Science and religion

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by NeitherExtreme

Just wondering... can atheism be an immoble belief system that will reject anything that is not consistent with it's beliefs?

Well, I'm not an atheist, so I can't speak on behalf of the group if there is one.

I think God is extremely important and central to people's world views, as it is in my family, but in my own case I neither know nor care whether God is real. That's not atheism. Do I think that God exists in some absolute physical causal primal way? No, but I don't know and the question isn't all that interesting to me individually anyway -- there are much more important and interesting issues in the world for me to attend to.

However, the word atheist just means "one who does not believe in God". It doesn't describe a system of beliefs. I think there is a lot of heterogeneity -- some who don't believe because they are hyperrationalists, and others who don't believe because they really do have some kind of belief system that requires there to be no God.

If I was given some rather convincing evidence of the supernatural, I would tend to accept it- Especially if to not accept it would be the illogical choice. (Which I feel is exactly the position I'm in, and if you're interested I can give you an example to work with...) Would you?

Of course. But does convincing evidence of the supernatural mean that the supernatural is true? ... or does it mean that what was once regarded as supernatural might actually be natural after all? For example, if we found evidence of Sodom and Gomorrah's wasted ashes, and we found a pillar of salt nearby, does that make the supernatural true? Or does it mean that two ancient cities burned down and there's a pillar of salt nearby?

[NeitherExtreme]

Originally Posted by Aedes

Of course. But does convincing evidence of the supernatural mean that the supernatural is true? ... or does it mean that what was once regarded as supernatural might actually be natural after all? For example, if we found evidence of Sodom and Gomorrah's wasted ashes, and we found a pillar of salt nearby, does that make the supernatural true? Or does it mean that two ancient cities burned down and there's a pillar of salt nearby?

Well, your refering to ancient history, and that's a legitimate point that there are usually more than one way of interepreting what remains. I was refering to a little bit more "here and now"... Just to go super-hypothetical in an almost commical way: Let's say that you would be sitting in your chair and you would say out loud: "God if you exist, send a meteorite laced with gold and silver to prove it." And then one second later a meteorite laced with gold and silver comes crashing through the roof and lands at your feet. Engraved in it are the words "I exist". Would that constitute enough evidence?

I guess what I'm asking in my rediculous way is "Could there a point at which there is enough proof that you would believe that the supernatural exists?"

[Aedes]

You've heard of the experiment people have running, right, where they have an empty cage and they're asking if God will create something inside of it...

Yes, I will believe things that I witness. But the issue is not only what I've seen (the raw data of you making a prediction and then the prediction you describe occurring, in that sequence) -- it's also an issue of interpretation, right? If you pull that meteor trick with a cynic, in fact with many people, they will sooner think "Aww come on, I don't know how he did it, but he arranged for that to happen somehow."

People resist a supernatural explanation for things they witness. Kind of like going to a magic show. I've been to a handful of them and I've seen what they do, cutting people in half and making things disappear, and I haven't a bloody clue what they're doing. Nor have I found (though I haven't really looked) a natural explanation.

So this means that there are two possibilities -- either it IS magic and supernatural; or it's NOT magic, and I just don't know the explanation.

Another possibility in MANY of these whoa dude scenarios is coincidence. Last year my wife and I were sitting on a hotel balcony in Hawaii drinking glasses of wine, and in a moment where we stopped talking all of a sudden there was a shooting star, right in front of our faces. Was that a sign of some kind? What if we happened to have been talking about God in that moment -- would that be a message?? Or would it be two events juxtaposed whose only significance is that they're both witnessed in our consciousness? In 4 days we're going back to Hawaii, to that same hotel in fact, and the difference this time is that my wife is 6 months pregnant -- was that shooting star some kind of good omen?

What I'm arguing here is that it's not as simple as witnessing something supernatural. It's also a matter of overcoming an innate resistance to assume that that something I've witnessed is supernatural -- and this probably requires repeated occurrences as well as validation from others to make sure I'm not crazy. That's why the supernatural works for religions -- because it's validated within a whole community, which to some degree shares interpretation.

And isn't that what we've been talking about over in the evolution thread, about what science really is? Science is a type of group validation, in which you're not just making observations -- you're making observations under controlled circumstances (to the degree possible), then letting the whole world know the parameters of your observations so that they can repeat them if they want.

Life experience need not be as rigorous as a science lab. But if you see something that doesn't jive with your experience of reality, you may want to make sure someone else sees it too before you assume its truth -- there are lots of associations and interpretations we make.

