Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 10 to 18 of 28

Thread: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

  1. #10

    Default Re: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

    In my world view sprituality and religion are mutually exclusive. Of course my definition of spirituality would be fundmentally different that what is commonly understood.

    Therefore I consider spirituality and science as mutually inclusive, POTENTIALLY.

    A concept of spirituality, difficult to put into words, would consist of identifying that state of mind that would be the total opposite of that state of mind that causes psychosomatic illness.

    Answer the question: are emotional reactions totally under our control, a result of choice? Or not?

    Some may object that I am confusing biological/chemical operations of the mind (with the body following along) with what religions' might term as "states of grace". My point is that I am not confusing anything at all, that the phrase "state of grace" only became the latest term for an ability homo sapeins had long before religous descriptions were bandied about.

    BTW, one might consider the game chess as a test of spirituality.
    DSCH: a Soviet artist's reply to unjust criticism.

  2. #11

    Default Re: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

    Humans have a long history of using spirituality or mysticism whenever they've stumbled onto something that current scientific models can't explain. Just because quantum physics doesn't correlate with the dictums of newtonian physics doesn't mean that there is a greater spiritual force present. It only means that there is a lacuna in our scientific knowledge.

  3. #12

    Default Re: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

    The fuller knowledge we achieve the better able science will be in DESCRIBING spirituality.

    Or,

    The fuller knowledge we achieve the better able science will be to DESCRIBE spirituality.

    I'm not sure which sentence is better.
    DSCH: a Soviet artist's reply to unjust criticism.

  4. #13

    Default Re: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

    BTW, this thread began with a gigantic equivocation (classical variety) on the word hell.
    It's amazing how seductive it must be to do this, since we see it often enough during related discussion on the word "god" or "creator".

    Here we have discussion centered on changing the definition of the word hell.

    I ask why? To what purpose? So that every person can agree that there is a hell, even though what everyone means by that word is radically different as we progress from post-to-post and thread-to-thread?

    I call it "equivocation for announcment purposes". Someday maybe I'll submit this concept to wikipedia for inclusion among their list of types of informal logical fallacies as a subset of equivocations.

    The idea is "to announce to the world"* that hell exists, even though the "world" will have a specific and different understanding of what that word means. This error, as an error, can be intentional or unintentional.



    *Posting on a website qualifies as "announcing to the world"
    Last edited by LkwdSteve; 12-20-2009 at 10:48 AM.
    DSCH: a Soviet artist's reply to unjust criticism.

  5. #14

    Default Re: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

    Steve, I'm not sure who your previous post is diectd to, but my purpose in starting the original hell thread was to learn what some of my fellow poster's thoughts were on the subjet. I don't paticularly want to convince anyone of hell's existence; indeed, if someone convinced me that hell did not exist I would probably welome the news.

  6. #15

    Default Re: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

    No, not directed toward you. Your points and definition were fairly clear. At least I think you were in line with the poster quinn when it is offered that one ends up in hell as a result of God's decision according to his criteria, and after death. Questions about what it is like become secondary to the three assumptions that there is a hell, it is populated under God's direction, and that those decisions are implemented with respect to each individual after said individual's death.

    Therefore, questions about what hell is like, becomes a topic for discussion among believers who think that hell was created by God for a specific purpose. Questions about whether there is a hell, is a topic for believers vs. unbelievers with, ironically, unbelievers stating here that the posited hell is one of their reasons for rejecting or abandoning religion.

    In this thread you stated that the existence of suffering after death is hell. This is fine as long as it is understood that God is the moving force behind that. I assume that that is the case. If it is not, then you have changed the definition (which I don't think you have).

    What I object to are suggestions about being in hell before death. This is typified in common usage by phrases such as "hell or earth" or "living hell". That is a definite change of definition and doesn't belong in your more specific conversation. Call it by another name! Not hell.

    Concepts that begin with the phrase "The following could be considered a type of hell.....", and when inserted into this specific conversation, I vigorously object to. An average reader may get confused into thinking that it is an endorsement that hell exists as a result of purposeful creation, when it is no such thing. I will say that such errors in this discussion, while unfortunate, are inadvertant.

    The same cannot be said for the push to get intelligent design into classrooms. There the ultimate goal is to get the intelligent designer to be equated (classical variety equivocation) with the Biblical God. If successfull, they can announce to the world that the existence of an intelligent designer has been accepted, and, oh-by-the-way, come to the local church next Sunday and read all about him!
    DSCH: a Soviet artist's reply to unjust criticism.

  7. #16

    Default Re: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

    You understand my beliefs correctly, Steve. Christians debate weather it's "God's choice" or "people choosing to reject God" that gets people into hell, but as long as God is the one in charge I suppose it doesn't really matter.

    I agree with you on how the push for ID works.

  8. #17
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts View Post
    Humans have a long history of using spirituality or mysticism whenever they've stumbled onto something that current scientific models can't explain. Just because quantum physics doesn't correlate with the dictums of newtonian physics doesn't mean that there is a greater spiritual force present. It only means that there is a lacuna in our scientific knowledge.

    If you are coming from the viewpoint that is IN the physical universe searching for the "prior cause" then it makes sense that you would say that. However having had enough spiritual experiences to make me look for answers I can say to you that:

    1) I have developed enough data on the subject so as to have to the ability to replicate those experiences, (hence falling into the definitions of "science" as there are rules/laws governing how phenomena operate spiritually);

    2) Having said that I have found that the "prior cause" is not to be found exclusively in physical phenomena;

    3) Quantum Mechanics does show "Science" approaching mathematcial descriptions of phenomena that have no "logical" explanation & some of those phenomena are described as well in Spiritual teachings. This is why I cite Capra's The Tao of Physics as a recognition of describing the same reality with 2 different languages.

    I would ask you if you have ever felt like you have had a "spiritual" experience or maybe an experience that you have not been able to explain.

    I also suggest that you read up on Schroedinger's Cat.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger's_cat

    What Schroedinger discovers is that in the subatomic world what happens to the cat is NOT revealed until a person opens the box the cat is in. In the world of QM the result IS dependent upon the viewer. So you have to ask yourself, "WHOM IS DOING THE VIEWING?"

    Are you just a brain, genetic code & hormonal programs or are you something else, especially if you ahve the ability to effect a change as put forth in his experiement.

    Just a thought....

  9. #18
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: Do Science & Spirituality ever meet?

    Quote Originally Posted by LkwdSteve View Post
    The fuller knowledge we achieve the better able science will be in DESCRIBING spirituality.

    Or,

    The fuller knowledge we achieve the better able science will be to DESCRIBE spirituality.

    I'm not sure which sentence is better.

    In the world of QM they both equaly apply.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •