Username: Password:
Welcome! Please Sign In or Register

Science

reviewed by abichara

abichara
10/14/2009

Science 1

Science and technology are morally neutral, and as such cannot held up as religions. When I say morally neutral, I mean that its neither intrinsically good or bad. Much good can come out of science and technology, but great evil can be perpetuated using technological means. For example, nuclear energy harnessed for peaceful purposes can do great good, but in weaponized versions, it can lead to great destruction.

Science is our best attempt at explaining the natural world around us. As a practical matter, it is impossible to understand how everything in the universe works. Indeed, the more we discover, the more we realize how little we know!!! Many who deny the existence of God place enormous faith (ironically enough) in an enormously imperfect and incomplete knowledge of science. Just some examples:

1. Science cannot truly understand gravity. I recall that Einstein died while trying to find a "Unified Field Theory" and how it related to the Theory of Relativity. From at least a metaphysical standpoint, we have yet to gain a firm grasp of these dynamics. Now since gravity is such an important subject within the field of physics, and since physics is important for understanding the creation of the universe, why wager one's soul on an incomplete or poorly understood subject?

2. Science has no answers for the big existential and philosophical questions. For example, why am I experiencing my life in my body at this very point in time and not someone else's life in another body and another time? What determined that I should be me or that you should be you? What's the point of origin?

3. Why would evolution conduce to the development through "natural selection" of creatures that requires an ever intelligent conscious mind in order to function? That these biological functions should have greater metaphysical goals should give pause to those who seek to separate God from science and the processes of nature.

Science cannot act as the arbiter of moral action. How can one conceive of morality if we are all developed from the same origins and in the same manner as animals? Without God as an absolute setter of moral standards, morality becomes subjective rather than objective. It can be defined along national, ethnic or even personal lines. A thief might argue that in his eyes his desire to steal others rightful possessions is natural and therefore lawful, or a nation might argue that it is good and right to murder a large number of its citizens through a massive eugenics program. An absence of God tends to lead to moral chaos, nihilism and spiritual vacuum--all of which is the opposite of an ordered universe with easily definable criteria--everything which science seeks to explain! That in the final analysis is the end of any postmodern philosophical system.

The biggest mistake people make is separating science from God. Science is our best attempt at understand how the universe works--how its all orchestrated. Certainly we should endeavor to discover the big questions, but we must also remember that our understanding of scientific processes is fragmented, speculative, and disjointed. These are man-made theories that many times are just stab in the dark attempts at understanding processes that might be too difficult to grasp. A clear headed observation of nature reveals that there is a larger Mind at work.


Join to vote! 5 Helpful / 0 Funny / 4 Agree / 3 Disagree
Showing 58 Comments
You must be logged in to comment. login now.
Lena commented 47 days ago.
Disbelief in God does not necessitate lack of faith in humanity. Morality and ethics don't require a religious foundation, although if that's what it takes for a particular person to treat others kindly and with respect, I'm glad of its existence for the good of us all.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Lena, if I may....what then is the foundation of morality and ethics...once religion is removed from the equation?

FranksWildYears commented 47 days ago.
Good manners.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Ever so common, Frank. How silly of me.

abichara commented 47 days ago.
You could try to live life morally and ethically without religion, and there's no doubt that many do, but it's spiritually lacking. That's the type of essence that positivism lacks. Not everything is relative to certain subjective criteria that's more socially determined than anything else.

Actions, whether good or bad, don't exist in a vacuum. Correct action, that which is orderly and just in motivation stems from natural law, which in turn is derived from God's law.


Lena commented 47 days ago.
General respect for others and the aforementioned faith in humanity lay quite a good foundation in my experience.

Surprising as it may seem, I was raised as a godless heathen and I still managed to avoid becoming a serial killer. :)

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
(Edited 47 days ago)
Hmm...
I don't think anyone is sugesting that atheists are serial killers. However, seems to me that morality has to have some sort of basis....some grounding. Otherwise, I guess you are a well-mannered, caring person just for the hell of it.

abichara commented 47 days ago.
But what is the basis of such good action? We know that the aims are to promote a better society, but why do it? History seems to show that humanity is held together by a very thin string that can break for any reason: war, economic crisis, natural disasters are just some of the most common causes.

Humanity wouldn't function without a proper social contract that ensures liberty, order, etc...But there must be source of authority that guarantees this, beyond human authority which is imperfect and prone to corruption.

This is the real foundational stuff about society, what holds it together and why.

Lena commented 47 days ago.
While it's likely that a person who does believe in God would find a life without religion "spiritually lacking," your assessment ignores the fact that an atheist finds a life where a god or gods are prescribed upon them to be artificial and dissatisfying...dare I say, a bit soulless.

For context, since it seems like your beliefs are quite firmly rooted in Christianity, try envisioning yourself being encouraged to submit to Judaism or Islam, instead.

