N
- Status
N
Nohome
Guest
It gets more complex, but less complicated.
Or it could be some combination of both. Imagine science as a train on the track of knowledge. God is on the train of faith on the same track, comming from the other direction. There is no question that they will eventually collide, it is just a matter of when and where.
Nohome
B
buffalo
Guest
Explain
N
Nohome
Guest
Since the center of the universe is undefined, so is the claim that Earth is the center of the universe.
N
Nohome
Guest
Since the center of the universe is undefined, so is the claim that Earth is the center of the universe.
B
Beautiful
Guest
Why would ‘he’ say such a thing? He? Pope Benedict XVI?
I believe HE would say such a thing because he knows all too well the temptations that man faces day in and day out - not just temptations that scientists face in their work but those who read scientific studies and all the little guys in between who struggle with rudimentary life in a sometimes banal existence.
Consider the following words written by Jean-Francois Baudoz in his book With Christ
T
tomarin
Guest
much of what was once scientifc truth has also been debunked by science. have you read thomas kuhn’s theory of scientific revolutions? if you have then you know an argument can be made that science itself doesn’t advance in a unilinear fashion through a gradual accumulation of observed facts, but rather it lurches in one direction or the next as a result of the complete abandonment of one paradigm for another. the paradigm in use determines what constitutes a fact, not the other way around.
i’ve been thinking about this conversation we’ve been having and it seems to me that your point of view could be described as materialist in the sense that for you, the bottom line is the material, tangible world – this is ultimately all there is and what appears to be spiritual is “real” insofar as it can be confirmed by our investigation of the physical universe, that is, by science. since you describe yourself in your profile as a former catholic you may adopt whatever philosophy you like but you shouldn’t expect others here to necessarily agree with you, since the church regards scientific materialism as a creed that is antithetical to our faith.
N
Nohome
Guest
I suppose, though I would think I’m rather more correctly described by physicalism. Yet I remain convinced that the intricacies of the universe can only be explained as having been authored by God.
Perish the thought, none here need agree with me.
Nohome
B
buffalo
Guest
Catholic teaching is that man is the center of creation, so I would infer that puts where he lives there too. There are different ways to use the word center.
T
tomarin
Guest
what’s the difference between physicalism and scientific materialism?
M
mschrank
Guest
Hmm, I don’t know. I’ve been reading a lot about genes and biology and I think things are currently looking a lot more complicated than they were in Mendel’s day, or even 10 years ago.
I won’t even mention the “Q” word.
O
Orogeny
Guest
That’s a joke, right? When we have people insisting that we teach pseudoscience in our classrooms in very large part because they don’t understand what science is and what it isn’t?
Peace
Tim
E
edwest2
Guest
I’m not insisting on pseudo-science being taught in the classroom.
My question was about this site. Why the big deal about evolution? The facts are there, right? The scientific community uses it, right? So why the big to do about getting Christians to accept it here, on this site?
Peace,
Ed
My question was about this site. Why the big deal about evolution? The facts are there, right? The scientific community uses it, right? So why the big to do about getting Christians to accept it here, on this site?
Peace,
Ed
N
Nohome
Guest
Physicalism is a refinement of materialism. Materialism has no room for the more ephemeral disciplines of late 20th century science. That’s my opinion anyhow.
Nohome
M
mschrank
Guest
Evolution means a lot of things, common descent, natural selection, and then neo-Darwinism (ND) in most contexts. It’s more complicated than I thought, and neo-Darwinism is only one of a few different theories albieit the biggest. And I’m not talking about intelligent design, I’m talking about alternative scientific theories that try to solve some of the problems neo-Darwinism has. And they are there, don’t let anyone trick you into believing it’s all said and done.
Turns out, its great for some things, if not most things, but at some points it kind of breaks down. Most scientists cling to the ‘advent hypothesis’, i.e., ‘some day’ we’ll get it and ND will solve the problem. Others, have posited alternative explanations. They range from strict materialism reworked (mainstream evo-devo), to more ‘new age’ stuff like Sheldrake.
It’s actually a pretty exciting horserace!
O
Orogeny
Guest
Who has started more threads about this topic, Ed, you or me? Why don’t you answer your own question.
Actually, the question that you should answer is what is the big to do about getting Catholics to deny evolution.
Peace
Tim
D
drpmjhess
Guest
Catholic teaching is only a terrestrial religion. If you were elsewhere in the universe, that place would look like the center too.
B
buffalo
Guest
Perhaps, perhaps not. However we have been told much through Revelation.
Catholic teaching is only terrestial? Do you think other worlds have a different version? How so?
Man occupies the center of a few more things. He is in the center of the biggest disrtances and the smallest. He is the center of Creation. Should I go on?
D
drpmjhess
Guest
I have no doubt that intelligent life has evolved on some small fraction of the terrestrial-like planets around 10\22 stars in the universe, or that some intelligent species have evolved religious consciousness. However, there are no Catholic dioceses that we know of on any of the exoplanets that have so far been discovered.
N
Nohome
Guest
Mathematically, the odds are in favor. Still, I don’t see this as a threat to religion.
Nohome
- Status