Can science prove or disprove "God"?

[ChrLzs]

24 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

It would seem the only thing the proponents of science believe infinite is the ability of man to understand everything, eventually.

?  It may seem like that to you, but can you quote anyone saying it?

I'm certainly not saying that, but, imo, we've done a pretty good job since we started sciencing... and I think you'd have to concede that if we (or a cosmic event) don't cause our own extinction, and we eventually start colonising the rest of this solar system and spreading across the galaxy..  that we understand an awful lot, and the gap that requires a God or similar shrinks each day.

That gap will never disappear, as the same infinitely recursive question (and several others) applies to both God and the known Universe....

What came before?

[+Hammerclaw]

10 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

?  It may seem like that to you, but can you quote anyone saying it?

I'm certainly not saying that, but, imo, we've done a pretty good job since we started sciencing... and I think you'd have to concede that if we (or a cosmic event) don't cause our own extinction, and we eventually start colonising the rest of this solar system and spreading across the galaxy..  that we understand an awful lot, and the gap that requires a God or similar shrinks each day.

That gap will never disappear, as the same infinitely recursive question (and several others) applies to both God and the known Universe....

What came before?

I've read many erudite hypotheses on what came before. Can you quote any scientist who says the stance of science is that at a certain point the quest for knowledge of it's origins forever ceases and what lies beyond will forever remain unknown and unknowable? If not, the converse must be true and I stand by my statement.

[XenoFish]

I see science understanding everything the same why I see answering the question of, "Why?". Because every answer leads to another question. And if all things were discovered the last question would still be "Why?".

[ChrLzs]

37 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

I've read many erudite hypotheses on what came before. Can you quote any scientist who says the stance of science is that at a certain point the quest for knowledge of it's origins forever ceases and what lies beyond will forever remain unknown and unknowable? If not, the converse must be true and I stand by my statement.

????

The converse of that question is not your original statement, nor would a 'no' answer mean the converse is true, anyway...

 

[+Hammerclaw]

3 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

????

The converse of that question is not your original statement, nor would a 'no' answer mean the converse is true, anyway...

 

???? back at you. Either science is on a hopeless quest it pursues, never-the-less, or everything will be understandable, eventually. For all I know, if man survives the ages, his intellect may grow exponentially and his quest for knowledge will never end until a final resolution--or do you say it will?

[+Nuclear Wessel]

40 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I see science understanding everything the same why I see answering the question of, "Why?". Because every answer leads to another question. And if all things were discovered the last question would still be "Why?".

Why?

[freetoroam]

4 hours ago, Sherapy said:

Hammies is an equal opp. gift of gab, he will win you over trust me. Lol

The guy has swag and a beautiful heart. 

 

gift of the gab? lol. his swag is swaying in the opposite direction to mine. 

[ChrLzs]

4 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

Either science is on a hopeless quest it pursues, never-the-less, or everything will be understandable, eventually.

That takes the prize for the biggest false dichotomy so far.  Hopeless quest?  This coming from someone using a personal computer to interact with potentially anyone, anywhere on the planet?  Who lives for twice as long as his ancestors?  Shall I go on?

To me, the glass of scientific achievement is well over half full..  And I'm happy to drink from it.  (Yes, even though I know it will never be full.)

[jmccr8]

I think that if there was not drive to know more we would become extinct, how would we adapt to our environment and it's changes as I would expect that by the time we got to know it all we would be dispersed throughout the galaxy with new wonders and challenges?

jmccr8

[Mr Walker]

18 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

And yet it seems like I've read somewhere, "And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should". 

Yup But thats an entirely different paradigm.

The universe is unfolding as it will, but  You can select one of many possible  paths through  your life and what you select every moment of every day will unfold or shape or create every part of your future.

That is the power and beauty of beings who can see the future result of behaviours, who can predict consequences, who can envision alternate outcome from different choices  both short and long term,   and who  can make logical and rational choices based on that knowledge  If a person ends up in gaol, or divorced, or miserably unhappy   it is because they made a series of faulty choices which led them to that end.  

