sciencedaily.com — A person's unconscious attitudes toward science and God may be fundamentally opposed, researchers report, depending on how religion and science are used to answer "ultimate" questions such as how the universe began or the origin of life.
Dec 19, 2008 View in Crawl 4
infernal6Dec 20, 2008
Naturalism FTW!
Closed AccountDec 20, 2008
you got the superstitionthat you are eligible to sort.
kronzdiggDec 22, 2008
How do you define prove?
obscenegraceDec 22, 2008
In Europe, the Church "rescued" Plotinus because the metaphysics of NeoPlatonism was so in line with the Christian worldview. At the same time, the "Moors" got the writings of the more empirically-minded Aristotle (which is why they were so much more scientifically advanced during this period). BTW, without philosophy, there would be no science. See aphorism 344 of Nietzsche's The Gay Science below:How we, too, are still pious.— In science convictions have no rights of citizenship, as one says with good reason: only when they decide to descend to the modesty of hypotheses, of a provisional experimental point of view, of a regulative fiction, they may be granted admission and even a certain value in the realm of knowledge—though always with the restriction that they remain under police supervision, under the police of mistrust.— But does this not mean, if you consider it more precisely, that a conviction may obtain admission to science only when it ceases to be a conviction? Would it not be the first step in the discipline of the scientific spirit that one would not permit oneself any more convictions? ... only we still have to ask, to make it possible for this discipline to begin, must there not be some PRIOR CONVICTION, even one that is so commanding and unconditional that it sacrifices all other convictions to itself? We see that science also rests on a faith, there simply is no science "without presuppositions." ...But you will have gathered what I am driving at, namely, that it is still a metaphysical faith upon which our faith in science rests—that even we seekers after knowledge today, we godless ones and anti-metaphysicians still take our fire, too, from the flame lit by a faith that is thousands of years old, that Christian faith which was also the faith of Plato, that God is the truth, that truth is divine ... But what if this should become more and more incredible, if nothing should prove to be divine any more unless it were error, blindness, the lie—if God himself should prove to be our most enduring lie? —Ruminate
Closed AccountDec 22, 2008
can't you practice outside, parrotomatic? for your obviously so desired infarct I meanthe children are sleeping, anyway, if your overuse of exclamation marks means "nothing to say" (as regulary),it might be even better you just shut up and leak off - thx.
mwilhelmJan 2, 2009
Totally AGREE!However, facts - as provable concepts have no relation to truth whatsoever.A Truth can have many facts, but all are merely implications in the understanding of the perspective of the observer. The Truth is true no matter how you look at it - on every level whereas the fact is only pertinent to those whom it is relevant.
mwilhelmJan 2, 2009
On the second page of the National Enquirer
edyangJan 4, 2009
@burkay-Man's separation from God is too vast to be made up by works. Grace is a concept that is so foreign yet completely filled with love. We are saved not for anything we do but by the pure love of God.-Methinks you got it mixed up there. Jesus came back from the dead and showed his triumph over death. He was the one that raised Lazarus, further proof of his power. Your examples of doctors and Bin Laden are spurious.-Please give me a list of what predictions were falsified. Also, you take the wrestling match out of context.-Again, please tell me what versions are conflicting.-I wasn't out to "prove" anything. These were simply a list of my defensive reasons for believing in Christ.God bless!
garywilddJan 27, 2009
EINSTEIN BELIEVED IN GOD.End of discussion.