First principles

[Iacchus]

You have a better idea?

Oh, I know! Let's just sit down on this rock and ponder whether or not I'm the only existing mind, and if everything else is an illusory creation of my mind. Hey, works better than empirical observation Instant Nirvana, just add water.

Reality is absolute. So yes, I suppose I could sit down on the rock and ponder the absoluteness of Reality ... which, of course could only be The One.

The best one we have, to add.

I have a mind too you know. But then again it's only subject to certain types of behavior, according to Science that is.

Reading Comprehension: 0
Iacchus Strawmen Playhouse: 21451

Eh ... ?

Yup, you hit the nail on the head - You can't positively verify the existance of something that doesn't exist, d'uh.

But why are there so many other things about human behavior that suggest otherwise? Or, is that to suggest our stay here on this planent has been nothing but one big collective hallucination?

Non sequitor - if something doesn't exist, it can't come out and say that it doesn't exist in the first place, d'uh.

So, will Science come right out and say that there is no evidence that God exists? Or, is it afraid it might actually be accused of not knowing what it's talking about?

Are you so mentally inept that a teenager has to spoon feed logic to you?

But as usual, you're probably going to reply with more nonsense.

Yes, but seriously.

 

[Iacchus]

EVERYTHING you've ever learned about the world has been through SCIENCE. Did you learn that fire burns? Science. Did you learn that water is wet? Science. We commit random acts of science every day. Science isn't all old men in lab coats trying to splice goat genes to spider genes; science is any time you use empirical observation and comparison to the experience of previous events. Any time you can say with certainty that the sun will come up tomorrow, that it 'looks like rain', that a piece of chocolate should make you feel better - that's all science, you idiot.

Yes, but seriously.

 

[uruk]

So, will Science come right out and say that there is no evidence that God exists? Or, is it afraid it might actually be accused of not knowing what it's talking about?

Science has repeatedly made this statement. Science does not say that god does not exist, just that there is no evidence to support the existance or nonexistance of a god. You have scientists who make a claim that there is no god, but science does not.

You sir are just a science hater. you do not understand or want to understand what science. And you attack something you no knowledge about. you don't even what you are attacking. Science does not tell nature what to do. Science is mearly the study and understanding of nature. Nautre tells science what it is

 

[Iacchus]

About all I can tell you is that life as we know it on this planet is not all there is. And, if Science has no means to ascertain the nature of the spirit and, the life beyond the grave, then that doesn't speak much about Science's Universal ability to revelate now does it?

 

[uruk]

About all I can tell you is that life as we know it on this planet is not all there is. And, if Science has no means to ascertain the nature of the spirit and, the life beyond the grave, then that doesn't speak much about Science's Universal ability to revelate now does it?

You'd have to show me proof that there is something beyond this universe before I'd agree with you. The existance of a spirit and an afterlife is an assumption on your part. Before you can say that it exists, you have to provide evidence to support it. So therefore all that there is may be all we have in this universe. Science can only study what it can hold, see, or test. If you cannot provide something inwhich to test then science cannot touch it, but then you would not have any evidence to provide to prove your claim.
Science cannot "revelate" that which does not exist.

 

[Iacchus]

There's one definite way to prove it, but if you're wrong, you wouldn't be able to tell, and you would have missed out on a life which doesn't mean anything. Hmm ... How ironic?

 

[Maledict]

There's one definite way to prove it,

Then prove it - or are you just going to sit around talking to figments of your imagination?

but if you're wrong, you wouldn't be able to tell, and you would have missed out on a life which doesn't mean anything. Hmm ... How ironic?

As usual, you're making no sense whatsoever.

 

[Iacchus]

Science cannot "revelate" that which does not exist.

The problem with Science is that it's only working with one dimension, and hasn't adopted the necessary discipline to work with any other. It would be a lot like studying to become an auto mechanic, and then turning around and applying for a surgeon's position at a hosptital.

 

[Iacchus]

Then prove it - or are you just going to sit around talking to figments of your imagination?

As usual, you're making no sense whatsoever.

I'm saying the best way to prove it is when we die. And believe me that time will come.

 

[uruk]

There's one definite way to prove it, but if you're wrong, you wouldn't be able to tell, and you would have missed out on a life which doesn't mean anything. Hmm ... How ironic?

Is this the only way you can prove it? Or is this the patented answer that will preserve your belief system? If there is a soul it affects our actions. This nonphysical entity affects a physical entity and it has to do it in a physical way. If it does then that action can be sensed, measured and tested. By Science.