[Mr Walker]

18 hours ago, XenoFish said:

I find it odd in a way about "the right path", it always seems like those promoting a path are just pushing a way of thinking. My "path" looks like nihilism, but for me, its about living. Living without all the filler. Same great taste, half the calories.

Plus, I do not want anyone to follow my path. Make your own.

There are always different paths. Humans create their path through the series of choices they make from the time the y are old enough to be aware of cause and effect.  Some humans enjoy a tough challenging path while others like one without any bumps or detours   It is when a path becomes destructive to self or others that outsiders must step in and rescue or re guide a person back onto a safer path. If you  are happy, well adjusted psychologically and have all your psychological and physical needs met by your life, then you are on a good path But if you are not happy, have no purpose (and thus are not having all your psychological needs met) feel disconnected from people, place, or time, then   there is a better path forward for you.There is NOT one path forward for every individual  human. We all have (and have always had all our lives) many potential paths forward , from which we chose one to walk . 

 I push beliefs attitudes and behaviours which are constructive and creative, which push people and humanity forward, to help them improve, grow, and evolve.  

[Mr Walker]

18 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Over the last 6 months you have been talking about a pre-existent language of the mind and have shown no documented scientific evidence that it exists and that you use it to construct mental concepts and this is where we disagree. I have been saying that on can create or improve a concept because they have experience in the world.

Much of your innovations didn't just appear in your mind without having been first created through thousands of years of discoveries. I have never claimed to being so unique that any of the things I build we based solely on my imagination but rather that they are based of things that already exist just like most of the people who build and develop new tech, they are improvements based on what is known.

All the weapons that you made already existed and you read about them not created a new never before seen concept. Even your fantasies are based on the expressions of others, you may have made some modification but they are not new. Concepts in books and movies are stories that have the same basic elements, sure they may vary to some degree but the format is based on elements that already are known.

That was the point of the example that I used with a child that had no or very limited sense experience.

jmccr8

Not pre-existent Language of the mind  evolves alongside oral or spoken language Without language of the mind one cannot  communicate using language to others As our language of the mind grows more complex and includes abstract thoughts symbolic language etc this is also reflected in our use of these to communicate with others. it allows the development of poetry art music and prose  I am not going to prove all this to you and i shouldn't have to it is really multi disciplinary established factual knowledge in the modern era It can be found and researched and read about on the internet or in professional journals and magazines .

What you say is true up to a point yet i created all those thing with only the resources of my mind to guide me.  I had only read ABOUT them in novels or history books and had to work out all the physical principles which made them work  in my own mind

 And most scientific advances, while built on the shoulders of others, are made by people with the abilty to free their minds and to be creative and innovative    They may use small incremental steps from current technology but they can imagine those steps and how to achieve them  they test experiment and move forward as the y make new discoveries from their testing Thus, knowing only  the basic ingredients for gunpowder, and not even the right proportions i could, through experimentation, testing , retrying  and retesting eventually  make a variety of  powerful explosives and a variety of colourful pyrotechnics   Humans require knowledge and exerince to be creative but there is also another requirement which is an abilty to think in a different often nonlinear way and to make intuitive leaps of the imagination between points which have no apparent linkages .    

[Mr Walker]

16 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

I see there is much talk of roads in life, debates of and declarations about which is the best route to take, yet only a few there are who seem mindful of their destination. Some like the high road with their heads in the clouds, looking down their noses from the heights of their own self-esteem, haughty with disdain for those they deem lower than themselves. Some prefer the low road, creeping along quietly, innocuously, inoffensively, making scarcely a ripple in the waters they cross and not print on the path behind them after they've passed. When they have gone on their way, where they have trodden, there's not a trace they had ever been. Some choose the short way, dashing through life impetuously, with little regard for their own safety or well-being or that of others, immersed in the thrill and exhilaration of life streaming by. Some dawdle at the way stops, fixated on a feature of the landscape, obsessed with a certain event of exultation, waiting in vain for one unique moment to repeat itself, to catch a fruit that had already fallen. Then there are they who choose, in my mind, the best path of all, the scenic route, long, winding, sinuous, sometimes steep but more often of a gentle grade, easy on the feet, with wonders and marvels to meet up with and sprawling vistas and astonishing and sweeping panoramas around the occasional turn. It's the longest way, dipping here, in a shady valley, there, cresting a sun-drenched hill. It requires our constant attention, sometimes easy, sometimes hard, especially when--at last-- our feet grow weary and our footsteps falter. Then, we climb the hill to the city gates at sunset, where we cross the threshold to our final destination, the place where all roads lead, for in that regard alone, all roads are equal. 