FranksWildYears commented 47 days ago.
And there's something wrong with decency for decency's sake? There's no vacuum. There's action, reaction, experience, learning and then more action. It works quite well, whether it was developed by god, mother nature, evolution or the Marquees of Queensbury.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Lena is ignoring me today. Perhaps she should try Buddhism (?)

FranksWildYears commented 47 days ago.
(Edited 47 days ago)
Maybe she's dealing with you on a higher plain.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Frank...I guess "deceny for decency's sake" is as good as it gets....so long as it suits you and there is nothing to tell you that it may be errant to deviate....

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
"plain"?

FranksWildYears commented 47 days ago.
Sorry that was over my head.

Lena commented 47 days ago.
@victor, my first reply was for you :)

I don't think people need the threat of eternal damnation (or any other similar fear instilled in them) to self-govern.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Frank: 1) I am not plain.....growing the mustache back and looking pretty good.
2) What if one changes one's mind about being decent for decency's sake?

abichara commented 47 days ago.
Frank, I agree completely, but there must be accountability for this process of action/reaction to work, and that's where God steps in.

Lena, Some religions work better than others. Let's look at what creates the best outcomes, what is truest and hasn't been subverted over the years.

Religion should satisfy ones desire for love, order and purpose. Storyline's aside, they satisfy these spiritual demands that transcend the material.

FranksWildYears commented 47 days ago.
(Edited 47 days ago)
The thing that keeps people from being errant and deviating are social controls as represented by institutions like the church, the state, your family, tribe or gang. They've been around forever. None of them is perfect, but we continue to progress, for good or ill.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Lena...I don't disagree with that....but I do not think that is what abichara was saying.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
This is interesting stuff....but I don't think you get my question. To answer yours, there is nothing wrong with decency for decency's sake; but unless it is grounded in something bigger and more important than self, such can come and go like a bad marriage.

FranksWildYears commented 47 days ago.
And does come and go, under any of the above mentioned precepts, including science.

Good to hear the 'stache is going well.

jedi58 commented 47 days ago.
A lack of understanding of gravity or any other naturally occurring phenomena does not imply the need for a belief in a "higher power". When we didn't know any better we turned to religion for answers and that is indeed why many religions exist - as a source for answers.

Science is no different, it is what we determine through observation and measurement and believing in science does not mean you can not have a religious faith either - many notable scientists were Christian.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
I agree with abichara's last 2 reviews.
But...if we settled nothing else here.....I look better with a 'stache.

abichara commented 47 days ago.
Human nature is a very interesting thing. It's a mixture of sunshine and shadow, light and darkness. The sunshine is the perfectibility (or the potential thereof) of human reason...This makes government and civilization possible. The darker side of human nature is the imperfectability of human passion and man's faulty sense of judgement that makes government (or an enforcement authority) necessary.

So where do we go from here? We need to encourage the "lighter" side of human nature to shine through while setting up appropriate safeguards to prevent human greed, passion and lust for power from gaining too much of a foothold.

That's why I say that society is held together by a very thin string. It is a delicate balancing act that easily be overturned.

Lena commented 47 days ago.
@victor - my something bigger happens to be humanity itself. I strongly disagree that that is any more transient than a belief in God.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
So...Lena..you have a "strong" love of humanity, and therfore have no need of God and/ or religious principles?
Kudos.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
(Edited 47 days ago)
On August 18th, someone broke into my home. They stole my Umbrella Cockatoo. I had had him for 12 years since he was a hatchling. He was like my child.
Late yesterday, workers at one of the local waste treatment plants found a baby that had been flushed down a toilet.
Just two local and recent examples....but, forgive me if I fail to share your faith in a Godless "humanity".

abichara commented 47 days ago.
Victor makes a good point. Humans are capable of great good, but on the flip side...

That's why you can't rest an entire moral system on purely humanistic terms. It must be grounded in something else more timeless, more "true" to good action.

jedi58 commented 47 days ago.
a minority is not an accurate representation really

FranksWildYears commented 47 days ago.
(Edited 47 days ago)
There are examples of atrocities inside the walls of a temples, churches and other places of worship as well. That's neither points for or against either set of beliefs. The Catholic Church will back me up on this, I'm pretty sure.

jedi58 commented 47 days ago.
hahaha that is indeed a very good example FranksWildYears

abichara commented 47 days ago.
Frank, No one doubts that the Catholic Church has been responsible for many atrocities throughout its history, but NONE of that is reflective of the principles articulated in the religious texts like the Bible.

If anything, it only proves that man is inherently imperfect and NO human authority should be the source of any morality. It ultimately stems from God, not the church or the government.

