BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion
 
Lux Angel Eyes
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      07-02-2013, 06:28 PM   #265
MiddleAgedAl
First Lieutenant
21
Rep
326
Posts

 
Drives: M3
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sitting down, facing the keyboard

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka View Post
However, when it comes to the masses, faith plays a major role in laymen science. My comparison of faith in religion as well as science was towards those masses.

Surely the millions of people who are intellectually incapable of comprehending and postulating such in depth theories and possibilities while believing them to be true are relying on faith, no?
Having blind faith in something is completely logical, if you know that someone else who isnt as blind as you (in that area), also shares that faith. That key distinction is where the comparison becomes flawed.

When I step on the elevator on the 35th floor of an office building, I have faith that it was properly designed, installed & maintained.

That is a type of ignorance-fueled faith; frankly, I really know nothing about elevators, beyond the fact they have some sort of safety system.

However, despite the fact I know nothing, I can easily find others who do know a lot about it, and can explain the physics in an irrefutable manner. My "faith" is ignorant yes, but it's still logically sound, because someone who isnt as ignorant as I am, shares that faith.

If it was like religion, then no person on the planet alive today could have that knowledge. The best you could get is: "well, since I dont possess any special power, I cant say with certainty any more than you can, but this book (written back when people couldnt even explain where the sun went at night) says the mechanism is safe". How very comforting....

Unless you can find someone who has died, gone to heaven, taken notes, and then came back, there's nobody on this planet who can muster the same authority on religion that the elevator engineer can muster on his topic, if you know what I mean.

Suffice it to say, if riding elevators required that level of blind faith that religion does, I'd be taking the stairs !
Appreciate 0
      07-02-2013, 07:50 PM   #266
AndreyT
Captain
AndreyT's Avatar
United_States
15
Rep
967
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 335i Sedan, Sport
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northern California

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka View Post
Similarly, even with something more physical and technology based; someone who has never observed nano technology yet believes it exists, has faith in that technology. Now i know you're going to say like a brain, there are devices that allow us to see these things that we can't see with the naked eye. I understand that, but ultimately people who believe in this technology without having seen these things, or used microscopes to view them are taking what has been handed out by the media, textbooks, papers, articles, wikipedia, etc... to be true, by faith. Use trust if the word faith scares you, but it's still faith.
That would be non-scientific. Believing directly in the technology is indeed an example of non-scientific faith.

Scientific "faith" does not work that way. A scientific person does not perceive technology as self-sufficient dogma. A scientific person believes in a significantly different thing: they believe that if the need arises, they will be able to gain access to objective evidence that substantiates the technology in question. A scientific person believes in nanotechnology specifically because they know that they can gain access to the instruments that will allow them to see it with their own eyes (a microscope, if you will), hear it with their own ears and touch it with their own hands.

In other words, this "faith in technology" is critically founded on the understanding that it is not blind and does not have to be blind. This "faith" is critically supported by the fact that converting it from faith into objective knowledge is a matter of believer's free will.

None of this applies to religious faith, of course.

Last edited by AndreyT; 07-02-2013 at 10:11 PM.
Appreciate 0
      07-02-2013, 09:55 PM   #267
grimlock
Lieutenant Colonel
57
Rep
1,811
Posts

 
Drives: F10 N52B30@255PS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hong Kong

iTrader: (0)

Another way to look at it is faith is knowing something (or hoping that something is true -'imperfect' faith) but not being able to explain it.
Science is certainty, but it sees only as far as your own nose (relative to faith).
Would you rather have a certain bird in your hand, or a cageful hidden in the bush? (okay, this analogy makes no sense..)

Science and faith occupy opposite ends of the spectrum, some people prefer to reside on one side and some on the other.. now if you want to straddle the sides / a little greedy like me you start to look for similarities examining both sides.

Science will explain eventual what faith proposes already.
-I said that.
Appreciate 0
      07-02-2013, 11:18 PM   #268
i dunno
Lieutenant
5
Rep
408
Posts

 
Drives: a pair of legs
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 328i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by grimlock View Post
Another way to look at it is faith is knowing something (or hoping that something is true -'imperfect' faith) but not being able to explain it.
Science is certainty, but it sees only as far as your own nose (relative to faith).
Would you rather have a certain bird in your hand, or a cageful hidden in the bush? (okay, this analogy makes no sense..)

