Exactly. That is their interpretation of the findings of science, which is far different from claiming that science has demonstrated something. I’ve got a book of his essays on such things out from the library, which I’m going to start as soon as I finish Penn Jillette’s mystery novel. If he ever claims that science has demonstrated indisputably there is no god, he should say it there.
I happen to agree that science has eliminated much of the need for a god by providing natural explanations for things that needed divine causes. But history has also. That’s far from a proof.
There clearly are scientists who happen to be atheist who have spoken out on their beliefs regarding spirituality. To deny that is silly. On the other hand, other scientists who are believers have spoken out on the spirituality that they have experienced through their studies. To claim, because some scientists are outspokenly atheist, that Science is trying to “convert” the world to atheism is just as stupid as to claim that all spiritual people want to send the rest of the world to hell, just because you can find some hateful idiots like Fred Phelps and Jimmy Swaggart and Oral Roberts. It is bad logic that is not supported by the facts.
As to the link to the Wired article. lekatt missed the very important point that Dr. Persinger was examining only the sensations of reported spiritual experience and made no observation regarding spirituality. The author of the article, a writer of opinions for a popular magazine, not a scientist, drew his own philosophical conclusions from his experience–based on opinions he held before the experiment. That does not in any way rise to the level of “science” trying to “disprove” the spiritual.
Look, science has said God is just a bunch of brain misfires, the average religious person takes that as an attack on his faith in God, and resents it very much. You can tiptoe around the words all you want, but it is perception that counts. If the Christians perceive science has attacked their religion, then in their minds science has attacked religion.
Science has not eliminated the need for God, science can’t cure depression and related maladies, but God can. Science can’t give any hope for the future, or purpose to life, or meaning to hardships, but God can. Science will not replace God, not in a million years.
Why? After all, there is a thread here every month along the lines of “Why do Christians hate homosexuals?” or something like that. If the atheists and the doubters can happliy lump all those with faith togther, the faithful should be able to do the same back!!
Which is very different from “God will”. In most cases, for mystical and unknowable reasons, he won’t. “It is God’s will” is not acceptable to the mother of a severely depressed child. Don’t toy with people’s emotions by holding out a cure which is achieved only in the most random and unpredictale circumstances. At least scientists have the courage to say “we don’t know” when understanding phenomena is beyond their grasp; religion dangles the lie of God’s infallible omnipotence in front of desperate people, and picks their intellectual pocket while they are not looking. That is just wrong.
Lekatt, for your edification, science has said no such thing as “God is just a bunch of brain misfires”. Science, in fact, is not capable of saying anything reliable about God one way or the other. VS Ramachandran, one of the world’s most accomplished neurological researchers has made that exact point. Science studies nature, not supernature.
Perhaps not a full cure just yet, but science has managed over the past few decades to come up with some darned effective TREATMENTS. I’m a fairly functional fellow thanks to science.
(trying to remind myself what a waste of my time it is to argue with lekatt)
No, to be precise one scientist is saying that internal spiritual experiences can be explained by brain “misfires”. I’d wonder if he’d actually call them that, since there could be some evolutionary justification.
And I don’t dispute at all that some Christians who misunderstand science, or who have been lied to by their leaders do think that science is attacking religion. They are wrong, and many Christians do not. People think all sorts of incorrect things.
How odd then that for the nearly 2,000 years that there was god and no science depression still happened, while once there was science there were drugs that could at least relieve the symptoms of depression. I’d just be wasting bandwidth if I asked for a cite of god curing depression. Odd that when god had a chance women and children died in childbirth, plague swept through countries unchecked, men and women died young and in pain, famine was common even in the heart of god loving Europe, and people lived in filth and squalor. If god does exist, he’s a failure. Time to give him the boot and let science and medicine, which actually improve our lives, take over.
Neither my wife nor my kids nor I pray or believe in god. Yet we’ve been happy and successful and pretty healthy for 25 years. When my daughter had a high fever, science and medicine made it better. If I spent my time praying instead she’d probably be dead today. And we all have plenty of hope for the future and purpose in life without any god. If you hate science so much, I invite you not to partake of its blessings.
Your contribution to this thread is a bunch of brain misfires.
Look: Some scientists have interpreted the results of the collective body of research about the natural world to indicate a lack of need of supernatural agents for natural processes. I don’t think any of them have much of a leg to stand on if or when they claim science thus “disproves” the supernatural, because the supernatural is, by definition, not subject to this sort of scrutiny. They (the ones with any brains, anyway) know the limitations of scientific investigation. Now, it is fair to say folks like Dawkins therefore find the supernatural a completely superflous concern, and entirely unnecessary for anything worth considering about the world. In addition, they find the entire notion of a “supernatural” realm so dubious as to be unworthy of belief. This is, again, their take on the evidence. I happen to be one of those sorts of folks myself. The validity of this point of view shall remain moot for all time, and I don’t think anyone can (or does) claim the opposite, with absolute confidence. It’s simply not possible to do so.
