• Stephen Fry hits back at accusations of Islamophobia
    344 replies, posted
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42049005]personally i think we are all delusional to some extent or another. some of the brightest people i know believe 9/11 was an inside job, for example. i tend to not really hold it against the religious if what they believe is technically a delusion. i just wanna make it clear that you are basically calling the religious delusional without actually using the term.[/QUOTE] i don't know how i got from my original point to this so i'll just leave it here
[QUOTE=supersnail11;42048996]i think they'd be even more delusional if they believed in a god despite a lack of proof, perceived or real[/QUOTE] that is willful ignorance and faith. being delusional means you can't discern between reality and fantasy; you can't tell faulty evidence apart from legitimate evidence.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049024]That didn't stop important scientists from making discoveries, Heisenberg was a Lutheran for instance, and his work has contributed greatly to theoretical physics.[/QUOTE] If you were studying the universe in depth for a lot of the western worlds history, you had to do this with the church. The entire study of early genetics came from a monastery, there is no divorcing the church from science historically because being a heretic was a crime punishable by death.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049024]That didn't stop important scientists from making discoveries, Heisenberg was a Lutheran for instance, and his work has contributed greatly to theoretical physics.[/QUOTE] heisenberg was an atheist "in the lab". that's what separates a "religious scientist" from a scientist who happens to be religious. all good scientists leave as many of their preconceived notions of the world as humanly possible at the door when they are actually doing the science work.
[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;42049019]Yeah.... About that.[/QUOTE] Didn't he also have like 10 wives? I'm pretty sure some of them were even captured in war and married to him at ages as low as 9.
Not all religions are misogynistic in nature you guys know.. Sikhism promotes equality between women and men clearly in its religious text, in fact one of its major messages and attribute is that it requires equality of everything e.g no caste system, no preaching (in the sense you aren't to say your way is the best, as Sikhism believes EVERY religion is in one shape or another a divine path to god) so basically equality of all religions etc. Indian/Punjabi/Jatt culture isn't to be confused with religion in this case though
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;42049051]Didn't he also have like 10 wives? I'm pretty sure some of them were even captured in war and married to him at ages as low as 9.[/QUOTE] this is the early 600s what do you expect
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;42049051]Didn't he also have like 10 wives? I'm pretty sure some of them were even captured in war and married to him at ages as low as 9.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha[/url] "Traditional sources state that Aisha was married to Muhammad at the age of six, but she stayed in her parents' home until the age of nine, when the marriage was consummated with Muhammad, then 53, in Medina;[8][9][10] with the exception of al-Tabari who records that she was ten years old.[11]"
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049024]That didn't stop important scientists from making discoveries, Heisenberg was a Lutheran for instance, and his work has contributed greatly to theoretical physics.[/QUOTE] That was 150 years ago, today we have more evidence and most of the scientific community is atheist. Again, you can have it both ways but only under the condition that you're ignoring the facts. You can be an atheist in the lab and stop being one once you exit the lab, the point is that doing so is silly and unrational.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42049050]heisenberg was an atheist "in the lab". that's what separates a "religious scientist" from a scientist who happens to be religious. all good scientists leave as many of their preconceived notions of the world as humanly possible at the door when they are actually doing the science work.[/QUOTE] All of the sources I've read show Heisenberg doing the opposite, he was very upfront about his religion.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049072]All of the sources I've read show Heisenberg doing the opposite, he was very upfront about his religion.[/QUOTE] is it similar to the sources I've read that say einstein was a christian through and through thanks to all of his quotes? because they can easily be misrepresented.
[QUOTE=Gatsby;42048724]As an great man once said, “The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.”[/QUOTE] Alright, then you can believe in a god that would sit idle while people are burned alive with white phosphorus simply because of the geographical location in which they live, while "men of god" abuse children. While "men of god" deny condoms to citizens of AIDs-ridden countries and watch them die in their own hospitals. While teenage girls are stoned to death because their hymen was broken for legitimate reasons. While homosexuals are beaten to death in the streets because of how they were born. While children are born exclusively to harvest their organs and sell them to the highest bidder. If you want to believe in that because there is no evidence NOT refuting the existence of that aforementioned deity, go right ahead.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049072]All of the sources I've read show Heisenberg doing the opposite, he was very upfront about his religion.[/QUOTE] that doesn't contradict me at all. like i said, you can be religious and a scientist, but you cannot simply defer to god when doing the science work otherwise you will never make a new discovery. [editline]2nd September 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;42049089]Alright, then you can believe in a god that would sit idle while people are burned alive with white phosphorus simply because of the geographical location in which they live, while "men of god" abuse children. While "men of god" deny condoms to citizens of AIDs-ridden countries and watch them die in their own hospitals. While teenage girls are stoned to death because their hymen was broken for legitimate reasons. While homosexuals are beaten to death in the streets because of how they were born. While children are born exclusively to harvest their organs and sell them to the highest bidder. If you want to believe in that because there is no evidence NOT refuting the existence of that aforementioned deity, go right ahead.[/QUOTE] i like epicurus' trilemma: if God is unable to prevent evil, he is not omnipotent if God is not willing to prevent evil, he is not good if God is willing and able to prevent evil, then why is there evil?
