Difference of Opinion

[edgray]

Not all religious people are close-minded, but I've never met any (open-minded ones). The very definition of close-minded is "Not open to new ideas" (check Google too), and I've never met any religious people or any religions that have welcomed new concepts of science into them.

well this is true. Religious people, more often than not, are opposed to new ideas, new concepts and new understanding. Is it any wonder that the most religious western nation (the US) has the least agreement and understanding of the Theory of Evolution? And also the least interest in trying to understand it.

Looking at the world through religious eyes already has an answer for things it doesn't understand. "It's God's hand". That shuts off the process of inquiry before it even starts.

Religion is like looking at the world through a skylight. You only get a limited view of what's out there. Science rips off the roof and reveals the entire sky.

 

[Accountable]

You two's blind prejudice and bigotry is astounding, not to mention ironic given the way in which you choose display it.

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

If something suits the definition, then it simply is, it's not opinion or bigotry or whatever else you wanna call it. Please, if you're so keen, inform us of how religion is open-minded and accepts new ideas and advancements in science.

 

[edgray]

You two's blind prejudice and bigotry is astounding, not to mention ironic given the way in which you choose display it.

It's just an interpretation of much research on the subject, rather than assumptions or opinion.

 

[Accountable]

Science and religion are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are complementary.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
~ Albert Einstein

After untold seconds of personal indepth research, I found this:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html

 

[edgray]

Science and religion are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are complementary.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
~ Albert Einstein

After untold seconds of personal indepth research, I found this:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html

interesting how your timeline there stops after Einstein's death... cutting edge research if there ever was any. Almost as if science stopped when he died...

Do you have any idea how far science has progressed since then? Do you think the latest Einstein-like scientists have the same faith? Or do you think their extended knowledge of the physical world, based solely on empiricism, might massively reduce the areas as to which God might exist in?

Also, it's worth asking yourself: to what extent did they believe in God? In Einstein's case, he most likely didn't subscribe to any organised religion. Nor did he believe that God made the Earth, and created man in his image. He wouldn't have ascribed naturally occurring phenomena to God.

Going back further, back in the days of, say, Isaac Newton, there was still so much in the world that was unexplained and at that point in time, unexplainable. There was no idea as to how the universe, let alone Earth, came to be. There was no idea how life came from non-life. There was no idea as to what caused illness or disease. Or how complexities in the environment created the phenomenon we call "weather". This allowed more room for a belief in God. That room is now shrinking as more of the universe is explained.

Current research shows that BA scientists often have a belief in a God, but do not subscribe to a religion. Less than half of Masters scientists have a belief in God. Professors believe at a rate of around 10%, and few of those subscribe to any religion. The stats from these God and Science sites (of which there are many, purposely placed to forward religious agendas with highly suspect interpretations of outdated research) never give a complete picture, and are driven by a vested interest: that is, to perpetuate a belief in God, and justify it. Science has no vested interest, other than in explaining the universe around us based on proof.

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

What has that website got to do with this anyway?

 

[Accountable]

Also, it's worth asking yourself: to what extent did they believe in God?

No, it's not. It's not worth being an apologist for your views, either. It is certainly worth looking deeply at yourself and your own bigotry, using the scientific method, and ascertaining if holding it is productive to your own growth.

 

[edgray]

No, it's not. It's not worth being an apologist for your views, either. It is certainly worth looking deeply at yourself and your own bigotry, using the scientific method, and ascertaining if holding it is productive to your own growth.

you cleverly avoided pretty much every point I made there because it didn't fit with your thesis that I'm a bigot and closed-minded and that in fact God and science are inter-related.

Go back and try again.

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

I know a lot about research methods and the scientific methods. It's pretty good for something that admits it isn't perfect and accepts when it is wrong, unlike some religion. Calling everything a bigot doesn't do much. Do you even know anything about science?

