HOME | DD
paramoreSUCKS β Science
Published: 2012-09-22 06:59:24 +0000 UTC; Views: 7066; Favourites: 419; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
My religious views have changed a bit since this stamp . I'm really not flatly an atheist. I've looked at pantheism. I started reading Cloud Atlas and that got me thinking about reincarnation and what happens to the energy we have after we die. Hell, I've even thought we're just in The Matrix. I just don't know. What I do know is: science has actually give us answers and progress.[link]
Related content
Comments: 278
π: 1 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 0
Science and religion are actually not as mutually exclusive as a lot of atheists believe. They can coexist.
π: 1 β©: 0
ITS ALL A CONSPIRACYΒ
π: 0 β©: 0
Can't really agree. it's two different things.
π: 0 β©: 1
true. one's real and one's magicΒ
π: 0 β©: 1
Kinda yeah. And they can get along. xD
π: 0 β©: 0
I still don't know why religion exists anymore
There are a lot of theories and scientists that are disproving pretty much all religions
π: 2 β©: 1
You're stupid.
π: 0 β©: 1
They're both awesome things that should be conciliated.
Ok,I'm a Christian,but that doesn't mean I don't support science. Science has improved mankind's life quality year over year,and thus it should not be undervalued.
Religion has formed cultures; every form of religion should be respected and admired in its traditions. Don't forget that Ancient Egyptian,Greek and Roman myths were parts of a religion. That's not only about Christianity.
Without any form of religions,we probably won't have the majority of art and culture forms all over the world. Remember that even prehistorical men based lots of their rudimental art off their primitive religion.
I just agree with what Einstein said:
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind."
π: 1 β©: 1
Yay, a logical person! <3
π: 0 β©: 0
Remember when science used to explain things? Now niggas think it exist to disprove God....
π: 0 β©: 1
Hidden by Commenter
π: 0 β©: 1
And you see, you are the problem. Science wasn't made to prove the supernatural, it was made to explain the everyday things. It's called staying in your lane. I'm sure you've heard of it. I'm sure you've seen what not staying in your lane does.
Understand, lunatic? Or do you treat science just as much as a religion as the rest?
Also, I don't remember claiming to believe in a sky daddy, do you?
π: 0 β©: 1
Hidden by Commenter
π: 0 β©: 1
*Sigh* Ofc a long triggered like rant would follow. My mistake, not "supernatural" I mean "metascience" Science can't disprove what it wasn't made for.
>Common Sense
LOL I just came back from talking to a fucker who said Common Sense was subjective, then continued to say there is nothing wrong with fucking a dead body. lmao!
I'm starting to think you might not even have Common Sense. Common Sense tells us we are nothing but small insects, yet you continue to think you(not you particularly) can over shoot and act like big shots. Yet you are still ruled by emotions, death, and the elements.
π: 0 β©: 1
Hidden by Commenter
π: 0 β©: 1
Nononono, "beyond" our understanding, when it becomes our understanding, then it can be seen as just regular science.
I've never known anybody who used religion as a means of feeling special. And I fail to see how religion has anything to do with people being "another link in an immensely long chain".
π: 0 β©: 1
Hidden by Commenter
π: 0 β©: 1
>There was a time when people said that machines would never fly because it was beyond our understanding, centuries later someone flew in the first airplane.
...'centuries later'....
>Nowadays only an true ignorant would claim "beyond our understanding" as something absolute, by now everyone should know that is something relative only to the time you live in. Future generations will know what is today"beyond our understanding".
Purely subjective. Mainly because to claim to know the full extent of something would be spitting on the name of science
>Also, do you realize how incoherent your explanation is?.
It is not incoherent if you aren't picking up on it.Β Science is finite. Stop thinking it's the exact and only truth because that would be treating it like a religion.
>What is the point of investigate something you already understand?, the whole point of science is to Investigate precisely what is beyond our current understanding, so we understand it in the future.
Example;We know air exist to breath. But that doesn't necessarilyΒ mean we know exactly how it works, we just know why it's here, not how.
>And what I said was that people rely on religion because they refuse to use common sense and accept they are just another link in an immensely long chain.
Seems like a pure generalization of a group of people you don't like. I don't like Hilary Clinton, butΒ I don't call her racist or hate on people who do like her. Nor did I even vote.
π: 0 β©: 1
Hidden by Commenter
π: 0 β©: 1
Sounds like you are saying our understanding is without limits...
That's funny "is beyond our understanding". A phrase used against the term logic. I see logic as a limit to knowledge because logic tells us that the apple will always fall from the tree. I'd like to believe that one day the apple will stay, but that is illogical. Thinking the illogical is how most great minds became great minds.
Science ends where the Universe ends? That sounds idealist and religious like to the core. You assume the human race will last that long though?
Again, knowing doesn't always mean understanding. In the days of Rome, knew air existed, but they did not understand it. Not only that, who's to say that something is done being understood? We have yet to know even half of what this existence has to offer.
You sound like you are making a desperate attempt at generalizing, shall I point towards Buddhism? Not only that, it seems your understanding is blocked by a resentment for religion. How do you hope to grow in knowledge when you have a clear bias against another?
π: 0 β©: 0
Science gives us answers which fit reality to "sufficient" extents - they depend on what we're using science for and why we're advancing it. For example, if there is an unknown scientific force which is of no use to the industry in a society like ours, it won't be studied and may never be found. Under materialism, science is only meant to be something useful, not something that is objective. Take the wildly varying gravitational constant, which has varied by over 1% in recent decades (a disaster for scientists). To most industries, this does not matter, but to truth-seekers, it's horrible.
