C
crowonsnow
Guest
What then is non-empirical science? And are you claiming that spirits are an example of non-empirical or non-material science? Please explain your position.
- Status
F
Fran65
Guest
If you think this, then you don’t understand science. The point about science is that it can and does carry out empirical investigations to answer questions. There are no silly or fictitious questions. If its been asked, its not a fictious question because it has been asked. We only know or define something as ‘silly’ after its been investigated. For example, it used to be silly to think that the world was a sphere. It used to be thought ‘silly’ that people could travel at speeds greater than a horse without suffocating .
Catholics believe in the Trinity. That is not the same thing as three ‘gods’. Neither do we believe that Mary, the angels and saints are gods. You need to get your theology straight before making statements about our beliefs. As for looking for evidence, its not necessary for those beliefs if you have faith. I say that as a Catholic Scientist.
Oh dear, maybe History would be useful too. Those are medieval beliefs. Although, yes there are *some *religions still teaching those things. Not Catholicism though!
That is true and it is dangerous. I love the line from the film Jurassic Park, when the Mathematician says “Sometimes we do things because we can without stopping to ask whether we should”.
I’m sorry, but this is not true. Perhaps you are referring to the way in which some scientific findings are reported, such as ‘alcohol is bad for the heart’ and then ‘red wine is good for the heart’. Those things are taken out of context. The great thing about real science is that it does develop and build upon earlier knowledge. As a hypothesis is confirmed, then theories change, new hypotheses are tested and so on. That’s the scientific method. Its cyclical and developmental. It is a gift from God.
C
crowonsnow
Guest
Isn’t this Satan and aren’t all these other devils evil spirits?
When Catholics baptize they are required to profess a belief in these evil spirits. These same evil spirits are responsible for all the disease and calamity that befalls humanity.
How is the above not accurate? Catholics, for example, still do exorcisms. Aren’t exorcisms performed to toss out the “evil spirits?”
F
Fran65
Guest
As a Catholic I believe in Satan and in demons.
This is not incompatible with the knowledge that disease is *caused by *viruses, bacteria, and disorders of structure and function of the human body.
Some, but not all, disorders of the spirit can be caused by possession and these people are cured by exorcism (through the grace of God). I’m not qualified to say which are possession and which are not.
My understanding of the suffering and terrible state of the world is that this due to the Fall, which occured when Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge. That was at the suggestion of Satan, but *does not mean *that everthing evil in the world today is of demonic origin. Otherwise we would have and need more exorcists than Doctors, Law Enforcement and others occupied with preventing suffering and helping the suffering.
Priests appointed and trained as exorcists carry out exorcisms. Catholics who are neither of the above do not and are told not to.
I would suggest that you seek a more complete education about Catholic teaching before trying to argue about it.
This is not incompatible with the knowledge that disease is *caused by *viruses, bacteria, and disorders of structure and function of the human body.
Some, but not all, disorders of the spirit can be caused by possession and these people are cured by exorcism (through the grace of God). I’m not qualified to say which are possession and which are not.
My understanding of the suffering and terrible state of the world is that this due to the Fall, which occured when Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge. That was at the suggestion of Satan, but *does not mean *that everthing evil in the world today is of demonic origin. Otherwise we would have and need more exorcists than Doctors, Law Enforcement and others occupied with preventing suffering and helping the suffering.
Priests appointed and trained as exorcists carry out exorcisms. Catholics who are neither of the above do not and are told not to.
I would suggest that you seek a more complete education about Catholic teaching before trying to argue about it.
C
crowonsnow
Guest
Hi Fran65,
But the Catholic religion is first and foremost belief in the existence of good spirits and evil spirits. Without the belief in spirits there aren’t any Catholics. So if there is disease and if there are Catholics, how can you have disease without spirits?
A
Abbadon
Guest
Huh what… I was talking about theology and religion… Not science… Props up to empirical evidence, peer reviewed testing, logic and reason… hell yea…
That said fiction is awesome to… But it shouldn’t be treated as reality within the setting of our reality… Following and believing in the laws that govern world of warcraft is fine as long as you keep it in world of warcraft.
A
Abbadon
Guest
And how do you know this? Without assuming it and saying well he has to be able to. What evidence do you have of knowing this to be true?
It’s easy to make blanket magical statements…
A
Abbadon
Guest
And I would say you seek a more complete education about psychology… Please don’t treat the mentally unstable as possessed, please, we’ve come a long way since the middle ages. Please just take them to your local hospital, they may not be in a state of mental disorder and rather having a seizure or epaleptic fit or countless possibilities.