Its not about judging others but first in picking the best path for yourself and then helping others find safer, kinder paths for themselves  Not everyone has the good parenting, good education, and good community support of a wider network of family, teachers and other adults,  required to learn wisdom and common sense.

Those who do have an obligation to help those who do not.  For example i have an obligation to do my best to prevent anyone who has drunk too much from getting in their car and driving. I have an obligation to stop people hurting others and even to stop people form hurting themselves through ignorance  i have an obligation to educate and inform people on the dangers of certain behaviours ( including how to have safe sex) 

 However with adults i only have  an obligation to go further than information and education, when their behaviour threatens themselves others or good order and safety of a society.

With children i have both a legal and an ethical obligation to act to prevent behaviours which are harmful. 

And no the  final destination might be the same but all roads are not equal because all roads do not have the same stops along the way. Some hurt people others heal.  Some are constructive others destructive.  All the paths you  have described are basically constructive and creative. But what about a path of violence, abuse, crime, suffering, and pain?  A path which limits and prematurely ends the life of the walker but also of many others he meets along the way?

Your opening  sentence is critical and correct.  We actually build the path we tread, and the thought and discipline we put into constructing it determines,  not only the path, but the interim destinations along the way.

I worked out my life path when i was 10  years old, revised it slightly  in my teens, again more radically,  in ealry  adulthood, and made minor modifications after 30.  Basically i am still on the path i planned for myself 57 years ago and it has followed the route i planned  but with a few nice surprises, detours, and interesting unplanned experiences along the way.

And i missed a couple of destinations like being a biological father  and flying (in a machine)  in outer space,  both of which were beyond my control. 

Edited August 18, 2017 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker]

8 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

It would seem the only thing the proponents of science believe infinite is the ability of man to understand everything, eventually.

I would agree The human mind, maybe added to by artificial enhancements and technology, is capable of understanding everything given enough time  We are an evolved product from within the universe  Hence we are totally integrated into our universe and ,given time and knowledge, nothing in existence is beyond our comprehension because we are a part of it. and evolved from it 

[+Liquid Gardens]

3 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

 If a person ends up in gaol, or divorced, or miserably unhappy   it is because they made a series of faulty choices which led them to that end.  

How incredibly naive and simplistic, your survey of the human condition has apparently been incredibly myopic.

[+Liquid Gardens]

10 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

I've read many erudite hypotheses on what came before. Can you quote any scientist who says the stance of science is that at a certain point the quest for knowledge of it's origins forever ceases and what lies beyond will forever remain unknown and unknowable? If not, the converse must be true and I stand by my statement.

Hmmm, the alternative of science thinking it will explain everything (something I also have never heard any scientist state) is not that the quest of knowledge ceases at some point, that presumes that there will be a finite amount of things to know.  That isn't in evidence yet; if 'everything' is eternal and infinite, then we both will never understand everything nor does our quest necessarily cease.

[+Hammerclaw]

10 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Hmmm, the alternative of science thinking it will explain everything (something I also have never heard any scientist state) is not that the quest of knowledge ceases at some point, that presumes that there will be a finite amount of things to know.  That isn't in evidence yet; if 'everything' is eternal and infinite, then we both will never understand everything nor does our quest necessarily cease.

Never said it would cease or ever be resolved, only that science has no boundaries and accepts no hypothetical limitations on it's will or eventual capacity to understand.

