Naturalism - the false argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-03-2013, 04:15 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
(27-03-2013 04:10 PM)Buddy Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 01:45 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Yes, yes, and yes. Here's my $0.02, if that is true, which it is, how can a Theist scientist proceed with scientific methodology without having to adopt his worldview to a skeptical worldview for the purposes of study? He cannot. This discussion is relevant not only to science but to practical matters--how does a pro-lifer dispense abortifacients and etc., etc. Science is in modern times asking religious scientists to leave religion at the door and then freethinkers claim science does not disqualify or rationalize away evidence for God as absurd on its face. How could it not? Be honest, please!
Did you mean how does a pro-choice justify abortion, when Science says life begins at conception? Well this one justifies abortion by giving the mother a chance to place the most importance on her life, ...and ...I admit.... I also have the importance of population control in the back of the decision somewhere.....maybe ..........? Scientists must leave beliefs at the door of the lab, they can't mix faith with knowledge, else..their findings would be a belief.......also the thinkers make no such claim about any evidence for the gods, as there has never been any evidence to consider.


Science says life begins a conception? No.

When human life begins is not a clear-cut scientific question with a clear-cut scientific answer. It is a moral and ethical question.

One answer is that human life begins when a fetus is viable outside the womb.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 05:49 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
(27-03-2013 04:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 04:10 PM)Buddy Wrote:  Did you mean how does a pro-choice justify abortion, when Science says life begins at conception? Well this one justifies abortion by giving the mother a chance to place the most importance on her life, ...and ...I admit.... I also have the importance of population control in the back of the decision somewhere.....maybe ..........? Scientists must leave beliefs at the door of the lab, they can't mix faith with knowledge, else..their findings would be a belief.......also the thinkers make no such claim about any evidence for the gods, as there has never been any evidence to consider.


Science says life begins a conception? No.

When human life begins is not a clear-cut scientific question with a clear-cut scientific answer. It is a moral and ethical question.

One answer is that human life begins when a fetus is viable outside the womb.
Since when is Biology a moral question?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 06:36 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
(27-03-2013 05:49 PM)Buddy Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 04:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  Science says life begins a conception? No.

When human life begins is not a clear-cut scientific question with a clear-cut scientific answer. It is a moral and ethical question.

One answer is that human life begins when a fetus is viable outside the womb.
Since when is Biology a moral question?

That is the biological answer. An early stage fetus cannot survive without a host. We also can't take a zygote out of one woman and transfer it into another. We can take cells and insert them into a willing uterus and hope for the best...but ask any couple going through IVF, it is hard road with lots of disappointment.

That's a far cry from saying that science believes life begins at conception. We don't celebrate the conception of a child annually.

Look at it this way...do you celebrate your conception date? The date the sperm hit a ovum? Or do you celebrate the day you were born? Do you add 10 months to your age?


[Image: mrhanky.jpg]

Wind's in the east, a mist coming in
Like something is brewing and about to begin
Can't put my finger on what lies in store
but I feel what's to happen has happened before...


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 06:53 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
(27-03-2013 05:49 PM)Buddy Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 04:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  Science says life begins a conception? No.

When human life begins is not a clear-cut scientific question with a clear-cut scientific answer. It is a moral and ethical question.

One answer is that human life begins when a fetus is viable outside the womb.
Since when is Biology a moral question?


You made a statement that is simply not true. There is no scientific consensus that "life begins at conception".

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 06:59 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
(27-03-2013 06:36 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 05:49 PM)Buddy Wrote:  Since when is Biology a moral question?

That is the biological answer. An early stage fetus cannot survive without a host. We also can't take a zygote out of one woman and transfer it into another. We can take cells and insert them into a willing uterus and hope for the best...but ask any couple going through IVF, it is hard road with lots of disappointment.

That's a far cry from saying that science believes life begins at conception. We don't celebrate the conception of a child annually.

Look at it this way...do you celebrate your conception date? The date the sperm hit a ovum? Or do you celebrate the day you were born? Do you add 10 months to your age?
Science does not believe shinola. Science knows. You could celebrate your conception, and maybe you should, it could be called the 'beginning of my life celebration', "thank G........uh..... goodness ....my parents wanted me"! Or you can copy the thousands of previous generations and celebrate your birthday like they do, keeping in mind your life started at conception. What else would you call that 40 weeks ?.....'dead time'?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 07:10 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
Sorry no. Life begins at birth. Conception is only part of the process. Conception does not guarantee a birth. All it is is a biological process that has potential for life.


[Image: mrhanky.jpg]

Wind's in the east, a mist coming in
Like something is brewing and about to begin
Can't put my finger on what lies in store
but I feel what's to happen has happened before...


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 07:13 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
(27-03-2013 06:36 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Look at it this way...do you celebrate your conception date? The date the sperm hit a ovum? Or do you celebrate the day you were born? Do you add 10 months to your age?

This is cultural.

My flatmates (Thai, Vietnamese, Chinese Malay etc.) actually do.

It took me a while to realise why, when asked her age, a girl would add a year.

Turns out, gestation is included.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 07:18 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
(27-03-2013 05:49 PM)Buddy Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 04:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  Science says life begins a conception? No.

When human life begins is not a clear-cut scientific question with a clear-cut scientific answer. It is a moral and ethical question.

One answer is that human life begins when a fetus is viable outside the womb.
Since when is Biology a moral question?

Biology is not 'a moral question' but the term 'life' is.

From another thread about Synthetic Life...


'Life' is a social construct.

From physics to chemistry to biology... just human categories.

It's all a continuum.

We are made of non-living components.

And not for long.

We will become unmade.

Disorder to order to disorder.

C'est la vie.


For legal purposes we (humans) need to create a convention that pin-points the moment that 'life' begins.

That is all.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 07:21 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
(27-03-2013 07:13 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 06:36 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Look at it this way...do you celebrate your conception date? The date the sperm hit a ovum? Or do you celebrate the day you were born? Do you add 10 months to your age?

This is cultural.

My flatmates (Thai, Vietnamese, Chinese Malay etc.) actually do.

It took me a while to realise why, when asked her age, a girl would add a year.

Turns out, gestation is included.

No kidding? I suppose, if you look at it from the point of view of what was more fun, getting it on or labor pains, the former makes more sense!



“I suppose our capacity for self-delusion is boundless."
― John Steinbeck, Travels with Charley: In Search of America
“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's." - Mark Twain in Eruption
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 07:24 PM
RE: Naturalism - the false argument
I've known lots of Vietnamese and none of them did that (cant really speak to the others) They hold onto their cultures pretty tightly too.

Interesting.


[Image: mrhanky.jpg]

Wind's in the east, a mist coming in
Like something is brewing and about to begin
Can't put my finger on what lies in store
but I feel what's to happen has happened before...


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: