🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.physics
Article #478

Re: Religion & Physics Don't Mix

#478
From: Cameron Randale Bass
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1992 17:33
47 lines
2798 bytes
In article <6163@tuegate.tue.nl> johan@blade.stack.urc.tue.nl (Johan Wevers) writes:
>crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes:
>
>> Actually, most core doctrine is taken on faith.  There ain't no
>> way to determine the 'truth' of faith.  It's 'true' until the 
>> last adherent dies, after which may be debate.
>
>You can believe in something that can be proven wrong. What's the point?

     I don't know?  Does there have to be a 'point'?

>> By using science or logic you can do no such thing.  'God' is
>> not required to be consistent, nor even logical.  You cannot 
>> falsify a concept taken on faith.      
>
>If you abandon logic you can `proof' anything. That's useless. If
>religious people claim that their deity can interact with reality
>in a non-trivial matter (i.e. staying within the limits of the
>uncertaincy principle), it can be proven wrong.

     Not necessarily within their religion.  Within science certainly,
     but you cannot insist that they play by *your* rules in
     *their* religion.

>> Why do certain people have such difficulty with the proposition
>> that there are domains which 'science' and 'logic' can never reach?
>
>Why should there be such area's? 3000 years ago people explained
>lightning with Donar, the god of lightning. Now we know it's
>electricity. Give me one (1) goog reason why this shouldn't happen
>with anything.

     Donar, the god of lightning, is as good an 'ultimate' explanation
     as anything we've been able to come up with.   It isn't science,
     but it obviously does not have to be.

     You seem to be having difficulties with delineation between
     science and religion.  Let me help you out, if you're talking about
     'gods' your rules for science do not necessarily apply.  Similarly,
     in science there is no place for unfalsifiable concepts like 'God'.

                               dale bass
-- 
C. R. Bass                                           crb7q@virginia.edu
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia                            (804) 924-7926
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Nov4.173327.16136@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!gatech!concert!uvaarpa!murdoch!kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU!crb7q
References: <1992Nov3.161226.1740@ugle.unit.no> <1992Nov3.170646.11593@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <6163@tuegate.tue.nl>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!gatech!concert!uvaarpa!murdoch!kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU!crb7q
From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)
Subject: Re: Religion & Physics Don't Mix
Message-ID: <1992Nov4.173327.16136@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
References: <1992Nov3.161226.1740@ugle.unit.no> <1992Nov3.170646.11593@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <6163@tuegate.tue.nl>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 17:33:27 GMT
Lines: 47