I experience life and do as I freely will. Mistakes of perception, memory, and logic begat from social, emotional and other habitual patterns. Not something I'm supposedly prone to.
Our brains are prone to certain kinds of errors that only careful critical thinking can correct. This "six-pack of problems" may lead many of us unconsciously to accept false ideas:
· We prefer stories to statistics.
· We seek to confirm, not to question, our ideas.
· We rarely appreciate the role of chance and coincidence in shaping events.
· We sometimes misperceive the world around us.
· We tend to oversimplify our thinking.
· Our memories are often inaccurate.
You make it sound like science is more productive and useful than anyones faith or religion has ever been.Thats a phat NO. "Useful information"? Do I have to use the "S word" again?
To rephrase this; you are saying that faith and religion is more productive and useful to humanity than science is. Might I also add technology to this sentence since science and technology are fully connected. Without science and technology, the human race would be reduced to almost nothing. If one were to completely wipe all traces of science from human history, we would be without language, technology (which even includes the most basic tools such as hammers), medicine, mathematics, logic, statistics, rational thought, history, law, geography, communication, biology, chemistry, the list goes on. I ask you to imagine how life as a human would be if you lived just as any other animal on this planet with only your instincts to live by. If you think about it, I would seem that faith and religion wouldnt even exist if it were not for science. Humans have an uncontrollable urge to learn and discover new things. It is this curiosity that defines who we are as a race; it separates us from the animals. We are unlike anything else on this planet. If you take that away, we are nothing special.
To quote Albert Einstein, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
One can follow science and be religious simultaneously, but they must be kept separate in the mind. Religion is on a different level when compared to science. They both follow completely different philosophies which is why arguments always arise between the two.
I chose to defend religion and you and some others chose to generalize my beliefs. I haven't been putting religion over science this whole time. I've been comparing them and thats just so frustrating to you folks.
None of us have generalized your beliefs. We see the flaws in your argument to us and feel the need to bring them out in the open for discussion. If you feel the need to discontinue this course of action, feel free to. You have not frustrated me in the slightest, I enjoy this type of conversation and hope you choose to continue.
Reality is not subjective, you seem to think it is. This is the very reason the scientific method exists as it does - to eliminate the subjectivity of reality and observe what is OBJECTIVELY true to all of us. I couldn't care any less about your own little subjective reality, why? Because it means nothing to me, it's useless to me, to anyone else who is not you..
Its good to see your emotional. That makes it easier for me to defeat you. Your taking what I've said out of context because that is your only scape goat now. My reality is just as real as your reality. There is no requirement for you to care about something that is only unique to me.
I dont see the relevance of anything that was said here. It appears to be nothing more than an emotional attack on someone that prefers rational argument.
You're wrong. You can sit here and say the faith required to believe in a god is the same kind of faith scientists use when coming to conclusions all day long, but the bottom line is you're wrong. You don't understand the words you're using, if you did you would realize the arguments against your points are completely valid yet you sidestep them when brought up.
So basically the mode now is to criticized and save face. Your full of crap to be frank. I haven't sidestepped one issue yet. That was a false statement you made as well as a weak move to desparately criticize me. Every post thats been directed towards me I've confronted head on. I understand every word I use but I don't understand your lack of respect.
Indeed, you have sidestepped issues; for example your usage of the word subjective. It was not a false, weak, and desperate move to criticize you. He was trying to explain the different usages of the word faith that you refuse to accept in this argument. I have previously made two posts in response to you on this thread and have not received a response.
Tell me one thing, just ONE thing that religion - that is, ANY religion - has given us that science couldn't. Guess how many things science has given us that religion couldn't...
Comfort, spiritulism, hope, determination, integrity, foundation, ethics, and morals. You can take them or leave them.
Skeptics Society said:
As a social primate species we evolved a deep sense of right and wrong in order to accentuate and reward reciprocity and cooperation, and to attenuate and punish excessive selfishness and free riding. As well, evolution created the moral emotions that tell us that lying, adultery, and stealing are wrong because they destroy trust in human relationships that depend on truth-telling, fidelity, and respect for property. It would not be possible for a social primate species to survive without some moral sense. On the constitution of human nature is built the constitutions of human societies.
What your ideas lack I have already attained through faith. Hows about I invert what you just said to criticize you? Science is searching for something when there is no damn good reason to. I don't necessarilly believe that but both science and religion are stagnant. Stagnant in explaining issues of our demension and the origion of human life.
Ill give you this, religion is stagnant. Nothing has changed in religion for a very long time. Science on the other hand, is far from stagnant. A tremendous amount of scientific research is being conducted in every scientific field. Science cannot ever become stagnant; there will always be something new for us to desire an understanding of.
Browse this website; ten minutes of reading should convince you that science is not stagnant. Better yet, do some of your own research on the subject.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/
Anyways, Im tired.