Z
zamboni
Guest
True enough. Scientifically proving that particular scripture would have been difficult without a volunteer. Thanks for your help in adding objective value to this thread.
- Status
I
inocente
Guest
Nope. The (imho wildly far out) interpretation of QM that consciousness directly influences nature also comes close to a proof for the non-existence of God (our consciousness alone would be enough).
Moral - be really careful not to read more into a theory than it actually says, no matter how enticing the interpretation.
That doesn’t sound like Heisenberg, could you cite a reference? Schrodinger invented his cat paradox as a reductio ad absurdum of the kind of argument you are making. Torture it however you want, you can’t get science to prove or disprove the existence of God, honest. And would you really want that?
I
inocente
Guest
I thought about buying it, and while very cheap, was put off by the size. At 846 pages, it is 73.4375% the size of my NIV. Could you suggest a link in the online version where a humble Baptist might find the good stuff? It’s not going to convert me
but I’d like to know more.A pragmatic exploration of nature, very messy but the best anyone can come up with. We are made to be curious, and the Father smiles when the kids work out things by themselves.
And for giving my selfish genes the excuse to post that:
granny,
Blessings
J
JohnDamian
Guest
The Catechism is not a book one reads through from cover-to-cover, like the Bible, a textbook or a novel. The Catechism is a Catholic religious encyclopedia, where one dips into at particular points of interest.I thought about buying it, and while very cheap, was put off by the size. At 846 pages, it is 73.4375% the size of my NIV. Could you suggest a link in the online version where a humble Baptist might find the good stuff? It’s not going to convert me
Here is an online Catechism;
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
The Catechism is split into parts, then sections, then individual concepts. It explains the Catholic perspective on these concepts with referance to scripture, theology and suchlike.
If you have any particular areas you want highlighted or pointed towards, feel free to ask.
I
inocente
Guest
(Sorry everyone about mass posting - catching up)
Some interpretations of scientific theories have a whiff of Satan. The idea of reincarnation has been used to perpetuate a caste system - lower castes are being punished by the universe for sins in a past life, thus helping them would damage your karma by undermining the universe’s intent. Let the idea die out without allowing pseudoscience to resurrect it (pun).
If you are saying that more souls = more sin then it follows that* less souls = less sin* and hence no souls is the optimal state. Ergo, God made a really Big Mistake with creation.
In remorse for mass posting, can I lighten up the mood with this piece of philosophy:
We all have great creativity and imagination, so it’s always more probable that people are making things up or are fooled than anything else. That’s why we need evidence, and the evidence is not too hot that RNA records everything. Your links to Wikipedia don’t say that it does unless I missed something.
Some interpretations of scientific theories have a whiff of Satan. The idea of reincarnation has been used to perpetuate a caste system - lower castes are being punished by the universe for sins in a past life, thus helping them would damage your karma by undermining the universe’s intent. Let the idea die out without allowing pseudoscience to resurrect it (pun).
Que? To make a reasonable scientific measurement you would need to discount for the increased population, better health, longer lives, etc.
If you are saying that more souls = more sin then it follows that* less souls = less sin* and hence no souls is the optimal state. Ergo, God made a really Big Mistake with creation.
In remorse for mass posting, can I lighten up the mood with this piece of philosophy:
I
inocente
Guest
How can scientists not be religious?
Z
zamboni
Guest
I did not say RNA records everything, so that may be what was missed… and the links don’t stop at the two Wikipedia pages.
I was/am not saying any of these things.
Thanks.
R
rvilbig
Guest
You see, the human soul is that which gives form to the matter of the human body. Its matter is in a state of potency to fire action potentials (due to Boltzmann energy transitions via quantum mechanical effects in sodium channels in neurons), and thus neurons fire spontaneously as the form (i.e. soul) brings these *potencies *to act. For example in cortical neurons.
These “spontaneous” action potentials underlie many of the complex behaviors of higher animals. For example, in birdsongs (this is wny Thomists conjecture the existence of a “sensitive” soul in the dumb animals.)
So the real question, given that matter is in a state of potency to act, is whether you believe that the *form *given to your body by your choices that you make is random or purposeful.
Analogously, you must answer whether the form given to inanimate matter (which had innumerable potential forms which where not actualized) in the course of evolution was random or purposeful. If you, against all appearances, maintain that it was random, then “What therefore you unknowingly worship, I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and all that is in it, the Lord of heaven and earth.” (Acts 17:23-24) This was God giving form to the potencies of matter, and this is a four thousand year old teaching of the Church that your childish quibbling will not undermine.
Selective pressures do not produce genetic mutations; they have no material cause connecting them, as Nobel laureate Jacques Monod taught: they are causally independent events. I’m on vacation so I don’t have access to the full text, but he compares the causal independence of variation and selection to a man walking under another man on a ladder who drops a hammer on him: neither’s course of action was influenced by the other. To the Christian, however, we may recognize that God has coordinated these variations and selections as a hidden cause, for example as Aquinas argued:
“An occurrence may be accidental or fortuitous with respect to a lower cause when an effect not intended is brought about, and yet not be accidental or fortuitous with
respect to a higher cause, inasmuch as the effect does not take place apart from the latter’s intention. For example, a master may send two servants to the same place, but in such a way that neither is aware of the mission of the other. Their meeting is accidental so far as each servant is concerned, but not regards the master. …] So when certain events occur apart from the intention of secondary causes, they are accidental or fortuitous with respect to those causes; and they may be said without further ado to be fortuitous, because effects are described simply in terms of their proximate causes. But if God’s point of view is considered, they are not fortuitous, but foreseen.” (Shorter Summa, #137)
Furthermore, matter cannot produce consciousness and awareness of qualia. This requires an immaterial soul. See Prof. Feser’s Philosophy of Mind for an introduction to this basic concept.