I do think there is often vigorous opposition between science and religion, but only so far as some theists insist scriptural literacy trumps methodical evidence-based inquiry as the best and most valid way to describe and explain the workings of the natural world. Those theists who do not make such assertions do not, in general, find themselves at all in opposition to those whose job it is to investigate the world using the scientific method. As mentioned above, sometimes theists are scientists (even very good ones), and apparently they suffer no internal or external conflict in having these two isms tacked onto their CV, so to speak.
I personally have some rather unconventional oppinions about the present utility of faith-based belief systems, but that’s a topic for another thread. “Science” has no monolithic take on that subject, and cannot, because it is not some creature, out there in the darkness, harboring some ghastly will to destroy the souls of the Believers. That’s beyond a strawman. It’s not even a man. It’s a made-up boogeyman that exists only in your bizarre imagination. Give it up. You’ll feel better.
How are defining God? You seem to be emphasizing some very vague and unspecific mental phenomena while mainstrem religion emphasizes preparing for the afterlife, avoiding behavior tht supposedly provokes divine retribution, retelling myths explaining the origins of the traditions, and basic worship. Science emphasizes many other things, while the workings of the human mind, along with what came before the Big Bang, and just how the first bit of life came about, remain rather mysterious. Perhaps supernatural activity is/was involved, but those who support that assertion can’t just play the victim, they have to uncover evidence (and for starters, be a little more specific).
No, its’ the TRUTH that counts. Thou shalt not bear false witness.
So who’s being the jerk here? If you’re acting like an annoying pest and crybaby, and I’m ignoring you because you have nothing worthwhile to say, that’s not the same as me beating you up.
If you want more respect, you have to earn it by demonstrating the ability to be objective. You can’t just demand it and play the victim or you’ll get even less.
Just an many religionists don’t understand what science is doing, so many scientists don’t understand what religion is doing either.
The concept of God is very comforting to those facing death in battle, many of our soldiers in Iraq are rediscovering religion, or death from disease, I never talked to a terminally ill person who didn’t believe in God, or death by any means. It is a scary time. People who are depressed get that way because of their beliefs. Most hate themselves, think they are unworthy, and can’t do anything like others can. They are afraid of life, and afraid of death. It is a terrible place to be. Pills only slow down the negative thoughts, counseling helps to change the negative thoughts into positive ones, and if successful can cure depression.
But the thought of God’s love holding them safe and secure for all eternity works best and fastest. There are a set of tools, spiritual tools for clearing the mind of negativity and allowing positive thoughts to grow stronger until the person is totally cured forever.
We have discussed near death experiences here many times, well, tried to anyway. One of the things that happen in the experience is healing. People are near death, or already dead one moment and the next they are healed. It is love that does the healing. This is just one of the little known elements of the experience. God heals.
I know most of you don’t understand spiritual growth is learning to love, so you can know what others are feeling and be of help to them. I have faith you will understand in the future when the end of your time on earth nears, and your thoughts will turn more to spiritual questions and less to science.
I feel I owe Lekatt a debt of gratitude, because everytime I read one of this posts I am enriched by the experience, and come out a wiser and more informed person.
“How?”, you might ask.
Well it’s simple, really. Everytime I manage to wrap my neurons around on of Lekatt’s posts I truly feel that I’ve lost something. I feel as though I am less than I was only moments before. In fact, I feel all of humanity is diminished by Lekatt’s posts. It is too much power for one person to have, really.
Indeed I feel more ignorant with every ill conceived opinion, every meandering, senless, ignorant concept from him that I read, that I must IMMEADIATELY, grab whatever is nearby and learn something.
The dictionary, an encyclopedia, word of the day toilet paper, ANYTHING, it doesn’t matter, as long as I lenarn something new. And then I sigh, and the world is right once again.
So thank you Lekatt, with every silly notion of yours, you have made me a better man.
Lekatt, perhaps you would be so kind as to admit that your main point is a complete frabrication on the part of people like you.
Science says nothing about God or anything supernatural.
I’m happy for you and your family, however your tirade against God and your praise of science are misgiven, not just because they are completely misplaced, but because you must now condemn science for the same reason you condemn God — at least to avoid a double standard. If God has failed, then so has science. Although you’re enjoying good health and well being, countless millions of people are starving, suffering, dying, and subsisting in hopeless squalor. So long as men have free will, neither God nor science will compel them. You and I and other men are responsible for our state of affairs. No one and nothing else is.
However, Lekatt’s position in this thread has been that back in the good 'ole (god fearing) days, the world was a paradise, and only now, with the increase of scientific endevours, has it gone to hell in a hand-basket.
