Culture & Lifestyle

Rave

Faith and Science: A Fresh Perspective

Posted 26 months ago|36 comments|640 views
Written by
Rudi Stettner
 Moderator
I receceived an email today that was a forward of an article by Aryeh Arnie Gotfryd, who views science and religion as being not only compatible but part of the same great picture. He earned Canada's first PhD in the field of applied ecology. His career spans the field of science and religion. He achieves interesting results when he looks for (and seems to find) a common denominator between the two. Consider the following quote, which is part of a larger article in which he discusses the "climategate" scandal.


"Society somehow drew an artificial line between faith in the clergy and faith in

the scientist. The fact is, once you give away to anyone your freedom to decide

any issue, you have essentially committed an act of faith. If you pass it on to

an organized group with an identifiable doctrine, you have in effect practiced a

religion.



The difference is that while most religions center on faith in a Supreme Being,

scientism places that unequivocal trust in man. The upside of religion is that

man takes his infinite trust and attaches it to an Infinite Being - that kind of

makes sense. What doesn't make sense is to attach such unbounded faith in

limited human beings and the contrivances of their minds, however great those

minds may be.



Besides, the objects of our adulation, the duly ordained priests of scientism,

have gods of their own: Power and moneys, as we have seen so clearly in this

past week. If you want to worship power and money, you don't need a middle man;

you can do so directly. On the other hand if it's something absolute that you're

searching for, why not have faith in the Creator? "





Following is a link to the article in its entirety, which I was not yet able to find on the Aryeh Gotfryd site.

http://meditationsinthysight.blogspot.com/


There is a growing body of thought in which science and religion are seen as partners. Such an approach can and should transform public discussion of matters that hinge on science and public policy. Such discussion might increase the light shed on the intersection of science and religion and turn down the heat.


http://www.simpletoremember.com/authors/a/dr-gerald-schroeder/


http://www.geraldschroeder.com/AccordingToGod.aspx


Reprinted with permission from Magdeburgerjoe.com
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
26 months ago: Go Rudi go! While I do not know if the Almighty is Jewish, Christian or Muslim. I do know that when anyone has a strict compartmentalized approach to theory it is destined for failure. When thinking deep thoughts and presenting complex theories one must not be bound by regional restraints. Why think only hemispheric or globally? Why think only in galatic terms. One must be able to reach out to the universal thoughts and plans. Only then will they begin to understand.

You are correct in the statement that Science in now a Religion. Unfortunatly it is a compartmentalized religion and not a universal religion.
26 months ago: Seeking out knowledge is one thing. Proving it is another. When a scientist or a small group of scientists declare or present a single point without releasing data to support it is a religion or a cult. When a select group declares a process as the truth while also closing ranks to protect that view it becomes a religion or a cult.
26 months ago: Another winner.
26 months ago: The Earth is FLAT.

Today the Earth is HOT?

Prove it with secondary analysis of your data. Why not release all of your data? Why pick and choose your data to meet your end game.

Did or do you know that the reference to the prescribed glogal temperature increase is not based on maximum global temperatures. It is based on higher than recorded minimum global temperatures.
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: Tell me Siempre if space is infinitely big meaning it never stops it would stand to reason their would be infinitely number of earths according to Drakes Theory. The fact of the matter is we have not found another earth and another earth has not contacted us through SETI. Remember if space is infinite then it never stops, if it never stops it stands to reason their would be infinitive number of human civilizations. It would stand to reason some of those earths have far surpassed us actually a infinitely number of earths have far surpassed our technology. But not one of them has contacted us legitimately? I think God laughs in the face of scientists trying to disprove him and some Christians cheer on those same scientists.
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: The odds of us being the only planet is slim when throwing dice but then again if space is teeming with infinite number of civilizations we would have been contacted already. But the fact of the matter is God does not play dice.
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: If some of you science followers caught that that was slap in the face to Einstein "God does not play dice" is his quote but how fitting.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
26 months ago: To say that we have not found another earth is silly. We have discovered numerous planets revolving around other stars. I agree with Siempre in that science is based on veriafiable fact and religion is based on that which cannot be verified.Faith does enter into the equation though. TCG asks us to "prove" various theories and to produce data, but we are not all Renascence men, and the amount of data has expanded exponentially and is beyond any man. Therefore we have to have faith in the scientific method, and on the peer review system that allows other scientists to verify results of research. In a an era where the amount of information in the Sunday NY Times is greater than a lifetimes knowledge a hundred years ago, people have to rely on specialization. I freely admit that I am not a climate specialist and have to rely on the research and expertise of others who have more education and experience. To do otherwise is foolish.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
26 months ago: It is interesting that after all of the "Climategate Scandal" hoopla, none of the embarrassing emails provide any information that research was intentionally faked or flawed. This is clearly a smear campaign funded by the fossil fuel industry that is afraid that their ability to rape and plunder the environment may be curtailed. While they are paying millions to spread confusion and doubt, the evidence backing up human caused climate change keeps rolling in from myriad sources. Scientists are by nature cautious because they are afraid of being criticized as being extremist, but the environment is changing much faster than they had predicted.
According to the Copenhagen Diagnosis report, climate change has rapidly accelerated beyond all previous predictions and humans are to blame. The findings are a synthesis of 200 peer-reviewed papers that continued to pour in from all over the world after the UN IPCC issued its 2007 analysis. Somerville described the report as an "authoritative assessment" of the newest climate change data.
The results reveal that global warming emissions in 2008 were nearly 40 percent higher than those in 1990. Further, sea level rise is 80 percent above past IPCC predictions.
26 months ago: I personally do not subscribe to the concept of blind faith. Living by blind faith with regard to spiritual things or blind faith in science and natural things is a weak and pitiful existence.