With sincere hope that this will help you proceed forward with your life,
-Ryan Vilbig
ryan.vilbig@gmail.com
R
rvilbig
Guest
Prof. Feser’s blog entry includes some references. Also, see Wolfgang Smith’s book Quantum Enigma or Robert John Russell’s Cosmology. In his works, Heisenberg points us to Aristotle who held the view that God was the pure act proceeding all else, so I might be more correct to say that “Heisenberg *implicitly *argued” this.
Hope this helps. Also, I’d strongly advise that you look into an RCIA program near you and join the Catholic faith. The one, true Body of Christ suffers immensely from the divisions inflicted through Protestant disobedience to the Head, Jesus Christ, and to the visible head on earth, Pope Benedict XVI.
-Ryan Vilbig
ryan.vilbig@gmail.com
G
grannymh
Guest
I am sure that the Father not only smiles but also has a hearty laugh. As a high school kid, the way I worked out things was with the most irrational, nonsense proof imaginable for the Father’s existence. It worked.I thought about buying it, and while very cheap, was put off by the size. At 846 pages, it is 73.4375% the size of my NIV. Could you suggest a link in the online version where a humble Baptist might find the good stuff? It’s not going to convert me
A pragmatic exploration of nature, very messy but the best anyone can come up with. We are made to be curious, and the Father smiles when the kids work out things by themselves.
And for giving my selfish genes the excuse to post that:
granny,
Blessings
As for the good stuff in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, right now I’m learning about Adam and human nature. Fascinating! I also like the explanation for original sin. Makes sense to me.
Post 63 has a link for the Catechism which is on the Vatican website. I have not tried that one. Currently, I use this website. www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
When you first get on the link, the top bar has all kinds of other topics to explore.
One can put the word paragraph and the number in the search bar. Entering topics, like Adam, is also very useful.
When you enter a paragraph number, like “paragraph 355”, and then click on the opening line, CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 355 you will see the following under the paragraph:
»
»
»
»
My suggestion is to get a hard copy of the Catechism , ISBN: 1-57455-109-4 and use it along with the *Catechism *on line. For example, there are additional references marked in the book’s margins. It is easier to follow the footnotes which contain Scripture references, etc. Also, using a yellow hi-lighter to mark important sentences messed up my screen.
Seriously, I use the inside cover as my cheat sheet for paragraph numbers which I often refer to. By the way, paragraph 355 is amazing.
Blessings,
granny
The Good News of Jesus is meant for all ears.
W
wanstronian
Guest
Glad to have helped you confirm your delusional view of what constitutes ‘scientific.’
People like you make religion what it is…
Z
zamboni
Guest
"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse." Romans 1:20
Z
zamboni
Guest
"For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD." Ezekiel 18:32
S
sinnerdexter
Guest
Blaise Pascal wrote a remarkable prayer that can help each believer in facing the tasks of life. He prayed” *“Lord, help me to do great things as though they were little, since I do them with Your power; and little things as though they were great, since I do them in Your name. *
A
awatkins69
Guest
Ethical, aesthetic, mathematical, metaphysical, etc. judgments all are outside of the realm of science. I don’t think many people would dispute this.
I
inocente
Guest
rvilbig - thanks for the link and books :bowdown2: I think there’s a degree of wishful thinking on Feser’s part, reading more into Heisenberg than he said. To me, he was acknowledging that QM doesn’t get to the bottom, both in the obvious sense but also that quantization, by its nature (pun), introduces a new type of abstraction. I’ll return the favor by offering this explanation of Bohr’s complementarity. I’m not a physicist but have an affection for minimalism, and it makes more sense to me.
plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-copenhagen/#4
plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-copenhagen/#4
You may be right about Heisenberg though, as he was a Protestant.
Z
zamboni
Guest
"Is not my word like fire," declares the LORD, “and like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces?” Jeremiah 23:29
youtube.com/watch?v=m03vpmiAhAg&feature=fvst
I
inocente
Guest
JohnDamian and grannymh – thank you both for that kindness :bowdown2:. I had tried the online version of the Catechism but the content page frightened me off - didn’t realize (duh) that it isn’t intended as one narrative to be read from start to finish.
Went back after your posts but found a need for 3 or 4 monitors, so I think you’re right, I’ll have to buy the book.
We sometimes create little projects for ourselves, not as a quiz but rather to deepen understanding, and if nothing else it will be an extra source. Couldn’t actually take it to house-group though – I’d be the subject of earnest prayers in some souls for the next week (seriously). But good to find things we Christians have in common, that give extra meaning.
Went back after your posts but found a need for 3 or 4 monitors, so I think you’re right, I’ll have to buy the book.
We sometimes create little projects for ourselves, not as a quiz but rather to deepen understanding, and if nothing else it will be an extra source. Couldn’t actually take it to house-group though – I’d be the subject of earnest prayers in some souls for the next week (seriously). But good to find things we Christians have in common, that give extra meaning.
- Status