Contrasting science to religion

Discussion in 'Science' started by bricklayer, Nov 12, 2019.

  1. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, that's pretty much meaningless.

    It can just as easily be said that science, law, medicine, architects, and every other area of expertise solve problems that "we" don't understand.

    I'll bet there are feaures of bricklaying that "we" don't understand.
     
    bricklayer likes this.
  2. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sometimes, even the obvious can slip by even the best of us.
     
  3. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is why it's important to have (and listen to) experts in the various fields.

    If I wanted a brick wall, it would be a big mistake not to talk to someone who knows the issues of doing that - what foundation is required, what loads can be born, what needs to be behind the brick, etc., etc.

    The same goes with biology. If we want to know how something works in biology, we need to talk to a biologist.

    If we want to know the several different ways for new species to arise, we shoul ask someone who has watched it happen through a microscpe.
     
  4. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We still have’t recovered the Roman formula for cement, nor how the ancients mastered moving massive stones for some of the megalithic structures they left us.... oh, I forgot... ancient aliens.
     
    Cosmo and WillReadmore like this.
  5. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't go about it that way at all. I may consider one idea before I consider another idea because of the "expertise" or authority of those who proffer an idea, or even because of the popularity of an idea, but their authority as experts, or the popularity of the idea, play absolutely no part whatsoever in my actual considerations of the idea itself. Ideas stand or fall on their own merit in my estimations.

    Nothing good comes from disagreeing with people rather than ideas, but the very worst things have come from agreeing with people rather than ideas.
     
  6. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Right. You totally disrespect experts in the field in question.

    If you wanted to build a fireplace and did't know bricklaying, you would ask your neighbor, because though he had never done ANYTHING with bricks, he DID have "ideas".

    God forbid that you should talk to someone who was an expert in bricklaying.

    After all, ideas should stan on thei own!!!
     
  7. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Totally disrespect experts in their field"? Is that the hyperbolic strawman you want to argue against? You might be surprised to find out that there is a whole world between entertaining an idea and accepting an idea. The mark of an educated mind is the ability to entertain an idea without accepting it. I'm more inclined to entertain an idea proffered by an expert, but the fact that an expert proffered the idea means absolutely nothing to me once I begin my considerations of the idea itself. On the other hand, some of the best ideas that I have encountered have come from people who claim no particular expertise.

    I am stunned that you would accept an idea based on who proffers the idea rather than on the idea itself. However, that does explain your pleas to authority in lieu of reasoning.
     
  8. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The mark of an educated mind is the ability to find reliable sources and to identify and dismiss the crap.

    Again, you STATE that an expert opinion means absolutely nothing to you. Somehow, you think you are above those who have spent their lives studying a topic, with their results tested by numerous independent scientists. I see no excuse for that.


    And, I've explained the reasoning on issues I've argued with you.

    You can get "good ideas" from lots of people when the topic doesn't require serious examination or where the impact of a marginal idea isn't significant.
     
  9. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's right! An idea doesn't get bonus points from me because it comes from an "expert".
    In my estimations, ideas stand or fall on their own merits regardless of whether or not it is proffered by an "expert".

    I do not agree or disagree with people. I agree or disagree with ideas. Nothing good comes from disagreeing with people rather than ideas, but the very worst things come from agreeing with people rather than ideas.
     
  10. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is just plain nutty.
     
  11. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is a completely different way of thinking. I let ideas stand or fall all on their own regardless of who proffers the ideas or how many people accept them. Authority and popularity play no role in my deliberations. I do not agree or disagree with people; I agree or disagree with ideas.

    There are two significant ways that you and I differ that I've noticed so far. The first is the role that authority and popularity play in what we are left to believe. The second regards identity. I think of myself and others, first and foremost, as individuals rather than as members of groups. You and I really do have almost opposite view points.
     
  12. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, you let ideas stand or fall based on your opinion - without regard for proven results by experts available to all who care to look.

    The anti-evolution idea failed a century ago.

    Ignoring expert opinion is NOT a positive, especially when ALL experts in the field in the world over are in agreement and have been for a long, long time.

    Yes - that's a group!! In fact, it is the group of those who know how this subject works.
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  13. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do form my own opinions. I do not adopt off the shelf opinions. I read. I converse. I seek out and examine multiple perspectives, but I never adopt ideas lock stock and barrel. As I wrote above, the authority of those who proffer an idea and the popularity of an idea play absolutely no part of my assessment of the idea.
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2019
  14. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, that's nonsense. Its NOT what you do

    You have made a decision on a topic of science while ignoring everyone in science.

