Science must destroy religion

[JaKael02]

Doh!

I read experimental, instead of experiential

I agree, I don’t dismiss these ‘‘spiritual’’ experiences.

I’ve had them myself, but I would not use the word spiritual, giving birth to my own children, and placing that pure, new, life for the very first time on my breast.

Cuddling my family around a fire, staring up at the night sky.

Helping one of my mares deliver her foal.

The first time I ever looked through a telescope at the moon, or the first time I saw Jupiter and her moons.

It made me realize just how utterly inconsequential we were in the universal scheme of things, which made me appreciate every moment of the life I have.

There isn’t a week that goes by that I don’t have some kind of experience of the numinous.

But I know the locus where all this is happening is my own brain and my feelings and senses.

No Deity required.

Sarah x

Sarah,

If these descriptions are your spiritual experience, I’d argue you never had an authentic spiritual experience. However, that is okay because most have not.

Kindly,

James

 

[ASimon]

Sarah,

If these descriptions are your spiritual experience, I’d argue you never had an authentic spiritual experience. However, that is okay because most have not.

Kindly,

James

I would argue they are, if potentially a less potent one. The kinds of things she’s talking about certainly evoke feelings of transcendence - which is the character of what you’d feel in a more “authentic” experience. Perhaps the kind of experience evoked from a meditative or prayerful state would be more powerful.

 

[atheistgirl]

Sarah,

If these descriptions are your spiritual experience, I’d argue you never had an authentic spiritual experience. However, that is okay because most have not.

Kindly,

James

I completly agree with that. I’ve never had a ‘‘spiritual’’ experience of anything Divine.

I’ve had plenty of experiences that fill me with awe and wonder and the deepest sense of joy.

But nothing remotely ‘‘spiritual’’ as a believer in a Deity and afterlife might claim to have experienced.

Sarah x

 

[JaKael02]

I completly agree with that. I’ve never had a ‘‘spiritual’’ experience of anything Divine.

I’ve had plenty of experiences that fill me with awe and wonder and the deepest sense of joy.

But nothing remotely ‘‘spiritual’’ as a believer in a Deity and afterlife might claim to have experienced.

Sarah x

Sarah,

Glad we agree. We have more in common than you think.

Kindly,
James

 

[JaKael02]

I would argue they are, if potentially a less potent one. The kinds of things she’s talking about certainly evoke feelings of transcendence - which is the character of what you’d feel in a more “authentic” experience. Perhaps the kind of experience evoked from a meditative or prayerful state would be more powerful.

Simon,

Hi. Your description is very “New Age Spirituality”. In that definition of spiritual experience, you are correct.

I did not define, but the spiritual experience I was referring to was directly from the monotheistic trinitarian God. These can not be produced via prayerful states or meditations.

Hope we can find common ground. Kindly - James

 

[atheistgirl]

These can not be produced via prayerful states or meditations.

Neurologists are having a very interesting time looking at this:

The most significant finding was the activation in the left medial prefrontal cortex extending to the anterior cingulate gyrus. Other significant loci of activation were observed in the right caudate body extending to the right insula and in the left midbrain close to the hypothalamus. The results in this study are in concordance with the hypothesis that compassion meditation is accompanied by activation in brain areas involved with empathy as well as with happy and pleasant feelings, i.e. the left medial prefrontal cortex and the anterior cingulate gyrus.

cmiv.liu.se/research/current-research-projects/fmri-meditation

Sarah x

 

[JaKael02]

Neurologists are having a very interesting time looking at this:

cmiv.liu.se/research/current-research-projects/fmri-meditation

Sarah x

Good source. I agree! Of course within the context of new age spirituality experiences.

 

[BernardM]

My point was, it’s not ‘‘fath’’ or any supernatural entity, that is supplying the answers to improving the world, it’s cold, hard, science.

Were do you think modern science came from? It did not pop up in an act of spontaneous generation.

About not needing religion, stepping outside of my own belief and looking at it in a broad historical perspective religion is a necessity in societies. It teaches morality and ethics, and helps bond a society together by common belief. Historically all atheistic governments have been horrific, from the first in 18th century to those we still have today. Individual atheist may be fine, but as it is an expression of nihilism nothing good will ever come from it.

 

[atheistgirl]

Were do you think modern science came from?

