{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
1/22/2013 9:54:25 PM
22
Dr. Neil DeGrasse on Religion among scientists.
Watch this and start at 1:07:30
This is for all the people who think that it is impossible for science and religion to coexist. For someone to believe and accept both. Take what he says to heart damn it. So atheists drop the idea that all theists are dumb, they aren't. Not all atheists are that smart either for that matter.
-
2 RepliesI'd just like to point out that while he makes that point, he also makes the reverse point. [quote]“I want to put on the table, not why 85% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences reject God, I want to know why 15% of the National Academy don’t.” [/quote]
-
Edited by Sarah: 1/24/2013 12:11:05 PM10/10 for NdGT.
-
Edited by Circadian Wolf: 1/24/2013 11:59:19 AMI never disputed such a statement. My statement is that humanity and logic cannot co-exist, science or religion aside.
-
3 Replies[quote]o atheists drop the idea that all theists are dumb, they aren't.[/quote] I don't recall the majority of atheists ever assuming this. [quote]Not all atheists are that smart either for that matter.[/quote] Never said we were.
-
1 ReplyI am a man of science and faith. Always have been and always will. I don't find it hard to reconcile them both. It is perhaps easier for me and people of my particular Christan faith to accept this because how we've come to understand the role of the Bible. The Catholic church generally follows that Bible isn't meant to be taken literally, but rather there are some "Divine Accommodations" that cannot be accounted for. The "Divine Accommodation" basically means that Bible's purpose is to convey God's love and story to use, not to be used as a historical or scientific explination for God's mystery. To quote someone who spoke this better that I, "The Bible is to be interpreted in view of the fact that it is an accommodation of Divine truths to human minds: God the infinite communicating with man the finite... We must be careful, then, not to push accommodating language about God and His nature to literal extremes. God does not have feathers and wings (e.g., Psalms 17:8); nor is He our literal Father in the same sense our earthly father is." -John Calvin
-
4 RepliesI feel like you shouldn't be allowed to #mythics
-
3 RepliesThis is one brilliant son of a gun, but he's loud as hell.
-
9 RepliesReligion can coexist with everything, except politics.
-
10 RepliesI'm both a Muslim and a Paleontologist, but at my core I am a deist. Checkmate, theist/atheist trolls.
-
5 RepliesI was watching another speech he gave just yesterday on YouTube. I haven't watched this one yet but the other one was about how the greatest scientists in history have always evoked religion and God when and only when they reach the limits of their knowledge.
-
2 RepliesAnyone who thinks they know everything about the universe is an idiot. In a universe of such mystery and size who is to say what is or isn't possible.
-
I think he definitely identified some tensions between religiosity and science.
-
2 RepliesEdited by Cat: 1/23/2013 4:07:20 PMAs an atheist, I never gauged somebody's intelligence based on their religious beliefs, and I do understand that a religious scientist can make amazing progress for humanity. The thing is, most of these scientists tend to be very moderate, and even though their very life work might reveal things that contradict religious scripture, they still hold onto those beliefs. I will say that fundamentalism (focusing more on the Abrahamic religions) probably isn't compatible with science, because if you take most religious scripture at face value, it simply doesn't mix well with how the universe actually works.
-
2 RepliesI have never seen the problem with science and religion. Certain things taught by science does conflict with some religious teachings, evolution being a hot topic, but that is small aspects. Still, science is a process. Most of the things science has once believed has been discovered to be wrong, but that is part of the process. We thin X, find out that X is wrong, but that a small portion of it is true and build off of that. Heck, most of what science teaches today is probably wrong and we won't find out for a hundred years. Yet, from these fallacies we find some truth and continue to expand our knowledge of the physical universe. How does understanding the universe conflict with religion?
-
1 ReplyNeil DeGrasse. I've seen atheists use his arguments against theism and theists use his arguments against atheist. He is a truly brilliant agnostic, isn't he?
-
You make extremely broad generalizations, but also make a good point. He also makes great points in the portion of the speech you told us to watch. I'm a theist and accept science.
-
Now now calm your tits. Very few atheists have claimed that all theists are idiots. Infact you hate generalizations but make a few yourself. Bravo.
-
4 RepliesI don't think you understand the point he is making. He is not endorsing religion among scientists, he is saying the number of religious scientists should be zero. While he does encourage taking a more tactful approach to the subject than Dawkins ([url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik]even tells Dawkins directly[/url]), he often belittles religious ideas ([url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oxTMUTOz0w]my fave[/url]) in his own talks, and calls any scientist content with religion explanations of the physical world [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5dSyT50Cs8]useless[/url].
-
4 RepliesEdited by HurtfulTurkey: 1/22/2013 10:12:19 PMFixed link. Awesome video.
-
5 RepliesGood job debunking an argument that no one ever made.
-
Neil deGrasse Tyson is pretty awesome.
-
9 RepliesEdited by Vicex: 1/22/2013 10:01:43 PMI'm just going to leave this here... Edit: Unfair and disrespectful? Ha, not at all.