Science and faith occupy opposite ends of the spectrum, some people prefer to reside on one side and some on the other.. now if you want to straddle the sides / a little greedy like me you start to look for similarities examining both sides.

Science will explain eventual what faith proposes already.
-I said that.
Science and faith don't belong on the same spectrum. They're not mutually exclusive. It's not like a seesaw where you lean one way or the other. Science is figuring out and unraveling the structure of the physical world. Religious faith is believing in something existing outside our physical universe that gives reason and meaning to that structure. Since religion is a belief in something beyond our physical world, it's something that falls out of the scope of the physical sciences. The existence of an omnipotent deity is not something science seeks to answer. It's perfectly reasonable to approach life scientifically and still believe in a divine being.

Last edited by i dunno; 07-02-2013 at 11:35 PM.
Appreciate 0
      07-03-2013, 12:24 PM   #269
AndreyT
Captain
AndreyT's Avatar
United_States
15
Rep
967
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 335i Sedan, Sport
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northern California

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by grimlock View Post
Science and faith occupy opposite ends of the spectrum, some people prefer to reside on one side and some on the other...
False. Science and faith do not "occupy opposite ends of the spectrum". This is just another mantra uneducated people chant in a futile hope to quench occasional inferiority complex attacks.

The acceptance of science is not a matter of preference, it is matter of competence. People don't "prefer" one or another, people progress from dogmatic beliefs to scientific understandings in the course of their lives. They eventually stop at certain level of competence, defined by their mental capacity and the strength of their determination to push forward. That progress is an inherent part of human nature.

Yet, despite being an inherent part of human nature, it still requires the determination to make the considerable effort required for that progress. And indeed, lazy people "prefer" not to make any effort at all. On top of that they might be deliberately "encouraged" not to make any effort at all by the ruling regime that these people were brought up under. They might even be prohibited from making any effort in that direction by the very same regime. USA is the first example that comes to mind of the regime under which the situation is especially grave.

Last edited by AndreyT; 07-03-2013 at 01:14 PM.
Appreciate 0
      07-03-2013, 12:53 PM   #270
grimlock
Lieutenant Colonel
57
Rep
1,811
Posts

 
Drives: F10 N52B30@255PS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hong Kong

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by i dunno View Post
Science and faith don't belong on the same spectrum. They're not mutually exclusive. It's not like a seesaw where you lean one way or the other. Science is figuring out and unraveling the structure of the physical world. Religious faith is believing in something existing outside our physical universe that gives reason and meaning to that structure. Since religion is a belief in something beyond our physical world, it's something that falls out of the scope of the physical sciences. The existence of an omnipotent deity is not something science seeks to answer. It's perfectly reasonable to approach life scientifically and still believe in a divine being.
I disagree that (what I believe you are saying) the precepts of faith exist outside the physical universe. Given that I take certain contructs of religion as allegories to truth rather than literal, all the concepts of faith that I suscribe to exists within the provable world.

So I am talking about the truth of religion(s) rather than falsiable strawmen like can a man walk on water (unassisted) or can you turn water into wine etc.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreyT View Post
False. Science and faith do not "occupy opposite ends of the spectrum". This is just another mantra uneducated people chant in a futile hope to quench occasional inferiority complex attacks.

The acceptance of science is not a matter of preference, it is matter of competence. People don't "prefer" one or another, people progress from dogmatic beliefs to scientific understandings in the course of their lives. They eventually stop at certain level of competence, defined by their mental capacity and the strength of their determination to push froward. That progress is an inherent part of human nature.