The problem with Science is that it's only working with one dimension, and hasn't adopted the necessary discipline to work with any other. It would be a lot like studying to become an auto mechanic, and then turning around and applying for a surgeon's position at a hosptital.

Well actually 10 dimension But that is niether here nor there.

Again, Science can only deal with what is in the realm of this universe. If science is to deal with spirits and afterlife it has be givin the means in which to do so. Apparently the only method you use to venture in to the realm of spirits and afterlife is to just take someones word for it or to just ponder about it without ever trying to testor consider if what you are pondering has any validity.
Sorry but this cannot do. It is no different then just saying "well, I think it is this way or it is so" At least that statement has the virtue of being qualified by stating that it is a supposition. People like you just make a statement and demand that we accept it as fact without any evidence. Even you are familiar with not taking anything on face value alone. If you do then I have some oceanview property in New Mexico to sell you.

I'm saying the best way to prove it is when we die. And believe me that time will come.

The you sir, do not think much about what you think about.

 

[Iacchus]

Again, Science can only deal with what is in the realm of this universe. If science is to deal with spirits and afterlife it has be givin the means in which to do so. Apparently the only method you use to venture in to the realm of spirits and afterlife is to just take someones word for it or to just ponder about it without ever trying to testor consider if what you are pondering has any validity.

Afraid not. I have my own means. And why don't I ever bother to bring it up? Because how would you believe me, without the means to get inside my mind? In which case I've either gone mad or, Science has no grounds whatsoever to claim that God doesn't exist.

 

[Maledict]

Afraid not. I have my own means. And why don't I ever bother to bring it up? Because how would you believe me, without the means to get inside my mind?

It's been established that your "means" is sitting around uselessly pondering all day.

So either I'm completey mad or,

I thought that was evidently established long ago.

Science has no grounds whatsoever to claim that God doesn't exist.

*Yawn*

You really need to brush up on your reading comprehension.

 

[Iacchus]

It's been established that your "means" is sitting around uselessly pondering all day.

No.

I thought that was evidently established long ago.

You're only confirming what I'm saying here, that it has to be one or the other.

 

[Navigator]

OMG!

Never thought I'd witness the day when science buffs acted much the same as the thing they most like to critic!

he he.



Now, nature certainly does tell us things...hey - you don't need a comprehensive handle of the English (or Latin) language, in order to know you are a hungry lion.

Lions have their own language, and sure as farts mostly stink, humans know darn well when a lion says "Im hungry"

No point in holding up a "Science Saves" placard to ward away the Lion comin at ya, - it aint smiling cause it's glad to see ya dudes....

Shessh!

Like that darkins twit!

Anyhoo...I am convinced (round of applause for the science frat) Science is just as in the dark as any of the other institutions of humanity goes.

I can rest easy knowing all round belief systems are BS until further notified, and will keep mine and watch them grow.

Hey! That rock rolling down the hillside! Quick! It is heading strait for us! RUN!

Scientist: Rocks can't communicate - it is nature and nature doesn;t communicate.

Me: Well YOU stand right there in its path! Me, I am moving to one side...please don;t be offended because I chose not to believe you.

Really dudes....tsk tsk.

The most pathetic thing about those parading around as 'scientists' is that they like to complain but really, what alternatives do they offer?

No Ne

 

[Radrook]

Replace "science" with "religion" in your statement and you have the other side of this coin.

Quite true.
And that is the intended point!
The equivalence of the twain.

 

[Radrook]

You'd have to show me proof that there is something beyond this universe before I'd agree with you. The existance of a spirit and an afterlife is an assumption on your part. Before you can say that it exists, you have to provide evidence to support it. So therefore all that there is may be all we have in this universe. Science can only study what it can hold, see, or test. If you cannot provide something in which to test then science cannot touch it, but then you would not have any evidence to provide to prove your claim.
Science cannot "revelate" that which does not exist.

The word "universe" by definition prohibits anything existing apart from it since it encompasses everything that exists. So your request for extra-universal proof is nonsensical.

BTW
There is no such word as "revelate."
What you probably meant is "reveal."
It's not "existance" it's "existence."

 

[uruk]

Afraid not. I have my own means. And why don't I ever bother to bring it up? Because how would you believe me, without the means to get inside my mind? In which case I've either gone mad or, Science has no grounds whatsoever to claim that God doesn't exist..

