Which side are you in?

Discuss the March 2021 Philosophy Book of the Month, The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God’s Plan by Daniel Friedmann.
Nick_A
Posts: 3288
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Which side are you in?

Post by Nick_A »

Sushan
As per the author, there are three kinds of humans when it comes to the discussion regarding origin of the solar system and life.

1. Those who believe in scientific theories and see the incongruity of the biblical teachings with the scientific evidence.

2. Those who believe in God and the creation, yet with the basic scientific knowledge seeing that what science says does not go along with what bible says.

3. Those who have a fairly good knowledge about science as well as the bible, but not taken any side, yet thinking over whether these two can go hand in hand.

Are these the only groups that we can divide all humans regarding this topic of discussion? In which group are you in (or mostly fit in)? Why do you say so?
There is another small group and I've yet to find an individual on a secular philosophy site who has answered this basic question in a logical fashion who I can learn from. This basic question asks: What is the purpose of our universe and Man's purpose within it? What does it do and why does it do it? It seem obvious enough but for some reason it is equally avoided by both science and religion. Yet if it were ever understood, there would be no conflict between science and religion.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
John_Jacquard
Posts: 19
Joined: September 27th, 2021, 8:09 pm

Re: Which side are you in?

Post by John_Jacquard »

Sushan wrote: March 1st, 2021, 8:58 pm
When you consider the origin of the universe, the emergence of life on Earth, and the future of humanity, the chances are you do so from one of three perspectives. Perhaps you’re educated in the sciences and are convinced that current scientific theories and data explain our origins and enable us to exercise some control over future events; yet you also have a knowledge of the Bible and its seeming incompatibility with science. Alternatively, you might believe that God created the world and that the scriptures contain all of the answers about our origins and future; at the same time, you understand the basics of the scientific theories and can see their apparent incongruity with some of the teachings of your religion. Then again, you may be familiar with the fundamentals of biblical religions and of science, not feel committed to one or the other perspective, yet be curious about whether their apparently disparate explanations and timelines for our origins and outlook on the future are reconcilable.
As per the author, there are three kinds of humans when it comes to the discussion regarding origin of the solar system and life.

1. Those who believe in scientific theories and see the incongruity of the biblical teachings with the scientific evidence.

2. Those who believe in God and the creation, yet with the basic scientific knowledge seeing that what science says does not go along with what bible says.

3. Those who have a fairly good knowledge about science as well as the bible, but not taken any side, yet thinking over whether these two can go hand in hand.

Are these the only groups that we can divide all humans regarding this topic of discussion? In which group are you in (or mostly fit in)? Why do you say so?

That is not true that those are the only perspectives.
You have a lot of hidden assumptions in your comment.

Science and religion are not at odds with each other at all
Because information is organized in different ways in terms of how meaning is encoded .

You have literal information and you have metaphor information
They both accomplish what the other cannot accomplish.

In our modern times literal information has grown so much , however metaphor is still massive part of our life .
Both are valid they just work differently.

A simple example

Take a photo .

What is it literally?

A photo is literally stacked rows of color dots.

But, when you look at a photo and see something say a human being , it is metaphor meaning information that you see something besides stacked rows of color dots .

It is literally impossible for stacked rows of color dots to be a person !

Yet you can look at a photograph of a person and trace that information back to a real person .


So metaphor information is valid and many examples where metaphor lead you to truth which literal information says is impossible .



So information is encoded different ways.

Literal meaning ( approximation of narrow context , specificity low compression. Meaning is direct on surface )

Metaphor meaning ( ambiguity, tackles large context , high compression meaning is deeper down )


Science and religion have nothing at all that clash with each other .
They both use totally different types of information encoded differently .
Buzzard3
Posts: 19
Joined: January 26th, 2022, 12:09 am
Favorite Philosopher: Catdinal Robert Sarah
Location: Australia

Re: Which side are you in?

Post by Buzzard3 »

Pattern-chaser wrote: March 2nd, 2021, 11:21 amMy view is simple. For those who understand science, and religion, realise that the two are not in conflict. They have different purposes. Science offers facts, and thereby understanding. Religion offers aims, aspiration and guidance, and thereby understanding. For me, at least, there is no conflict.
I tend to agree, but when it comes to facts about the origin of life on earth, science is seriously overrated. For example, science is clueless about how a living, reproducing organism could have come into existence via a natural process.

As for the macro-changes in life-forms over time, science is largetly clueless how these changes could have occurred. Certain aspects of the fossil record actually contradict current evolutionary theory (eg, the Cambrian explosion) and science has yet to adequately explain how novel body plans and new organs could evolve. Some evolutionary scientists acknowledge these problems but most of them just stick their heads in the sand and say "we don't know how it evolution happened - it just did!" Lots and lots of theories are offered, but most of them can't be tested, which means such theories are worthless as science; they're just pseudo-scientific stories.
An exception: I cannot understand, or support, scriptural literalists, such as might be found among US extreme Christians. Their insistence on their sacred texts being the actual words of God leads to all manner of inescapable confusions, IMO.
I agree. I respect their faith, but the literalists paint themselves into a corner and are forced to deny certain uncontestable scientific facts, which makes them look backward and stupid. As far back as the 18th century some geologists claimed that the evidence suggested life on earth began perhaps millions of years old, so Bible literalists have a 17th century mentality.
EricPH
Posts: 279
Joined: October 22nd, 2021, 11:26 am

Re: Which side are you in?

Post by EricPH »

The creation of the universe is history, and you can't change history. Either at least 'One God' created the universe or it happened purely by natural causes. Truth exists.

However creation happened, I don't believe it could happen without God. I don't subscribe to the myth that creation happened purely by natural causes.

Every generation that has died before us, has died without the science to prove how the universe came to be. Our generation will die with lots of clever science., but lacking the definitive proof that will finally give us truth.
Good_Egg
Posts: 194
Joined: January 27th, 2022, 5:12 am

Re: Which side are you in?

Post by Good_Egg »

I tried to formulate these categories more rigorously, and got something like:
- those who believe that where a religion contradicts science that the religion is wrong
- those who believe that where science contradicts their religion that the science is wrong
- those who believe that, properly understood, there can be no contradiction.

But I'm not satisfied with that formulation. Several reasons.

One is that it omits the don't know / don't care / don't understand the question type of response.

One is that the third category is too broad. Anyone can claim that properly understood there is no contradiction, whilst in practice their understanding of what is proper is that the science should always suffer correction or the religion should always give way, and they're really in the first or second category.

One is that science is a method directed towards truth as a value. And that some of those in the second camp, who reject science where it doesn't agree with their religion, are not so much rejecting on the grounds of untruth as of moral wrongness in asking the question. If we formulate the categories based only on truth we're biased in favour of science before we start.

(For a possibly-controversial example, if you put forward a scientific hypothesis about the cause of homosexuality, some will reject it, not because they think it cannot be true but because they think you shouldn't be asking the question).
"For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God" - James 1:20
Post Reply

Return to “The Biblical Clock by Daniel Friedmann”

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021