Yet, despite being an inherent part of human nature, it still requires the determination to make the considerable effort required for that progress. And indeed, lazy people "prefer" not to make any effort at all. On top of that they might be deliberately "encouraged" not to make any effort at all by the ruling regime that these people were brought up under. They might even be prohibited from making any effort in that direction by the very same regime. USA is the first example that comes to mind of the regime under which the situation is especially grave.
I didn't start in faith or outside of it, a reasonable exposure of both but quite agnostic upbringing.
You could flit between the two, when either has particular appeal or you find truth in it.
Can't comment on the encouragement of faith to stupidfy people..
Appreciate 0
      07-03-2013, 03:54 PM   #271
Levi
Brigadier General
Levi's Avatar
Czech_Republic
124
Rep
3,441
Posts

 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Prague

iTrader: (0)

Interesting discussion going on here.
Appreciate 0
      07-04-2013, 08:37 AM   #272
Nkc
NOOB
Nkc's Avatar
28
Rep
683
Posts

 
Drives: Cars
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Vancouver/Hong Kong

iTrader: (0)

Shah are you proud of yourself now? Look at what you have created...shame on you bro
__________________
E89 Z4-35i DCT --- E36-Z3 M-Roadster --- E82-1M
Current BMW's
Appreciate 0
      07-04-2013, 04:02 PM   #273
i dunno
Lieutenant
5
Rep
408
Posts

 
Drives: a pair of legs
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 328i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by grimlock View Post
I disagree that (what I believe you are saying) the precepts of faith exist outside the physical universe. Given that I take certain contructs of religion as allegories to truth rather than literal, all the concepts of faith that I suscribe to exists within the provable world.

So I am talking about the truth of religion(s) rather than falsiable strawmen like can a man walk on water (unassisted) or can you turn water into wine etc.
I'm not quite following what you're saying. Give an example of the "concepts of faith" that you mention.

I'm not talking about the precepts of faith. Precepts definitely exist in the physical world since they're human constructs derived from faith. I'm talking about the fundamental basis of faith - that there's an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent deity/deities who created the universe. Faith is rooted in a belief that there's more than just the physical world. Since science is bound to the limits of our spatial dimension, it's impossible for us to gather evidence that proves or discredits the existence of something outside our universe. Does that make it clearer?
Appreciate 0
      07-05-2013, 08:07 PM   #274
grimlock
Lieutenant Colonel
57
Rep
1,811
Posts

 
Drives: F10 N52B30@255PS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hong Kong

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by i dunno View Post
I'm not quite following what you're saying. Give an example of the "concepts of faith" that you mention.

I'm not talking about the precepts of faith. Precepts definitely exist in the physical world since they're human constructs derived from faith. I'm talking about the fundamental basis of faith - that there's an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent deity/deities who created the universe. Faith is rooted in a belief that there's more than just the physical world. Since science is bound to the limits of our spatial dimension, it's impossible for us to gather evidence that proves or discredits the existence of something outside our universe. Does that make it clearer?
Okay, I think I get what you are saying.
The religion preached in churches holds that there is a 'deity' (God) that exists outside of our world which we must face when our life in this world ends.
I never went to church and my in interest in religion in from the 'universal truths' /spirituality perspective.
So I never considered the true/false in the deity proposition /or life after death (heaven).. well perhaps as a child but quickly realised the futility of trying to answer such a question.

The "concepts of faith" that I suscribe to are things like 'love' (), law, behaviour, society etc. - or the 'universal laws' that, in my mind, are proven way to live your life.
So I have just picked and choose what I find truth in religion as it can concern me, I don't go to church or have plans to, so It never occurs to me to ask whether God /heaven actually exists..
Hope you find this helpful.
Appreciate 0
      07-05-2013, 09:02 PM   #275
i dunno
Lieutenant
5
Rep
408
Posts

 
Drives: a pair of legs
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 328i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by grimlock View Post
Okay, I think I get what you are saying.
The religion preached in churches holds that there is a 'deity' (God) that exists outside of our world which we must face when our life in this world ends.
Well, for those who subscribe to Christianity, they also believe that He's due to return to the world and rapture blah blah blah


Quote:
Originally Posted by grimlock View Post
So I never considered the true/false in the deity proposition /or life after death (heaven).. well perhaps as a child but quickly realised the futility of trying to answer such a question.
YES! This might be the most intelligent thing said in this thread so far. People constantly and uselessly bicker about how there is or is no God when it's a question that can't really be pursued in a worldly manner.