    Claiming you read or talk is totally ridiculous if you ignore those who know.

    And, science is not just "profering an idea". Evolution has been tested over and over and over again. Ane, it is STILL beign tested. Evolution is a constant in biology, and results of tests in biology continually show to be consistent with this theory.

    Calling it a "profer" just shows you have't even bothered to consult those who know.

    As Asimov said, there is a cult of ignorance in this country. And, that is hugely negative for America.
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  15. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do not "ignore everyone"; I just disagree with most of them. I am quite able to entertain an idea without accepting it.
    Evolution remains a theory exactly because it cannot be tested.
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2019
  16. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In science, nothing can become a theory without being multiply tested by independent teams, reviewed by experts and finally published in a reputable journal appropriate to the topic.

    Subsequent to that, testing continues for any useful theory, such as evolution. Every fossil dug up is a test of evolution, for example.

    Anyone who could falsify the theory of evolution would be famous. We would know their name as well as we know Darwin and Einstein. Any scientist looking for fame could try falsifying evolution.

    There is nothing above "theory" in science - it is the most concrete possible in describing a process. The meanig of the word in scinece is nothng like the social definition of just being an idea. Theory in science is NOT an idea - it is far more than that.

    Next, evolution has been tested over and over and over again for 100 years.


    You need to brush up on what science is - besides what the theory of evolution says.
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  17. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Evolution is not repeatable. In theory, it's happening too slowly to observe. The things is, it's not happening at all.
     
  18. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is happening in bacteria/virus as we speak and due to the reproduction rate is very easily seen.
    https://www.nature.com/subjects/bacterial-evolution
     
    WillReadmore and Cosmo like this.
  19. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    except we test it and repeat it on a daily basis in the lab.

    well, it's proven that it is. you could of course publish your evidence, disproving the entire field of biology, and then claim your nobel prize. But we both know you can't do that.
     
    tecoyah, WillReadmore and Cosmo like this.
  20. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Evolution happens at different rates in different conditions. One of those factors is the time it takes to reach adulthood.

    Remember that you need a flu vaccine every year.

    Scientists study methods of speciation in progress in labs, using fruit flies, etc.

    For several reasons, evolution in humans is slow at this point.

    Every fossil that is dug up and every plant or animal alive on earth is a test of evolution.
     
    Cosmo and tecoyah like this.
  21. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It seems to me the correlation between acceptance of an entity with absolutely no (0, ziltch, nada) proof and the denial of every other entity that evolves are directly tied. This is a mental condition.
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  22. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We successfully investigate LOTS of stuff without repeating it.

    We solve murders without repeating them. We adjudicate car crashes without repeating them. We convict bank robbers without repeating the crime.

    It might be informative to repeat every incident, but it is absolutely not necessary.

    With evolution, there are numerous approaches that can be taken. Evolution is directly watched in life forms that reach maturity rapidly. It can be seen in the changes of viruses and bacteria as they do their war against our vaccines and antibiotics by evolving. It can include many approaches to determining the age of specimens - which when compared to changes in genome could easily disprove evolution (but never does). Etc. Etc.

    There is HUGE room for repeatability that can confirm or disprove evolution.

    Also, there is no other candidate theory. It's not as if we're trying to decide between two possible hypotheses.
     
  23. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The link I provided speaks for itself...the point was people should not stereotype the word 'religion' since in reality there are myriad conflicting and diametrically opposed religious ideals. And who is to say one religion is better or more correct than other religions? I'm not aware of scientists being threatened by religions but obviously religions are threatened by science...why is this?
     
  24. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, there are cases of religion threatening science.

    For example, religious ideas of cosmology, biology, etc. can result in pitching educational institutions as evil. And, financial desires can cause science to be eliminated from public policy decision making.

    These attitudes may not damage science in the sense of causing science to come up with wrong answers, but it does harm science as being one source of information that is important to individuals as well as our nation as a whole.
     
  25. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I suspect actual science will continue unabated by religion and politics and other external factors. Yes all of these can be a nuisance, like in funding or education, etc., but the scientific process itself is not challenged by religions. It would be great in those areas of disagreement if religions would involve themselves in the scientific process to present their case...
     

Share This Page