[+Liquid Gardens]

53 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Never said it would cease or ever be resolved, only that science has no boundaries and accepts no hypothetical limitations on it's will or eventual capacity to understand.

I think that's because using the type of reasoning that science is based on, any limitations at this point are purely hypothetical, where's the good evidence that our understanding will  eventually cease?  I think we're abutting more philosophical questions here too; can we ever know that we know everything?  All it seems we could ever say is, 'we thoroughly understand everything that we know of'; assuming no Morpheus, I'm not sure if we can ever know that we're not in The Matrix, or that God just created us a few minutes ago with all of our memories, or that you are just dreaming all of this, or that the spirits of the dead are moving among us right now, etc.

It seems as soon as we draw any boundary then we've also introduced a hypothetical 'outside' of that boundary to wonder about. I think there are science-based arguments/ideas currently that if there were universes 'before' this one for example, that no information from those previous universes would be available in this one, which if so would be a dead-end in that direction.  Then again the path of science historically is paved with 'if so's that turned into 'not so's.  

Edited August 18, 2017 by Liquid Gardens

[+Sherapy]

5 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Yup But thats an entirely different paradigm.

The universe is unfolding as it will, but  You can select one of many possible  paths through  your life and what you select every moment of every day will unfold or shape or create every part of your future.

That is the power and beauty of beings who can see the future result of behaviours, who can predict consequences, who can envision alternate outcome from different choices  both short and long term,   and who  can make logical and rational choices based on that knowledge  If a person ends up in gaol, or divorced, or miserably unhappy   it is because they made a series of faulty choices which led them to that end.  

Then why didn't you apply this ability and select to create being a biological father with children of your own? 

Are you saying that it was your goal to end up childless? Are you saying it was due to your own faulty choices? 

I think you might want to revisit your conclusions; I don't think you mean  to be as harsh and judgmental as you have come off in this post. 

You did not do anything or deserved to be childless, anymore than those that divorce derserve to be browbeat for taking the path of ending a bad situation, oftentimes divorce heals families. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 18, 2017 by Sherapy

[CeresExpo2000]

On 8/12/2017 at 10:38 PM, Timonthy said:

Such a convenient argument, as always. 

Bravo sir! All hats off to you.

but if we only had the original stone tablets that Moses brought down from the mountain.

The Arc of the Covenant - The Battle of Jericho

[Stubbly_Dooright]

11 hours ago, freetoroam said:

16 hours ago, Sherapy said:

Hammies is an equal opp. gift of gab, he will win you over trust me. Lol

The guy has swag and a beautiful heart. 

 

gift of the gab? lol. his swag is swaying in the opposite direction to mine. 

If my point of view is anything, I think you both have positive influences to give, that I think sparks reflection to a good debate.     

3 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

How incredibly naive and simplistic, your survey of the human condition has apparently been incredibly myopic.

I agree with your response. And what about uncontrollable happenings, especially in situations like divorce, or situations that make a person unhappy, and such. Frankly, if it's the truth of what's happened, one should realize they are experiencing it, by outside influences. (And divorce is not participated by one party, like marriage.  ) There is so much  more, and each individual needs to know it and deal with it. In my feeling, of course, that agrees with you.      

2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I think that's because using the type of reasoning that science is based on, any limitations at this point are purely hypothetical, where's the good evidence that our understanding will  eventually cease?  I think we're abutting more philosophical questions here too; can we ever know that we know everything?  All it seems we could ever say is, 'we thoroughly understand everything that we know of'; assuming no Morpheus, I'm not sure if we can ever know that we're not in The Matrix, or that God just created us a few minutes ago with all of our memories, or that you are just dreaming all of this, or that the spirits of the dead are moving among us right now, etc.

It seems as soon as we draw any boundary then we've also introduced a hypothetical 'outside' of that boundary to wonder about. I think there are science-based arguments/ideas currently that if there were universes 'before' this one for example, that no information from those previous universes would be available in this one, which if so would be a dead-end in that direction.  Then again the path of science historically is paved with 'if so's that turned into 'not so's.  

