God V Science (again)

close
more_vert
stray S
stray Sep 17, 2008 13:24:23
Replying to handofdave

Yep, yep, totally agree. What I was doing there was constructing an argument, flawed to fuck as you correctly describe, that was an attempt to show that compassion can fulfil an evolutionary goal (using cod evo. psych) and then just leaping to say that compassion is a product of the soul. Ergo, the soul is a product of evolution. Be it that the soul is maybe 12 grams of something inside our brain, a construct of our thoughts, whatever. A shorthand description for why our emotions can more than occasionally act as much against our survival as for them.

What I'm saying is dodgy from beginning to end, but I'm just pointing out that you can crowbar the concept of life containg souls into science, albeit giggleworthy instinctively. Thing is, because of the planck limits etc, there are a lot of accepted scientific theories for which there can never be proofs. Whacking the idea of a soul into another one equally unproveable I reckon is just as valid. But then, I'm really, really uncomfortable doing it as evolutionary biology is most definitely not my field. I can only come at things from philosophy and mathematics (the same thing really), which is why I was trying to highlight in my earlier posts just how far away in terms of how these Christians are acting from their accepted text, and likewise how far these rabid anti-faith scientists are from theres also.

H handofdave
handofdave Sep 17, 2008 14:04:54
Replying to stray

There are some religions, or people within religions, that don't bother with trying to extrapolate where we came from (genesis, evolution) or where we're 'going', they just concentrate on putting a philosophy into practice here and now.

I get so weary of hearing the Xtian right blather on with their insipid constructs. There are some who've even gone so far as to create street maps of the 'heavenly city'. And plenty others who swallow these literalist, wildly speculative inventions as fact.

The 'Book' has, for many reasons, outlived it's usefulness. Certainly, the only really important thing faith has to offer anymore is a framework for community. Religion really should quit mucking about with the how's and when's. If it wants to deal with 'why's' that's an intangible that doesn't infringe on science- they're welcome to play in that 'lab' all they like, as long as it's understood that prehistoric metaphors don't have any place in the science classroom or in secular government.