Societal values like love and law are fine and dandy. It's great to live a life based on constructive behavior, but you don't need organized religion for those values to exist.
Appreciate 0
      07-05-2013, 09:18 PM   #276
i dunno
Lieutenant
5
Rep
408
Posts

 
Drives: a pair of legs
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 328i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka View Post
Surely the millions of people who are intellectually incapable of comprehending and postulating such in depth theories and possibilities while believing them to be true are relying on faith, no?
So faith is just a product of stupid people?
Appreciate 0
      07-05-2013, 09:47 PM   #277
Mr Tonka
Tonka.... Mr. Tonka
United_States
41
Rep
1,202
Posts

 
Drives: Exceptionally well :)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Tampa, FL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by i dunno View Post
So faith is just a product of stupid people?
According to most atheists....
__________________
-Joe


"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." — Frédéric Bastiat
Appreciate 0
      07-05-2013, 11:29 PM   #278
M3Denver
Lieutenant
M3Denver's Avatar
7
Rep
423
Posts

 
Drives: 2011 BMW M3
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Denver CO

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka
Quote:
Originally Posted by i dunno View Post
So faith is just a product of stupid people?
According to most atheists....
The odd thing is religion has thousands of years of philosophy, law, stories, ancient languages, translation, numerology, astrology, spirituality, eye witness accounts, and in more modern times science examining it. The reality is the depth of the Christian and I would include the Jewish religion, goes so deep in many levels which makes it way More complex than science as it takes more of your faculties to process it all. Science is tangible proof backed by numbers, highly complex and in some cases unsolvable numbers.
Religion, is built as the results of Gods personal relationship with Us which demands EQ and IQ to be challenged and working.
I see religion is way more complex, and those atheists or anti theists challenged by being open to something so profoundly great that can make us insignificant and all that we do seem trivial.

My 2 cents
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 01:18 AM   #279
i dunno
Lieutenant
5
Rep
408
Posts

 
Drives: a pair of legs
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 328i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Denver View Post
The odd thing is religion has thousands of years of philosophy, law, stories, ancient languages, translation, numerology, astrology, spirituality, eye witness accounts, and in more modern times science examining it. The reality is the depth of the Christian and I would include the Jewish religion, goes so deep in many levels which makes it way More complex than science as it takes more of your faculties to process it all. Science is tangible proof backed by numbers, highly complex and in some cases unsolvable numbers.
Religion, is built as the results of Gods personal relationship with Us which demands EQ and IQ to be challenged and working.
I see religion is way more complex, and those atheists or anti theists challenged by being open to something so profoundly great that can make us insignificant and all that we do seem trivial.

My 2 cents
I'm curious about the complexities and depth of the Abrahamic religions. Could you expand on that? I would gladly hear about why it requires so much cognitive processing power to be a believer. Preach to me!

I'm no expert on this, but in my view, I feel like Christianity has such a rich history because it's so entrenched in our culture. The Church has been a historical superpower throughout time and still holds a lot of value today. As a result, stories, language, philosophy, law, etc. are all inherently influenced by a Christian perspective. Is it reasonable to say that it has this perceived depth because it's so ingrained with how our society developed?

Let's say you live in China. China also has a very long history and deeply rooted beliefs and practices. To us, things like Chinese medicine, chi, feng shui all sound like horse shit. But to some people, it means everything. They study, experience, and embrace their culture's values. It's their way of life and adds a lot of meaning to their existence. If you grew up in China and developed a strong attachment to its culture, wouldn't you hold Chinese beliefs to the same level as how you view Christianity and Judaism? How would you respond if some foreigner came up to you and started telling you about how everything you based your life on was wrong and that his/her beliefs and principles were the only way to live? Probably the same way you'd respond if a Hindu in the US tried to convert you from Christianity.

I would argue that religious people have a sense of significance and don't perceive our actions as trivial. I feel like atheists have the best understanding of how trivial and insignificant human life is. Once they're dead, that's it. There's no reincarnation or heaven, just dust. In the grand scheme of the universe, they accept our minute existence and acknowledge that it's completely meanlingless. I think that's the appeal of religion. It fills that void caused the innate insignificance of our lives. It provides relief to our overall meaningless world and comforts people with an existence beyond our physical realm. This makes religion very empowering.

