SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Steve Lokness who wrote (83116)9/9/2008 2:29:51 PM
From: biotech_bull  Respond to of 541929
 
So they believe what is convenient for them?

Not necessarily. As Kate pointed out it's an evolutionary process. One could look at religious symbolism as a tool or training wheels that let you glimpse the greater truth. Once you are a believer or achieve the cohesive personal testimony as Kate put so eloquently, there is no need for the symbolism - the faith is greater than that.

The conflict between science and religion can be traced to the fact that they straddle a chasm. Science and rational thought cannot cross the chasm but faith does so effortlessly. The way I see it Science and Faith are non-euclidean parallel lines that can only meet in infinity

I've mentioned the limits of science before - Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, Godel's theorem etc etc - I don't think rationally speaking we can even get our heads around parallel lines meeting at infinity <g>

The tools that faith uses to cross the chasm are outside the realm of science and hence difficult to accept for a rational viewpoint- may even seem downright ridiculous. This faith does not even have to be of a God - someone who understands the beauty of nature or the deep symmetry of the universe has probably found it.

Nothing in that sentence suggest a belief in God to me
I guess it depends on how one defines divinity - and whether one can find it in trivial things such as friendship, beauty and nurture