Re: Evolution
Well...the evolutionary biologist and all-around guru of biology, Steven Jay Gould has this idea called NOM (which stands for non-overlapping magesteria) NOM is essentially the idea that religion and science are two different ways of looking at the world and they answer fundamentally different questions in at their most basic level and that their realms (magesteria) do not overlap.
I've written about my opinion of this on my blog, which goes something like this: do overlap in the perception of individual issues by individuals (which, as a pragmatist, is where it counts). I think (and I've posted this here before) that the reality of science looks more like this...
lol, I think it makes plenty of sense.
I don't have any religious beliefs that are unscientific, in the sense that they are disproven. I do, however, have plenty of religious ideas that can't be answered by science...at least not by the sorts of technology and understanding of science that we have today, at this moment. I also have some religious ideas that overlap (in the *fuck* zone), that are based in scientific ideas, but might have a religious idea-based "engine" so to say...and some areas where I am willing to suspend disbelief simply because, while I am uncertain/doubtful of the existence of a metaphysical cause, the power of the mind is pretty good. What I do NOT ever ever ever ever do though, is replace scientific ideas with religious ones or include religious ideas in an official explanation of a scientific idea (for example, while I might PERSONALLY, as a pantheist, believe that the Universe is Divine, I would never teach Intelligent Design as a component of evolution...and indeed, I think the Divinity of the Universe has absolutely nothing to do with evolution...but I digress, I'm just trying to illustrate).
Think about it this way...lots of things are not scientific facts. Beauty, love, peace, freedom, liberty, justice, etc... All those ideas that make us human are "religious" (not in the meanin of being of a religion, but by virtue of being part of that NOM.
Originally posted by Medusa
View Post
I've written about my opinion of this on my blog, which goes something like this: do overlap in the perception of individual issues by individuals (which, as a pragmatist, is where it counts). I think (and I've posted this here before) that the reality of science looks more like this...
Sorry. Made no sense. Question time.
Thal do you reconcile your scientific knowledge with your religion? As in do you say yeah this science stuff over here makes sense and fits into my religious beleifs. Or is it more like there is this science stuff. But that has nothing to do with what I actually spiritually believe. Both are different. One is fact and the other is....not.
Help a sick girl out here.
Thal do you reconcile your scientific knowledge with your religion? As in do you say yeah this science stuff over here makes sense and fits into my religious beleifs. Or is it more like there is this science stuff. But that has nothing to do with what I actually spiritually believe. Both are different. One is fact and the other is....not.
Help a sick girl out here.
I don't have any religious beliefs that are unscientific, in the sense that they are disproven. I do, however, have plenty of religious ideas that can't be answered by science...at least not by the sorts of technology and understanding of science that we have today, at this moment. I also have some religious ideas that overlap (in the *fuck* zone), that are based in scientific ideas, but might have a religious idea-based "engine" so to say...and some areas where I am willing to suspend disbelief simply because, while I am uncertain/doubtful of the existence of a metaphysical cause, the power of the mind is pretty good. What I do NOT ever ever ever ever do though, is replace scientific ideas with religious ones or include religious ideas in an official explanation of a scientific idea (for example, while I might PERSONALLY, as a pantheist, believe that the Universe is Divine, I would never teach Intelligent Design as a component of evolution...and indeed, I think the Divinity of the Universe has absolutely nothing to do with evolution...but I digress, I'm just trying to illustrate).
Think about it this way...lots of things are not scientific facts. Beauty, love, peace, freedom, liberty, justice, etc... All those ideas that make us human are "religious" (not in the meanin of being of a religion, but by virtue of being part of that NOM.
Comment