Because I'll believe anything if it exists in the realm of credible experience, which includes brains other than mine. But on my own I'm more likely to believe I've lost it than I am to believe in vampires and goblins and fire breathing dragons, or to believe that I'm being visited by dead relatives -- so the day I start seeing those, and no one else can corroborate it, is the day I check myself into the "farm".

[NeitherExtreme]

Ok, well I might border on being just annoying here, but I'm not sure I've got the direct answer yet, but maybe I misread and you did give it when you said that you would believe thing you witness...

Anyhow, if not, take my silly metiorite scenerio- now pretend that it was a spontanious thing that you asked for that sign, so no one could possibly pulled a trick on you. And pretend that 5 of your most sober minded friends were in the room, heard your request, and verified that the event occured. Would that work for you? I know that there is something difficult to overcome to believe in an event being "supernatural" (and I personally feel more like a skeptic and cynic than otherwise, so I think I relate for the most part), but is there a point where you would believe it? Or would you actually catagorically refuse to believe it and consider yourself crazy even if a verifiable sign occured? (I realize my story here is nuts, but if you can, just play along for the theoretical discussion.)

Also- no I hadn't heard of that cage experiment... Doesn't sound too hopefull does it?

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by NeitherExtreme

Anyhow, if not, take my silly metiorite scenerio- now pretend that it was a spontanious thing that you asked for that sign, so no one could possibly pulled a trick on you. And pretend that 5 of your most sober minded friends were in the room, heard your request, and verified that the event occured. Would that work for you?

Yup. I'd believe it. And I'd either somehow dismiss it through some psychological compensating mechanism, or I'd become like all the people who have witnessed UFOs, trying to convince the world not to ignore me.

[Fido]

How much belief equals a knowledge?

[Fido]

Originally Posted by Aedes

Yup. I'd believe it. And I'd either somehow dismiss it through some psychological compensating mechanism, or I'd become like all the people who have witnessed UFOs, trying to convince the world not to ignore me.

If you see something, does that not equate to knowing it, and if you know it, why is it necessary to not be ignored? I have tried to tell people stuff they do not believe at all, because I find it necessary, and even think it is true. Then. I'm done. I have fulfilled my obligation to my fellow humans, and if they ignore me -fine. Considering the world has smoked many a person for getting out of line, I'll take ignorence in preference to being the main entertainment on any given day.

[NeitherExtreme]

Originally Posted by Aedes

Yup. I'd believe it. And I'd either somehow dismiss it through some psychological compensating mechanism, or I'd become like all the people who have witnessed UFOs, trying to convince the world not to ignore me.

Haha, quite right. In that exact scenerio I'd think about melting the thing down, selling the metals, and trying to convince the world to ignore me.

Anyhow, believing that you have witnessed something supernatural doesn't mean that you need to in turn try to make everyone else believe through that one event, though it might be good enough for you and those who know you well enough to believe that you're telling the truth. And of course even after the potential acknowledgement of the supernatural through such a crazy event, there would be more questions created than answered. So it also comes down to a hope (and a faith) that the supernatural has revealed more about itself than simple signs. Crazy signs might be able to point us in the right direction, but if a God does exist, it's pretty obvious that answering all of our personal questions is not His first priority. Which would raise the question of why wouldn't he want to answer all of our questions... Anyway, I don't pretend that a simple sign solves it all. At the same time I do believe that at times God has and does reveal Himself in ways that demand a logical and rational response.

PS. I can give a non-hypthetical example of such a situation that has been important one to me, if you're interested. If not, no harm done.

[dpmartin]

Aedes
i realy hope this helps:

"Can you say the above in a way that makes sense to one who does not already have faith? I don't think it's possible. And without taking refuge in the idea of God's grace granting people faith (wasn't it Augustine who proposed that?), explain rationally why it's incumbent upon humans to discover God, and why it shouldn't be incumbent upon God to reveal himself to humans?"

You know if it is God’s Will that man should know Him then the only way that man can know God is that God would reveal Himself to you, which on one hand "why it shouldn't be incumbent upon God to reveal himself to humans?" is a valid question. But on the other hand you have to ask my friend you have to ask Him. Been there. My plea was God I don’t know any one who knows you. Problem resolved, tho I did not expect an answer, nor did I look for those who did, after I asked. If you ask He will answer. Which I hope explains "explain rationally why it's incumbent upon humans to discover God, " not necessarily required to discover, but ask in sincerity.

May the Good Lord be with you

[davinci]

I once heard that we are how God increases his/her/it's consciousness. If all is thought and God is light and all. We are allowing the movement of consciousness.