The Sounds of Science

[Techdread]

Re: The Sounds of Science

God gave us curious mind. He obvious wants us to learn a lot about His universe. I have even had SETI running on my computer. http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/

jim

If my old bible studies are correct Eve by tempting Adam by the apple from the tree of knowledge gave us our cursorily, but I digress.

We evolved curious mind's because life tends to gets more complex as time goes by. Run the clock backwards and organisms get more simple.

Maybe God(s) set the wheels in motion in the first place, however I have know doubt that most of the big questions will be answered with out the need for a God(s).

And most importantly does believing in a single God help in our understanding of the Universe?

[charliebrown]

Re: The Sounds of Science

Does the earth really go around the sun? Or is that just the model that yields the simplest mathematical model?

[sunskyfan]

Re: The Sounds of Science

As usual Raz you are thought provoking . I do like the concept of animating truth as the pivot for connecting the physical and the non-physical world. It has been in my mind for some time that this the common theme coming out of the Mediterranean that sparked the creation of Western civilization is the worship for first the word (as in written language) and the idea. We assume that people always looked at the world the way we do now but they didn't. When Jesuit missionaries would encounter peoples who could not read they would have a Priest write something on a piece of paper and have one of the tribesmen carry it to another priest far away. The transfer of information appeared mystical. Without faith/confidence in abstractions ideas are fantasy. It doesn't matter what the accurate historical narrative to me it is good enough to recognize that whatever happened a religion was born that held that abstraction was real and thus, along with all the "nutrients" of the region birthed Western Civilization and Western Science and a very successful ultimately progressive peoples.

How does this relate to economics and itulip? Money is an abstraction that has force in the real world through human beings. It bridges the two. It is pretty clear to me that the less moral and ethical the world is (over time) the more physical its money must ultimately be. Gold is the ultimate symbol that we have lost confidence in our fellow man to act morally, legally, and ethically. Fiat money makes for an incredibly efficient economy that can produces remarkable wealth but it doesn't take a religious man (which I am not) to ask when will learn that when we abrogate our morality/ethics our fiat money becomes worthless?

[flintlock]

Re: The Sounds of Science

Yet not all objections to this are intellectual, for when encountering Ultimate Reality you will understand that rejecting it leaves you in a very cold place. But the desire to be accountable to no one is very powerful, and most men would prefer to be their own god.

I find this is very true. It suits our human nature. Most of us do prefer to answer to no one. Yet doing so does leave us in a cold place. What a conflict!

I was raised Christian but have found it very hard to hang on to some of the beliefs I was raised on. Some things just don't add up. And the frauds I see wearing religion on their sleeves are very demoralizing. I found the "Christian faith" of my Grandmother's generation much more believable. They lived it, and it wasn't used for personal gain as often as today. I can truthfully say there are very few "Religious persons" I personally know today who strike me as sincere, even viewed in a very lenient way. More often than not it appears to be used as a tool for social or professional advancement, psychological comfort, or more cynically, as a facade to hide more sinister motives. It saddens me to feel this way because at one point in my life religion really gave me comfort. Now it just perplexes me.

But one thing I did want to say. Science in itself can become a sort of religion. Many have a unlimited faith that science has all the answers. It gives them a secure feeling that they have it all figured out. It's in our human nature to seek this feeling just as much as seeking religion fills that need for others. I'd say be careful of the pride in your own intellect that you don't miss something. For all we know we are all a figment of our own imaginations!

[c1ue]

Re: The Sounds of Science

I do find it curious that many seek to reconcile science with religion.

One requires faith, the other requires skepticism.

There is no requirement that the two must overlap - it is only those which seek to unify these completely disparate spheres who are trying to mix fire and water.

As for evolution - the part which both sides miss is that the evolution in action isn't necessarily in the future. Much of evolution has already occurred and simply hasn't expressed yet.

The work done by Belyaev is an excellent example: it isn't that selective breeding suddenly created multiple new species of domesticated foxes.

http://www.hum.utah.edu/~bbenham/251...Experiment.pdf

It is that the underlying genetic diversity was obscured by a small subset of dominant genes.

Thus the concept that some magic gene appears which changes everything is 'now-ism' and misses the complexity of the actual genetic record.

Certainly you can ascribe this complexity to a higher level organization, but equally so this complexity can be a result of millions and billions of years of evolution - or more correctly the constant addition of variation into the DNA record.

Put another way: it isn't that evolution rewards survival of the fittest.

Survival by definition has nothing to do with being fit - it merely denotes survival. Genes which promote survival in turn are rarely a magic bullet - the true factor is whether the genes are widespread enough, followed by the genes at least not interfering with survival itself. A gene which actually somehow specifically aids survival is rare indeed and almost always has some type of penalty associated with it.

Sickle cell anemia, for example, is a very interesting genetic phenomena: a recessive gene which in its most common form (non-expressed but present), appears to confer health benefits against a range of debilitating diseases but which in its expressed form basically kills the bearer.

[jiimbergin]

Re: The Sounds of Science

I can truthfully say there are very few "Religious persons" I personally know today who strike me as sincere, even viewed in a very lenient way. More often than not it appears to be used as a tool for social or professional advancement, psychological comfort, or more cynically, as a facade to hide more sinister motives. It saddens me to feel this way because at one point in my life religion really gave me comfort. Now it just perplexes me.

!

There are many people who claim to be Christian, including those in the most fundamental of churches who really do not know the Lord. There are probably many near you who truly love the Lord and do not use Christianity to get something. I know that there are many that I know both where I live and elsewhere in the world. I pray that someday you may find some.

Jim

[Techdread]

Re: The Sounds of Science

Nice one, on lighter note.

[charliebrown]

Re: The Sounds of Science

OK, in retro-spec I guess it does. Observationally, we can be fooled, but we do have the law of gravity and planetary mechanics, Which I am not willing to question.