Religion=Science, Science=Religion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-10-2012, 12:44 PM (This post was last modified: 22-10-2012 12:48 PM by PeiPei22.)
Religion=Science, Science=Religion
Okay, I know this topic has probably been picked over already, but since I'm a new member here, please bear with me.

So right now I'm taking an Intro to Islam course at my university. . . .*sighs*

Last year, it seemed like a good idea at the time, because I still considered myself to be open-minded about religion at the time. 6 months ago, my attitude about religion was more like "I'm not religious, but let religious people believe what they want to believe; if it makes them happy, then who am I to judge?"

And originally I wanted to take the Intro to Buddhism course but my advisor told me it had already been filled up and there were no empty slots; however the courses in Catholicism and Islam were wide open (Coincedence? Me thinks not). So yeah, at the time I was open-minded about it, but thanks to Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and many others. . .my eyes have been opened and I realized that there are too many "loopholes" in major religions for them to make any kind of sense.

So my professor for Islam a few weeks ago spent all this time talking about how science backs up many of what is taught in the Qur'an, citing that as evidence that it must be the true word of God. For example, in the Qur'an it states that God created humans out of a clot of blood. Which is all fine and nice. . .but as I continued to read through my own paperback version of the Qur'an, it seemed to me like he was just doing as many religious people will do and pick out what parts of their holy books back up some of their arguments, but not others.

In my mind I'm thinking to myself, "Well if the science is compatible with the Qur'an, then what does the Qur'an have to say about the earth being millions of billions of years old?
What does it have to say about dinosaurs?
What scientific evidence does it say proves that there are several different levels of hell?"


Keep in mind that Muslims are really happy to constantly point out that (they believe) the Qur'an has never been altered by humans since it was first documented; which to me is actually more of a bad thing than a good thing.

Anyway, I basically wanted to know what you all thought about claims religious people make that science and religion go hand-in-hand. My Islam professor was also glad to point out that many of the most respected people in the field of science are also religious.
I didn't get the chance to point out to him that close to 90% of scientists in ANY of their respected fields, are atheists and/or non-believers; basically an overwhelming majority.
I was trying to give him the benefit of the doubt and let him defend his point but like I said, I can spot a lot of loopholes. . . .
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 01:05 PM
RE: Religion=Science, Science=Religion
It seems like you have answered your own question.

They just pick the stuff they like, the stuff that seems to back up some bit of their claim, and ignore the rest. They point at a few religious scientists and think that justifies that their religion is scientifically sound. They see what they want to see and ignore the inconvenient stuff and to their minds they have proven their claims with absolutely no counter-arguments.

Which you have already stated, so I'm merely confirming what you know.

And it's only about 4.5 billion years, not "millions of billions". The universe is only about 13.7 billion years old, which is little more than a baker's dozen billions.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 01:14 PM
RE: Religion=Science, Science=Religion
(22-10-2012 12:44 PM)PeiPei22 Wrote:  Anyway, I basically wanted to know what you all thought about claims religious people make that science and religion go hand-in-hand. My Islam professor was also glad to point out that many of the most respected people in the field of science are also religious.

If you get the chance, could you ask your professor to provide you with a list of said "respected people", so that you may study what they've done.

Personally, I don't think science and religion can go hand in hand. The methods employed by science and religion to determine the truth are polar opposites. I feel very confident in stating that any respected scientist, who is also a theist, is demonstrably victim to cognitive dissonance.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes caffeinesoul's post
22-10-2012, 01:31 PM
RE: Religion=Science, Science=Religion
"only about 13.7 billion years old" Laughat I liked the "only".

Anyway.

As you have read/watched Hitch, you may recall his interest in religion as human's first (and worst) attempt at a legal system, health care, cosmology, philosophy, documenting the prevailing version of morality etc.. In that context it was science (knowledge) but, importantly, without what we know today as the Scientific Method.

So let's call it a prototype of today's science... version 1.0.

Bucky Ball could probably tell you how many earlier texts (versions) were around before the Qur'an. My understanding (partial) of this novel is that if the Old Testament of the bible was e.g. version 6.0 then the Qur'an would be v.7.0 (the New Testament would be Vista)

The big difference between the old stories and modern science could be this:
Religion' "prophecy" (telling) could be likened to Science's "prediction".

Ask your professor for Islam what future discoveries he can predict from those texts. His answer is likely to be that their god reveals enough to guide us humans to make the discoveries which can then be confirned in the book.

Well, in that case, it's not exactly science, is it?

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 01:53 PM
RE: Religion=Science, Science=Religion
You could ask the professor, "You are using this as a rhetorical device or teaching method, right? You don't actually believe that horseshit?"

Because it doesn't sound like he's teaching; he's proselytizing.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
22-10-2012, 02:11 PM (This post was last modified: 22-10-2012 02:37 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Religion=Science, Science=Religion
(22-10-2012 12:44 PM)PeiPei22 Wrote:  Okay, I know this topic has probably been picked over already, but since I'm a new member here, please bear with me.

