Comments on Science!

Go to How the Universe looks from hereAdd a commentGo to Science!

Re: Re: Ciel

GoldenMean, I understand and agree with much of what you say here, and only take issue with the generalization that "most scientists are atheists."  I was raised by scientists: My dad was a radio astronomer who worked at the Hayden Planetarium in NYC. Because of this, I grew up around many scientists in quite a variety of disciplines. My mother was an astronomy student and an active mystic, too. If she had not died a very few years into their marriage, he once told me, he might have gotten more involved in the mysticism because it was very interesting. He in no way dismissed it, or a couple of precognitive incidents he himself experienced, but recognized that he didn't have the means to explore that level of reality.

The strictures of scientific method insist that the scientist cannot work scientifically with anything that has not been proven, in his/her attempt to prove something else. All the elements leading to a proof must be themselves proven. This does not mean they can't believe that these unproven things exist or matter. The best scientists know full well the limitations of science, that there are things it hasn't got the tools or methods yet to explore. 

My philosophical life has been about this very question of how to reconcile Science with God.  I have come to realize that there is no problem there once one has opened up enough to see--that there is no problem. Science is the way we learn how the physical world works. Mysticism is the exploration of the paraphysical worlds, and more about why than how. They are both valid when applied to their own spheres. 

 

posted by Ciel on March 29, 2017 at 6:45 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Ciel

That is very true.  And I fear this is a far more widespread problem than is generally addressed.  I am actually more concerned about metaphysical/spiritual issues than climate issues.  When it comes to metaphysical issues,  most scientists are atheists.   I do not have numbers or statistics,  but here is an excerpt from a post of mine reviewing the book "Proof of Heaven",  addressing the general scope of the problem (please pardon the length):

...most scientists scoff that God or spirits do not exist,  because they cannot detect or measure spirits.  Instead of scoffing,  they should be questioning their own knowledge.  They should be questioning their limited means of measurement.  For spirits are not all they cannot measure.   Science cannot measure good and evil,  science cannot measure love and hate,  science cannot measure intentions,  science cannot measure free will,  science cannot measure morality,  science cannot measure ethics,  science cannot measure a soul,  science cannot measure God.  What science cannot measure,  a soul for example,  science ignores,  or even denies that souls exist.  Most scientists lean toward atheism, and scoff at religion.  But….. good, evil, love, hate, free will, intent, life energies, souls…..  these “unmeasurables” are the most important things to measure, are they not?  I think so, and you probably think so, too.

Yet,  these  “unmeasurables”  are the things that many scientists (the atheistic ones)  argue against,  proclaiming they do not exist.  Psychologists argue against free will,  arguing that we are helpless slaves of our emotions,  our hormones,  our genetics and our traumatic childhoods.  Philosophers argue against conventional concepts of morality,  dismissing them as mere social rules that hold no real moral truth.   Sociologists deny the possibility of individual evil intent,  looking for all kinds of excuses and reasons to show that society forces some people to turn to crime.  Most other scientists simply ignore these  “unmeasurables”,  because they are in the business of measurement,  so why should they waste time on something that cannot be measured,  and therefore may not even exist?  How would a scientist measure these intangible things that exist only in our minds and spirits?  This only leads to massive frustration,  and possible loss of funding for lack of results.  But they DO spend massive amounts of money and time researching behaviors,  brain activity,  genetics, hormones, and chemicals in our bodies,  and use this evidence to argue that the all-important  “unmeasurables”  mentioned above do not exist.  This is a round-about, negative way of acknowledging that the  “unmeasurables”  are of prime importance.  It is also a biased battle against the truth,  instead of an honest effort to find the truth.

Science ignores it,  but If you do have a soul,  if you ARE a soul,  then that is the most important fact in your entire existence,  is it not?  That one fact changes your outlook on everything else.  This is a big reason many people are atheists.  If they acknowledged the metaphysical,  it would logically and morally require them to move out of the ‘comfort zone’ of atheist denial,  and accept the uncertain and the unknowable.  It would remove the fence they have built around their backyard of certain knowledge,  and they would have to ponder the uncertainty of things that were beyond that fence.  They would have to develop faith in higher powers.  They would have to change their lives.  They would have to stop attacking those who hold beliefs different from their own.  For atheism IS a belief system,  perhaps even more so than the religions it attacks.  It seems to me that it would take a great deal of stubborn, bitter belief to witness the miracles of life all around us,  and inside us,  that science cannot measure or control or explain,  and still proclaim that there is nothing metaphysical behind it all......

again,  Ciel,  please pardon the over-lengthy comment.  I just wanted to show, that science has a loooong way to go,  to be really respectable.   Cheers 

posted by GoldenMean on March 27, 2017 at 9:37 PM | link to this | reply

Re: GoldenMean,

Bill Nye has something to say about how the counter-climate-change agendists have worked not to disprove but to cast doubt, to foster distrust of scientists. But the science speaks clearly.

As in every discipline or professon, there will always be those who are lacking in ethics, who will promote what they are paid to promote. This is true on both sides of the climate issue. 

 

posted by Ciel on March 27, 2017 at 7:38 AM | link to this | reply

Ciel

I share your passion for science and truth.  However,  scientists have brought hostility upon themselves,  by allowing their political / philosophical beliefs to guide or influence their scienctific investigations.  For example,  some climate scientists in Europe were caught in fabricating their data,  to exaggerate the rising temperatures.  Others have ignored contrary data.  This casts great doubt upon the science itself,  which should not be happening. 

posted by GoldenMean on March 27, 2017 at 6:28 AM | link to this | reply

I am so thankful for the existence of science. Hopefully, the climate change war can be won.

posted by FormerStudentIntern on March 18, 2017 at 9:11 AM | link to this | reply

Re: RPresta,

Yes, it is time to raise a voice grounded in simple reality over those noisy chaotic voices defending their right to ignorance and denial of simple realities.

posted by Ciel on March 18, 2017 at 2:19 AM | link to this | reply

Re: Annicita,

Yes, I believe so.

posted by Ciel on March 18, 2017 at 2:18 AM | link to this | reply

Re: TAPS

It isn't just in the Springs, it is like the Women's March:  March for Science is happening in other cities, too.

posted by Ciel on March 18, 2017 at 2:17 AM | link to this | reply

will there be events for you to attend?

posted by Annicita on March 17, 2017 at 6:34 PM | link to this | reply

Great post. This conference is most necessary. Ignorance often has a loud voice. 

posted by Sea_Gypsy on March 17, 2017 at 4:43 PM | link to this | reply

Good post.  I'd love to go to Colorado for that....but I won't.

posted by TAPS. on March 17, 2017 at 1:38 PM | link to this | reply