-->
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 10:54:48 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
News: Bellagio 10452
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  The Smiley Smile Message Board
|-+  Non Smiley Smile Stuff
| |-+  The Sandbox
| | |-+  Separation of Church n' State
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Separation of Church n' State  (Read 33080 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #100 on: September 01, 2013, 01:59:12 PM »

One of the most fascinating aspects of the science versus religion/faith topic can be found in medical science. There are many accounts of certain things happening in healing and medicine which defy science, or for which doctors have no scientific or medical reasons for how or why they happened. The term "miracle" gets used quite often in these situations where a doctor who would not normally use that kind of term in his or her field simply has no other explanation rooted in their medical or scientific knowledge.

I'm forgetting the man's name, maybe someone can fill in, but there was one historian who worked on the issues of religion vs. science extensively, but as he began digging deeper into the field of medicine, he gave up in light of what he found which could not be explained and which even doctors, again not usually given to reaching beyond a scientific explanation, attributed to something unexplainable.

It's not at all taking sides, but for those interested in this debate it would definitely be a topic worth looking at further.


Firstly, these kinds of statements are so vague and full of hearsay as to be utterly meaningless unless you can provide any kind of independently verified sources.

Secondly, let's hear no more about "science" versus "religion". That is also nonsense.

Firstly, the tone of this reply is completely unwarranted as a response to what I wrote. At least try to keep it somewhat respectful if something I wrote bothered you so much to trigger that reply. I can't see what that could be at the moment.

Secondly, let's hear no more after this of someone ordering others "let's hear no more". And since you quoted me, keep in mind that I'm only commenting on what others in this thread were discussing, and that was science versus religion, and offering up a related topic to look into if interested. Is there a problem with that? Tell those calling it that if you have such an issue with it, I'm making a suggestion. As far as what the discussion can be labeled instead of "science versus religion", call it Seamus or Patty or Joe for all I give a f***.

Thirdly, I can't recall the name of the historian in question, he was part of the mid to late 20th century, but i think it was "rockandroll" made reference to him and his studies a few years ago on this board. Once we get the name right, look into his history a bit and you'll see the part about him confronting medical science.

Fourthly, I don't always have THE TIME to list a litany of quotes and citations and facts to satisfy everyone on the fucking board's liking. Find some on your own. There are plenty of cases of unexplained medical happenings and mysterious healings and recoveries which you can Google search and read on your own, likewise previous debates on the pros and cons of calling them "maladies", "miracles", or "Seamus", whatever the case.

Fifthly, whatever it was that triggered the tone of the reply, I hope all that gets worked out.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #101 on: September 01, 2013, 02:04:54 PM »

People tend to attach religious significance to anything thing science has yet to find an explanation for.

If those people are religious or are devout followers of a religion, then wouldn't that make sense in their way of life?

The fascinating part for me is to look at those, like medical doctors and surgeons, who have seen and studied those cases which have no explanation, and may or may not be driven by the families of or the patients themselves claiming a religious "miracle", then they have to work out or come to terms with in their own minds what they just witnessed, and how to explain it.

To use an often-cited example, there is a difference between someone getting a slice of toast that looks like a religious icon and declaring it is a sign from above, and a doctor or surgeon watching something happen medically which goes against not only the science of such a thing happening but what was expected to have been the outcome based on the medical knowledge of the case.

It's trying to get into that mindset where everything you've been taught about something like cancer, or any medical condition, can be wiped out by things you see play out under your observation. *That* is the fascinating part for me, never mind whatever folks want to call it.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2013, 02:05:57 PM by guitarfool2002 » Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #102 on: September 01, 2013, 02:42:20 PM »

I think another fascinating aspect in all this is the role of the healer in Native American societies, as just one example from around the world. Even though the most commonly (conveniently) used term "medicine man" isn't accurate enough to describe their role, consider how the tradition of that person's position and duties within the tribe has evolved in some ways with the development of modern medicine, yet stayed true in other ways to past traditions. Those traditions have remained very much a secret, and those practitioners are not as open to even discussing basic details with outsiders, so exactly what those healing practices are have remained a mystery outside of the tribes themselves. Yet how many medical doctors would want to study and observe these healers at work, and their techniques?

I may be wrong, but I don't see near as much criticism or challenging of that tradition of spirituality and healing in those cultures, perhaps because so little is really known about it and the practices themselves are far from the public eye.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
Pacific Coast
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


View Profile
« Reply #103 on: September 02, 2013, 05:08:45 PM »

Quote
In my opinion,Modern science renders religion moot. Outdated, outmoded, not needed. Mythical fairy stories written in ancient times.

Literal readings of religious mythology is naive and immature.

The advanced science (scientia = knowledge) of our ancient ancestors was communicated through cryptography. They had a symbolic intuition that is acutely lacking among today's technopolists.
Logged
Pacific Coast
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


View Profile
« Reply #104 on: September 02, 2013, 05:27:55 PM »

I think another fascinating aspect in all this is the role of the healer in Native American societies, as just one example from around the world. Even though the most commonly (conveniently) used term "medicine man" isn't accurate enough to describe their role, consider how the tradition of that person's position and duties within the tribe has evolved in some ways with the development of modern medicine, yet stayed true in other ways to past traditions. Those traditions have remained very much a secret, and those practitioners are not as open to even discussing basic details with outsiders, so exactly what those healing practices are have remained a mystery outside of the tribes themselves. Yet how many medical doctors would want to study and observe these healers at work, and their techniques?

I may be wrong, but I don't see near as much criticism or challenging of that tradition of spirituality and healing in those cultures, perhaps because so little is really known about it and the practices themselves are far from the public eye.