Faith has to have substance or it is not faith at all. If it has no substance, that kind of "faith" it is mere wishing at best or self-imposed ignorance at worst.

Not a good way to live. At least not for me.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
26 months ago: Science as you know it just as much based on faith as religion is. Now, I may be wrong, but I don't recall anyone here claiming to be a climatologist. As Siempre pointed out, to undeniably prove anything in the scientific world would take years of study, investment of money, and an unbiased opinion at the outset. Therefore, everything you know about climate change you have been told by a person or people. You have faith that what they tell you is the truth. Various emails recently have proved that notion to be...er...let's say "questionable".

Other scientists and various people will tell you that the opposite is true. You have faith that they are only trying to deceive you, to get you to part from the truth. In essence, they are evil, (oil companies, etc.) and therefore are the enemy.

You see the parallels here? There is a big difference between God and our perception of God. What we are told and that which we choose to believe. Heaven, Hell, Satan, the deceiver, the enemy. We believe what we choose to believe. Scientists can't decide if coffee is good for you or not, if eggs are good for you or not.

Jesus told a man, "Give away all your wealth and follow me, if you want to be saved." That's exactly what the global climate change people are saying.
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: "To say that we have not found another earth is silly. We have discovered numerous planets revolving around other stars."

Where is the proof to back up that claim? I can say with all honesty you don't have proof because it is just speculation when it comes to SETI scientists. I have studied and read alot. There is no proof your claiming.
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: "However, since I don’t want to spend thousands of dollars and invest years in coming up with my own research then I read Science news magazines and articles as well as peer reviewed periodicals. So you see I don’t need faith or trust. I just need to follow the dots and make sure that they match up."

You simply don't understand do you? You do need faith that every experiment done was not compromised in one way or another. You are putting faith in man which will never be perfect. This whole world is full of speculation. From our History books which are most often opinions. From our science based on fallible observations of fallible experiments.
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: "self-imposed ignorance at worst"

I could not have said it better myself.
26 months ago: Self imposed ignorance at best. Self imposed destruction at worst.

Why would they care? It's not their dime. Always easier being a lap dog waiting for a free meal.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
26 months ago: During the past ten years scientists have discovered over 130 planets rotating around other solar systems. See: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/050509_exoplanet_review.html
Scientist are now getting excited because they may have found one that is at the right distance from a sun to contain water and thus perhaps to harbor an atmosphere that people could survive on. See: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/070424_hab_exoplanet.html
26 months ago: Siempre:

You're talking about science except for Global warming...er..uh....cooling....uh...er climate change science. Those scientists have corrupted and are about to corrupt for a century all science.

Some scientist better start bellying up to the bar and name names and clean house.