FranksWildYears commented 47 days ago.
(Edited 47 days ago)
OK so we've narrowed it down to morality coming not from a church or any other institution, but from either god or from man. And either way, we get the word of that morality from man figuring out what god wants us to do, or from man figuring it out for himself.

Personally I can live with either.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
No one has been responsible for more deaths than the Muslims. Funny that here on RIA, it is always Christianity that gets the call-out.

abichara commented 47 days ago.
Victor, Many people, independent of religious affiliation have done atrocities in God's name. The real name of the game is POWER, or the unfair acquisition of it.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Abichara....I know. My last comment was just a side-statement of the obvious re/ RIA.

jedi58 commented 47 days ago.
therefore it is not proof either way that not believing in religion means a lack of a morale compass

morality is often a taught thing these days - sadly there are those who are not taught, but we see evidence in what is right or wrong everywhere in the media from books to television and even if we're not taught morality directly we still have a means of judging this

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
(Edited 47 days ago)
jedi...personally, I don't care who believes what- so long as they are not flying planes into buildings. However, you speak of "evidence". There, we are clear. When God was in the homes and the schools, the #1 discilinary problem in US public schools was spitballs. Now they shoot and stab each other, if not the teachers.

jedi58 commented 47 days ago.
mental instabilities != godlessness

fitman commented 47 days ago.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Fit, as usual, you make no point.
Great movie though.

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
(Edited 47 days ago)
And jedi points to "evidence", then seeks to dismiss same.

fitman commented 47 days ago.
Some of the most peacful people on earth are atheists.

Some of the most violent are religionists.

As for the Arabs:

http://tinyurl.com/The-ArabWorld

Lena commented 47 days ago.
@victor, A causal relationship between religion and non-violence in children is suspect, especially given the plethora of other differences between then and now (corporal punishment, student/teacher ratios, the economy sustaining a single-income household if desired, etc).

A more likely cause: there has been a dramatic change in the accessibility of weapons and explosives (and information on how to make / use them).

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Arabs?

Victor83 commented 47 days ago.
Ah shit! Lena....I forgot...it is the fault of the NRA...not the lack of God and principles upon which this country was founded.
My bad.

jedi58 commented 47 days ago.
@victor83 yes but unstable individuals don't necessarily not have morales, in some cases they just chose to go against them whether willingly or not

fitman commented 47 days ago.
Victor,

Point is, the movie is from your "golden age" of "God in schools".

(Veering off-topic: What's with adult ham actors playing the parts of teenagers, as if teens were incapable of portraying their own age group on the screen?)

jedi58 commented 47 days ago.
(Edited 47 days ago)
in addition to the increased availability of weapons as Lena mentions an apparent increase in violence is also amplified by our increased exposure to such events due to the advent of the "digital age" - a lot of news stories like that now spread further and are more readily available which is why a good number of people always assume the world is more violent now than it used to be

e.g. 50 years ago the news of a shooting or stabbing in a school would probably cross a couple of states - now the entire world gets news of it (at least for the more extreme cases anyway)

fitman commented 47 days ago.
Victor:

Some of the "principles upon which this country was founded" are quite admirable. Others, not so great.

Perhaps listing the positive and negative would help in gaining a perspective on how we've ended up in this dystopia?

Hint:

Selfish materialism isn't something new.

Lena commented 47 days ago.
@victor I was actually blaming gun shows and the internet :P

louiethe20th commented 45 days ago.
Abichara, I have been on RIA for alot of years and this is one of the top 2 or 3 reviews I have ever read. Kudos to you, you have earned it here!

abichara commented 45 days ago.
(Edited 45 days ago)
Thanks Louie.

The point that I was trying to make, but it sort of got lost here, is that the processes of biology and physics require a rational Mind to develop. Our observation of the natural world bears that out. There are so many inputs that could have led to multiple outcomes, yet here we are... Science fails to explain that metaphysical development of the universe and humanity itself, from a physical, spiritual and mental standpoint. It does have value as a explanatory tool, but finding truth there by itself won't get you far. Science is just a process of attempting to find truth, it isn't truth itself. Too many unexplainable variables to account for.

It's also foolish to separate God from science, as both are obviously mutually exclusive. Newton, Einstein and a host of other great minds can account for this reality. And they certainly also knew that there were plenty of physical phenomenon that can't be explained by normal criteria.

LadyJesusFan777 commented 45 days ago.
Abichara, I back you 100% percent. You have a very good way with words. You make perfectly good sense, and I can't imagine anybody saying otherwise. I believe God first, science second. If it wasn't for God, there would be no science.

louiethe20th commented 45 days ago.
Excellent points once again Abichara.

FranksWildYears commented 38 days ago.
The more I read this the more disappointed I am in its presumptive and circular arguments.

abichara commented 38 days ago.
NOTE: It was edited for clarification of certain points.
Showing 58 Comments
About This Reviewer
By the Numbers