A part of what is being discussed here at the moment, seems to remind me of this commercial I remember seeing years back. 

 

Of course, it gets that kind of "You're kidding me!" type thought. In a sense, I think it's that thought, (well, at least I think this) that of course this can't be true, because..........................

Well, again, that's how I see it.   

2 hours ago, Sherapy said:

Then why didn't you apply this ability and select to create being a biological father with children of your own? 

Are you saying that it was your goal to end up childless? Are you saying it was due to your own faulty choices? 

I think you might want to revisit your conclusions; I don't think you mean  to be as harsh and judgmental as you have come off in this post. 

You did not do anything or deserved to be childless, anymore than those that divorce derserve to be browbeat for taking the path of ending a bad situation, oftentimes divorce heals families. 

First, I want to point out, that I agree with you on this. I know quite a few individuals, who have gone through to become parents, because of such obstacles. And they went through it in a way, that also sent a wonderful message of how they did it, and who they adopted. So, I think you made a good point.  

I feel, and I could be wrong, and I would understand if you corrected me on this Sheri.    but, there are some who wish to stay childless, and often do things to give of their time to help. Of course, they also feel that they are still childless, in the means that what it implies, and not convince themselves they are truthfully full fledged parents, when in reality they are not. Adoptive parents and foster parents, I do believe are parents. Other situations, that I hear are so short and temporary, I find it to be just helping out and that's it. 

I have became friends with someone on the base, years ago, who was foster raised, and it was such a heartwarming situation, that she would gush about her foster family, complete with pictures she had framed on her wall.  I wonder, if it matters how much time one spends in a family? 

Then there are some, who keep thinking they are parents and so forth, and I find, that no, they are not. There is also a note, and this is my experience, I have "adopted" a friend and neighbor's boys, as my own, so I often joke about them being my boys too. I also tended to 'joke' about adopting my daughter's good friends along the years, so I feel I'm a mama of a lot. (Well, Hell, I feel I adopted Xeno, so I would feel, I'm a mama here on the boards.  ) But in the end, it's all in joking and wording. If one is going to check off something in applications, it wouldn't make the mark, I do see it as. 

I'm not 'defending' someone, like I said, I agree with your point. I just feel, there are those who come forth and are honest about being childless, while helping children. 

I hope you don't mind me bringing that up.  I will await your answer........................ here in the corner.   

 

[+Sherapy]

6 minutes ago, Stubbly_Dooright said:

If my point of view is anything, I think you both have positive influences to give, that I think sparks reflection to a good debate.     

I agree with your response. And what about uncontrollable happenings, especially in situations like divorce, or situations that make a person unhappy, and such. Frankly, if it's the truth of what's happened, one should realize they are experiencing it, by outside influences. (And divorce is not participated by one party, like marriage.  ) There is so much  more, and each individual needs to know it and deal with it. In my feeling, of course, that agrees with you.      

A part of what is being discussed here at the moment, seems to remind me of this commercial I remember seeing years back. 

 

Of course, it gets that kind of "You're kidding me!" type thought. In a sense, I think it's that thought, (well, at least I think this) that of course this can't be true, because..........................

Well, again, that's how I see it.   

First, I want to point out, that I agree with you on this. I know quite a few individuals, who have gone through to become parents, because of such obstacles. And they went through it in a way, that also sent a wonderful message of how they did it, and who they adopted. So, I think you made a good point.  

I feel, and I could be wrong, and I would understand if you corrected me on this Sheri.    but, there are some who wish to stay childless, and often do things to give of their time to help. Of course, they also feel that they are still childless, in the means that what it implies, and not convince themselves they are truthfully full fledged parents, when in reality they are not. Adoptive parents and foster parents, I do believe are parents. Other situations, that I hear are so short and temporary, I find it to be just helping out and that's it. 

