FAITH, the biggest excuse for IGNORANCE.

by nicolaou 111 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  PSacramento

  @PSacramento

  Science doesn't prove anything, it provides evidence to give a probabilty of something being more correct over something else. Logic and Math are the only things which have anything that can be called conclusive proof and only in their respective domains.

  As applicable to the universe we can percieve, correct?

  It's not a matter of science can't "disprove" (read give evidence against) god, it's that trying to "prove" any negative is an incredibly foolhardy task, rather you assume the negative until you "prove" the positive.

  You don't assume leprechauns exist until science disproves them.

  I don't think that I posed my question clearly enough, sorry.

  Can the scientific method ( since it is not sceince that proves anything) be used or is applicable to studying things outside of our perception?

  Has the scientific method proven the existence of the "mind"? has it put down on paper "the whys" of our existence of that of the universe?

  Can the scientific method prove or disprove the existence of "conscience" ?

  Science is great, having a Bach in Mechanical Engineering I love science, but sceince is limited to what we can observe and precieve at any given time.

  Lets not forget that 100 years ago a virgin birth was either a miracle or bullshit and now it can be an "everyday" event.

  Science is self-correcting and that is what makes it so awesome, scientists, not so much at times it seems.

  But I maintain that God, be His vary nature of being "outside" our reality, can't be proven or disproven by science since science is NOT in the business of making claims or studying what is outside our natural, percievable, world.
• 

  trevor

  This is a long and interesting debate. The difficulty is that all the logical arguments apply only to corporality. Religion is based on the notion that an invisible spiritual world exists that underlines this one. No acceptable proof can be offered as yet. We either dismiss a spiritual world as fantasy or embrace it on the basis of faith.

  If we were able to nail it down and show physical evidence of its existence it would cease to be spiritual. This applies not just to belief in Jesus but to all spiritual leanings.

  Even a vague idea that the universe is aware of itself through an unseen and as yet unknowable power, amounts to spirituality. The idea cannot be dismissed because it has not yet been proved. Nor should it be dismissed, because all discovery starts with an unproven premise.
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  A language can NOT have a word for 'ball' and accurately claim it has no word for 'sphere.' A BALL IS A SPHERE. Sometimes I think Alice is trying to make religious people look like idiots on purpose.
• 

  EntirelyPossible

  As applicable to the universe we can percieve, correct?

  Partially, yes, but also to the universe we can't (or couldn't) at the time perceive. For instance, black holes were predicted long before they could be detected (indirectly). Extra-solar planets were predicted long before they could be detected. Once the tools are in place to detect those things, we can verify and see where corrections need to be made and where they don't.

  Can the scientific method ( since it is not sceince that proves anything) be used or is applicable to studying things outside of our perception?

  Already answered.

  Has the scientific method proven the existence of the "mind"?

  Yes.

  has it put down on paper "the whys" of our existence of that of the universe?

  there are several hypothesis out there.

  Can the scientific method prove or disprove the existence of "conscience" ?

  Yes.

  But I maintain that God, be His vary nature of being "outside" our reality, can't be proven or disproven by science since science is NOT in the business of making claims or studying what is outside our natural, percievable, world.

  To be taken seriously, you need to define what our "reality is, the limitations of it, why we can't see outside of it, what is natural, supernatural, etc. Otherwise god might as well be the invisible, incorporeal floating heatless-fire breathing dragon in my garage. or Zeus.
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Or him:

  
• 

  PSacramento

  Science has proven the existence of the "mind" and "consceince"?

  Where can I read up on that?

  I am obviously a tad behind on that !
• 

  jgnat

  Conscience, or an underlying set of social mores, may be hard-wired in to all humans by evolution. Steven Pinker speaks of these as " Moral Instincts " in a fourteen page article in the New York Times.
• 

  EntirelyPossible

  Where can I read up on that?

  Your questions was HAS science proven the existence of the mind. Yes. Start with wikipedia.Of course, by "mind", you may mean something different that what I do. Perhaps we should levelset on the definition? Do you mean human thought, the physical brain, consciousness?

  On the conscience, it was "could the scientific method prove it's existence". If by conscience you mean something like the internal personal aptitude for judging right and wrong, then sure, we could construct a test for that.
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  As mentioned earlier, there are scientific ways to prove God exists, as well. Elijah "evidently" did such a test. You can't prove that he doesn't but you really should be able to prove that he does.

  No such similar test has succeeded in a positive result in thousands of years.

  I'm beginning to think he isn't what his people say he is.
• 

  PSacramento

  Your questions was HAS science proven the existence of the mind. Yes. Start with wikipedia.Of course, by "mind", you may mean something different that what I do. Perhaps we should levelset on the definition? Do you mean human thought, the physical brain, consciousness?

  By mind I mean beyond the standard functions of the Brain, I suppose.

  By "mind" I mean consiousness, thoughts and such, yes.

  On the conscience, it was "could the scientific method prove it's existence". If by conscience you mean something like the internal personal aptitude for judging right and wrong, then sure, we could construct a test for that.

  Ok, but that test would be for what though?

  Judgment of right and wrong is subjective, I mean can the scientific method proves that conscience exists?

  But I do see your point, we would have to agree on a definition of "conscience" before we can test that it does exist.