I don't really agree with how you say that a relationship with God requires tremendous cognitive prowess. Correct me if I'm wrong, but religion is suppose to be all encompassing regardless of how smart or stupid you are. To say that believing in God is only accessible to smart people automatically means that certain people are destined for eternal damnation, because they don't have the brain power to be a Christian. For religion to succeed, it has to be understood by everyone.

Last edited by i dunno; 07-06-2013 at 02:55 AM.
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 01:45 AM   #280
Levi
Brigadier General
Levi's Avatar
Czech_Republic
124
Rep
3,441
Posts

 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Prague

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by i dunno View Post
Also, I feel like atheists have the best understanding of how trivial and insignificant human life is. Once they're dead, that's it. There's no reincarnation or heaven, just dust. In the grand scheme of the universe, they accept our minute existence and acknowledge that it's completely meanlingless. I think that's the appeal of religion. It fills that void caused the innate insignificance of our lives. It provides relief to our overall meaningless world and comforts people with an existence beyond our physical realm. This makes religion very empowering.
I'm not sure if you can call that "best understanding". Because Christians would say they have the best understanding. There is no scientifc explanation to the sense of life. Infact science only looks at facts, but not sense. It is possible to relate life to science. If life is tirval, so is science, as without life, there would be no science.

Thus, as people believe in God/gods, the same way some can believe in Science, and indeed quite many do, consciously or unconsciously. Science as a whole can very well be a 'religion'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by i dunno View Post
I don't really agree with how you say that a relationship with God requires tremendous cognitive prowess. Correct me if I'm wrong, but religion is suppose to be all encompassing regardless of how smart or stupid you are. To say that believing in God is only accessible to smart people automatically means that certain people are destined for eternal damnation, because they don't have the brain power to be a Christian. For religion to work, it has to be understood by everyone.
I think you are right on this point. Everybody of any intellect can be religious of have some beliefs. Even the most wild people (in our perspective?) have beliefs, while at the same time they eat other human beings, what is more and animalistic way of living.
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 10:38 AM   #281
Mr Tonka
Tonka.... Mr. Tonka
United_States
41
Rep
1,202
Posts

 
Drives: Exceptionally well :)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Tampa, FL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl View Post
Having blind faith in something is completely logical, if you know that someone else who isnt as blind as you (in that area), also shares that faith. That key distinction is where the comparison becomes flawed.

When I step on the elevator on the 35th floor of an office building, I have faith that it was properly designed, installed & maintained.

That is a type of ignorance-fueled faith; frankly, I really know nothing about elevators, beyond the fact they have some sort of safety system.

However, despite the fact I know nothing, I can easily find others who do know a lot about it, and can explain the physics in an irrefutable manner. My "faith" is ignorant yes, but it's still logically sound, because someone who isnt as ignorant as I am, shares that faith.

If it was like religion, then no person on the planet alive today could have that knowledge. The best you could get is: "well, since I dont possess any special power, I cant say with certainty any more than you can, but this book (written back when people couldnt even explain where the sun went at night) says the mechanism is safe". How very comforting....

Unless you can find someone who has died, gone to heaven, taken notes, and then came back, there's nobody on this planet who can muster the same authority on religion that the elevator engineer can muster on his topic, if you know what I mean.

Suffice it to say, if riding elevators required that level of blind faith that religion does, I'd be taking the stairs !
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreyT View Post
That would be non-scientific. Believing directly in the technology is indeed an example of non-scientific faith.

Scientific "faith" does not work that way. A scientific person does not perceive technology as self-sufficient dogma. A scientific person believes in a significantly different thing: they believe that if the need arises, they will be able to gain access to objective evidence that substantiates the technology in question. A scientific person believes in nanotechnology specifically because they know that they can gain access to the instruments that will allow them to see it with their own eyes (a microscope, if you will), hear it with their own ears and touch it with their own hands.