I have became friends with someone on the base, years ago, who was foster raised, and it was such a heartwarming situation, that she would gush about her foster family, complete with pictures she had framed on her wall.  I wonder, if it matters how much time one spends in a family? 

Then there are some, who keep thinking they are parents and so forth, and I find, that no, they are not. There is also a note, and this is my experience, I have "adopted" a friend and neighbor's boys, as my own, so I often joke about them being my boys too. I also tended to 'joke' about adopting my daughter's good friends along the years, so I feel I'm a mama of a lot. (Well, Hell, I feel I adopted Xeno, so I would feel, I'm a mama here on the boards.  ) But in the end, it's all in joking and wording. If one is going to check off something in applications, it wouldn't make the mark, I do see it as. 

I'm not 'defending' someone, like I said, I agree with your point. I just feel, there are those who come forth and are honest about being childless, while helping children. 

I hope you don't mind me bringing that up.  I will await your answer........................ here in the corner.   

 

Actually, Stubbs you brought in great points, of course there are those that choose to be childless for reasons like not adding to the population, or because they think they are suited to other things. My neighbors as a matter of fact, chose to not have kids. 

Each to their own, and I agree with you on this point I don't have daughters, yet I am a mother of three grown sons, and most likely I would have fared fine with daughters, but I really don't know, because I didn't have them. I don't think it is the same to raise girls as it is boys, for me.  I think I might have struggled more due to the lack of relationship with my mother. 

I tutor, but this doesn't qualify me as a teacher, it most likely has elements that are transferable, but it is not the same, I would have much to learn. 

For ex: I recently interviewed a relief caregiver who had a degree in special ed, helped with the care of her mom with late stages dementia and I also knew her to be a caring loving mother, she certainly had the qualifications, the problem was in the interview/training process I knew she wouldn't be a good fit, not because she didn't have the potential, not because I didn't want her to be the right fit, she just wasn't open to learning and wasn't humble enough to know what she didn't  know,  she thought she already knew everything because she had a degree in something else. When I asked what do you know about stage 4 COPD and Hospice she admitted to knowing nothing ( which is fine, I didn't either at first) but the questions that she asked to get up to speed had no bearing on the situation at all. I concluded, In my mind, no way would she work. Sadly, for her, the know-it-all while good in some cases was not for this situation, so her strategy to be assertive, came off as aggressiveness/closemindedness and she lost the job. I tried to gently tell her It wasn't a situation that needed to be changed according to what she thought, but a situation that she needed to keep things as structured and familiar for the patient as possible, for my ladies well being, it went over her head. 

[+Liquid Gardens]

1 hour ago, Stubbly_Dooright said:

I agree with your response. And what about uncontrollable happenings, especially in situations like divorce, or situations that make a person unhappy, and such. Frankly, if it's the truth of what's happened, one should realize they are experiencing it, by outside influences. (And divorce is not participated by one party, like marriage.  ) There is so much  more, and each individual needs to know it and deal with it. In my feeling, of course, that agrees with you.      

Exactly, it's mostly the inclusion of divorce that is ridiculous, there are tons of divorces that are not based on 'faulty' choices.  My parents married and that was not faulty or a mistake, my parents divorced and it was not faulty or a mistake, and my parents both remarried and that wasn't faulty or a mistake.  I think it conflicts with someone else's path in life which is by definition the bestest, thus anything else is faulty.

[+Hammerclaw]

14 hours ago, freetoroam said:

gift of the gab? lol. his swag is swaying in the opposite direction to mine. 

At least she didn't misspell it.

[+Sherapy]

1 hour ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Exactly, it's mostly the inclusion of divorce that is ridiculous, there are tons of divorces that are not based on 'faulty' choices.  My parents married and that was not faulty or a mistake, my parents divorced and it was not faulty or a mistake, and my parents both remarried and that wasn't faulty or a mistake.  I think it conflicts with someone else's path in life which is by definition the bestest, thus anything else is faulty.

Geez, how about the countless people who find the love  of their life after a divorce, or friendship with a spouse they didn't have in the marriage.