So, your "means" amounts to "I have a feeling". Again without a means to verify or establish it's validity outside your own "feelings" it cannot be taken as fact or said to certain as that "feeling' can be anything. How would you know that that "feeling" is your spirit or god and not gas? Faith, I suppose?

Again, Science has never said that god does not exist, just that there is no evidence for the existance or non-existance of said god. You cannot say that a unicorn exists unless you have an actual unicorn to exhibit. The same applies to god. You cannot say that it exists until you can provide evidence for its existance.
Untill you have evidence you can only say that it may exist.

Quite true.
And that is the intended point!
The equivalence of the twain.

Sorry, wrong. Other than a few fundamental assumptions, science can back up most of what it says with demonstrable, repeatable facts and experiments which will yield consistant results reguardless of who performs them. Can religion make that same claim?
As a matter of fact all those wonderful things which puts food in your stomach and gives you a job and devices to communicate and transport around in and party out with and the knowledge and technology that saves your life are the benefits of science. The printing process in which all those bibles are printed by, uplink and downlink satilites and radio transmitters which broadcast the word of god and the buliding which church goers meet to congregate are also the benefits of science.
And yes science also makes weapons and polution and soforth but the point to that is that science is also a tool and as such is subject to human resposibilty. Recall that it is religion that causes the wars inwhich science is used to make weapons for destruction. See history and the present situation in the Middle east for proof.

The word "universe" by definition prohibits anything existing apart from it since it encompasses everything that exists. So your request for extra-universal proof is nonsensical.

BTW
There is no such word as "revelate."
What you probably meant is "reveal."
It's not "existance" it's "existence."

Again, things like spirits and gods are claimed to have effects in this universe. (i.e. miracles, creation of said universe, guide our bodies within this universe...etc) a physical effect on a physical universe. that effect should be detectable, testable and verifiable.

BTW
"revelate" was Iacchus' word. I just repeated it in my post.
and "Damit Jim! I'm a doctor not an english teacher!!!"

No point in holding up a "Science Saves" placard to ward away the Lion comin at ya, - it aint smiling cause it's glad to see ya dudes....

Of course any fool would know that a placard would not ward off a charging Lion, But a gun brought to you by the utilization of science certainly would.

Anyhoo...I am convinced (round of applause for the science frat) Science is just as in the dark as any of the other institutions of humanity goes.

True, on some things. But science has brought to us more light than any religion or belief ever has. And I'm sorry but the rest of your post doesn't seem to make sense. Could be me though.

 

[Z]

Actually, Gentle Reader, I feel called upon to note that there are two prevalent (sp?) theories on the Universe:

1) The Universe is whole and includes all possible things, and
2) There are several Universes, possibly infinite, each with its own fundamental and underlying principles.

Though I prefer the sci-fi use of 'Dimensions' when discussing the Multiple Universe theorem.

Either way, though, any given universe should logically exclude extra-universal concepts.

 

[uruk]

1) 1) The Universe is whole and includes all possible things, and
2) There are several Universes, possibly infinite, each with its own fundamental and underlying principles.

Though I prefer the sci-fi use of 'Dimensions' when discussing the Multiple Universe theorem.

Either way, though, any given universe should logically exclude extra-universal concepts.

So then IF there is a god or spirits, would they part of the or our particular universe? If they are, then science has a possibility of verifing their existance. If not, then there is no possibilty for science other than the one that I just mentioned (that is to say to detect their effect on our universe).

 

[Z]

You know, there are several ways to tackle this problem... that is, several possibilities.

I was going to try to tackle them, but they are truly mind-boggling.

Let me just 'whet the proverbial whistle' by providing the various factors in this concept:

a) there is either Only One Universe, or Many
b) God is either Real or Unreal
c) God either exists or does not exist (in this case, Exist can also mean Unreal - mathematical concept, bear with me.)
d) God is either integral to the universe, external to the universe, or the universe is somehow included within God.

These four factors alone leave one with several interesting concepts - like, is God a denizen of another Universe, having created our Universe, but himself being subject to some other Creator? Is God an integral part of our Universe, meaning He had to will Himself into being as well? Does God exist on the Unreal plane (that odd place where there's an answer for x/0 or 1/2 times infinity)? Is our 'Universe' just a sub-set of a larger Universe? Is God actually just another Universal phenomenae making wild claims? Is God perhaps only the God of this particular corner of Reality?

I will try to go into more depth later... for now, I'm boggled.