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

It's probably worth mentioning I used to believe in god once, not any religion or anything, just god. But since learning about science, you'd actually be amazed at how much my eyes were opened.

 

[edgray]

No, it's not. It's not worth being an apologist for your views, either. It is certainly worth looking deeply at yourself and your own bigotry, using the scientific method, and ascertaining if holding it is productive to your own growth.

by the way, do you ever sleep?! It must be the middle of the night over there!

 

[Maldoror]

well this is true. Religious people, more often than not, are opposed to new ideas, new concepts and new understanding. Is it any wonder that the most religious western nation (the US) has the least agreement and understanding of the Theory of Evolution? And also the least interest in trying to understand it.

Looking at the world through religious eyes already has an answer for things it doesn't understand. "It's God's hand". That shuts off the process of inquiry before it even starts.

Religion is like looking at the world through a skylight. You only get a limited view of what's out there. Science rips off the roof and reveals the entire sky.

I find this amazing about Christians in the US. I live in a mostly Christian society, yet you'd never hear someone opposing the theory of evolution, it's common knowledge.

 

[Accountable]

I know a lot about research methods and the scientific methods. It's pretty good for something that admits it isn't perfect and accepts when it is wrong, unlike some religion. Calling everything a bigot doesn't do much. Do you even know anything about science?

Yes. I know that science uses the axiom of correlation is not causation, and to discount an entire population wholesale because of a label is the antithesis of science.

It's probably worth mentioning I used to believe in god once, not any religion or anything, just god. But since learning about science, you'd actually be amazed at how much my eyes were opened.

I certainly would.

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

I didn't say ALL were close-minded, I said there probably are open-minded ones, just never met any Har har.

 

[edgray]

I find this amazing about Christians in the US. I live in a mostly Christian society, yet you'd never hear someone opposing the theory of evolution, it's common knowledge.

I made a thread about it some time ago: http://offtopicz.net/showthread.php?t=71255

It's quite interesting to see how countries with the highest acceptance (like Denmark, which leads the way) have the lowest belief in God and the lowest subscription to organised religion. At the other end of the spectrum you have the US.

 

[Accountable]

you cleverly avoided pretty much every point I made there because it didn't fit with your thesis that I'm a bigot and closed-minded and that in fact God and science are inter-related.

Go back and try again.

Every point you tried to make is a diversion from the subject. You stated quite emphatically your foregone conclusion that "religious beliefs are the very definition of close-minded," and have since been trying to justify your stance with apologist statements and caveats. Your statements here suggest that any scientific discovery must first necessarily pass the litmus test of whether the scientist him/herself holds any positive religious views before examining it for scientific merit. What is that if not close-minded?

I accuse you of the very close-mindedness of which you accuse all religion and religious people. You respond not by denying, but by justifying. Interesting.

by the way, do you ever sleep?! It must be the middle of the night over there!

I get up at 4am, even on weekends. It's the curse of having assertive pets. They insist on their breakfast at their breakfast time.

 

[Maldoror]

I made a thread about it some time ago: http://offtopicz.net/showthread.php?t=71255

It's quite interesting to see how countries with the highest acceptance (like Holland, which leads the way) have the lowest belief in God and the lowest subscription to organised religion. At the other end of the spectrum you have the US.

I find some of the observations from the article to be flawed. I mean the correlations mostly. It's not religion that causes "higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion" but the opposite.

People are only ready to get rid of their delusions of the divine when they find their moral compass, when they can do "good" or not cause harm for its own sake independently of the idea of divine reward and punishment.

 

[Accountable]

I didn't say ALL were close-minded, I said there probably are open-minded ones, just never met any Har har.

Indeed that is what you said. Is it possible that you have met some, but that you were simply unaware that they were religious? Isn't that possible?

 

[KimmyCharmeleon]

Indeed that is what you said. Is it possible that you have met some, but that you were simply unaware that they were religious? Isn't that possible?

Probably, but it is rare I ever meet new people.