"Believing in science" - what does that mean?

In science we take all these unknowns..all these pieces of the evolutionary, archeology, paleontology puzzle and group the fishes with fishes and animals and insects with their kind and discover fishes whose fins became like legs and then find some with legs that returned to the water...(fish - tetrapods - Pakicetus - whales!)

Its true the pieces are all over the map and get rearranged and shuffled as old hypothesis are disproved and new hypothesis come up.

Which is why for me, I want a scripture that indicates which falls under myth, allegory, parable, fantasy, hyperbole, and fact....as in Sunday school it was drilled as all fact and unquestionable.....that aint science.
 
moralorel said:
One thing I often mention, which can't be repeated enough, is that good science can predict when applied. So if someone believes in a scientific conclusion, but all or most of the predictions that come from this conclusion end up failing, then it is poor science.
Click to expand...
Perhaps an addendum to this is how quickly we jump on a few right answers proving the whole. Some believers in a country feel truly empowered by modern prophecy comes true but scientistics quickly dismiss it as coincidence. But one study coming true on some point that numerous other studies have failed to result in them jumping on it as proof.

While I support the empirical method for physical data, the presence of too many uncertain factors in this reality leading to replication crisis and cagey mind of Man makes me wonder how well practiced it is in actual modern science which has become a belief system of its own.
 
wil said:
In science we take all these unknowns..all these pieces of the evolutionary, archeology, paleontology puzzle and group the fishes with fishes and animals and insects with their kind and discover fishes whose fins became like legs and then find some with legs that returned to the water...(fish - tetrapods - Pakicetus - whales!)

Its true the pieces are all over the map and get rearranged and shuffled as old hypothesis are disproved and new hypothesis come up.

Which is why for me, I want a scripture that indicates which falls under myth, allegory, parable, fantasy, hyperbole, and fact....as in Sunday school it was drilled as all fact and unquestionable.....that aint science.
Click to expand...
It wasn't intended to be science. If I were to write a story about some crazy things I witnessed, I wouldn't expect anyone to accept my writing as a science book. So if some 80-year old man led me and some friends through a sea that he had just parted, I wouldn't expect to be mentioned in a science journal for my writing.
 
moralorel said:
It wasn't intended to be science. If I were to write a story about some crazy things I witnessed, I wouldn't expect anyone to accept my writing as a science book. So if some 80-year old man led me and some friends through a sea that he had just parted, I wouldn't expect to be mentioned in a science journal for my writing.
Click to expand...
Agree wholeheartedly. Once again the brain's beliefs divide and conquer. This is me and that isn't. Two brains on opposing sides of a wall.

This is why I think Jesus' message of love was not just unique for his time but still, for the most part, is so today.

As an experience itself, unconditional love shows us there can be no boundary for the self. No need to separate, to place each higher or lower in any property. For the rare enlightened it can be a unimaginable way to live in the world. For the numerous awakened it is a way to bathe in the light and then be thrown back into the black prison created by the egoic mind full of avatars that we shy from, attack and can form loving bonds that can be broken later. As I know too well.

A eternal awareness of changing gain and loss with no surety of either. We can try to control that uncertainty and be buffeted around emotionally and physically by success and failure in the venture as our illusions alter. Or we can surrender to the shifting currents and be buffeted around emotionally and physically as we wonder how long the illusion will last. Either way, it is most likely, the illusion in its current nature will end at some future point when the living physical body can no longer persist. What then? Peace of unknowing or wonder or a new reality of uncertainty?

Gawd, I'm in a black mood this morning.
 
Vasu Devan said:
This is why I think Jesus' message of love was not just unique for his time but still, for the most part, is so today.
Click to expand...
Jesus' message to the unrepentent cities was the most cruel message that I have come across.

Then Jesus began to criticize openly the cities in which He had done many of his miracles, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you! And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will be thrown down to Hades! For if the miracles done among you had been done in Sodom, it would have continued to this day. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for the region of Sodom on the day of judgment than for you!"
Click to expand...
 
Thomas said:
I think the key takeaway here is we can all believe in science when science does what it does best, and when fans of the disciplines observe its boundaries.
Click to expand...
There are knowledgeable friends and there are ignorant fans. But scientific community works in its own way. It is evidence which decides a case. What does not have evidence is discarded.
 
