say homeopathy then we would rightly call the folk stupid.

Allow me to get in touch with my inner Molgrips for a moment:

We wouldn’t say the folk are stupid; rather, that the belief is.

Hmm yes but the efficacy of homeopathy is firmly within the realms of science. (Placebo effect notwithstanding). In other words, it’s knowable. If you give someone a homeopathic remedy, then it has a clear verifiable effect.

This is not so with the question of the existence of God. And as we have been told, this does not matter.

This is not so with the question of the existence of God.

How about unicorns?

Hmm yes but the efficacy of homeopathy is firmly within the realms of science. (Placebo effect notwithstanding). In other words, it’s knowable. If you give someone a homeopathic remedy, then it has a clear verifiable effect.

One might substitute the word ‘homeopathy’ with ‘prayer’, and the statement holds?

the efficacy of homeopathy is firmly within the realms of science

are you saying the origins of the universe , the laws of physics and how we were “created” are not within the realms of science?
Is the question of whether we have a “soul” not part of physiology or anatomy?

are you saying the origins of the universe , the laws of physics and how we were “created” are not within the realms of science?

What happened before the big bang?
What caused the big bang?
What is outside the universe?
Why is the universe here?
Why are the fundamental constants what they are?
Why does anything exist?

One might substitute the word ‘homeopathy’ with ‘prayer’, and the statement holds?

Perhaps, I dunno. I have my own thoughts about metaphysics which may or may not include God; I have strong views on how we should behave to each other; but I do not know what prayer is meant to be. Asking God to make you well when you’re sick seems a little odd given that God should’ve had a hand in making you sick in the first place? I don’t understand.

ah the molly side step shuffle

are you saying the origins of the universe , the laws of physics and how we were “created” are not within the realms of science?

Are they science questions or not?

I do not know what prayer is meant to be. Asking God to make you well when you’re sick seems a little odd given that God should’ve had a hand in making you sick in the first place? I don’t understand.

After my mum was diagnosed with cancer last year, our vicar said he’d pray for her. I’m not sure what he thought that would achieve, but I chose to interpret it in the same way as if he’d said he’d be thinking of us.

Given that a committed member of the church had very recently died of cancer, I assume he didn’t think the prayer would make any difference to my mum’s survival chances.

As it happens, she seems to be cancer-free, which is nice, but I doubt it had anything to do with the prayer.

I chose to interpret it in the same way as if he’d said he’d be thinking of us.

That makes sense.

It’s the ‘I’m sitting an exam today pray for me’ or praying before the start of a football match. I’m no expert but I think God’s probably going to sit back and see how well you’ve trained to take advantage of the talent He gave you, rather than make you his favourite over the other guy just because you prayed.

she seems to be cancer-free, which is nice

This is good, regardless 🙂

Are they science questions or not?

It wasn’t a side step, I was countering your point. Yes, those are science questions, however they don’t answer everything. I suspect SaxonRider would say they are different epistemic categories.

What happened before the big bang?
What caused the big bang?
What is outside the universe?
Why is the universe here?
Why are the fundamental constants what they are?
Why does anything exist?

I have no idea but I wouldn’t try to make up an explanation.

Also,

“We don’t know (yet)” is a perfectly acceptable answer.

I have no idea but I wouldn’t try to make up an explanation.

Not even if it made you feel good? I think many Christians would also admit to not yet knowing for sure – but they believe something. Don’t see a problem.

We should enter a race with the team name as STW Theological Society; the slogan on the jersey should say “That is a different epistemic category”.

“We don’t know (yet)” is a perfectly acceptable answer.

Indeed. Something that really delights me is living in age when not only do highly intelligent people regularly find explanations for hitherto unexplained phenomena, they also find ways to explain these things to relative dullards like me.

Not even if it made you feel good?

No certainly not. That’s pathetic.

I don’t think science will ever be able to tell us WHY the big bang happened, do you? It can only tell us the consequences of some other set of initial conditions. Which are the consequences of other initial conditions, and so on. But why? Why any of it?

Interesting to note that Christianity doesn’t answer this either – why does God exist? I’m just giving it as an example of a question that science can’t answer, and perhaps nothing can.

I don’t think science will ever be able to tell us WHY the big bang happened, do you?

I really don’t know. I agree it might seem unlikely but science has surprised us with many discoveries in a pretty short space of time. One thing I’m absolutely sure of is that religion doesn’t have the answers to those “big questions”.

molgrips – Member
What happened before the big bang?

Previous big bang.

What caused the big bang?

Too many unknowns and we will Never know.

What is outside the universe?

There is no answer as in not important.

Why is the universe here?

This is not important for the short life span of human beings.

Why are the fundamental constants what they are?

Impermanence

Why does anything exist?

They exist because they have to due to the previous cause. 😛

molgrips – Member
I don’t think science will ever be able to tell us WHY the big bang happened, do you?

They will NEVER find the answer no matter how they try.

I don’t think science will ever be able to tell us WHY the big bang happened, do you?

Maybe not. Maybe there isn’t a reason. So what? Again, “we don’t know” is a perfectly viable position.

“But whhyyyyyy?” is human nature, just look at your average five year old. Religion is pretty good at filling this gap in knowledge – to be fair, it’s pretty good at making up any old shit to fill any and all gaps in knowledge until we prove otherwise – but it’s nothing more than an answer of convenience.

And, it’s often not a particularly satisfying answer. “God did it” doesn’t actually answer anything, it just displaces the question.

I would rather scientists focus on things like teleportation or hover car, which are much more useful then trying to find out the origin of the universe … what a waste of time.

Invent teleporting machine and hover car please.

