Science Theologians

AssHatZombie said:
That's fine. My point is that usually those who advocate a scientific view do so to convince man he isn't special and that he should be emotionally neutral toward his own death. However, if you really beleive in evolution, you would realize that being convinced of your own irrelevancy, is a loser's mindset, not conducive to surviving.
Click to expand...

I would say that if a person held that point of view then they are not well educated in science. Science is a very limited philosophy. It is only intended to describe reality and the natural world. Nothing else. Science is amoral in the literal sense (not to be confused with immoral). That is, science is with out morals. Scientist and all other persons must use and borrow from other philisophies and systems of ethics and morals to determine how best to apply science to serve humanities interest. That is to say, science does not and cannot exist within a philosophical vacuum by itself. I would not want to live in a society that only had science as its guiding light for their system of ethics and morals.

Saying that believing in evolution equates with believing in your own irrelevence shows that you probably don't undertand what biological evolution is and how it is used by biologist as the unifying concept in the field of biology. How do concepts such as common descent and natural selection make one irrelevent?
 
Mottleydude said:
I would say that if a person held that point of view then they are not well educated in science. Science is a very limited philosophy. It is only intended to describe reality and the natural world. Nothing else. Science is amoral in the literal sense (not to be confused with immoral). That is, science is with out morality. Scientist and all other persons must use and borrow from other philisophies and systems of ethics and morals to determine how best to apply science to serve humanities interest. That is to say, science does not and cannot exist within a vacuum. I would not want to live in a society that only had science as its guiding light for their system of ethics and morals.

Saying that believing in evolution equates with believing in your own irrelevence shows that you probably don't undertand what biological evolution is and how it is used by biologist as the unifying concept in the field of biology. How do concepts such as common descent and natural selection make one irrelevent?
Click to expand...

you're miscomprehending.

I said accepting your own irrelevance is a maladaptive behavior, from an evolutionary point of view.
 
AssHatZombie said:
That's fine. My point is that usually those who advocate a scientific view do so to convince man he isn't special and that he should be emotionally neutral toward his own death. However, if you really beleive in evolution, you would realize that being convinced of your own irrelevancy, is a loser's mindset, not conducive to surviving.
Click to expand...

Quite the opposit, if I belive that my life is the result of millions of years of evolution and the result of the the efforts of millions upon millions of generations of life, Id consider my life VERY SPECIAL and would not be emotionally neurtal about death, as I would feel it my responsability to life to the fullest considering all the effort that went into getting me where I am!
 
Jarod said:
Quite the opposit, if I belive that my life is the result of millions of years of evolution and the result of the the efforts of millions upon millions of generations of life, Id consider my life VERY SPECIAL and would not be emotionally neurtal about death, as I would feel it my responsability to life to the fullest considering all the effort that went into getting me where I am!
Click to expand...

You're unique. Most science zealots use science to demean notions of intrinsic value of life, on behalf of the military industrial complex.
 
Single celled creatures appeared in the waters. Because of their genetic code, they were fruitful and multiplied. Although some divided in order to multiply.

The waters became full of creatures great and small. Some creatures evolved to trespass on the land for a short time. They saw the land was empty of animals, and that it was good.
Click to expand...

Wow... this sounds a lot like divine intervention, because there is certainly nothing in science or biology to suggest it. In fact, it is quite contradictory of biological findings to date. We have no evidence any sea-dwelling species ever evolved onto land. None! So this speculation is the primary basis for the theology of science faith? Insightful indeed!

We have studied numerous living organisms of different types, and we find one commonality among them... they don't replicate into other living organisms, ever. In fact, even if we desire to create a new unique living organism from another, we can't do it within the confines of a controlled lab environment, with all our technology and wisdom. So, there is no evidence to support this, and no knowledge or understanding of biology to support this, and it basically contradicts what we do know. Yet, you "believers" are convinced this happened! I marvel at that level of pure unadulterated faith.
 
Dixie said:
Wow... this sounds a lot like divine intervention, because there is certainly nothing in science or biology to suggest it. In fact, it is quite contradictory of biological findings to date. We have no evidence any sea-dwelling species ever evolved onto land. None! So this speculation is the primary basis for the theology of science faith? Insightful indeed!

We have studied numerous living organisms of different types, and we find one commonality among them... they don't replicate into other living organisms, ever. In fact, even if we desire to create a new unique living organism from another, we can't do it within the confines of a controlled lab environment, with all our technology and wisdom. So, there is no evidence to support this, and no knowledge or understanding of biology to support this, and it basically contradicts what we do know. Yet, you "believers" are convinced this happened! I marvel at that level of pure unadulterated faith.
Click to expand...

Wow, this sounds a lot like you took something written as humor and ran with it like I was proclaiming facts.
 
AssHatZombie said:
you're miscomprehending.

I said accepting your own irrelevance is a maladaptive behavior, from an evolutionary point of view.
Click to expand...

To be honest. I'm not really sure what your saying at all. You seemed to equate accepting science as accepting one self as being irrelevent. If you mean the reverse that viewing oneself as irrelevent is a death philosophy, I agree....but what has that to do with science?
 
Dixie said:
Wow... this sounds a lot like divine intervention, because there is certainly nothing in science or biology to suggest it. In fact, it is quite contradictory of biological findings to date. We have no evidence any sea-dwelling species ever evolved onto land. None! So this speculation is the primary basis for the theology of science faith? Insightful indeed!

We have studied numerous living organisms of different types, and we find one commonality among them... they don't replicate into other living organisms, ever. In fact, even if we desire to create a new unique living organism from another, we can't do it within the confines of a controlled lab environment, with all our technology and wisdom. So, there is no evidence to support this, and no knowledge or understanding of biology to support this, and it basically contradicts what we do know. Yet, you "believers" are convinced this happened! I marvel at that level of pure unadulterated faith.
Click to expand...


Damned Apostate! I excommunicate thee! :pke:
 
Mottleydude said:
Hey I can add to that. Mott's rule of taste. "Food always taste better when it's on someone elses plate."
Click to expand...

Good rule. But work out some way to include how much better food you caught, killed or raised yourself tastes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top