You ought to look at the perspective of Rupert Sheldrake.Β www.collective-evolution.com/2β¦
π: 0 β©: 0
"Science is the key to our future, and if you don't believe in science, then you're holding everybody back. If you're an adult and you choose not to believe in science, fine, but please don't prevent your children from learning about it and letting them draw their own conclusions." - Bill Nye
π: 0 β©: 0
I have nothing against religion much but I prefer science because it's interesting and helps us to understand the world around us :3
π: 0 β©: 0
without science we wouldn't understand many things
π: 0 β©: 0
Tell me when was the last time faith accomplished something that Science couldn't. Does faith prevent death? Will faith cure an amputee? Will faith help someone in critical condition?
π: 0 β©: 2
You are aware that the Earth was proven round by a religious man....using science.
π: 0 β©: 1
What's that got to do with my reply?
π: 0 β©: 1
"Tell me when was the last time faith accomplished something that Science couldn't. Does faith prevent death? Will faith cure an amputee? Will faith help someone in critical condition?"
I told you something that faith accomplished WITH science.....
Oh hospitals also. Faith and science~
π: 0 β©: 1
Science & faith are two completely different topics. Faith is blind following without evidence. Science GIVES evidence, or seeks for evidence, or even BEGINS to look for evidence. Did Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, Stephen Hawking, John Vincent Atanoff (AKA the creator of the computer), Bill Nye, or even Tim Berners-Lee (aka the man who created the internet) use faith to accomplish what they did or was it through science?
And no, hospitals are a work of science. Are you going to ask your doctor to pray for your surgery or actually use his scientific knowledge to help & cure you? A doctor, or ANY man of science using delusions & God as their guide for their work is an insult to their field. God doesn't do any of that, it's the hard work & scientific knowledge, & years of studying to get where they're at.
If you think faith works so well, then pray for your results, not work or even try to use science as that. Let's make this easier; When you get stabbed or shot at, make sure you pray for your salvation, use faith. Or are you going to be smart & use your common sense, & call a doctor who uses specialized science skills to help you? You can't have it both ways.
π: 0 β©: 1
Your bias is rather disturbing.... Speaking in religious terms, unlike most of the neo-zealous atheist or whatever, back in the day, science was never created to disprove the concept of a god... It was there to explain the stuff around you. Gravity, Light, Sound.
If I can tell you something, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, Stephen Hawking, John Vincent Atanoff, Bill Nye, and Tim Berners-Lee had faith that what they were doing would benefit the world. Not exactly religiously speaking, so the right word would be..."hope".
No I meant hospitals were invented by religious people...."God doesn't do any of that, it's the hard work & scientific knowledge, & years of studying to get where they're at." That sounds a lot like personal bias. When arguing a religious debate personal bias must be pushed aside in favor of your agenda. The name of the game is further the plan. And personal reasons only have about 20% chance of effect.
I've been stabbed and shot before, If I had prayed then, I'm 100% sure a god would tell me to get the fuck up and find a hospital. But who knows.
π: 0 β©: 1
I like how you're claiming bias yet don't even know what the word means.
Whether it was done for the disproval of God or not, science has pushed people forward, & these same people have used science to debunk the same God they had to put up with from other people.
I'm not talking about no faith here, which is completely irrelevant. So cut the bullshit. The point of that example was that they were all atheists (two of them gay as well) who didn't need any religious nonsense to accomplish what they had to. In fact a lot of them clearly absoleted God. End of the argument.
Lol personal bias? Seriously, stop using words that you don't know what they mean. I didn't use any bias, those were facts. Or do you have any evidence to prove God did any of the work instead of the doctors' clear knowledge? Or are you going to claim that a doctor needing their own skills is a bias too?
Oh really? Do you have evidence to support that claim? You said 100%, so I need that evidence.
π: 0 β©: 1
"I like how you're claiming bias yet don't even know what the word means."
"Faith does nothing, science is best gurl".... that's basically what your prev post said ...if that isn't bias Mr.Frisby dwhat is....you only see it through one glass.
That's like using toast to beat up a bully. Science technically can't disprove a god....evolution doesn't disprove a god, big bang doesn't disprove a god. It just different from the bible.
Unlike you, I don't plan on cutting out any and all ends. Only irrelevant to you who can't see the relevance. So cut the bullshit. If you have an argument. Denying d all and every related matter would make this end pretty fast....
"The point of that example was that they were all atheists (two of them gay as well) who didn't need any religious nonsense to accomplish what they had to. In fact a lot of them clearly absoleted God. End of the argument."
OOOOHHHH, so you're gay, why else would you highlight the fact two of them were gay? There is the personal bias right there. How so, I'm guess those Christians told you you were going to hell right? Telling me two of them were gay really doesn't contribute to the argument, only reason I think you'd mention it cause you are hoping I'd go gaga Christian, but I'm not Christian. I'm just open minded.Β Facts? Hmph. What is considered "fact" can only be considered "opinion" to others, it's just shoving your beliefs down my throats....which is bad.....
"Oh really? Do you have evidence to support that claim? You said 100%, so I need that evidence."
You want me to get shot/stabbed again? Yeah-no. You just said, get shot/stabbed thenΒ pray for ya life. Why? What type of retard thinks a god wants you to sit there and waste time dying? C'mon dude, up your game here, this is weak. Stop proving Mr.Vista right....
π: 0 β©: 0
Show me the evidence of faith doing any of that.
π: 0 β©: 1
You probably won't understand.
π: 0 β©: 1
Why? Because it's all going to be claims without evidence or you blabbing on about how God works?
I'm asking you for evidence. Quite simple. Or are you trying to dodge what I'm asking for? Because that's definitely not going to look good in your case.
π: 0 β©: 1
No, it's just that most likely if I tell you about God's existence or proof for faith, you'll just reject it.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh gee, that sounds exactly what you'll do if I give you real evidence to prove your claims wrong. Does that sound correct?
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>