F
Fran65
Guest
You mean in addition to my undergraduate & postgraduate degrees and professional experience?
I have never said that mental illness is always and only caused by demon possession. In fact, if you take the time to read the following thread you may learn more about what I actually think on this question.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=261015&page=6
I have never said that mental illness is always and only caused by demon possession. In fact, if you take the time to read the following thread you may learn more about what I actually think on this question.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=261015&page=6
I hope this clarifies things.
F
Fran65
Guest
Because we live in a material world as well as world in which the supernatural exists.
It may be difficult to understand, but here’s another example.
We know that bacteria exist. We know that bacteria cause disease. But we also know that disease can be caused by other things such as viruses, poor nutrition, trauma, fungi and parasites.
The great thing about Catholicism, unlike some other religions, is that it recognises the value of science and scholarship. You may confusing Catholicism with Christian Science?
Anyway, like the rest of us, there’s plenty for you to learn and think about!
C
crowonsnow
Guest
Well then show me something supernatural. What does it look like, what does it sound like, what does it feel like? I think the supernatural is just people pretending. That people pretend is certainly real, and can have positive benefits in their lives. It can also have negative benefits depending on the degree to which they pretend.
Pretending that I can fly if I jump off a cliff is obviously a degree of pretending that has been selected against. Pretending that spirits are real is harmless, but if I pretend that a spirit will heal my child who is stricken with type 1 diabetes I will only get my child killed. Pretending that a spirit will heal this child while avoiding medical assistance is a behavior that is selected against. Maybe that’s what people mean by supernatural, to pretend.
I don’t understand your example. Yes, people, even people who believe in spirits go to doctors. Even Catholics. How is being Catholic special in this regard? What does that tell me about spirits? If a catholic parent has a child who becomes ill that parent takes the child to a doctor of medicine, not a doctor of theology. So do parents of other faiths. I don’t understand your example. How is being catholic special? Catholicism is simply as syncretistic as other faiths.
I would even go so far as to say that humanism is part of the catholic faith. Humanism is why we take the child with type 1 diabetes for medical assistance, not spirits. The humanist part of many faiths certainly does not eschew scientific knowledge. Maybe that’s why some say there is no conflict. On that note I would agree.
B
buffalo
Guest
The creator of time cannot adjust it as He wishes?
A
Abbadon
Guest
Just because you can create something does not mean you can control it. Also how do you know it created time without assuming it?
F
Fran65
Guest
I am genuinely sorry that you have not felt anything supernatural. One example of something that cannot be measured, cannot be seen, cannot be heard is love. If you counter that ‘love’ can be felt and can be measured using psychometric tests, then I would agree with you and suggest that ‘faith’ and experience of God’s presence can likewise be felt and measured.
As a psychologist I understand what you are saying when you think that the supernatural or experience of God is ‘pretend’. I would ask you how you distinguish between the real and the pretend. How do you know that someone is ‘really in love’ versus someone who only thinks that they are in love?
As a psychologist I know about the psychological explanation of faith and how some explain away the experience of God’s presence as a neurological oddity or wishful thinking. I would defy anyone to demonstrate that the experience was not or is not real however.
I note how you have slipped in ‘selected against’ as if using medicine instead of spiritual healing is an evolved behaviour. However, evolution occurs over millenia and modern medicine is only really a couple centuries old. (Yes, I do believe in evolution too and the Catholic Church states that its teachings do not conflict with evolution!)
I agree with you by the way, that relying on spiritual healing is dangerous and when imposed on a child amounts to child abuse.
Could you demonstrate where and how Catholicism teaches contradictory beliefs?
Science and faith are not contradictory unless one adopts an extremist position for both sets of practices. They can and do work together. Science works well for the material world, but it cannot explain or deal with the supernatural world. That belongs to theology and divinity. I would not expect my Priest to explain how an automotive engine works (although he may be able to
) Nor do I expect an empirical scientist to explain religious experience in supernatural terms.The difference is that there exists a particular type of ‘aggressive’ empiricist, such as Richard Dawkins, who insist on discussing things about which they know very little and are even less willing to learn about. My Priest however is not likely to enter a discussion about microbiology and tell microbiologists that they are talking rubbish
No, humanism is either a philosophy from between the 14th and 16th century - which I don’t think you mean; or it is the belief that "man is an end to himself, and the sole maker, with supreme control, of his own history. This has no place in Catholic teaching as it is a version of atheism.
There is a difference between faiths with respect to how they regard science. I am simply saying that in Catholicism they are *not *incompatible.