The endevors, and perseverance of brave man and women, often to the endangerment of their own lives.

religion is a necessity in societies.

By religion, do you mean any religion, so long as it’s a religion?

It teaches morality and ethics, and helps bond a society together by common belief.

If it teaches women are secondclass citizens, apostates must be killed, or it’s ok to lie to an unbeliever, are those good morals and ethics for the religion to pass on?

Where there are two or more religions, as in the middle east, I don’t think religion has helped bond those peoples, and I have serious doubts about the ethics of the conduct of all sides.

Sarah x

 

[Armyvet007]

If it teaches women are secondclass citizens, apostates must be killed, or it’s ok to lie to an unbeliever, are those good morals and ethics for the religion to pass on?

Where there are two or more religions, as in the middle east, I don’t think religion has helped bond those peoples, and I have serious doubts about the ethics of the conduct of all sides.

Sarah x

I suggest you review the history of Revolutionary France. Prime example of said behaviors not being caused/coming from religion. It also gives you a rather good example of how in the absence of religion, one is made [Cult of Reason and/or the Cult of the Supreme Being].

 

[tonyrey]

One tenet of the Church is this: it proposes but never imposes. You would have to provide a few good examples of where religion has inhibited scientific research. I don’t think it’s valid to claim that any research is inhibited because of religious beliefs. There were scientists involved with developing the atomic bomb, and they had some concerns about releasing such a force. And Robert Oppenheimer later realized that a terrible weapon had been created.

“In some sort of crude sense, which no vulgarity, no humor, no overstatement can quite extinguish, the physicists have known sin; and this is a knowledge which they cannot lose.”
J. Robert Oppenheimer

The human race will not make any significant changes in the wisdom of the ages on the ethical and social fronts. Mr. Harris makes a case for his brand of Utopia. I have already laid out the most likely scenarios.

Human nature will continue to exist in Mr. Harris’ desired world. Technology will not save us on the ethical or social fronts. As a student of the history of science and technology, there are only two possible outcomes: a global surveillance state still filled with human beings whose primary goal will be to manipulate the system or wage war. The second scenario is far simpler: total control by a scientific dictatorship, with an elite that will be allowed to live outside the limits given to the common man.

Who funds science today? The military, such as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, private industry that can be manipulated, and wealthy individuals. The average man on the street is unaware of this. The fabulously wealthy will continue to have things their way regardless of who’s in charge.

And if you’re skeptical about science being manipulated, I offer the following:

hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674047143

Some interesting statistics about the nations with the largest arms exports:

                                                            ...................2001..........    2010.........        +/-

1 U.S…5908… 8641… + 46%
2 Russia… 5896… 6039… + 2%
3 Germany… 850… 2340… +275% !
4 France… 1297… 1834… + 41%
6 China… 499… 1423… +185% !
7 U.K… 1368… 1064… - 22%

(Millions of US $)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_arms_exporters

 

[_Abyssinia]

I do not think scientists will agree with Sam Harris. Nearly 50% of scientists are religious, they do not seem to have problem complementing religion with science.

 

[edwest2]

Neurologists are having a very interesting time looking at this:

cmiv.liu.se/research/current-research-projects/fmri-meditation

Sarah x

I’ve read about this and it doesn’t prove anything unless one goes in with preconceived notions.

Peace,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

Extremists are a fact of life. Lots of evidence for them. If some one self identifies as an extremist, it’s not a stretch of the imagination to believe they are telling the truth.

God - no evidence of the existence of such a Being. (to me)

Lots of evidence for the existence of extremists.

Yes. It is.

No, some persons of faith. Not all persons of faith. I have nothing but admiration and appreciation and gratitude to those people of faith who get stuck in to the issues affecting the poor, the suffering, the ill, the homeless, the hungry and provide practical solutions to real problems affecting real people. I’ve expressed my appreciation for the fact the Catholic church is the largest charitable organization on the planet.

But some people of faith, some, are capable of extremism, and not in a good way!

Another judgemental Christian. I don’t have an unfavorable view of people of faith. I have an unfavorable view of people of faith, who claim, if they lost that faith, they would murder, rape and pillage all the day long. Yes, I have an unfavorable view of such people. With or without faith.