So right now I'm taking an Intro to Islam course at my university. . . .*sighs*

Last year, it seemed like a good idea at the time, because I still considered myself to be open-minded about religion at the time. 6 months ago, my attitude about religion was more like "I'm not religious, but let religious people believe what they want to believe; if it makes them happy, then who am I to judge?"

And originally I wanted to take the Intro to Buddhism course but my advisor told me it had already been filled up and there were no empty slots; however the courses in Catholicism and Islam were wide open (Coincedence? Me thinks not). So yeah, at the time I was open-minded about it, but thanks to Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and many others. . .my eyes have been opened and I realized that there are too many "loopholes" in major religions for them to make any kind of sense.

So my professor for Islam a few weeks ago spent all this time talking about how science backs up many of what is taught in the Qur'an, citing that as evidence that it must be the true word of God. For example, in the Qur'an it states that God created humans out of a clot of blood. Which is all fine and nice. . .but as I continued to read through my own paperback version of the Qur'an, it seemed to me like he was just doing as many religious people will do and pick out what parts of their holy books back up some of their arguments, but not others.

In my mind I'm thinking to myself, "Well if the science is compatible with the Qur'an, then what does the Qur'an have to say about the earth being millions of billions of years old?
What does it have to say about dinosaurs?
What scientific evidence does it say proves that there are several different levels of hell?"


Keep in mind that Muslims are really happy to constantly point out that (they believe) the Qur'an has never been altered by humans since it was first documented; which to me is actually more of a bad thing than a good thing.

Anyway, I basically wanted to know what you all thought about claims religious people make that science and religion go hand-in-hand. My Islam professor was also glad to point out that many of the most respected people in the field of science are also religious.
I didn't get the chance to point out to him that close to 90% of scientists in ANY of their respected fields, are atheists and/or non-believers; basically an overwhelming majority.
I was trying to give him the benefit of the doubt and let him defend his point but like I said, I can spot a lot of loopholes. . . .

This "science" in the Qur'an is a common theme in Apologetics in Islam. It's a little complicated, but the fact is Arabic culture was rather advanced at the time the Qur'an was assembled. They of course, got many things wrong, but the "well, how could Mohammed have known about all this stuff". is because he got , (or "they" got) it from their culture. The people who assembled the Qur'an had access to the top level of Arabic Astronomy and Math etc.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ns?page=25

Muhammad was not an historical person.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6udiRzFO4Sk

The concept that Allah is Yahweh is false. Islam's roots are in the moon-god cults of Arabia, The chief god of that cult was named "Sin"...the moon-god. Your professor is going to have a fit, if you say this, but you can read this link about Islam's origins, and ask questions if you find it helpful.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ns?page=25

I'll come back, and address the science questions later.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 02:31 PM
RE: Religion=Science, Science=Religion
(22-10-2012 12:44 PM)PeiPei22 Wrote:  In my mind I'm thinking to myself, "Well if the science is compatible with the Qur'an,

You've already been there too long. Tongue

I can pick up a random tome and equate it to science, as science is, at its heart, naturalist philosophy; the scientific method in primitive terms merely learning from experience. Being predisposed to faith-based learning, well, teaches religion.

All I've got of that is that dang Gwyneth Paltrow... Big Grin

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-10-2012, 04:25 PM (This post was last modified: 22-10-2012 04:28 PM by Vosur.)
RE: Religion=Science, Science=Religion
(22-10-2012 02:11 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Muhammad was not an historical person.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6udiRzFO4Sk
Robert Spencer has made another, even more elaborative video on this topic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUC5Su5P8D4

He wrote a book about it too: http://www.amazon.com/Did-Muhammad-Exist...cr_pr_pb_t

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
26-10-2012, 06:41 PM
RE: Religion=Science, Science=Religion
Yeeaaaaa No. to cut it simply --

Religion = faith unquestioned
Science = fact proven; theories made, tested, and proven or discarded. Also, when was the last scientist that went on a mass murdering spree, because people didnt believe him?

Huge difference.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-10-2012, 09:54 PM
RE: Religion=Science, Science=Religion
Quote:Because it doesn't sound like he's teaching; he's proselytizing.
Yeah, that confused me as well. Any time I learned about religions in college, I learned about what the followers of that religion believed. No professor ever tried to convince the class that the religion was true or made excuses for any of the nonsense.

(26-10-2012 06:41 PM)AlexInYT Wrote:  Yeeaaaaa No. to cut it simply --

Religion = faith unquestioned
Science = fact proven; theories made, tested, and proven or discarded. Also, when was the last scientist that went on a mass murdering spree, because people didnt believe him?

Huge difference.
Yeah, and if you make fun of someone's favorite scientist, they probably won't firebomb any embassies.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: