Religion and science: Is the opposition inevitable ?

Alright folks, let's keep it clean and civil.

Any thoughts on the subject?

Oh yes, NEVER DISCUSS RELIGION OR POLITICS with anyone who does not hold your position.

Very, very, well put milo. Your second GA from me today.

My opinion is, great, go for it ether way. I'm no one to pass judgement on what anyone believes. I, personally, can strike a balance. I have eclectic views, and it's all mine.

I will follow this thread, but, peace, out.

Milo, that was well thought out. I'm impressed.

If so, why don't religious people who have proper scientific world-view, come up to reconcile this evidently ignorant clash, to defuse this intellectual minefield ?

Thank you.

The inability to agree on acceptable terms and underlying first principles (truths) becomes the first hurdle. These are two very different ways of knowing, certain of those differences are incompatible or unbridgable by the vocabulary or concepts of the other.

Those who have reconciled are either comfortable with the fact that there remains a mystery between these mutually contradictory but firmly held ideas or they are comfortable ignoring the mystery that lies between. Many of them like to work the margins of this mystery to find their next lesson. The people who insist on one right answer could never be comfortable in such a state.

The second hurdle becomes one of enlightened self interest. To the scientific types who are comfortable with their religion, what is to be gained by "Waving the cape" in front of those who see only "their own way?"

I used to enjoy when our CEO came to our shop on his annual visit. He was a man who saw 256 shades of gray. No black, no white. Very nuanced thinking. Our shop superintendent saw only absolute black and absolute white, no grey at all.

The CEO would deliberately sit beside the superintendent the whole evening and the pyrotechnics were spectacular.

But most importantly, most of us have learned not to bait the bear. We choose to work where we can add the most value. In my case, it is being a patient exemplar for my family, friends, colleagues, and clients. We home schooled our kids and shared with them all of the ideas, including the stuff we didn't know, so that they too could appreciate not just the beauty of an orderly world of scientifically validatable things, but also the mystery underlying all of it despite our claimed "knowledge." Ultimately, I feel like our role is to be thoughtful critics and that we should be able to critically and intelligently articulate our understanding, appreciation and wonder at this amazing millieu that we call life.

But thats just my take.

I'm sure it's an apostasy to someone.

Hope that this is helpful.

milo

The unfortunate fact is that people will always choose to believe what they want to believe, even when all facts prove their beliefs to be false.

Just as there are religious zealots who are prepared to resort to murder to impose their beliefs on others, so too are there atheists who deliberately set out to upset and provoke ordinary people by claiming that science has proven that all religions are lies. Knowing full well that their actions can result in violence and doing it anyway makes these people no better than the religious zealots they denounce. Anyway you look at it, zealotry is zealotry, regardless of whether it is religious or secular.

I wonder what these guys would do if one day science proves that God (whichever god anyone believes in) is real, and that he guided the hands of scientists to discover the secrets of the universe.

"...people will always choose to believe what they want ..." - Of course, there is that famous quote:

"Don't ever let facts distract you from having a nice theory"

For anyone interested in this question, I highly recommend The Universe in a Single Atom, by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. He makes the point that science is an endeavor to improve the lot of humans and thus benefits from the sense of the connectedness of all humans that religion provides (at least when it does what it says it does). Further, he makes the point that if science contradicts Buddhist theology, it is the theology that must be wrong. A good read.

Hello,

I believe that religion is a very individual and personal belief, and for 6+Billion people there are 6+Billion religion. What we call a religion is a group ism,

If we look on the life of all originator of all religions, none of them asked (forced) to others to follow there words. But the unfortunate part is there were people who followed them regardless, and more unfortunate is that they could not take and spread their teaching in right prospectives.

The original words of greats are at a side, and new sets of theories are published, Stories and myths have taken place of the truths and principles.Thats the where problem Arises.

So long it is the question of science,it is as original as human history is. and even originated much before the concept of religion,

it is our creativity that genetically enhanced our Brain up to the level where we could start thinking of god, where all the religion coincide.

So it is the science that gave us the god.

GA.

Naturalism vs supernaturalism is a good way to frame this issue.

milo