Your assertion is not true, but after this reply is posted, I won’t see any more of your posts so go right ahead and make all the assertions about me you like.

Sarah x

Respectfully, are non-believers immune from committing crimes? The newspaper will tell us a radical this or radical that religious person shot and killed someone, but did you, or anyone here, ever see a newspaper headline that read: “Atheist robs liquor store, kills owner.”?

Peace,'Ed

 

[CopticChristian]

Doh!

I read experimental, instead of experiential

I agree, I don’t dismiss these ‘‘spiritual’’ experiences.

I’ve had them myself, but I would not use the word spiritual, giving birth to my own children, and placing that pure, new, life for the very first time on my breast.

Cuddling my family around a fire, staring up at the night sky.

Helping one of my mares deliver her foal.

The first time I ever looked through a telescope at the moon, or the first time I saw Jupiter and her moons.

It made me realize just how utterly inconsequential we were in the universal scheme of things, which made me appreciate every moment of the life I have.

There isn’t a week that goes by that I don’t have some kind of experience of the numinous.

But I know the locus where all this is happening is my own brain and my feelings and senses.

No Deity required.

Sarah x

AG,

I find your notion of spiritual fascinating and thought provoking. I believe that, as you say, there is spirituality in every day life. Some would say that there are gradations of spirituality. I accept that. How do we measure that?

I believe we should accept spirituality for those that believe that they are spiritual. As an athiest you say no Deity required. If you are correct then you have a spiritual experience. If you are wrong and you believe that you are right then you have a spiritual experience with a Deity you deny.

A Deity unrecognized or acknowledged does not change the Deity, for what kind of Deity would that be.

 

[CopticChristian]

Neurologists are having a very interesting time looking at this:

cmiv.liu.se/research/current-research-projects/fmri-meditation

Sarah x

Sarah,

What you have here is a drop of water from the Ocean. I suggest you watch the BBC special on “The Story of The Brain”…you can see the whole thing on YouTube…if I find the link for the whole series I will post it…

 

[atheistgirl]

I suggest you review the history of Revolutionary France. Prime example of said behaviors not being caused/coming from religion. It also gives you a rather good example of how in the absence of religion, one is made [Cult of Reason and/or the Cult of the Supreme Being].

What has the French Revolution got to do with the questions I asked BearnardM regarding his claims about religion?

Sarah x

 

[exoflare]

This is what hypocrites usually do. However, we still need to be charitable. Unfortunately, it seems I have come across negatively so I’ll need to be a little more careful with regards to the charity of my posts.

Where exactly do you think you were uncharitable, then? She only got mad because she couldn’t defend her made-up stories, wild exaggerations and double-standards, and people called her out on it. Instead of owning up to this it was easier to just stick her fingers in her ears and go neener-neener.

 

[atheistgirl]

Respectfully, are non-believers immune from committing crimes?

Absoltely not.

The newspaper will tell us a radical this or radical that religious person shot and killed someone, but did you, or anyone here, ever see a newspaper headline that read: “Atheist robs liquor store, kills owner.”?

No and I’m well aware of the bias in the mainstream media outlets.

I guess the reason it makes headlines is a Chrisian Muslim or whoever doing such things is patently against their declared agenda of peace and love to all mankind.

The claim by BearnardM was that religion is a unifying moral and ethical code for society to live by. I think you only have to look at what’s happening in the middle east now, or what happened in Beziers in the 1200s for example to know that blanket claim is not true.

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

A Deity unrecognized or acknowledged does not change the Deity, for what kind of Deity would that be.

This is kinda like the answer to the question I asked regarding God working through people who didn’t believe in Him. The answer was an unequivocal yes.

So the good that atheists do, is only done by the Grace of God, working through them, even if they don’t recognize or affirm it.

So God can’t lose, and can’t be put on the spot.

If God is using me as a vessel for His Grace without my sayso, ok, fine, I’m 5 -1 and 90 pounds and can’t fight that powerful a guy

But when the things I want don’t pan out, hey, that’s not God’s fault, because I don’t have enough faith in Him for my prayers (wishes and desires) to be answered

Or, my favorite, God does, and is answering prayers (maybe even mine) but not in the way I/We want, because God knows best - so it only looks like God isn’t answering them

I just can’t buy that kind of reasoning. Sorry.

Sarah x