In other words, this "faith in technology" is critically founded on the understanding that it is not blind and does not have to be blind. This "faith" is critically supported by the fact that converting it from faith into objective knowledge is a matter of believer's free will.

None of this applies to religious faith, of course.
You guys act as if everyone walking the planet who isn't religious is full of logic and is scientifically minded.

Whether the faith in science and or technology does or does not have to be blind makes no difference. Because people DO blindly believe what the media, magazines, articles, Wikipedia, internet and even forums tells them about science and technology.

What is the difference between believing in something that was written and recorded in standard fashion 2000 years ago and believing in something that was written and recorded in standard fashion 20 years ago?

Forget about the content of these books the person is reading and believing in, because they are not going to do anything other than read the books and decide whether or not to believe in their contents. They are not going to do any studying of the subject outside of the original books they learned from. They are not going to research anything to see it for themselves. They are only going to read the contents and believe both to be true.

What's the difference?
__________________
-Joe


"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." — Frédéric Bastiat
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 03:13 PM   #282
i dunno
Lieutenant
5
Rep
408
Posts

 
Drives: a pair of legs
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 328i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post
I'm not sure if you can call that "best understanding". Because Christians would say they have the best understanding. There is no scientifc explanation to the sense of life. Infact science only looks at facts, but not sense. It is possible to relate life to science. If life is tirval, so is science, as without life, there would be no science.
I think you're agreeing with me, but misunderstood what I meant. "Best understanding" might not have been the best choice of words, but science not being able to make sense of life is exactly what I'm saying. They have the "best" understanding of how life is trivial because they have no understanding of the meaning of life. Since life doesn't really make sense, wouldn't you say that atheists accept and embrace that human life is just a little speck of the universe and nothing more? In that sense, humanity is most insignificant to atheists. Religion tries to fill the void of the supposed insignificance of life. People of faith have something to look forward to beyond our physical existence. The world beyond gives their lives reason and meaning. As a result, their lives don't seem as trivial.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Levi View Post

Thus, as people believe in God/gods, the same way some can believe in Science, and indeed quite many do, consciously or unconsciously. Science as a whole can very well be a 'religion'.
I think we've already discussed the difference between faith and science in this thread. Science is verifiable in the physical world, while God is not. Whether science can be considered a religion is debatable. It really depends on your definition of a religion.

Last edited by i dunno; 07-06-2013 at 03:47 PM.
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 03:28 PM   #283
i dunno
Lieutenant
5
Rep
408
Posts

 
Drives: a pair of legs
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2008 E92 328i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka View Post
You guys act as if everyone walking the planet who isn't religious is full of logic and is scientifically minded.

Whether the faith in science and or technology does or does not have to be blind makes no difference. Because people DO blindly believe what the media, magazines, articles, Wikipedia, internet and even forums tells them about science and technology.

What is the difference between believing in something that was written and recorded in standard fashion 2000 years ago and believing in something that was written and recorded in standard fashion 20 years ago?

Forget about the content of these books the person is reading and believing in, because they are not going to do anything other than read the books and decide whether or not to believe in their contents. They are not going to do any studying of the subject outside of the original books they learned from. They are not going to research anything to see it for themselves. They are only going to read the contents and believe both to be true.

What's the difference?
In your example, there wouldn't be a difference, but I don't really understand what you're arguing. I think you're saying a lot of people blindly believe whatever they hear and read without further research or questioning. So stupid people are easily indoctrinated?
Appreciate 0
      07-06-2013, 04:47 PM   #284
Levi
Brigadier General
Levi's Avatar
Czech_Republic
124
Rep
3,441
Posts

 
Drives: Alfa Romeo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Prague

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by i dunno View Post
In your example, there wouldn't be a difference, but I don't really understand what you're arguing. I think you're saying a lot of people blindly believe whatever they hear and read without further research or questioning. So stupid people are easily indoctrinated?
Maybe, but don't think stupid is the right word if this is correct. If you look at marketing, today it is also 'religion'-like. I have no references, but marketing does influence and "indoctrinate" the consumers. Marketing is some sort of legal and open deception, it is not necessarily meant to harm, but marketing is meant to make people believe in something i.e a product, that in this case is not a religion but a belief nonetheless. Simply said, yes the normal person is stupid and thus believes in the product. However in business, where most are well educated (doesn't mean not stupid), they also believe in someone's else marketing.