[QUOTE=Gatsby;42048724]As an great man once said, “The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.”[/QUOTE] Absence of evidence means it doesn't exist until the evidence emerges, and should be treated as such.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42049087]is it similar to the sources I've read that say einstein was a christian through and through thanks to all of his quotes? because they can easily be misrepresented.[/QUOTE] “In the history of science, ever since the famous trial of Galileo, it has repeatedly been claimed that scientific truth cannot be reconciled with the religious interpretation of the world. Although I am now convinced that scientific truth is unassailable in its own field, I have never found it possible to dismiss the content of religious thinking as simply part of an outmoded phase in the consciousness of mankind, a part we shall have to give up from now on. Thus in the course of my life I have repeatedly been compelled to ponder on the relationship of these two regions of thought, for I have never been able to doubt the reality of that to which they point.” I don't know, it seems pretty hard to misinterpret that.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049129]“In the history of science, ever since the famous trial of Galileo, it has repeatedly been claimed that scientific truth cannot be reconciled with the religious interpretation of the world. Although I am now convinced that scientific truth is unassailable in its own field, I have never found it possible to dismiss the content of religious thinking as simply part of an outmoded phase in the consciousness of mankind, a part we shall have to give up from now on. Thus in the course of my life I have repeatedly been compelled to ponder on the relationship of these two regions of thought, for I have never been able to doubt the reality of that to which they point.” I don't know, it seems pretty hard to misinterpret that.[/QUOTE] the only sources i can find on that are "godevidence.com" and "goodreads.com"
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049129]“In the history of science, ever since the famous trial of Galileo, it has repeatedly been claimed that scientific truth cannot be reconciled with the religious interpretation of the world. Although I am now convinced that scientific truth is unassailable in its own field, I have never found it possible to dismiss the content of religious thinking as simply part of an outmoded phase in the consciousness of mankind, a part we shall have to give up from now on. Thus in the course of my life I have repeatedly been compelled to ponder on the relationship of these two regions of thought, for I have never been able to doubt the reality of that to which they point.” I don't know, it seems pretty hard to misinterpret that.[/QUOTE] ''About God, I cannot accept any concept based on the authority of the Church. As long as I can remember, I have resented mass indoctrination. I do not believe in the fear of life, in the fear of death, in blind faith. I cannot prove to you that there is no personal God, but if I were to speak of him, I would be a liar. I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil. My God created laws that take care of that. His universe is not ruled by wishful thinking, but by immutable laws''.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049129]“In the history of science, ever since the famous trial of Galileo, it has repeatedly been claimed that scientific truth cannot be reconciled with the religious interpretation of the world. Although I am now convinced that scientific truth is unassailable in its own field, I have never found it possible to dismiss the content of religious thinking as simply part of an outmoded phase in the consciousness of mankind, a part we shall have to give up from now on. Thus in the course of my life I have repeatedly been compelled to ponder on the relationship of these two regions of thought, for I have never been able to doubt the reality of that to which they point.” I don't know, it seems pretty hard to misinterpret that.[/QUOTE] It depends if this is actually his quote or someone's interpretation of his quote ... Also, science doesn't have any kind of authority so it's meaningless either way.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049129]“In the history of science, ever since the famous trial of Galileo, it has repeatedly been claimed that scientific truth cannot be reconciled with the religious interpretation of the world. Although I am now convinced that scientific truth is unassailable in its own field, I have never found it possible to dismiss the content of religious thinking as simply part of an outmoded phase in the consciousness of mankind, a part we shall have to give up from now on. Thus in the course of my life I have repeatedly been compelled to ponder on the relationship of these two regions of thought, for I have never been able to doubt the reality of that to which they point.” I don't know, it seems pretty hard to misinterpret that.[/QUOTE] I don't get how this makes the belief entirely more logical We can cite scientists through out recent history and talk about who's religious and who's not, it's not going to get us somewhere.
[QUOTE=supersnail11;42049151]the only sources i can find on that are "godevidence.com" and "goodreads.com"[/QUOTE] It's from a book he wrote. Erste Gespraeche ueber das Verhaeltnis von Naturwissenschaft und Religion.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049180]It's from a book he wrote. Erste Gespraeche ueber das Verhaeltnis von Naturwissenschaft und Religion.[/QUOTE] What is the raw uninterpreted quote?
[QUOTE=Gatsby;42047707]It's 2013 guys, being an atheist is pretty over rated now. Agnostic masterrace[/QUOTE] You're an atheist whether you like it or not. You literally are. [editline]2nd September 2013[/editline] Oh wow I just started reading this thread and this is way more off the rails than I thought
[QUOTE=Shreddinger;42049196]What is the raw uninterpreted quote?[/QUOTE] I'm in a lecture right now, but if you can find a copy of the book it's on page twenty two.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049219]I'm in a lecture right now, but if you can find a copy of the book it's on page twenty two.[/QUOTE] You want me to look for the quote?, lol.
[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;42049089]Alright, then you can believe in a god that would sit idle while people are burned alive with white phosphorus simply because of the geographical location in which they live, while "men of god" abuse children. While "men of god" deny condoms to citizens of AIDs-ridden countries and watch them die in their own hospitals. While teenage girls are stoned to death because their hymen was broken for legitimate reasons. While homosexuals are beaten to death in the streets because of how they were born. While children are born exclusively to harvest their organs and sell them to the highest bidder. If you want to believe in that because there is no evidence NOT refuting the existence of that aforementioned deity, go right ahead.[/QUOTE] God is an arsehole
[QUOTE=Shreddinger;42049228]You want me to look for the quote?, lol.[/QUOTE] it's a google search away. [url]http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/phbl.19700260701/abstract[/url]
And the point I'm trying to make is that science, and religion can both be followed without influencing each other.
[QUOTE=plunger435;42049238]And the point I'm trying to make is that science, and religion can both be followed without influencing each other.[/QUOTE] due to an intentional sealing of views from one another that seems overcomplicated and illogical at some level or another.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42049236]it's a google search away. [url]http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/phbl.19700260701/abstract[/url][/QUOTE] Thanks for finding it.
[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;42049019]Yeah.... About that.[/QUOTE] Explain why hundreds, if not thousands of women convert to Islam even in western countries if it is such an oppressive religion?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.