet again your assumptions that I am the one who must be wrong in my beliefs all these decades....LOL

WHAT BELIEFS WOULD THAT BE?
could you tell me again exactly what it is I believe because I don't remember what I told you.

 

yes. you have now done all the work that is required to produce a testable, scientific theory. all the experimentation, and peer review, and general consensus among virtually all the worlds' experts in a field. it's exactly the same thing as gravity and natural selection.


it is no fault of science that the english language is often redundant. i agree that maybe not using the word "theory" would clear up a lot of confusion, but so would you simply accepting the alternate use of the word theory when applied to science!!

 

I think we are all centered in ourselves....where else can we center ourselves?

All humor aside, only each person knows who they really are completely inside....is what I meant.

 

Don't worry, Meagain...I was still on topic with the philosophy of "the god within."

Only I had another way of trying to talk about it.....

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYp5XuGYqqY

 

I am not so sure we know what makes us up inside ourselves. Ask someone who they are inside and most often then none, they described everyone elses' answer to that question.
There seems to be no identity in our interpretation of our own reality, we simply repeat what we see, like mirrors of ourselves.

Most are what they per-sieve "God" to want them to be or actually what the conveyor of "Gods" word tells them they should be. Which again is "his" own interpretation of what "God" conveys, so in essence, religion is infact, only an interpretation of what man believes "God" wants

There is no truth to ourselves until we break from that monotonous hold that belief has over individuals. Then we can discover "who we are".

 

Hello, Xenxan.... I was trying to figure out how to pronounce your user name before. I don't think i can though. Is it a tongue twister?

 

i think it's pronounced "zen-zan" ?

 

There is absolutely no room for God INSIDE of science. How can this even be a serious question?

A scientist may have non-scientific beliefs OUTSIDE of his scientific work. As long as it does not interfere with the scientific work, faith in God is irrelevant and has nothing to do with real scientific work. Real scientific methods have safeguards against corruption from any bias; superstition, faith, religion, ignorance, dishonesty... These safeguards include peer review, logical scrutiny, and empirical proofs and observable third party replications.

Unfortunately for religion, science often disproves religious claims. Also science explains nearly every aspect of human mental conditioning regarding faith religion and superstition. There are logical explanations why humans invented Gods and religions and reinforced superstitious behaviors for survival over thousands of generations.

https://youtu.be/sHCHEykUxP4

https://youtu.be/SUMY7epfsHs

 

In regards to this quote earlier and the Donald Hoffman video...

What do you make of if we presumably understand evolution, yet still create "minds" infinitely more complex than evolution (apparently spacetime itself as well) as being fundamental to reality as Hoffman suggests?

To quote from the video: "Perhaps reality is some vast machine that causes our conscious experience or perhaps reality is a network of conscious agents, simple and complex, that causes each others conscious experience."

 

I wouldn't believe in Kundalini if i weren't going through the process. But now, to say that it's not real sounds like the most absurd thing ever. But i do know that prior to going through the energy, that i never knew about or even entertained the idea in my head of either magick or kundalini. I was actually contemplating just today how as a child that i never could have been open to something like Magick, that "Magic" is reserved for fantasy stories. Now i'm feeling that it's actually deliberately put in the realm of fantasy.

You seem to think that Science doesn't have power monitors going on to it. There are certain elite leaders who want to keep people in society under their control. There are political, religious, and other leaders who remove the ideas of Magick from society to keep us to believe in not being as powerful as we actually are. What evidence is there? Just turn on the local or world news and look at all the striking back of angry citizens towards their governments. This is no longer conspiracy-theory stuff. It's just truth.

 

Writer...sometimes the only evidence there is is PERSONAL SUBJECTIVE evidence. It's not my problem that Science isn't open minded up to even attempting to make instruments that can detect a common denominator of evidence for anyone claiming to be going through a kundalini process. I and no other doctor have an explanation for a variety of things, such as why when getting a psychological evaluation that i got average or above average on all the tests except the memory tests, which i got a score so low that less than 1 percent of anyone who had done the evaluation had gotten that score. Short term memory loss just so happens to be a common symptom of anyone going through a kundalini process. There is also no explanation for having a regular body temperature and yet internally going through intense amounts of heat that are simply impossible to know if you aren't in my shoes.

 

Mystery is eternal. I sometimes wonder if science had all the answers, would we be God? But then I realize scientists can't answer that question, so it can't have all the answers. But anyway, it's like the hard problem of consciousness...it's just impossible to say how strange reality is. It's totally a matter of opinion and a mystery.