Sciences and religions: incompatible!

General scientific debates. Presentations of new technologies (not directly related to renewable energies or biofuels or other themes developed in other sub-sectors) forums).
eclectron
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2922
Registration: 21/06/16, 15:22
x 397

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by eclectron » 01/03/21, 09:02

ABC2019 wrote:
eclectron wrote:
ABC2019 wrote:You should remember this for the epidemiology, and Izzy should remember it for the climate. : Lol:

and you for everything, to swallow and relay the disinformation, the scientific smoke orchestrated by the "big money".

Can you specify what disinformation I would have relayed to myself, and in which post, to understand what you mean?

-climate where you eat the "skeptics" paid for that.

- Collapse or you are not coherent: "we go to the end of the fossils and we see what 'we can do at the end." when we no longer have the means to act and when the climate will be even more crappy.

-sult to capitalism which is by nature ecocidal-> still an inconsistency on your part.

-in general: worship of conformism (economic, scientific) which prevents any innovation and evolution.

I would not comment on the medical aspect because I am not these subjects.
Last edited by eclectron the 01 / 03 / 21, 09: 09, 1 edited once.
0 x
whatever.
We will try the 3 posts per day max
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by Janic » 01/03/21, 09:03

ABC2019 »01/03/21, 07:31
GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:
It's not like there are any good believing scientists, no you think ...
ABC2019:
which proves that being a good scientist is not a universal quality which applies to everything one does, but simply that in some areas one can have had a correct reasoning, and in others completely delusional. The authority argument "you are not going to question what the professor thingy says, who has so many publications to his credit and such a prestigious post" is worthless.
You should remember this for the epidemiology, and Izzy should remember it for the climate.

This documentary is rather interesting, even if it is obviously oriented, but can it be otherwise?
Already, and even if this has only been mentioned superficially: Most of our current materialist sciences, such as medicine, have been developed by various “religious” currents whether coming from the East or the Middle East. The main scientists who developed OUR hard sciences in the West were themselves believers like Newton the father of modern science, Einstein himself but with a vision of god astrophysicist like Pastor, great Catholic, with a vision of a microbial god, etc ... We can also suppose that all scientists were and still are believers (differently according to individuals and their culture) or rather spiritualists aware or unconscious of this reality.
Moreover, the expression, "I believe" so widely used by all clearly underlines this evidence.
Now, religion! what is it actually? Whether in Latin religare(which connects) or in Greek therapeia which means to treat as in Hebrew where it is the practice with other humans which is the foundation of "religion". Nothing really bad about it, quite the contrary.
But it is criticized, and often with good reason, for having deviated from its original meaning, like, unfortunately, most human systems.
As a system, metaphorically, the automobile (all current means of movement for that matter) is in principle a form of idealization of the means of movement by providing more than our only limited physical means. But there are also the disadvantages that this produces; noise, pollution, various accidents, dependence on the system, destruction of the environment. However, despite its many indisputable drawbacks, our contemporaries continue to use it for its contributions considered to be positive. Ditto for the train, the plane, the boat, there is no ideal system.
Clearly, religions are means of ...., supports intended to help individuals in their material and spiritual life, despite all its faults and exaggerations. Hence the high number of these as there is a high number of manufacturers of transport vehicles to go from point A or point B.
Thus atheism, whose behavioral characteristics are very close to their opponents, is also a religion, of opposition to others (those which preceded it), like replacing a Renault, by a Peugeot or a Mercedes, which changes the forms, but not the substance.

NB: There is no more Christian medicine than atheist medicine, there is medicine or not! : Shock:

PS: the trial of Galileo is the symbol of the alleged refusal by the church of scientific progress (at 2'00 '') or religious dogmatism opposing the truth.
1 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
eclectron
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2922
Registration: 21/06/16, 15:22
x 397

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by eclectron » 01/03/21, 09:08

Ahmed wrote:We have simply gone from theocracy to technocracy: the religious character has only shifted ...

There is that : Wink:

Ahmed wrote:This is what makes it possible to understand indignant as much as devoid of meaning. Celineespectevenpassamer towards religion: mimetic rivalry.

not understood the hint? : Cry:
0 x
whatever.
We will try the 3 posts per day max
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by Ahmed » 01/03/21, 09:10

The trial (the trials, in truth) simply shows that the religious institution was more concerned with scientific coherence than it did, since it was accused of supporting as true a thesis that it was unable to demonstrate ...

@ Eclectron: to understand the allusion, you have to practice a little Latin for cooking!
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
eclectron
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2922
Registration: 21/06/16, 15:22
x 397

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by eclectron » 01/03/21, 09:15

Ahmed wrote: to understand the allusion, you have to practice cooking Latin a little!

It's not for me then ... out of Asterix ... : Lol:
0 x
whatever.
We will try the 3 posts per day max
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by Ahmed » 01/03/21, 09:19

The United States is an exception to structural atheism, compared to Western Europe. This is explained by the profusion of the American offer in matters of worship: each to find the form of belief which seems to him the most comfortable and in this way it is perfectly in accordance with generalized consumerism and social atomism. These two different developments ultimately only reflect the same thing.

@ Eclectron: do not underestimate yourself, you can get by with the context ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by Obamot » 01/03/21, 09:32

Not to mention that within a few centuries, the cursor will have moved again, between the area devoted to science and the “small” gray area of 96% (+) of the material that we don't know and which remains to be clarified, given the discoveries to come !?
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by Janic » 01/03/21, 09:45

the current problem is to have passed from religious superstition (a deviance from religion) to a scientific superstition (another deviance from science or rather from knowledge, which is more correct!) precisely because of ignorance !
2 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
eclectron
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2922
Registration: 21/06/16, 15:22
x 397

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by eclectron » 01/03/21, 09:53

Ahmed wrote:don't underestimate yourself, you can get by with the context ...

No honestly, as ABC would say, "I don't see"
an index in MP?
0 x
whatever.
We will try the 3 posts per day max
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Sciences and religions: incompatible!




by izentrop » 01/03/21, 20:19

ABC2019 wrote:
GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:It's not like there are any good believing scientists, no you think ... : roll:
which proves that being a good scientist is not a universal quality which applies to everything one does, but simply that in some areas one can have had a correct reasoning, and in others completely delusional. The authority argument "you are not going to question what the professor thingy says, who has so many publications to his credit and such a prestigious post" is worthless.
You should remember this for the epidemiology, and Izzy should remember it for the climate. : Lol:
Rather, it is you who should step off your pretentious pedestal.

To deny the opinion of the vast majority of climatologists and scientists of all categories about the consensus on global warming is of immeasurable pretension. In this area, you are more on the religion side (subject of this discussion), your credibility in general is messy.

The fact also that on the forum futura, we don't answer your silly questions, should give you some thought.
I'll say it again, although I'm sure you're going to get dodged again by a trick, your indoctrination is too ingrained for that to change. You can criticize Janic and Obamot, you are at the same level RC question.
1 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 203 guests