Is everything really explainable by science?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sinnerdexter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
rvilbig said:
Matter does not produce consciousness
Click to expand...
That’s open to debate. But let’s say, for the sake of argument, we could prove 100% that consciousness doesn’t come from matter and that it’s entirely “special” and “spiritual” – something that you can’t currently demonstrate – that still doesn’t provide any evidence that a god exists.
is Schrödinger’s cat dead or alive or both or neither? The answer is God decides.
Click to expand...
Good ol’ argument from random assertion.

Ed:
I work with some very creative individuals and have some friends who are artists and writers. The question has been asked: Where does creativity come from?
Click to expand...
There are only two possible answers. A random set of events over a period of time resulted in an assembly of matter that can create, is one.
Click to expand...
Or, the other answer is that selective pressures, acting on genetic mutations, very slowly gave rise to creatures with more complicated brain functions, functions which include the processes that we term “creativity.”
 
AntiTheist said:
…we term “creativity.”
Click to expand...
**“Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today, and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith!”

Luke 12:27-28**
 
inocente said:
On a point of clarification. Here’s the full quote from Dietrich Bonhoeffer

He’s appealing to us to find God in the body of scientific knowledge, to embrace that knowledge because all of it tells us of His presence. It’s hard to understate what a radical shift in worldview that is for some Christians.

Now, if you’re saying science itself has been corrupted then that puts us straight back into God-of-the-gaps, the very thing he argues against - we cannot pick and choose because it diminishes God.

But right on sister 👍 if you’re saying:
Neither those without the skill to interpret results,
nor those who misinterpret results for their own ends,
neither those who seek to dictate what is supernatural,
nor scientists who pontificate without evidence,
nor anyone else I didn’t think of,
will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Romans 8:32 NIV, paraphrased just a little
Click to expand...
As I am your sister in the above, I’m glad I have a smart brother.😃

Referring to science as being damaged is not quite as bad as science being corrupted. In my humble opinion, science will always seek the truth in the natural world. The damage to the interpretations of science can be illustrated in Inocente 8: 38-39 which is now on my cheat sheet of famous references. 👍

Blessings,
granny

The human person is the pinnacle of creation.
 
zamboni said:
**“Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today, and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, how much more will he clothe you, O you of little faith!”

Luke 12:27-28**
Click to expand...
zamboni said:
**“What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.”

Ecclesiastes 1:9**
Click to expand...
Is this supposed to prove something? Someone wrote some stuff down, therefore it’s true?

I guess cows really can jump over the moon then.
 
wanstronian said:
Is this supposed to prove something? Someone wrote some stuff down, therefore it’s true?

I guess cows really can jump over the moon then.
Click to expand...
What it proves, along with your own words, is that you say nothing original. Like me, you are the wine, not the winemaker.
 
zamboni said:
What it proves, along with your own words, is that you say nothing original. Like me, you are the wine, not the winemaker.
Click to expand...
You reproduce pompous rhetoric from a book of unknown authorship and unproven validity, on a thread referring to the use of the scientific method. What sort of original response would you expect?
 
wanstronian said:
You reproduce pompous rhetoric from a book of unknown authorship and unproven validity, on a thread referring to the use of the scientific method. What sort of original response would you expect?
Click to expand...
Speaking of this thread…😃

How would you explain the scientific method to the average non-scientific person, someone in their 40’s?
 
wanstronian said:
You reproduce pompous rhetoric from a book of unknown authorship and unproven validity, on a thread referring to the use of the scientific method. What sort of original response would you expect?
Click to expand...
The scientific approach to rebutting the scripture quoted would be for you to say something original.

…?
 
I voted no, and I have to say that the scientists I trust the most would say “no” as well.
 
For example science can tell us what gravity and electricity do; it doesn’t tell us what they are.
 
grannymh said:
I don’t understand how "original sin footprint = carbon footprint has anything to do with the scientific method.
Click to expand...
Scientific method is the fallback approach everyone uses when wishful thinking fails. Observation, hypothesis, prediction, experiment ( … to verify predictions).

Since the story of the original rape of the original tree (in the Garden of Eden) fits as a metaphor for the ongoing rape of mother nature (i.e., as seen through our carbon footprints), I am suggesting that our participation in the expansion of the original sin, as well as the “sin of the fathers” — left behind by the ancestors (… on the in-law side) — which we are all living under the weight of, is scientifically measurable, at least as far as the carbon shoe-print fits.
 
zamboni said:
Scientific method is the fallback approach everyone uses when wishful thinking fails. Observation, hypothesis, prediction, experiment ( … to verify predictions).

Since the story of the original rape of the original tree (in the Garden of Eden) fits as a metaphor for the ongoing rape of mother nature (i.e., as seen through our carbon footprints), I am suggesting that our participation in the expansion of the original sin, as well as the “sin of the fathers” — left behind by the ancestors (… on the in-law side) — which we are all living under the weight of, is scientifically measurable, at least as far as the carbon shoe-print fits.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

Blessings,
granny

Basic Catholic teaching **regarding Adam and Original Sin **is found in the
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, ISBN: 1-57455-109-4
Paragraphs 355-421. www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
 
zamboni said:
Ya, it’s all spelled out in the Catechism. Not sure what I need a keyboard for.

🙂
Click to expand...
Don’t know about your keyboard. I use mine as a pillow sometimes when I am on the computer too late. 😉

The way I look at this thread – science confirms that I am alive and there are certain scientific principles I better follow like brushing my teeth if I want to keep chewing apples while I am sitting in my favorite rocking chair.

On the other hand, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, answers questions as to why I am alive, what my nature is, why I shouldn’t get so cranky about the small stuff, and why is it that I should live beyond the decomposition of my anatomy.

Blessings,
granny

The human person is the apple of God’s eye.
(example of reality and figurative language)
 
How can scientists be religious?
How has religion evolved, according to science?
 
zamboni said:
The scientific approach to rebutting the scripture quoted would be for you to say something original.

…?
Click to expand...
There is no original response to an unoriginal rhetoric. There is no requirement for me to be original in pointing out that your contributions add no value.

The (unoriginal) fact is that quoting scripture proves nothing, and adds no objective value to this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top