It's not as obscure and hidden as you think. Anthropologists have documented the principles and many examples. I suggest reading Mircea Eliade's SHAMANISM for a grand overview. And, also, Joseph Campbell's work A HERO WITH A THOUSAND FACES is informative for its explication of the initiation ordeal that is obligatory in the shamanic vocation.
Logged
Pacific Coast
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


View Profile
« Reply #105 on: September 02, 2013, 10:52:05 PM »

A principal teaching of the Pythagorean School was that God is universal harmony, perceived through number.

Until the Industrial Revolution, art, religion, and science were intertwined; the order of the universe was an ongoing study, later coming to fruition in the modern science of astronomy. But in the meantime, something fell away from science that had defined it for centuries—a connection with mysticism. Pythagoras—the Greek philosopher, initiate, and teacher—stood at
the point of the marriage of music, science, and mysticism. He was one of the first “scientists,” and as an initiate, he asked deep questions of the universe.


"Pythagoras and Music"
Melanie Richards, M.Mus., S.R.C.


Read the whole article here:
http://www.rosicrucian.org/publications/digest/digest1_2009/05_web/online_digest_pythagoreans_full_051109.pdf
« Last Edit: September 02, 2013, 10:55:15 PM by Prabhuji » Logged
Bean Bag
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1177


Right?


View Profile
« Reply #106 on: September 03, 2013, 07:40:03 AM »

People tend to attach religious significance to anything thing science has yet to find an explanation for.

...yes, but they also attach religious significance to things that science has already explained.  Such as how a baby is born.  Science got that fully explained.  Yet each child is a miracle.
Logged

409.
Bean Bag
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1177


Right?


View Profile
« Reply #107 on: September 03, 2013, 07:42:20 AM »

Modern science renders religion moot. Outdated, outmoded, not needed. Mythical fairy stories written in ancient times.

Which, as I already fully explained -- is YOUR religion.  Science rendering fairy stores moot, is your religion.  A religion just as full of holes as any fairy story Alex.

If life were a puzzle, Alex -- and with all the pieces that science has tagged -- I don't think you or anyone else can even tell me with any confidence what you're building.
Logged

409.
Bean Bag
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1177


Right?


View Profile
« Reply #108 on: September 03, 2013, 07:54:36 AM »

One of the most fascinating aspects of the science versus religion/faith topic can be found in medical science. There are many accounts of certain things happening in healing and medicine which defy science, or for which doctors have no scientific or medical reasons for how or why they happened. The term "miracle" gets used quite often in these situations where a doctor who would not normally use that kind of term in his or her field simply has no other explanation rooted in their medical or scientific knowledge.

I'm forgetting the man's name, maybe someone can fill in, but there was one historian who worked on the issues of religion vs. science extensively, but as he began digging deeper into the field of medicine, he gave up in light of what he found which could not be explained and which even doctors, again not usually given to reaching beyond a scientific explanation, attributed to something unexplainable.

It's not at all taking sides, but for those interested in this debate it would definitely be a topic worth looking at further.


Firstly, these kinds of statements are so vague and full of hearsay as to be utterly meaningless unless you can provide any kind of independently verified sources.

Secondly, let's hear no more about "science" versus "religion". That is also nonsense.
I agree -- science versus religion is nonsense.  The battle is acceptance.  As GFool alluded to, there are people "of science" who make room for religion.  AS well, people "of religion" who make room for science.  In fact I think most people who are religious make room for science.

For me, the point of this discussion is identifying and understanding the new religion of intolerance -- the Secular Progressive.  We're seeing that shadowy beast peek its little head in and then quickly hide.   LOL
Logged

409.
Mike's Beard
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4265


Check your privilege. Love & Mercy guys!


View Profile
« Reply #109 on: September 03, 2013, 11:30:55 AM »

People tend to attach religious significance to anything thing science has yet to find an explanation for.

...yes, but they also attach religious significance to things that science has already explained.  Such as how a baby is born.  Science got that fully explained.  Yet each child is a miracle.

I dunno, something that happens thousands of times each day, day in, day out is not a miracle in my book.
Atheists tend to get a bad rap as being people who look down their noses at religious people but to me it's just a set of beliefs like any other. The only difference is how a person arrives at that point. I didn't choose to become an atheist, you just become one by default if no religion rings a bell with you. Faith is either something you have or you don't, it can't be forced.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2013, 11:37:27 AM by Mike's Beard » Logged

I'd rather be forced to sleep with Caitlyn Jenner then ever have to listen to NPP again.
Pacific Coast
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


View Profile
« Reply #110 on: September 03, 2013, 07:18:58 PM »

Science corrupted is technophilism. An interpretation of the Cult of Gadget: http://redicecreations.com/article.php?id=26714
Logged
Bean Bag
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1177


Right?


View Profile
« Reply #111 on: September 03, 2013, 10:12:48 PM »

People tend to attach religious significance to anything thing science has yet to find an explanation for.

...yes, but they also attach religious significance to things that science has already explained.  Such as how a baby is born.  Science got that fully explained.  Yet each child is a miracle.

I dunno, something that happens thousands of times each day, day in, day out is not a miracle in my book.
Atheists tend to get a bad rap as being people who look down their noses at religious people but to me it's just a set of beliefs like any other. The only difference is how a person arrives at that point. I didn't choose to become an atheist, you just become one by default if no religion rings a bell with you. Faith is either something you have or you don't, it can't be forced.
Well, I meant for my last comment to be somewhat in jest.  I don't think science has much of anything "fully explained."  Science is like explaining a joke... it's not funny when you do.
Logged

409.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.992 seconds with 21 queries.