Beam me up Scotty!

indeed why i lost faith in primary

If god made me who made god…the unanswered unknowable question remains unanswered

Furthermore it raises serious issues/ more unanswerable questions where we cannot prove some of its assumptions.

What is my soul – how doe this non physical – for it can transcend death – interact with my physical body what translates for it – why can we not find it, why can we not prove god etc. God is a crap answer that worked 4000 years ago when we thought the earth was flat and we had no idea what elements were or why 29 ers were better than 26 ers.

Today its a rubbish answer* enduring but rubbish.

* its so rubbish even most of the followers dont think creation is true. It can no longer convince the flock let alone the rest of us. Their faith is waning.

I agree it might seem unlikely but science has surprised us with many discoveries in a pretty short space of time

It’s impossible. Science can break everything down to fundamental laws based on fundamental constants. It can’t tell us why those constants have the values they are or indeed why reality exists, because there is no concept other than reality in which to formulate an answer that isn’t self referential.

Again, “we don’t know” is a perfectly viable position.

It is, yes.

“God did it” doesn’t actually answer anything, it just displaces the question.

That’s exactly what I said a few posts ago. The only logical conclusion then when faced with a unanswerable question is to pick an answer you like. I think that’s checkmate 🙂

The only logical conclusion then when faced with a unanswerable question is to pick an answer you like.

That’s my point, it patently isn’t. The only logical conclusion is to simply accept that we don’t know, that we don’t have the answer. Some people just can’t get their head around accepting this, which is one of the reasons religion can appear attractive.

Please invent teleportation and hover car … 😛

Much more useful me say.

The only logical conclusion then when faced with a unanswerable question is to pick an answer you like.

No its to accept you dont know and say you cannot answer it anything else is to just guess wildly and risks being wrong which is ILLOGICAL.

The logical answer with schrodinger’s cat is not to guess as you prefer it to be alive than dead its to realise out knowledge is incomplete as we dont know the answer.

Please go and study some logic.

Science can break everything down to fundamental laws based on fundamental constants. It can’t tell us why those constants have the values they are or indeed why reality exists, because there is no concept other than reality in which to formulate an answer that isn’t self referential.

read up on Godel and his incompleteness theory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems

Please invent teleportation and hover car …

I think you will find some pretty high level physics needs to be understood to get to the point of developing teleportation. That’s why understanding the universe and how it works is important.

Plus, it’s nice to know things innit?

slowoldman – Member

Please invent teleportation and hover car …

I think you will find some pretty high level physics needs to be understood to get to the point of developing teleportation. That’s why understanding the universe and how it works is important.

Plus, it’s nice to know things innit? [/quote]

Honestly my dear slowoldman chap I was going to say (exactly what you just said but decided to say something else … funnily) they have very high chance of accidental discovery of something else than trying to find out the origin of universe.

Ya, it is always nice to have accidental discovery but with regards to finding the origin of universe, I say let them get on with it and with all the brain cells available to them. But to say that science is the only truth … I think we have a long way to go.

Beam me up Scotty!

And there it is. Some people would rather live with a certain lie, than live with uncertainties…

Yes, we are pattern recognising animals who try to explain everything. But the ability to say I don’t know is surely a good thing.

Stoatsbrother – Member
And there it is. Some people would rather live with a certain lie, than live with uncertainties…

Yes, we are pattern recognising animals who try to explain everything. But the ability to say I don’t know is surely a good thing.

Are you replying to my thread or someone else? 😛

You lost me there … 😯

Chewkh.

No. This…

The only logical conclusion then when faced with a unanswerable question is to pick an answer you like

But the ability to say I don’t know is surely a good thing.

A lot of religious people do say just that.

TLDR but a mix of 3,4 & 5 for me.

You do know what the bible says about faith dont you 🙄
We need a #mollyfact for religious threads
Did you compile the big list of religious folk who want to rewrite the bible yet 😆

You’re really not getting any of my points Junkyard.

It’s not because I’m stupid though.

No, just stubborn. (-:

How am I being stubborn?

I know you are not stupid the problem is you are just not well informed on this subject area[or you could have listed all the religious leaders who wanted to re write the bible* and made me look like the ill informed one or realised how wrong that statement was] and you seem unwilling to accept this point. This means you make points that are not good ones.

None of us know everything abut everything [ though we may write like we do].

* Its daft look how much the archbishop of canterbury and the pope is struggling to get the flock to change its views on gays [ or the former in female bishops] nevermind suggesting re write the bible. No one is asking for this that I am aware of for it is the word** of god

** not all take it literally but they all accept its gods doctrine and it could only be rewritten by a new prophet creating a NEW TESTAMENT like what JC did.

or you could have listed all the religious leaders who wanted to re write the bible

I never said there were any, I have no idea. I made no such statement. You misunderstood what I was getting at. I did attempt to explain this earlier, you did not address it but came back to it again.

I know you are not stupid the problem is you are just not well informed on this subject area[or you could have listed all the religious leaders who wanted to re write the bible*

The good news bible? Some fairly significant ‘toning down’ in that little sucker – widely distributed and referred to?

Cougar said – maybe we could rewrite the bible. Of course, we can’t rewrite it cos it’s a historical document – what we can do is write new books talking about its contents. And I think there are quite a few of those already.

What I think Cougar meant was that the ideas are evolving over time, and have moved on from some of the ideas presented in the Bible. And I was agreeing with him.

not all take it literally but they all accept its gods doctrine and it could only be rewritten by a new prophet creating a NEW TESTAMENT like what JC did.

Unless somebody found some golden plates with a new set of Gospels on them?

its an easier to read version of the bible it has not rewritten the messages within or “changed the meaning”

Imagine it like shakespeare written in modern english- same stories , same message , easier to read.