A
Abbadon
Guest
No way… Your a psychologist and you beleive in deamonic possesion… After everything you know about the brain and how it works your telling me that you think people can be demonically possesed…
Then tell me as a psychologist how do you tell the difference between a demonic possesion and a split personality disorder?
A
Abbadon
Guest
I just want to take this moment away from crow and defend dawkins. Dawkins was a favourite of mine before he enterd the realm of relegious critisisum. And as a evolutionary biologist he would not enter to deep into discussions within say physics. but Dawkins does do a great job of explaining a concept called memes. And relegion is a meme. So althoug he may not be versed in every single relegion and ideology out there, he does understand the structure and possibly workins of such. And has written a few books on his findings. And plus his book on relegion (The God Delusion, I do not think he wrote another nor needs to) do not look at specifcs rather the fallacies as a whole. And as a comentary on the effect of relegion on societies and it’s effect on today, in education, in health and in war…The difference is that there exists a particular type of ‘aggressive’ empiricist, such as Richard Dawkins, who insist on discussing things about which they know very little and are even less willing to learn about. My Priest however is not likely to enter a discussion about microbiology and tell microbiologists that they are talking rubbish
…
There is a difference between faiths with respect to how they regard science. I am simply saying that in Catholicism they are *not *incompatible.
But who is really a specialist in the field of relegion. Sure as a scholor or a historian, but the mullas will say the priests are completely wrong and the priests will say the rabi are completely wrong. Thats just the monothiesims and they can’t even decide on who was a prophet and who was the son of a god born of a virgin…
I think as far as relegion goes, I do not mean historicaly or scholarly, all our oppions are valid on how many angles can dance on the tip of a needle.
F
Fran65
Guest
Yes, I am. However, it is very, very rare. Far more rare than people used to think. Our knowledge of psychology and psychiatry has markedly improved our ability to correctly diagnose mental illness.
There is no such thing as “split personality disorder”. It is often used to refer to one of three separate disorders: schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or multiple personality disorder. Perhaps you mean one of these disorders?
Competent psychologists and psychiatrists will make a valid and reliable diagnosis of mental illness based on detailed assessment and observation. We use a number of diagnostic tools such as the classification of mental disorders which provide detailed and multiaxial criteria for diagnosis.
My understanding is that demonic possession **is only diagnosed by a team including a trained and experienced exorcist. **The psychologist/psychiatric (name removed by moderator)ut is to exclude mental illness, not to diagnose demonic possession. That is outside our remit as medical professionals. A diagnosis is made once every other possibility has been excluded. That is how it works in the Catholic Church. I cannot speak for other faiths such as evangelical pentecostals.
Here is official teaching on exorcism:
I hope this helps.
F
Fran65
Guest
That is not true. You have correctly stated the difference between the three major religions, which is whether or not Jesus is the Son of God. That’s not the same as saying that Islam or Judaism is completely wrong.
That is what is called relativism and it is wrong. We have clear teaching with respect to our faith as to what is and what is not truth. It is based on Scripture, as well as on Tradition in the Catholic Church. Of course, you, and others are free to disagree, but that does not make relativism ‘correct’.
A
Abbadon
Guest
I want to get through this subject before I move on to some of your other responses, so I hope that is ok.
See I can understand someone in a field of science, regardless of purity, believing in a god/s, even a personal god/s. But I am having a hard time understanding that a psychologist, someone who has done post graduate work, thinks that demonic possessions are real, rather than a mental/physical disorder/abnormality. I’m sorry, because I most likely will offend you, but you really should know better.
Okay so you have outlined that you make sure that it is not a psychological condition before you go on to “treat” the demonic possession. After you have ruled out medical conditions, that means there would be experimental data on demonic possessions. Has every possibility ever been ruled out? I mean are there documented cases of demonic possessions. I do not see why then demonic possessions would not be able to be diagnosed by medical practitioners, it would have symptoms and unique identifiers wouldn’t it? Or because you don’t know what it could be you simply say that then it must be a demonic possession and can’t possibly be anything else?
How come this has not entered into a field of science and research been done on it? I mean it is an observable event, It would fit somewhere within biology and psychology. What biological affects do demons have on the human? If the demon can manipulate a humans speech and movement we should be able to observe some thing in the brain, should we not? How do we know if it is a demon and not a raksha, an illathid or perhaps an aethereal parasite?
Do you just believe in demonic possessions because you are told you should believe it?
I
Ignatius
Guest
Absolutely not. Science was developed as a tool of Faith. It’s job is to show the marvels that God has wrought.
- Status