And if there are other planets, G-d created them too. No?
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: Those are estimation Altruist even moons revolve around a sun not ours ofcourse but they have to be with a certain habital zone, that has to take into account if the sun is bigger then ours so hence the habital zone would be pushed back between 1%-10%. It still does not mean they could be just seeing a moon or a "planet" that has no life on it with no atmosphere. In till they can reach those "planets" which are 20 light years away it is all speculation. I have studied this astronomy fascinates me.
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: Actually right now from the last I heard it was they discovered 127 "planets" to be exact..but we have no telescopes that could even remotely give you a clear image of them. Kinda like when they find and take pictures of "blackholes".
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: Even our biggest 10 meter telescopes can not give a clear image. Alot could be misinterpreted by studying object 20 light years away. That is a massive distance and things get distorted at that great of a length.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
26 months ago: Al,

Scot said no earths had been discovered. Not planets. Of course there are going to planets. We have eight, or nine, or ten, or back to eight, ....anyway,..... right here in our own solar system.

But even at 150,000 miles per hour, our fastest vehicle speed to date, it would take 91,730 years to get there. Even if we could travel at one million miles per hour it would take 8000 years. So what good is it?

Who was it that said our dollars would be better spent taking care of the problems here on earth and not wasted on outer space? Oh yeah, that would be Obama, and Al.
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: "Even if we could travel at one million miles per hour it would take 8000 years."

Looking at it that way I mean 20 light years seems so far off. But putting it your way I think wow what a massive distance. I can not even comprehend how far that is.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
26 months ago: And the thing is, who is to say what would happen to that planet in 8000 years? It would be a drag to head that way, and some giant asteroid comes along and blows the place to smithereens before you get there.

Even the images we get from the radio collectors and telescopes(?) are over twenty years old. When we see them for the first time, we are seeing what it looked like twenty years ago.

As I understand it, the method we use to determine the presence of a possible planet is not from actually seeing it, but by measuring the shift in brightness of a star as a possible planet passed in front of it, and the movement of that star as it is acted on by an unseen body.
26 months ago: The thing I like about Scientology is, you retain your own good sense, it does not request nor require "faith".
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: "but by measuring the shift in brightness of a star as a possible planet passed in front of it"

Yes that is exactly what they do. Like how they find blackholes. A shift in light. I don't think it is very reliable way to make new discoveries, I find it interesting nonetheless.
scotmanster
scotmanster
26 months ago: "With religion the same is not required. Anybody with a fourth grade reading level and access to it can pick up a bible and become an expert. All that is required is faith. Access to G-d has to be simple because hope has to be easily accessible. Faith requires no proof just trust. The two are not the same. One is the study of how things work. While the other is about faith. Two different things altogether!"

That is what you call nonsense faith the same reason why many are against Christianity to begin with. I will rely not only on my faith but the new archaeological discoveries centering around events and places in the Bible, they make every day.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
26 months ago: Terryeo,

Have you ever seen a thetan? Do you believe the story of the ancient race that did whatever it supposedly did a long time ago? Criminy, dude, if that isn't faith in a religion, then I don't know what is.
26 months ago: OOTB - Good point. Bet you don't get a response.
26 months ago: OotB - good question. "spirit" is the word that might have served, but "thetan" is what Ron Hubbard used. Human eyeballs can not see spirits, neither mine nor yours. However, "see" can mean "be aware of", such as in "do you see the point"? Yes.

But that is personal experience. Your further question about an ancient race, let me ask, you've been reading what critics say, huh? Seventy - five million years ago .. such and such, so and so.

No, I don't believe what I can not experience for myself, thank you for asking.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
26 months ago: Terryeo

So in effect, you are aware of an entity that you can not quantify by any of the five natural senses, nor can you prove its existence mathematically or scientifically. You just know it exists. Sounds like faith to me.

I'm not trying to be facetious or argumentative. Would you explain how you being aware of spirits differs from someone's belief in God, as a matter of faith.

The only thing I know about scientology is what I have read on these forums. I can't even tell which ones are the critics, and which ones really believe in it. I've only known one person who got involved with dianetics, and he was explaining it to me. When he got to the part about how nothing is your fault, but a result of a negetive influence, I tuned out.
26 months ago: L. Ron Hubbard

"No culture in the history of the world, save the thoroughly depraved and expiring ones, has failed to affirm the existence of a Supreme Being. It is an empirical observation that men without a strong and lasting FAITH in a Supreme Being are less capable, less ethical and less valuable to themselves and society..."

"A man without an abiding FAITH is, by observation alone, more of a thing than a man."
26 months ago: TO - Your turn.
26 months ago: Case closed? Thank you.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.