Discussion in 'Religion' started by Dead_pool, Aug 1, 2015.
Making you feel good about things you don't understand?
I see that, too, but only because there are soooo many young offshoots of Western Christianity that had no roots. To me it looks like that for want of a root, they are proven weak over time, and have to change. Old-school Catholic and Orthodoxy Christianity, in contrast, have always allowed for non-literal interpretations of the Bible, so they're not rocked by new scientific revelations.
But as to the OP -- "Are there any religions based on logic, and which change according to new evidence?" -- I would have said (1) Roman Catholic, (2) several forms of Buddhism, and (3) the Vulcan religion.
Brother you're still wrong because logic of course cannot describe everything, there are a plenitude of examples. Logic is a human invention, a tool that allows our puny brain to try to understand the universe obviously it is ill-suited. It fails in all sorts of places, nature is not "intuitive" from the human point of view. Science finds amazingly shocking and new things all the times, especially at the frontiers of knowledge...the deep ocean, or space beyond our local region.
We've seen inside the atom, but only a certain distance, at which point logic no longer works. We've only theorized about the beginning of the universe, and we've barely collected an infinitesimal amount of data about the galaxy, the universe, or time itself.
Non logic isn't denying anything, it's accepting the possibility of anything. Which is obviously not uniquely human...it's also a quantum phenomenon.
You sound smart if you say 'quantum' a lot.
You sound obnoxious and snarky when you say things like that, but point taken I guess...
I''ll try to "sound educated" by pointing out logic fails at both the very very big and very very small scales. Logic is limited to the "human dimension". It's a tool we invented to make sense of things, but things "make" sense without humans or their logic to interfere.
What logic exists inside a black hole? What logic created the Universe? What logic exists outside it? Logic can't explain all that much, after all, just what's relatively right in front of us.
Four places so far logic "breaks" I can think of brothers..quantum theory, black holes, human imagination, infinity. Human imagination, counter intuition, and "illogical" thinking are often critical to scientific advances and invention. So if we refute everything "illogical" as useless, including religions, a lot of important science and engineering both old and new would never have been. Invention, creation...often aren't logical. That's why religion fits in that "illogical" category, because it deals with creation of everything...something science can't explain either. The day science can explain everything and how it was all created and why, it will trump religion. Until that day, it can't, logically..
I see words, but that doesn't mean you are saying anything.
It should be the other way around. logic/evidence -> faith
I should not marry to my own sister -> Adam and Eve's children should not marry to each other -> Adam and Eve cannot create the whole earth population
No, you just don't understand it and there are a very few people on this planet who do.
This is a god of YOUR gaps.
No, you just don't understand them and there are a very few people on this planet who do.
This is a god of YOUR gaps.
Is a function of the human brain. New research is ongoing and we gain a better understanding every day.
This is a god of the gaps.
Is a well understood mathematical concept and has been for quite a long time. I literally used it the other day for some engineering calculations.
This is a god of YOUR gaps
You really need to be clear on the meanings of words before you use them. Counter intuition is "that goes against what my mind is telling me is right but it is mathematically/evidentially verifiable."
Just because YOU can't understand something doesn't make it magic or illogical. Just because everything hasn't been explained doesn't mean it never will or that poking blindly in the dark grasping at straws as religions do is better than working on the evidence and math (aka the purest form of logic) which have allowed our current mastery of the physical unverse and continue to advance our understanding of it.
Humans have no "mastery" of the physical universe. I'm not sure if you're trolling me like those two bozos, but you can't honestly believe what you're saying.
And stop with the "God of the gaps" malarkey, I haven't made a single reference to god yet.
And no sir, logic literally stops working at the quantum level and that is grade school knowledge. It's not "rocket science" Logic also stops working in the math of relativity. Can you divide by zero?
Nobody on the planet understands the inside of a black hole, or before the Universe, or for that matter "what is Sifu Ben". Name the person who can explain these things and how you know they are correct, if you want to get technical.
I'm not going to bother responding to the silly trolls if you're just making jokes, I can see that once again, few of you are really interested in having a serious discussion about the topic. It's Billy Madison jokes, cracks about my education and understanding of the chaos of quantum phenomena, and hail logic, meanwhile ironically, claiming everything in the Universe is logical is illogical. Sorry I'm afraid the world's leading physicists are all on my side of the debate here...logic most definitely fails at the extremes of human perception. That's a scientific given. Stop claiming I don't "understand" things, it really makes you sound elitist and stupid. Don't lecture people like that.
Oh for sure. Seeing the edge of the observable universe, space flight, splitting the atom, building a massive particle accelerator... Definitely not any mastery of the physical universe.
Math is the purest form of logic. It certainly works fine for relativity given that relativity has been mathematically described. And even if our current level of theoretical physics cannot yet encapsulate all or certain phenomena that does not mean it will not or that logic suddenly fails.
So you have a PhD in theoretical physics then? Because if not you're not really qualified to talk about how math works for quantum mechanics, string theory, black holes, etc. These are incredibly specialized areas of theoretical physics. The fact that you will not admit your ignorance here is very telling.
Many folks here are but you've gone a bit off the deep end mate.
Math and science can't trump religion because they don't understand everything yet... That was your argument a few posts ago.
I'm not trolling, you are speaking, it's just your words are devoid of knowledge or insight, it's all folk wisdom, the O'Reilly paradox in action, just devoid of monotheism, but still pretty much anti intellectual.
Iron fist - disagreeing and questioning your knowledge base =/= trolling.
You've said that you don't understand infinity (mathematics), the basis so human neurophysiology (imagination) and physics (black holes, quantum etc). As such people have people out that this is a "god of the gaps" ( in this case, personal gaps) argument.
That is not trolling.
And you're the one saying the other guy is making silly argument?
I didn't get quantum physics in grade school. And given the state of US education, I think you didn't either.
I did get quantum physics in college though, and you are mistaking logic for common sense. Quantum physics still follows the logic of math and statistics. It doesn't follow common sense, but it is perfectly logical, if by logical you mean A follows from B according to the math.
Relativity is perfectly logical. Relativity was the result of applying logic to the maxwell equations.
It's almost like we learned about quantum mechanics and relativity using the same systematic investigation and logic that we investigated the rest of the world with.
I don't a great deal about those subjects, so I'd be more than happy to be corrected if I'm wrong, but.....
I was under the impression that stuff like quantum mechanics and relativity are theories developed through things like mathematical models. By their very nature they could not be investigated and tested in the way that could with something like seeing what mud is made out of, for example.
So they are simply models, untested (and at present untestable) theories. or is that like saying that maths is wrong? (I'm going to start confusing myself if I don't stop now.)
No, both have been extensively tested. Double slit experiments starlight dilation etc
I'm really curious about this. How do you test relativity?
Separate names with a comma.