So to what you said, yes, stupid people are easily decieved. But is lie the point?

I think what Mr Tonka said it not very accurate about calling "stupid people" (not in a negative way) believers of science. In a process belief comes after unsuccessful search of proof. In other words before believing, you question, whether you get an answer or not, whether it is right or wrong. Then you decide to reject or to believe. I doubt "stupid people" question, so if their is a lack of questioning, and consequently researching, what follows cannot be called belief. Maybe blind belief, is blind belief a ture belief? No, because you can 'open the eyes of the blind' so that they could see, only then they can believe.
Appreciate 0
      07-08-2013, 12:44 PM   #285
MiddleAgedAl
First Lieutenant
21
Rep
326
Posts

 
Drives: M3
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sitting down, facing the keyboard

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka View Post
Because people DO blindly believe what the media, magazines, articles, Wikipedia, internet and even forums tells them about science and technology.
Yes they do, but while they are blind in the science/tech arena, they know others are not. Most people who have an operation dont have the knowledge to fix their problem, but they rely on the doctors who do. That's a type of faith, but it's not really blind; because they know that the doctor had to endure years or hard work and training, and new advances are incorporated into that body of knowledge all the time. It's not frozen at 2000 years ago; it's a continuously evolving, improving thing.

I'm willing to let a "real" doctor operate on me. Call that faith if you will; but's it's not really blind faith. I mean sure, I'm blind in that case, but the guy holding the scalpel isn't. If an option was a spiritual healer or witch doctor, without scientific credentials, who clung to centuries old practices, no way I'd let them cut me open. That would require a level of blind/irrational faith that my brain cannot abide by. If you knew someone who was happy to let such a person treat them, wouldn't that influence your opinion of them, and their ability to think rationally?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka View Post
Forget about the content of these books the person is reading and believing in, because they are not going to do anything other than read the books and decide whether or not to believe in their contents. They are not going to do any studying of the subject outside of the original books they learned from. They are not going to research anything to see it for themselves.
No they are not, and I aint gonna study medical textbooks either before my operation, if I knew the doctor did, and he tells me he has to take out my appendix. The fact that I know someone, somewhere, did that research to independently verify the theory, in a repeatable, documented way, that actually invites scrutiny and ongoing refinement, well that means I dont have to. Even the med students dont have to personally verify it, because they know there are checks and balances in the system to prevent pure fiction from ending up in university med school textbooks. (if we believe something today, and science proves it to be pure fiction tomorrow, I know that it will not remain in the curriculum for another 2000 years. That comforts me as I'm wheeled into the operating room).

You cannot independently verify much of the theory put forth in the bible. I can't, you can't, NOBODY can. There are no such checks and balances, because nobody can provide them. Considering that, why would it be at all surprising that people might question the judgement of those who make important life decisions based on it?
Appreciate 0
      07-08-2013, 01:52 PM   #286
carve
Major
carve's Avatar
30
Rep
1,098
Posts

 
Drives: 335i
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: usa

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by grimlock
Science and faith occupy opposite ends of the spectrum, some people prefer to reside on one side and some on the other...
Although they both claim to offer explaination and undersetanding about the nature of reality, they're definitely on opposite ends of that spectrum. One side a is self-correcting, repeatable evidence-based meritocracy with mountains of useful results, and the other is the realm of immagination and argument from authority with no useful results. Definitely opposite ends of the spectrum.



Trusting a doctors advice isn't faith as their advice is based on a self-correcting process with objective evidence that it works (and usually, WHY it works and what the risks are) and a good record of results and extending human life and enhancing quality of life.




Quote:
Originally Posted by MP0WER
What is the difference between believing in something that was written and recorded in standard fashion 2000 years ago and believing in something that was written and recorded in standard fashion 20 years ago?
The difference is that Scientific claims are based on repeatable, verifiable evidence- objective. Religious claims are just based on older claims- subjective.

Last edited by carve; 07-08-2013 at 02:27 PM.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST