Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Baraka_Guru · 12-08-2008, 08:44 AM

new man,

I wouldn't go as far as to say that I have proven your point.

The human mind has been formulating theories long before we had come up with what we call the sciences (from a contemporary perspective). At its core, a theory is a system of belief that explains a set of claims. Before humanity had the benefit of scientific tools and procedures, this was generally how we sought truth. In a way, religious theories and scientific theories have the same root. Philosophers and writers would seek the truth behind "God's universe." This applied to the world around us, as well as how we think, feel, and make decisions. This is why you get molecular theories alongside moral theory.

I agree with Nimetic inasmuch as science is limited. Science only works to explain things on a molecular level, more or less. It deals with matter and antimatter. Until it can prove such things as why we make certain moral decisions and such, this remains deeply rooted in the realm of religion/philosophy, though the scientific community certainly has an interest, as it should. This is how science works. Studies of happiness have "entered the lab" (they've recently come up with a study that has ostensibly proven that happiness is contagious). We have literary theories, which explain how we act and how we exist as multifaceted human beings as demonstrated in textual representations. Not everything is cold, hard fact like freezing points and measures of viscosity. This is the difference between law and theory. A law is "knowing," whereas a theory is "believing." One knows something as fact, whereas the other believes something based on observation.

Science has a tough time with certain matters. Science hasn't even cut its teeth on many things that religion has been tackling for centuries. Moreover, it's important to bear in mind that religion is not a denial of science. That science sprung out of what the religious had been picking over all this time isn't simply fortuitous. Science and religion, in the best of scenarios, co-exist. One does not essentially work against the other.

12-08-2008, 08:44 AM	#28 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	new man, I wouldn't go as far as to say that I have proven your point. The human mind has been formulating theories long before we had come up with what we call the sciences (from a contemporary perspective). At its core, a theory is a system of belief that explains a set of claims. Before humanity had the benefit of scientific tools and procedures, this was generally how we sought truth. In a way, religious theories and scientific theories have the same root. Philosophers and writers would seek the truth behind "God's universe." This applied to the world around us, as well as how we think, feel, and make decisions. This is why you get molecular theories alongside moral theory. I agree with Nimetic inasmuch as science is limited. Science only works to explain things on a molecular level, more or less. It deals with matter and antimatter. Until it can prove such things as why we make certain moral decisions and such, this remains deeply rooted in the realm of religion/philosophy, though the scientific community certainly has an interest, as it should. This is how science works. Studies of happiness have "entered the lab" (they've recently come up with a study that has ostensibly proven that happiness is contagious). We have literary theories, which explain how we act and how we exist as multifaceted human beings as demonstrated in textual representations. Not everything is cold, hard fact like freezing points and measures of viscosity. This is the difference between law and theory. A law is "knowing," whereas a theory is "believing." One knows something as fact, whereas the other believes something based on observation. Science has a tough time with certain matters. Science hasn't even cut its teeth on many things that religion has been tackling for centuries. Moreover, it's important to bear in mind that religion is not a denial of science. That science sprung out of what the religious had been picking over all this time isn't simply fortuitous. Science and religion, in the best of scenarios, co-exist. One does not essentially work against the other. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot Last edited by Baraka_Guru; 12-08-2008 at 08:54 AM..