The Black Vault

humphreys wrote:I've thought about this a lot, and I guess it's a question for someone good at philosophy, because I really don't have an answer above it being a subjective preference of mine. I can't think of any objective reason why it's not a good thing to be completely delusional and to walk around with your fingers in your ears ignoring the real world, as long as it makes you happy and doesn't harm others.

I can't either. As I wrote earlier, the objective universe would go on as usual whether we were all squawking and throwing our crap at each other.

But there are moral reasons why we should care about truth. For one thing, justice hinges on truth.

More relevantly, treatng diseases requires medical knowledge. It's pretty simple: In order to fix the problem, you need to know what's actually happening.

Science strives to discover and understand objective truths. It's the very raison d'etre of science: to know the truth. That alone makes science moral, even if people misuse it.

humphreys wrote:Maybe pursuing truth above all is moral because it gives the human race the best chance of long term survival, and is therefore for the best of mankind in the long run even if it makes some of them intellectually uncomfortable in the present?

That too.

The universe may not care if we disappeared tomorrow, but if we care about human beings and their future, then science is our species' only real shot at survival.

Or we could just stay stuck on earth until our sun dies or a rock hits us and obliterates the world. At least with science we have a chance to survive as a species. Who knows what science may eventually allow us to do?

Maybe we could even escape the death of our universe, somehow, someday...

But if we don't even try, then we definitely won't survive. So we could view it as a moral imperative to support scientific advancement, even if there are risks.

I don't see religion or religious people saying any of the things you people are claiming. Liberals are always claiming what other people believe. You don't tell me what I believe. I tell you what I believe.

Science and religion must co-exist. No one is saying that we should abandon science. Some leftists however are suggesting that we abandon religion. Who is throwing rocks?

And, there are yet other leftists suggesting that we abandon rational thought. In fact, it is these types of people who are behind the Arab Spring, like the Muslim Brotherhood. But these people are simply taking a page out of history. They are politicians using religion to get people to go along with their grab for power.

People badmouth the results of science all the time, not science itself. Only a very few religions shun the use of modern science that I can think of, only Amish people come to mind. People badmouth the inventions of science everyday, that caused or created bigger problems, or at least the negative aspects of any given invention, affecting our society. We seem to have grouped almost every invention of man, or discovery of man, as a science ralated thing for this discussion. Nobody said to eliminate science, and nobody said to eliminate our modern things like Computers.

CodeBlackv2 wrote:I don't see religion or religious people saying any of the things you people are claiming. Liberals are always claiming what other people believe. You don't tell me what I believe. I tell you what I believe.

Science and religion must co-exist. No one is saying that we should abandon science. Some leftists however are suggesting that we abandon religion. Who is throwing rocks?

What happens when science and religion conflict?

I understand the need for science, why do we need religion?

greeney2 wrote:People badmouth the results of science all the time, not science itself. Only a very few religions shun the use of modern science that I can think of, only Amish people come to mind. People badmouth the inventions of science everyday, that caused or created bigger problems, or at least the negative aspects of any given invention, affecting our society. We seem to have grouped almost every invention of man, or discovery of man, as a science ralated thing for this discussion. Nobody said to eliminate science, and nobody said to eliminate our modern things like Computers.

You only want to eliminate, shoot down, or ignore science when it conflicts with your religion?

Here is the problem. Religious people want to pretend that they have no issue with science, only with the results of science that conflict with their religion, in which case its the scientist's fault for misusing science, they say.

The problem is, their objections are rarely based on scientific evidence. We have things like evolution with an overwhelming amount of evidence in its favour, but so many religious people reject it and call it "bad science" solely because it conflicts with their Bible.

If the Bible did not exist, these same people would not be rejecting evolution. This is a clear case of religion getting in the way of science and preventing real progress.

When science and religion conflict, literalist religious people are forced to choose religion and reject science.

I wasn't telling either of you what you believe. I was talking to Hum, not you two.

And CB, keep your mindless political labels away from me. They're irrelevant to me.

humphreys wrote:What happens when science and religion conflict?

Each side should seek to resolve the conflict using their own devices if they care about it that much. Ultimately conflicts don't matter. They only matter if you are trying to blend the 2 together.

humphreys wrote:I understand the need for science, why do we need religion?

That's like saying, "you can survive on algae so why don't we just feed you algae." We need it because we say we need it. It doesn't require anyone's permission. Your question implies that religion should justify itself to science. There is no such need.

DIss0n80r wrote:And CB, keep your mindless political labels away from me. They're irrelevant to me.

That's because its always leftists who come up with the ideas you are espousing. If that label doesn't fit you, you are free, and encouraged, to correct it.