Aupmanyav said:
is evidence which decides a case. What does not have evidence is discarded
Click to expand...
No offence, but that reads as astonishingly naive. If you actually really study science you'll find its driven by social and personal biases. Science can be extremely subjective, and still is. :)
 
moralorel said:
It wasn't intended to be science. If I were to write a story about some crazy things I witnessed, I wouldn't expect anyone to accept my writing as a science book. So if some 80-year old man led me and some friends through a sea that he had just parted, I wouldn't expect to be mentioned in a science journal for my writing.
Click to expand...
Ok, I'll accept that so what are the excepted explanations of the crazy things you witnessed and millions of people since have relied upon, preached upon, warred about, for the past 30 centuries?

So if the exodus wasn't history, what was it?
 
wil said:
All good brother? Seemed like contemplation....was it more to you?

For me observation without condemnation, we are along for the ride.
Click to expand...
Thanks @wil. My fault for drinking 2 cups of sweet milky coffee and a cup of sugarcane juice on an empty stomach. Crashed fast, crashed hard. Right as rain now and learned my lesson.
 
iBrian said:
No offence, but that reads as astonishingly naive. If you actually really study science you'll find its driven by social and personal biases. Science can be extremely subjective, and still is. :)
Click to expand...
What is better than that? Scientists differ on interpretations or even theories and present their evidence in support of their views. That is how science progresses. They are not stuck with 4th or 7th Century beliefs. Yes, scientists have personal biases. Einstein did not accept Quantum Mechanics. But you say social biases. can you mention an example?
 
Vasu Devan said:
Thanks @wil. My fault for drinking 2 cups of sweet milky coffee and a cup of sugarcane juice on an empty stomach. Crashed fast, crashed hard. Right as rain now and learned my lesson.
Click to expand...
Problem might have been with the sugarcane juice. I do not think coffee would do it even if it is sweet and milky.
 
Aupmanyav said:
But you say social biases. can you mention an example?
Click to expand...
An obvious one is the bias that life is somehow miraculous, so science still resists accepting that the same natural laws that resulted in life on Earth should happen elsewhere in the universe.
 
Last edited:
Aupmanyav said:
Problem might have been with the sugarcane juice. I do not think coffee would do it even if it is sweet and milky.
Click to expand...
well it was raw pressery cold coffee and sugarcane to be exact. wanted to try them out. my last meal before it had been 12:30 the previous day and it was 6:00 when i took it. mix that mush of caffeine and sugar with the anticonvulsants and antipsychotics I take and prolly a tug of war happens especially around my left temporal epileptogenic focus near my amygdala and hippocampus.
 
wil said:
Ok, I'll accept that so what are the excepted explanations of the crazy things you witnessed and millions of people since have relied upon, preached upon, warred about, for the past 30 centuries?

So if the exodus wasn't history, what was it?
Click to expand...
Obviously I was being hypothetical. Glad you saw my point. If you'd like to talk about the Exodus I'm certain there are threads still open on the matter.
 
moralorel said:
I don't recall ever saying that I "believed in science". It's because I don't trust scientific research, especially in my own country. Why? Because it is so corrupt. It also so flawed. It is influenced by money, the media and politics among other factors
Click to expand...
If the question or statement is reworded as "trusting science" Does that change the question? I was wondering that anyway when I posted it on which way to word it. I couldn't recall if anyone in here had ever used the phrase but I run across "believe in science" and "trust science" often enough to wonder about what everyone here thought of it.

I feel like the underlying question about what "science" refers to
People
Institutions
Method
Results
Topics of study/subjects of investigation
Body of knowledge
Is almost always muddied when people claim to believe, trust, love, or be interested in/fascinated by, science.
 
Aupmanyav said:
There are knowledgeable friends and there are ignorant fans. But scientific community works in its own way. It is evidence which decides a case. What does not have evidence is discarded.
Click to expand...
iBrian said:
No offence, but that reads as astonishingly naive. If you actually really study science you'll find its driven by social and personal biases. Science can be extremely subjective, and still is. :)
Click to expand...
Well, what @Aupmanyav says it what is supposed to happen and is more or less what happens over the long haul. In the short term, in almost any field of study, there are most often a variety of competing theories that are supported by their "fans"
 
moralorel said:
It wasn't intended to be science. If I were to write a story about some crazy things I witnessed, I wouldn't expect anyone to accept my writing as a science book. So if some 80-year old man led me and some friends through a sea that he had just parted, I wouldn't expect to be mentioned in a science journal for my writing.
Click to expand...
Hopefully someone, even a journalist on the fringe, would investigate and interview you.
wil said:
Ok, I'll accept that so what are the excepted explanations of the crazy things you witnessed and millions of people since have relied upon, preached upon, warred about, for the past 30 centuries?

So if the exodus wasn't history, what was it?
Click to expand...
A story. Maybe based on reality and grew over time? Maybe thoroughly allegorical and symbolic? Both?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top