tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post7566671152168876241..comments2023-04-26T10:38:02.064-05:00Comments on The Last Laugh: Relation of Science to Religion, Part 1 of 3Laughing Boyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00577758021496425133noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-33279315326852568342010-02-16T23:26:28.703-05:002010-02-16T23:26:28.703-05:00If I remember eating breakfast, I have evidence wi...If I remember eating breakfast, I have evidence with which to back my memories up: dirty dishes, less food in the fridge, a physiological feeling of fullness.<br /><br />If I remember falling in love, I cannot, empirically, back this up, as emotion does not readily lend itself to empirical recording, however the fact that my memories are accurate on such matters of breakfast eating leads me to conclude that they will be equally accurate on matters of love. My intuition, on the other hand, is frequently inaccurate testable matters, leading me to conclude that it will be equally inaccurate on matters which are untestable.CRLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09236470207500674153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-85531821515467026112010-02-15T14:07:11.063-05:002010-02-15T14:07:11.063-05:00CRL said:
There's a difference between persona...CRL said:<br />There's a difference between personal rational knowledge and personal intuition. The former is considerably more reliable.<br /><br />What exactly would be the difference? For example, I remember having breakfast - on what basis? I remember falling in love? on what basis?smithadrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08554011518877055530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-84822734360559539232010-02-04T23:32:33.719-05:002010-02-04T23:32:33.719-05:00"Are the "how" questions religion c..."Are the "how" questions religion can't answer limited to those that rightfully belong to science, like how life originated on earth?"<br /><br />By "how" questions, I meant questions about how the natural world works. I should have been clearer.<br /><br />"Can religion tell us how Christ's death accomplished our redemption..."<br /><br />Not clearly and without equivocation.<br /><br />"@CK: 'In my world having 'private knowledge' that only you can attest to doesn't really make the grade.'<br /><br />That seems pretty limiting..."<br /><br />There's a difference between personal rational knowledge and personal intuition. The former is considerably more reliable.CRLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09236470207500674153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-70168720740941481152010-02-03T22:25:39.384-05:002010-02-03T22:25:39.384-05:00@ CRL: ...religion only answers "why" an...@ CRL: <i>...religion only answers "why" and has no business answering "how"</i><br /><br />No business? OK. Remember that for later. Are the "how" questions religion can't answer limited to those that rightfully belong to science, like how life originated on earth? Can religion tell us <i>how</i> Christ's death accomplished our redemption, or is that still one for science? <br /><br />@CK: <i>In my world having 'private knowledge' that only you can attest to doesn't really make the grade.</i><br /><br />That seems pretty limiting. For example, do you have knowledge of what you were thinking about 5 minutes ago? Do you have knowledge of your emotional states? If a tree falls in the forest, and only you hear it, does it make a sound? Do you mean that you have no knowledge of the vast majority of the events of your own life (even if you clearly remembered every moment of your 49.83 years). Do you not know if you have you ever had a dream?<br /><br />Am I understanding you correctly?Laughing Boyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00577758021496425133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-1755076167301256252010-02-03T07:16:22.987-05:002010-02-03T07:16:22.987-05:00LB said: What can rightly be claimed as knowledge?...LB said: What can rightly be claimed as knowledge?<br /><br />Probably things that can be independently verified. In my world having 'private knowledge' that only you can attest to doesn't really make the grade.CyberKittenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06394155516712665665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-39583543984818944562010-02-03T00:16:38.039-05:002010-02-03T00:16:38.039-05:00"As to "why" questions, for the sak..."As to "why" questions, for the sake of argument, I think we should say that they are addressed by metaphysics rather than by religion."<br /><br />Correct. What I meant there is that religion only answers "why" and has no business answering "how".CRLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09236470207500674153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-42298472967138729692010-02-02T22:50:00.383-05:002010-02-02T22:50:00.383-05:00As to "why" questions, for the sake of a...As to "why" questions, for the sake of argument, I think we should say that they are addressed by metaphysics rather than by religion. This might help remove the anti-religious bias from the fundamental issue, which is: Are "why" questions valid? If so, where does one search for answers?Laughing Boyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00577758021496425133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-27392178965961416932010-02-02T20:55:25.654-05:002010-02-02T20:55:25.654-05:00The issue raised in this post is the narrowing of ...The issue raised in this post is the narrowing of knowledge to scientific knowledge, and the narrowing of what is scientific to facts perceived by the five senses. "Men of science", he asserts, develop "a strong bias to undervalue any other kind of evidence" which wold include " the intuitions of the reason and the conscience".<br /><br />What do you think of these claims? What can rightly be claimed as knowledge?Laughing Boyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00577758021496425133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-59314291455051591112010-02-02T13:26:00.157-05:002010-02-02T13:26:00.157-05:00crl said: CK: I don't mean to say that religio...crl said: CK: I don't mean to say that religion provides the answers to "why" questions, only that it attempts to.<br /><br />Attepts yes.... succeeds.... no.CyberKittenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06394155516712665665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-87437797547092371092010-02-01T20:04:35.449-05:002010-02-01T20:04:35.449-05:00CK: I don't mean to say that religion provides...CK: I don't mean to say that religion provides the answers to "why" questions, only that it attempts to.CRLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09236470207500674153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-82840302957232741912010-02-01T04:11:44.218-05:002010-02-01T04:11:44.218-05:00crl said: Science, in turn, should have nothing to...crl said: Science, in turn, should have nothing to fear from religion, which administers to a different realm, answering those pesky "why" questions which plague our thoughts. <br /><br />I would that thought that those 'pesky' why questions are answered (or at least attempted) by philosophy rather than religion. Religion, in my opinion, answers very little indeed, but then again such beliefs have always remained inexplicable to me.CyberKittenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06394155516712665665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-64119829867973107252010-02-01T01:34:04.664-05:002010-02-01T01:34:04.664-05:00Very interesting, thanks for the post - you have t...Very interesting, thanks for the post - you have to love Project Gutenberg. <br /><br />Love the final sentance - "<i>No class of men stands deservedly higher in public estimation than men of science, who, while remaining faithful to their higher nature, have enlarged our knowledge of the wonderful works of God.</i>"<br /><br />I agree with you CRL - we waste too much time and energy blurring the lines between "why" and "how".Ewanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16476351962780860227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1180636554808519203.post-44482839848071704422010-01-31T23:53:12.753-05:002010-01-31T23:53:12.753-05:00My view is that religion and science should have n...My view is that religion and science should have nothing to fear from each other. Science, if done correctly, is a reliable method of finding truth within the natural world; answering the 'what' and 'where' and 'how' questions. A true religion would have nothing to fear from these truths. Science, in turn, should have nothing to fear from religion, which administers to a different realm, answering those pesky "why" questions which plague our thoughts. It is only when religion tries to answer how and science tries to answer why that we see conflict.CRLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09236470207500674153noreply@blogger.com